In an address last week, President Obama presented to Americans the false alternative he always does when it comes to health care: choose between his destructive law, Obamacare, and the crumbling status quo before the law’s passage.
As the Supreme Court heard arguments last week about the constitutionality of Obamacare’s contraception mandate, a lower court considered another aspect of Obamacare: whether the law is actually being implemented as it was written.
On February 19, the UA Objectivist Club and College Republicans are inviting the public to the University of Arizona, where Dr. Yaron Brook will debate Dr. Keith Joiner (professor of Medicine, Cell Biology, and Health Promotion Services at the University of Arizona) on the morality and meaning of Obamacare.
You’ve no doubt heard Obamacare referred to as a train wreck. It’s a good metaphor for a number of reasons, not the least of which is the fact that train wrecks don’t just destroy the train, they cut a swath of destruction through the countryside.
The American Enterprise Institute recently published a paper, authored by eight economists, detailing the alternative health care system they prefer to Obamacare. I disagree with much of what they have to say, but I want to focus here on one crucial problem: The paper tries to achieve the impossible.
Obamacare requires young people to pay higher health insurance premiums in order to subsidize older people’s coverage. But don’t worry, say Obamacare’s defenders: Many young people will qualify for federal subsidies to offset the higher premiums.
