Patterico's Pontifications

3/1/2010

ObamaCare and the Nanny State

Filed under: Government,Health Care,Obama — DRJ @ 1:10 pm



[Guest post by DRJ]

Tom Maguire comments on President Obama’s health care summit anecdote (at the link) about his problems with car insurance:

“So what does this anecdote from the Great Communicator tells us? Well, it might tell us he is as dumb as a bag of rocks for not understanding the difference between liability and collision insurance.

But let’s give him the benefit if the doubt! I am trying to think like a Lib here, so bear with me – the moral of the story seems to be that even Barack Obama, future editor of the Harvard Law Review and President of the United States, found simple insurance decisions utterly mystifying and had no idea what he had actually purchased.
***
Well. If even Obama can be duped by greedy insurers into saving his money and taking a sensible risk, what hope do the rest of us have? Surely we need these new health insurance mandates to make sure both that we buy policies and that the policies we buy have everything we need, not just everything we (stupidly think we) want.

This is classic, generic Democratic paternalism – people can’t be trusted to make their own decisions and they certainly should not be expected to endure the consequences of those decisions.

Young Barack should never have been allowed to buy liability-only insurance that didn’t cover damage to his junker. Barack, Nancy and Harry will protect us from our own deplorable decision making on the health care front.”

I think there is a corollary to this and that is many people are willing to be protected. Some people — most often the young, single parents and elders — want government to look out for them. Life is uncertain and they worry they don’t have the skills, energy or time to handle its challenges.

There was a time when that’s what family and friends were for but, in today’s world, government is everyone’s new best friend.

— DRJ

31 Responses to “ObamaCare and the Nanny State”

  1. And then we all went bankrupt protecting everyone with our fairness.

    bill-tb (541ea9)

  2. “And then we all went bankrupt protecting everyone with our fairness.”

    Bunning is doing his part to help. He’s single-handedly cut medicare reimbursements by 21%.

    imdw (603c39)

  3. I’m sure you are right that many people are happy to have government relieve them of the responsibility of making decisions for themselves. If, however, this is how most people feel, or even close to half, we are in deep, deep trouble. The Tea Party movement and blogs such as this provide a mechanism for (re)educating our fellow citizens on the basic principles upon which this democratic republic was founded.

    Tim K (7e41e8)

  4. Another point:
    If the car he was driving was truly a “junker”, it might not have been insurable for comprehensive due to age.
    Many insurance companies IIRC just won’t write comprehensive for cars greater than 10-yrs old – unless you go “stated value” and have substantiated valuation analysis.
    Plus, as many have pointed out, if he was rear-ended, why was he contacting his insurance company to cover the damage? It would normally be the responsibility of the party at fault.
    Stupid, or deceitful?
    I vote: Yes!

    AD - RtR/OS! (aa95b5)

  5. Tim K:

    If, however, this is how most people feel, or even close to half, we are in deep, deep trouble.

    I agree.

    DRJ (daa62a)

  6. If they’re honest, most people would admit they would be okay if they were taken care of and saved from the negative consequences of their actions.

    How else would liberal proposals ever get traction?

    To twist the old adage, a liberal is a conservative who is facing foreclosure… or self-employed with existing medical conditions precluding health insurance… or invested with Bernie Madoff… or fired from a long-term job just because the boss ‘felt like it’.

    steve sturm (369bc6)

  7. And Tim K and DRJ: I hadn’t seen your comments when I posted, but I reiterate ‘MOST’.. which, being more than half, is why we’re in deep, deep trouble.

    steve sturm (369bc6)

  8. Teh One did not understand his own insurance decisions back then, and judging from his anecdote, apparently still does not. Yet we should trust them to understand how they want to handle over 1/6th of the economy. No thanks.

    JD (61b80d)

  9. I’ve forgotten whether young Baracky was just an Ivy League college graduate with a shiny new degree, or the recently graduated President of the Harvard Law Review at the time of this accident. If he was a Harvard Law grad unable to figure out that, when you get rear ended, you’ve got a virtually slam dunk case against the other driver and that driver’s insurance company, then I’m doing a deep discount on the value of a Harvard Law degree.

    Mike Myers (3c9845)

  10. As usual, I am left wondering if he is that dumb or that dishonest, and, as usual, the audience answers “both” or “does it matter?”

    Still amazing that this person was elected.

    Maybe states should require not only having car insurance in order to own a car, but to actually understand it.

    MD in Philly (e347b2)

  11. you’ve got a virtually slam dunk case against the other driver and that driver’s insurance company

    But that assumes the other driver has car insurance, which probably 50% of those driving in Philadelphia do not. Not sure how Chicago compares.

    MD in Philly (e347b2)

  12. I’ve been rear ended several times but only one had insurance and that was Farmer’s so I got rear ended again by them.

