Monday, August 10, 2009

2+2=5

How do you explain support for a program (greater government intervention in health care) that seems unable to accomplish (according to the CBO) its most touted purposes (cost-savings and universal coverage)?

This was the whole secret of it. At first, I kept wondering how it could be possible that the educated, the cultured, the famous men of the world could make a mistake of this size and preach, as righteousness, this sort of abomination--when five minutes of thought should have told them what would happen if somebody tried to practice what they preached. Now I know that they didn't do it by any kind of mistake. Mistakes of this size are never made innocently.

Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged, p. 668.


I would like to hear arguments that explain (1.) the legislators' motives and (2.) the legislation's mechanics, and see if these add up to better health care or greater savings or anything thing else that I would want more of. I think it's more likely that I'll hear different definitions of "health" or "savings," and that 2 and 2 make 5.

No comments:

Post a Comment