Today on Thom Hartmann's program he debated Michael Medved (again, like Dan Gainor and Yaron Brook before him, not exactly the paragon of free market advocacy). In an attempt to intellectually sucker-punch Medved and win the debate, he states something like "Well, if you're against socialized healthcare, you must be against our socialized military!" Medved hesitated, unable to answer.
Which is why they need someone like me or Tom Woods on his show. The way Hartmann words it, you'd think our military was some sort of grand savior to our society. Unless you view the mass murder of hundreds of thousands of foreigners and imperial occupation of over 150 countries as a good thing, I think you'll disagree as well.
Two things: 1) our socialized military has, like our quasi-socialized healthcare system, created an industrial-complex. Just as our socialized military has resulted in murderous OFFENSE (as opposed to its stated purpose of "defense") and fascist offshoots like Blackwater, our socialized healthcare system has created fascist offshoots in the form of health insurance companies, which were cartelized when the government decided to push companies towards covering all employee health insurance , thus giving them great incentive to profit off the incoming demand and turn away the frail sick outliers who would get in the way of the CEO salary. And yet Hartmann views the salary motive as the problem in health insurance. What came first Thom? Come on now.
Hartmann actually stated in the debate something to the tune of "Why should we allow for-profit insurance companies to earn millions just for writing the check to your doctor?" Yet is Hartmann so blind as not to realize that it was government's intervention in the market that created that insurance/co-pay/not-just-for-risk-anymore system? Instead, he attacks the for-profit aspect, which has nothing to do with it at all.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment