Libertarians for Socialized Medical Care

Avatar:
Ben Cohen
Author:
Publish date:
Social count:
0

Every now and then, I check out Reason.com to see how libertarians are spinning the latest economic news. Usually, it's a mixture of paranoia, obsessive fixations on everything 'private' and an unhealthy aversion to government in all its forms. The economic crisis wasn't about lack of regulation, it was abouttoo much regulation! (Bankers have the public interest at heart, and left to their own devices would do what is in the public interest - or something like that). Reason held steadfast in its belief that private markets and deregulation were the key to prosperity while the policies they had supported fostered the biggest economic crash in 80 years. It was impressive to say the least - they have shown remarkable dedication to their religion, and should at least be given marks for creative thinking.

However, much to my surprise, their editor Matt Welch has recently penned an article in support of French style socialized medical care for the United States:

For a dozen years now I’ve led a dual life, spending more than 90
percent of my time and money in the U.S. while receiving 90
percent of my health care in my wife’s native France. On a
personal level the comparison is no contest: I’ll take the French
experience any day. ObamaCare opponents often warn that a new
system will lead to long waiting times, mountains of paperwork,
and less choice among doctors. Yet on all three of those counts
the French system is significantly better, not worse,
than what the U.S. has now.

Enjoying the fruits of lower taxes, cheaper goods and more sunshine while leeching off of another countries free medical care seems pretty abhorrent, but I'm not one to pass judgment given I'm pretty much in the same boat as Matt (however, I haven't received much medical care in either country so far thank God). But Matt's article is another slice of incontrovertible proof that socialized medical care is better than private medical care. It's better because you can get it no matter what, and markets have nothing to do with whether you get treated or not.

If a libertarian is saying this, the argument really is over.