And so it continues: "Policy advisers for Clinton on Saturday said she would consider a proposal to garnish the wages of some U.S. residents who can afford health insurance but do not obtain coverage"---Long Island Newsday, 12/1.
So if we take the Democratic proposals and combine them---a rather crude approach, but not without predictive value---we will have mandatory enrollment in insurance plans, mandatory acceptance by insurance plans, mandatory checkups and other preventive care, mandatory employer-sponsored plans, and, of course, mandatory taxes to pay for all of this government compassion. Is anyone in the press paying attention to the implications of all this coercion?
So if we take the Democratic proposals and combine them---a rather crude approach, but not without predictive value---we will have mandatory enrollment in insurance plans, mandatory acceptance by insurance plans, mandatory checkups and other preventive care, mandatory employer-sponsored plans, and, of course, mandatory taxes to pay for all of this government compassion. Is anyone in the press paying attention to the implications of all this coercion?
1 comment:
Dr. Zycher, on loan from Satan, or at least John Locke, asks:
Is anyone in the press paying attention to the implications of all this coercion?
Dang. And Sen. Edwards sez no American should be legally permitted to go 20 years without a checkup, all to no newspaper notice.
My body belongs to the state, or soon will. My mind can't be far behind.
Keep agitating, Ben. We classical liberals are the real rebels and friends of liberty, in our weird way...
Post a Comment