David Brooks is absolutely right to focus on the pipe-dream that cutting healthcare costs can solve the fiscal crisis Obama inherited from Bush that has metastasized with the recession. Bruce Bartlett has even grimmer news after looking at the new trustees' reports on social security and Medicare.
Sully goes on to list new data showing that combined Social Security and Medicare consume 8.1% of GDP.
What gets me about this is that Andrew is absolutely obsessed with what is, in the grand scheme of our budget issues, a very trivial issue (Social Security, 1.3% of GDP) and completely dismissive of any attempt to reign in healthcare which consumes over 15% of our GDP. I honestly have no idea how any thinking person, which Andrew certainly is, can maintain a state of such obvious cognitive dissonance on this subject.
It's clear from his writings that he abhors any sort of national medical program but at the same time he steadfastly refuses to make an affirmative case for our current healthcare system. He simply refuses to acknowledge that a system that is on its way to consuming 1/5th of American GDP is at the root of our fiscal crisis while he directs all of his ire at one of the few succesful social safety net programs this nation has. It's truly bizarre.
He lacks any capacity for rational thought on the subject of healthcare and the budget. He hates Social Security and he hates government healthcare so, facts and reality be damned, Andrew's going to attack those programs every chance he gets.
No comments:
Post a Comment