Will 6/21/09

Sneaking in Single-Payer

My take on George Will's latest. His column was published in the Washington Post.

Summary: This is about the public option. That means that the government will provide health insurance.

Quote:

Insuring the perhaps 20 million persons who are protractedly uninsured because they cannot afford insurance is conceptually simple: Give them money -- (refundable) tax credits or debit cards (which have replaced food stamps) loaded with a particular value. This would produce people who are more empowered than dependent. Unfortunately, advocates of a government option consider that a defect. Which is why the simple idea of the dependency agenda cuts like a razor through the complexities of this debate.

My Views: There's one thing here that Will does not go into. If the health insurance companies were so bad, if they made such "obscene" profits, and if their policies were so poor, then why don't some of those rich liberals form their own health insurance companies? They could take less executive compensation, less profits, and provide better insurance. So, profits were less than obscene; They were only spectacular. In just about any other business situation, that would be acceptable (that's being laconic).

Is this public option business really about providing better insurance, or is it about more government control?

---

George Will almost didn't make it as a syndicated columnist. His style was considered too erudite for a general audience.

Whatever one thinks of his views, read his work for use of language and for how he marshals facts and uses logic.

Here's his Wiki bio.

His latest book is at the right.