    Machinist (9780ec)

  13. Bunning is doing his part to help. He’s single-handedly cut medicare reimbursements by 21%.

    Really? All by himself? I guess I forgot about the Bunning Amendment to the Constitution which states that laws can be passed by Jim Bunning without the consent of any other members of either house of Congress.

    On a side note, I think Libertarians should rejoice in the knowledge that our President seems to be advocating no-fault car insurance.

    Some chump (050674)

  14. Some chump, the issue is that Congress scheduled a cut in reimbursements, and then in the kind of Kabuki theater that Democrats are so proud of, continually defers those cuts. Bunning objected to the latest bill deferring the cuts already legislated. So in essence, he did do it by himself – but only because it was previously set up in that backwards manner.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  15. SPQR, that’s hardly “by himself”. The cuts had to be legislated by other Senators. Just because Bunning is objecting to deferring the cuts doesn’t mean he’s made the cuts by himself.

    Some chump (050674)

  16. Some chump, wow, I’d almost think you didn’t read my whole comment …

    SPQR (26be8b)

  17. “SPQR, that’s hardly “by himself”.”

    He’s the only one standing in the way. Everyone else agrees to not have these cuts.

    imdw (1af0fd)

  18. Next … national auto insurance run by the government … everybody will have to have collision.

    Neo (7830e6)

  19. What could go wrong ?

    Everybody would be able to put the pedal to the medal and aim for the nearest tree.

    Neo (7830e6)

  20. imdw, that is amusing that you claim that “everyone” else agrees not to have these cuts since the Democrats have been relying on them as part of the fraudulent “savings” of healthcare reform.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  21. They were for those cuts before they were against them, SPQR.

    JD (c754d7)

  22. He’s the only one standing in the way. Everyone else agrees to not have these cuts.

    Standing in the way of what? Of deferring legislation that had already gotten a majority vote?

    He didn’t enact the cuts all by his lonesome. The cuts didn’t magically appear out of thin air. If the Senate really didn’t want the cuts, they’d take them out completely, rather than keep deferring them. It’s only by a very twisted use of the English language that you can possibly claim that Bunning made the cuts all by himself.

    Some chump, wow, I’d almost think you didn’t read my whole comment …

    I did read it, SPQR. I maintain that Bunning did not enact these cuts by himself. Further, even if Bunning gets his way and the cuts go forward in the Senate, the House of Representatives would have to approve them, too.

    Some chump (050674)

  23. “Standing in the way of what? Of deferring legislation that had already gotten a majority vote? ”

    The senate wants to pass the legislation continuing this funding by unanimous consent. He’s refusing to go along with this.

    imdw (2aa2bf)

  24. So they don’t have unanimous consent. Who gives a flying f*ck. The Dems have 59 votes in the Senate, and nothing is stopping them from calling a vote, other than their desire to demagogue this issue.

    JD (c754d7)

  25. I think Baracky made up the Acme Insurance story. Below is a quote from Illinois DMV. This refers to current law. Perhaps one of our IL posters know if it was law at the time of Obama’s phony story. Note that Uninsured Motorist coverage is automatically included in liability coverage.

    Under Illinois law, liability insurance policies automatically
    include uninsured motorist coverage at the
    legal minimum requirements for bodily injury or
    death. This ensures coverage if you are involved in an
    accident with a driver who is uninsured.

    State law does not require you to carry collision, comprehensive,
    medical payment or uninsured property
    damage coverage.

    Stu707 (0981d5)

  26. If Ms. Palin had said something similar, we’d have the accident report by now. Just sayin’.

    Diffus (02ac31)

  27. No sh*t, Diffus. Good point.

    The Bachelor is the single most noxious television show in the history of the world. There should be snipers.

    JD (cf0242)

  28. “So they don’t have unanimous consent. Who gives a flying f*ck. The Dems have 59 votes in the Senate, and nothing is stopping them from calling a vote, other than their desire to demagogue this issue.”

    Calling a vote also involves delays, since it takes up legislative time. Bunning also refuses to consent to a simple up or down vote.

    imdw (017d51)

  29. Oh good Allah, the poor little put upon legislature has to follow the rules they established. Why, it is just amazing.

    JD (cf0242)

  30. “Oh good Allah, the poor little put upon legislature has to follow the rules they established. Why, it is just amazing.”

    Yes I know. The rules are stupid and need to be changed. One reason they haven’t in the past is individual people weren’t cutting medicare payments and tossing workers in the street like this. The sooner we fix this, the better. But that may not be enough recourse for those doctors.

    Apparently even dish tv / satellite viewers are getting fucked by this guy. Unbelievable.

    imdw (8f8ead)

  31. Bunning: History’s (newest) Greatest Monster.

    When does the rotation back to Eric Cantor occur? Around Daylight Savings Time?

    Techie (43d092)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.0829 secs.