Tres links sobre el tema:
1) Uno va a una columna de Susan Estrich, una feminista liberal que escribió un libro de amor a Hillary Clinton y que se dedicó a masacrar a Palin el año pasado:
The idea that somehow you're going to tax the "rich" enough to pay for quality health care for every American who doesn't have it, can't afford it or stands to lose it, not to mention for all of the undocumented aliens who receive it for free now and presumably will continue to in Obama health land, is almost laughable. It's one of those things candidates say in campaigns, ignoring the fact that it doesn't add up. But in a bill that might pass? Add a 5 percent surtax on every small business in the country that makes $250,000 or more? This is going to create jobs? What am I missing?
El segundo, un resumen que CBP hace de una columna de Clifford Asness:
There are large groups of people in this country who want socialized medicine and they sense that the stars are aligning, and now is their time to succeed. They rarely call it socialized medicine, but instead "single payer health care" or "universal coverage" or something that their public relations people have told them sounds better. Whatever they call it, they believe (or pretend to believe) a lot of wrong-headed things, and they must be stopped. Step one is understanding how and why they are wrong. Step two is kicking their asses back to Cuba where they can get in line with Michael Moore and Al Gore for their free gastric bypasses.
Por último, del WSJ, "A Reckless Congress"
...the most remarkable quality of this health-care exercise is its reckless disregard for economic and fiscal reality. With the economy still far from a healthy recovery, and the federal fisc already nearly $2 trillion in deficit, Democrats want to ram through one of the greatest raids on private income and business in American history. The world is looking on, agog, and wondering why the United States seems intent on jumping off this cliff.
Ayer se lo decía a CBP en un comentario:
ReplyDeleteI still believe that Democrats, and the statists of all kinds that support them, are not trying to "fix" anything with this. They are simply trying to fulfill an ideological agenda. Socialized health care is “good”, even if it does not work.
It is better to be wrong with collectivism than right with market economy.
De todos modos, ¿se aprueban o no esta ley y el disparate de “cap and trade”? Vamos a ver cuán argentinizada está la clase política de EEUU.
Es cierto, pero una derrota legislativa de Obama le puede servir para ganar las presidenciales del 2012. Como pasó con Clinton.
ReplyDeleteEn cambio, si los dems ganan las legislativas más mocos se van a mandar y lo perjudicarán a Obama para el 2012.
No sé, así pienso yo.
Hay mocos y mocos. La socialización del sistema de salud es un moco monumental del que no se vuelve. Yo prefiero que pierda ya. Prefiero un Obama de dos términos con congreso republicano desde el segundo año (como lo fue Clinton) a un Obama con congreso por cuatro.
ReplyDeleteEsperemos que alcance para que fracase esa legislación socialista. Sería un desastre, el más grande entitlement de la historia.
ReplyDeleteParece que la mayor parte de los gobernadores están en contra porque les incrementa los gastos.
Estamos viendo el avance del socialismo en los EE.UU. más fuerte desde Roosevelt.
yo estoy con Ramiro... esto se perfila muuuuy fiero...
ReplyDelete