February 08, 2010
Food for Thought
Elise dissects the back story behind that poor, nameless breast cancer victim Obama was touting recently. The whole sad story is ably summed up in one devastating paragraph:
... under Obamacare Ms. Shouse would have made the same choice she actually made: choosing to risk her life to expand her business. Or she would have been denied the chance to make that choice and would have good health insurance but no expanded business. Not even Obamacare could have afforded Ms. Shouse the opportunity to do what she wanted without paying for it one way or the other.
This is the heart of my objections to Obama's governing philosophy. Over and over again he and his wife Michelle have argued that it's unfair for us to be burdened with choices about how to spend our own money. But for some unfathomable reason it's never unfair to shift the costs of our bad choices to others.
No wonder he can't seem to stop blaming Bush.
Posted by Cassandra at February 8, 2010 10:03 PM
TrackBack URL for this entry:
It's also a problem that could be solved much more cheaply and easily than with this boondoggle that the House put together; or the separate boondoggle that the Senate did.
As Elise notes, the only thing that the system might have done that would have had a major effect would be to make it easier for her to be diagnosed early. So, even if you accept a government-has-an-obligation-to-provide solution here, you can have it easy: the government will pay for every American to have one physical a year, plus any additional tests that are necessary.
After that, you'd have the diagnosis you needed to seek help under existing programs, as she received. That would have probably improved her survival prognosis, and lowered the cost of her treatment.
The cost of 300,000,000 exams and subsequent tests is not small; but it's far cheaper than these massive plans being foisted on us. Instead of "Hey, let's make every teenager in America buy an expensive health care plan, while rationing care for every American at the top end of the age range," you'd have one benefit, bang.
Posted by: Grim at February 8, 2010 11:00 PM
" . . . it's unfair for us to be burdened with choices about how to spend our own money." That says it all for me.
Posted by: Texan99 at February 9, 2010 10:16 AM