#Obamacare: VA Democrat calls for making physicians serfs of the State

Posted by: Phineas on November 3, 2013 at 3:52 pm

**Posted by Phineas

"A Democrat directs his serfs"

“A Democrat directs his serfs”

What was it I was saying yesterday about ownership of one’s own time and labor being essential to a free man or woman? Oh, yeah:

Nothing you pay money for is an inherent, natural right. To declare health care a “right” everyone is entitled to, you have to take from someone else, if need be by force, their property, whether it is their time and labor, or the products they produce. Force them to sell something for less than what it is worth or to provide it “free,” and you are effectively stealing from them, even enslaving them. For the government to demand that taxpayers pay far more than they need to for insurance in order to subsidize your medical procedures is no different than a medieval lord taking a farmer’s grain crop and giving it to his favorites.

And as if to illustrate that last point, along comes Virginia House of Delegates candidate Kathleen Murphy, a Democrat, who advocates making it a law that physicians must accept Medicare and Medicaid patients:

FYI last night at the Great Falls Grange debate, Democrat delegate candidate Kathleen Murphy said that since many doctors are not accepting medicaid and medicare patients, she advocates making it a legal requirement for those people to be accepted.

She did not recognize that the payments are inadequate to cover the doctors’ costs. She also did not recognize there is a shortage of over 45,000 physicians now and that it is forecast to be 90,000 in a few years.

Democrats appear to want to make physicians slaves of the state, but Democrats don’t admit they would just drive more doctors out of practice into retirement and other occupations. The Obamacare law and regulations are causing millions of people to lose their health insurance, drop many doctors and hospitals. The HHS internal forecast is 93 million Americans would lose their health insurance due to the Obamacare law and rules about adequacy of insurance.

It’s like the old joke in which the patient complains to the doctor that “it hurts whenever I do this,” and the doctor replies “then stop doing that!”

Progressives have created a deadly problem through government interference in the economy: their “Affordable Care Act” requires millions of individuals to buy policies and pay inflated prices for coverage they don’t need, in order to cover the costs of, among others, Medicare and Medicaid patients. But, as has been mentioned in several places, far more Medicaid “takers” are signing up than relatively well-off “payers,” threatening the viability of Obamacare, itself.

Compounding this is the doctor shortage “Mason Conservative’s” correspondent mentioned above: not just from doctors leaving the field rather than deal with Obamacare, but fewer and fewer accepting Medicare and Medicaid patients. Already reimbursed at an artificially low rate by the government for their services, many are refusing to take on more such patients –or any at all– as Obamacare signs up thousands more.

A rational person would look at the problem and recognize its causes: top-down government intervention in the healthcare market. That same rational person would then realize that the “hair of the dog” is not the solution; that, in fact, ending the disruptive government intervention is what’s called for.

But, we’re not dealing with rational people. We’re dealing with progressive Democrats, convinced against all evidence that an economy and society managed by technocratic government “experts” is best, let alone possible. It’s their central delusion and it is absolutely crucial to their political belief system.

Hence Ms. Murphy’s suggestion that doctors become servants of the State. It isn’t possible that government created this problem, it’s just some recalcitrant doctors. Or, if government did create a problem, it’s only a “glitch,” to be fixed by more, you guessed it, government intervention, even if that means taking by force of law the time and labor (the property!) of the doctors.

After all, it’s for the public good, and only government knows what’s truly good for the public.

PS: Though it is kind of fitting for the party that defended slavery, Jim Crow, and segregation, no?

RELATED: Legal Insurrection calls it the “revolt of the kulaks.”

(Crossposted at Public Secrets)

RSS feed for comments on this post.

6 Responses to “#Obamacare: VA Democrat calls for making physicians serfs of the State”

Comments

  1. Lorica says:

    Amazing how the lawyers want to control the doctors, and call it fair. Makes you want to cuss. – Lorica

  2. Drew the Infidel says:

    Things are NOT, repeat NOT, best left to technocratic government “experts”. Look how that approach failed to pay off in Vietnam.

    Remember when Pelosi (scientific name “Haggus Neuroticus”) said about the healthcare law, “We have to pass it to find out what’s in it”? In medical school, that is taught as the definition of a stool sample.

  3. Carlos says:

    “#Obamacare: VA Democrat calls for making physicians serfs of the State”

    And this is different from what they want to do to the rest of us…how?

    The direct (if unstated) purpose of any socialist state is to make all but the ruling class serfs. Get used to it, ’cause the fools that vote the likes of Obhammed, Pelousy and Dingy into office and keep them there are the ones that won’t even know they’re serfs, even after a lifetime of Russian-like drudgery, ’cause their leaders will keep telling them how well off they are compared to what it would be like if the Republicans were in charge.

    And they’ll STILL believe them because their chosen ones wouldn’t lie to them now, would they?

  4. Neo says:

    I am just perplexed by this new “doctrine of fairness.”

    Besides the fact that fairness or being fair isn’t referenced once in the US Constitution or, thanks to a story in the WSJ some twenty years ago, there is no word for “fair” or “fairness” in many languages, we are now propelled into using fairness as our rudder.

    While the idyllic notion of fairness is laudable, there really is no definition of fairness that is recognizable to all. I doubt there is any case law to support a definition. It instead becomes, much like beauty, “in the eye of the beholder.”

  5. Judge Jeanne Pirro excoriates O’Dingleberry. Calls him and his execrable minions liars about 1,000 different times and ways. A 580 foot grand slam all the way.

    Beautiful and brainy – she’s got it all.

    Bye bye Dhimmicruds. Just think, the correct party will put 100 different Ted Cruz’s up for election AND ALL OF THEM will win! LOLOLOLOLOLOL!

    Talk about nuclear powered PWNAGE.

  6. TomTB says:

    We don’t need to look any farther than the peepuls paradise of Cuba. There a Doctor makes less money than a bartender (the ones that serve the fat touristas like Michael Moore), and they are forced to go to whatever backwater country fidel and his brother think are still too stupid to see the folly of socialism.