Wednesday, July 25, 2012

HealthCare: My Reply to BusinessWeek

Business Week's writer, Elizabeth Dwoskin provides an article titled, After Repealing Obamacare, What Would Romney replace it with? In typical fashion, it assumes that a bad "solution" must be replaced with another bad "solution".

Here is my reply to her article:

This article has a false premise. It assumes that Obamacare must be replaced with something else. Translation: It means that the political class must come up with a "solution". This type of fallacious thinking is why we are in financial dire straights.  The Status Quo motto, "Health Care for nothing and the Check-ups for Free".

To the writer of this article: Why do you assume that a select group in Washington DC must provide solutions for our problems? Never mind the obvious historical data that points to the gross inefficiencies of this outfit. Let us review the "successes": e.g. Medicare, Social Security, War on Terror, War on Drugs, War on Poverty, Postal Service, Medicaid, and etc.  None of these programs are efficiently effective, and all have helped the United States Government achieve the trillion dollar debt load coupled with a trillion dollar deficit.

Now, we are to believe that these same individuals who brought the aforementioned failures can derive a "solution"? Investors use historical data to attempt to project future events. While this method is not 100% accurate, I can accurately state that any US Government solution will be an abyssal and absolute failure, based on its historical failures.

Many believe that Insanity is doing the same things over and over again, but expecting different results. I think this holds true with the majority of people in Washington DC and outfits that push their co-dependency agenda to the American People. Now we are to believe that the Government will get this one "right". Engaging into this notion is quite spurious to say the least.

The winners will not be the minorities, poor, or the sick/shut in. The winners will be the larger health care outfits, the lobbyists and most importantly; the members in Congress. Rent seeking behavior will increase, and the actors that participate in this timeless activity will be compensated accordingly, and on the tax payers dime, of course.

Should a solution involving the egregious inflation the price of Health Care, while concomitantly shrinking the availability of this precious good be considered a "solution"? Is this a viable solution for the poor and uninsured?  How do I know that inflation and increased scarcity of Health Care will happen? Government has a glorious history of providing inflation and shrinking the availability of a good when it enters the marketplace. History supports this claim.  And, the poor and uninsured will be the losers.

The solution is simple, if one understands economics. But, it is not easy if you are conditioned to think in a co-dependent mindset. The solution is not with the Government having a "solution".  The solution lies with the individuals having the freedom to choose to solve their own problems. Optimization of our individual economic utility is the solution, not the Government using the power of Fiat.

Respectfully Submitted,

Robert Williams Jr

CEO of