In almost any situation reason is the guide that delivers the best results.
As President Obama and the Democrats continue their push to socialize the health care system and other parts of American life, they seem to have thrown reason out the window. Reason would inform the Democrats of several important points they seem unwilling or unable to acknowledge.
Contrary to what the Democrats would like you to believe, it is impossible to provide insurance for 30 million more Americans without increasing the scope of government and the size of the federal deficit.
While we are on the subject of impossibilities, the experience of every other country that has tried some form of government run health care should be enough reason not to try it here. However, the quest for an unattainable social justice mixed with a consolidation of power has the Democrats not really caring that the program will be a massive failure and waste of money. Government run health care is the ultimate example of emotion triumphing over reason.
For those that support ideas not based in reason, such as redistributing wealth or achieving some other form of social justice like universal health care, they are quite often the biggest victims of promises that will never be delivered. These pawns of liberal politicians are sold the idea of a leg up, when really what they are receiving are straps holding them down, dependent on a system that discourages any personal responsibility. As they become more dependent on a government system, they become less likely to question why it doesn’t work. Thus a block of voters, Democrats, have developed to keep voting for liberal politicians promising the impossible.
What is missing from this equation is reason. Reason would tell these citizens that regardless of the proposals liberals make, impossible goals will never be met no matter how much money is thrown into the quest for social justice. Ultimately liberal politicians want to create a vicious circle of dependency, whereby a voter must vote for the liberal to continue a flawed program they have come to need. A person using reason when voting would realize these “pie in the sky” liberals don’t have the citizens’ best interests in mind, only their own.
There has never been a society, nor is there one now, that has been able to take enough money from productive citizens and provide for the wants and needs of every other citizen. This type of economy is known as either socialism or communism, depending on the specific example, and has never been successful for any extended period of time. The incentive to work hard, to achieve, is removed when the government promises to provide everything for free. The society eventually implodes. Research the USSR for a great example.
The non-socialists reading this will accept the preceding premise as common sense. This is because their world view is probably based in logic. The Democrats in Congress tricking, or more diplomatically put, pandering for Obamacare are not interested in using logic as part of their methodology. This is both dangerous and reckless on their part, because the pursuit of the impossible is a misuse of taxpayer dollars, and a selfish endeavor designed to buy votes for their future elections.
The answer to almost every question our local, state, and federal governments face is to put reason ahead of emotion when attempting to conduct the business of the people. While some ideas may seem noble or ideally just, a reasonable examination of available resources and the track records of existing government programs tells us some ideas are just not feasible. Sometimes, in fact almost all the time government creates more problems by wasting taxpayer resources that could be better spent by the private sector or individual. The engine of the US economy is built on low taxes and low government intervention. There are many needs of the people that are better met by the private sector. Competition is quite often the best form of regulation possible.
Reason is your friend. If you use it, you will conclude the Democrats are fighting for themselves, but they are not fighting for you, and they are certainly fighting against reason…
Comments