In his A Time for Choosing speech
on October 27, 1964, Ronald Reagan said the following:
"The full power of centralized
government - this was the very thing the Founding Fathers sought to minimize.
They knew that governments don't control things. A government can't control the
economy without controlling people. And they know when a government sets out to
do that, it must
use force and coercion to achieve its purpose. They also knew, those Founding
Fathers, that outside of its legitimate functions, government does nothing as
well or as economically as the private sector of the economy."
Government, like any
organization, becomes more and more inefficient the larger it becomes.
Look at the Post Office and Amtrak as examples.These entities are some of the poorest run in the country.Amtrak is now only a small percentage
of the size it once was and many aspects of the Amtrak system have been
partially privatized, including volunteers who serve at Amtrak stations in
communities.The volunteers often
serve simply to keep the trains running to their towns. The only reason
the Post Office and other government agencies are still afloat is because they
are agencies of the Government, and by association in the pocketbooks of
American citizens. If these were private institutions, many would have
gone bankrupt and out-of-business by now, as other more efficient and lower
cost providers would enter the market.
Consider the cash
for clunkers program. Did sales rise? Of course they did - for a
very short period of time. However, not only did the program run out of
money the first week calling for an emergency bill to increase the programs
purse, but it hampered longer term sales as well. The program in essence,
encouraged those in the market for a car to act sooner rather than on their own
timeline. Sales of new automobiles rose for a time, then dropped
dramatically once the program was complete.
The Washington Post reports that auto sales
dropped 11.8% after the program ended in August, and impacted retail sales 1.5%
Click Here for the Washington Post
You may remember in the not too distant past
when the government decided that every American should own their own home,
regardless of their ability to make the monthly mortgage payments. This
idea spurred on the low interest loans that were passed out across the country.
It was these low-rate, adjustable mortgage loans (whose interest rates
did rise) that led to the defaulted mortgages that fueled the fall of the U.S.
economy into the 2009 recession.
Sure, health care is an idea that in theory we
can all agree everyone should be able to access. However, having no
viable solution to pay for this coverage can only lead to intense economic
burdens with poor business outcomes that would eventually lead to a precipitous
decline in the quality of services.Further regulation of the health care field would remove the economic
incentives to take risks in research and development efforts; eventually
forcing the system to lose ground in seeking remedies and new cures for
diseases and illnesses.
Should the government mandate the purchase of
health care insurance?Sound off
in today's quick poll.