Professor Mankiw has this to say: “Even if one accepts the president’s broader goals of wider access to health care and cost containment” — and who doesn’t? — “his economic logic regarding the public option is hard to follow.” Professor Mankiw is a generous spirit. By “hard to follow,” he really means “completely bogus.” He goes on:
Consumer choice and honest competition are indeed the foundation of a successful market system, but they are usually achieved without a public provider.
We don’t need government-run grocery stores or government-run gas stations to ensure that Americans can buy food and fuel at reasonable prices.
- WHAT MOTIVATES AND ANIMATES OBAMACARE'S SUPPORTERS ISN'T LOGIC; IUT';S COVETOUSNESS AND INFANTILENESS: THE DOIESRIE TO HAVE THIRD PARTIES TAKE CARE OF THEM AND ABSOLVE THEM OF PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY.
- AND THIS IS ALSO WHAT MAKES THEM THINK THEY CAN SUCCEED: THEY THINK THIRD PARTIES HAVE UNLIMITED AMOUNTS OF CAPITAL WHICH THEY CAN TAP INTO VIA TAXES.
- IN OTHER WORDS, THEY KNOW THAT WHAT MAKES THE PUBLIC OPTION A TROJAN HORSE IS TAXPAYER SUBSIDIES.
- IT'S SOCIALISM.
- IT ALWAYS DOES A CRAPPIER JOB AT PROVIDING A SERVICE OR MAKING A GOOD THAN THE PRIVATE SECTOR.
- AND IN TRUTH, IT'S LESS FAIR AND LESS JUST - THOUGH THE LEFT ARGUES TO THE CONTRARY (BY ARGUING HEALTHCARE IS A RIGHT AND HAVING A JOB IS A RIGHT).
- BUT IT'S REALLY LESS FAIR AND QUITE UNFAIR BECAUSE NO ONE - NOBODY, NOT A SINGLE SOLITARY SOUL - HAS MORE RIGHT TO MY HARD-EARNED PROPERTY THAN ME.
- AND TAKING IT AWAY FROM ME AND GIVING IT TO SOMEONE ELSE CAN NEVER EVER NE FAIR OR JUST.
- ONLY I CAN GIVE IT AWAY - OR USE IT TO BUY SOMETHING I WANT.
- TAKING IT AWAY FROM ME TO GIVE OT TO SOMEONE ELSE IS FASCISM.
WE MUST DISSENT ACCORINGLY.
No comments:
Post a Comment