NYT on Obamacare's Economic Inequality Neutralizer
You thought this administration was all about wealth distribution before? Obama is not content with perpetuating the anti-citizen policies of his sycophant predecessor, he's taking it one step further and insisting Obamacare is his attempt to put wealth back into the hands of the lazy, stupid, or otherwise unqualified.
I've been punished my entire life for being intelligent, now I might as well accept my fate, get fat on government cheese and soak the government for all its worth while I still can. Hell, why don't I squeeze out another kid or two too?
For all the political and economic uncertainties about health reform, at least one thing seems clear: The bill that President Obama signed on Tuesday is the federal government’s biggest attack on economic inequality since inequality began rising more than three decades ago.
Over most of that period, government policy and market forces have been moving in the same direction, both increasing inequality. The pretax incomes of the wealthy have soared since the late 1970s, while their tax rates have fallen more than rates for the middle class and poor.
Nearly every major aspect of the health bill pushes in the other direction. This fact helps explain why Mr. Obama was willing to spend so much political capital on the issue, even though it did not appear to be his top priority as a presidential candidate. Beyond the health reform’s effect on the medical system, it is the centerpiece of his deliberate effort to end what historians have called the age of Reagan.
Speaking to an ebullient audience of Democratic legislators and White House aides at the bill-signing ceremony on Tuesday, Mr. Obama claimed that health reform would “mark a new season in America.” He added, “We have now just enshrined, as soon as I sign this bill, the core principle that everybody should have some basic security when it comes to their health care.”
What was that about Reagan?
Since Mr. Obama began his presidential campaign in 2007, he has had a complicated relationship with the Reagan legacy. He has been more willing than many other Democrats to praise President Reagan. “Reagan’s central insight — that the liberal welfare state had grown complacent and overly bureaucratic,” Mr. Obama wrote in his second book, “contained a good deal of truth.” Most notably, he praised Mr. Reagan as a president who “changed the trajectory of America.”
But Mr. Obama also argued that the Reagan administration had gone too far, and that if elected, he would try to put the country on a new trajectory. “The project of the next president,” he said in an interview during the campaign, “is figuring out how you create bottom-up economic growth, as opposed to the trickle-down economic growth.”
Listen, I'm not your average conservative. I may own a "Reagan for President" t-shirt but I don't believe in the Republican utopia of the conservative majority. Gays getting married? Hell yes, let them. Abortion? It's not for me to tell you what you can do with your bag of unborn babies, you can work that out with your conscience yourself, Dr Death. But wealth distribution? How in the hell do you encourage a country that already gave up its industry to the third world to actually work when you have guys like Obama insisting what's yours is his and what's his is, well, still his?
Anyone want some Jelly Bellys?