Blog on the Run: Reloaded

Wednesday, June 24, 2009 8:26 pm

So therefore we … uh, what?

Filed under: More fact-based arguing, please — Lex @ 8:26 pm

Shorter George Will: A publicly funded health-insurance program wouldn’t need to make a profit and so could provide services more efficiently than private insurance. That’s unfair to private insurance.

Oooooo-kay. And this is bad … why?

Something else all these anti-government types need to take into account: Social Security is popular. Medicare is popular. The VA health-care system is, by many objective criteria, the nation’s best. That’s not a compelling argument for a government-funded health-insurance plan, nor is it intended to be. But it does suggest that people who say government can’t do anything right don’t know what they’re talking about.


  1. Cheating is popular, Lattes are popular, Obama is popular, CO2 emmissions are popular, David Letterman, Rush Limbaugh etc etc etc. Since when does being popular make something good or even right? Popularity is merely the definition of plurality or overwhelming acceptance, and is not a definition of competence, reliabilty, or rightness.

    Comment by Jon Firebaugh — Thursday, June 25, 2009 3:58 pm @ 3:58 pm

  2. Uh, Jon, I wasn’t arguing that popularity is “a definition of competence, reliability or rightness.” I will concede, though that in the case of SS and Medicare, I confused things by using “popular” as shorthand for “popular because they work well and are perceived to work well” — with working well meaning “providing appropriate services with minimal overhead.”

    Comment by Lex — Thursday, June 25, 2009 4:03 pm @ 4:03 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Create a free website or blog at

%d bloggers like this: