Ron Paul: The “Right” to Healthcare is Based on Theft and Coercion

Healthcare and Economic Realities

by Ron Paul

With passage of last week’s bill, the American people are now the unhappy recipients of Washington’s disastrous prescription for healthcare “reform.” Congressional leaders relied on highly dubious budget predictions, faulty market assumptions, and outright fantasy to convince a slim majority that this major expansion of government somehow will reduce federal spending. This legislation is just the next step towards universal, single payer healthcare, which many see as a human right. Of course, this “right” must be produced by the labor of other people, meaning theft and coercion by government is necessary to produce and distribute it.

Those who understand Austrian economic theory know that this new model of healthcare will cause major problems down the road, as it has in every nation that ignores economic realities. The more government involves itself in medicine, the worse healthcare will get: quality of care will diminish as the system struggles to contain rising costs, while shortages and long waiting times for treatment will become more and more commonplace.

Consider what would happen if car insurance worked the way health insurance does. What if it was determined that gasoline was a right, and should be covered by your car insurance policy? Perhaps every gas station would have to hire a small army of bureaucrats to file reimbursement claims to insurance companies for every tank of gas sold! What would that kind of system do to the costs of running a gas station? How would that affect the prices of both gasoline and car insurance? Yet this is exactly the type of system Congress is now expanding in health insurance. In a free market system, health insurance would serve as true insurance against serious injuries or illness, not as a convoluted system of third party payments for routine doctor visits and every minor illness.

While proponents of this reform continue to defy all logic and reason by claiming it will save money, I worry about cataclysmic economic events. Already investors are more reluctant to buy US Treasuries, fearing that the healthcare bill, along with other spending, will cause government debt to explode to default levels. I had the opportunity last week to address my concerns with both Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, especially about the potential for the coming serious inflation. I am not optimistic that these important decision makers truly understand what is coming, why it is coming, and how best to deal with it.

The Federal Reserve finds itself in an unprecedented and unenviable position. To keep up with government spending and corporate irresponsibility, it has increased the monetary base by nearly $1.5 trillion since September of 2008. Excess bank reserves remain at historically high levels, and the Fed’s balance sheet has ballooned to over $2 trillion. If the Fed pulls this excess liquidity out of the system, it risks collapsing banks that rely on the newly created money. However, if the Fed fails to pull this excess liquidity out of the system we risk tipping into hyperinflation. This is where central banking inevitably has led us.

The idea that a handful of brilliant minds can somehow steer an economy is fatal to economic growth and stability. The Soviet Union’s economy failed because of its central economic planning, and the U.S. economy will suffer the same fate if we continue down the path toward more centralized control. We need to bring back sound money and free markets – yes, even in healthcare – if we hope to soften the economic blows coming our way.


  • My brother recommended I might like this website. He was entirely right. This post truly made my day. You cann’t imagine simply how much time I had spent for this information! Thanks! best reseller hosting | reseller hosting |

  • Cyndi H.

    To Fred the Protectionist……..
    Your messages seem not only judgemental, but also uncontrolled. Maybe more people would appreciate your thoughts if you took the time to calm down after reading messages that have irrated you. It appears you are not fond of Sarah Palin, but you could use some lessons from her on how to control your emotions. During the vice president debate, I feel both Biden and Palin did very well with controlling their emotions. That is very important in any discussion.

  • Fred the Protectionist

    You know if the open-border/free-traders hadn’t destroyed so many good paying jobs in the first place then we wouldn’t need socialism (healthcare, minimum wage, green-communism, etc…)

    But alas, now we need socialism because everyone is getting poorer (except the super rich). Thanks open-border/free-traders, you did this to yourself.

    • Fred enough with the empty and pointless rehtoric, You make no sense at all.

      • Fred the Protectionist

        Why do you hate Americans?

  • Wil

    Corporatism and Capitalism

    Hello, I have a question but can’t find a place to ask so here it is:

    “What mechanism can be put in place to guaranty free market won’t slip to corporatism?”

    Does minimizing the gov size is enough?
    In other words successful corporate from free market gain money and so can gain political power, how can we make sure they won’t affect the gov decision (food, monsentos, health care companies, cars, cigarette, stupid financial bailout….). For instance many agree to say cigarette is not good for people but still they are sold everywhere, how can we minimize their lobbying….

    Thanks for your explanation and helping me understand


    • wil

      I mean Corporatocracy (and not corporatism)


      • Fred the Protectionist

        The lefties have their own little words for what’s going on.

        definition CORPORATISM: The bad things that happens when open-borders/free-trade destroys the middle class.

        Unfortunately when you try to bash “The Corporations” cause of “Corporatism”, you don’t solve the underlying problem. So the answer isn’t with the left, it isn’t with the right, it isn’t with the Greens, it isn’t with the Libertarian nuts. It’s with people like Pat Buchanan or Ross Perot.

        • longshotlouie

          Maybe you can explain to the readers why you believe that corporatocracy could not happen with tariffs, tariffs, and more tariffs. Good Luck

          Again, tariffs are just another version of ‘command and control’ economy.
          The tariff history of the US in one lecture

          Read more: Know Your Tariffs — Mises Economics Blog

          • Fred the Protectionist

            I guess the ‘founding fathers’ (and every republican up till the 1920’s) were big believers in ‘command and control’ economy cause they only used Tariffs to power the government. Do you think the ‘founding fathers’ (and every republican up till the 1920’s) were fools?

            Oh you know better then them ‘founding fathers’ do you.

          • longshotlouie

            Just keep saying “the founding fathers’ and every republican up till the 1920’s” believed that crap and maybe it will come true.

            Again, you avoid the premise presented while repeating the laughable rhetoric.

            Any actual response to the lecture?

          • Fred the Protectionist

            That’s because the founding fathers and every Republican up til the 1920’s was an America First protectionist.

            Notice I left out all the Free-Traitors like the Democrats, the Democratic Party has a 200 history of Free-Traitorism. Free-Traitorism is new to the Republican Party, NEO=NEW.

    • Ryan

      *** “What mechanism can be put in place to guaranty free market won’t slip to corporatism [Corporatocracy]?”***

      Well, first off, we have a Corporatocracy right now, that much is clear.
      Ron Paul wants to change that.

      Ron Paul has stated many times over the years that, “I want the market to set interest rates [not congress, with votes bought by lobbyists].”.
      Basically, a free market is self-regulating.
      Economic competition between corporations keeps their prices as low as they can go, always trying to beat the competition. As a result interest rates remain at their lowest possible level.
      Of course, their needs to be anti-fraud laws and other checks on the system, but Ron Paul argues that preventative measures are better than regulatory measures.

      Ron Paul says it better than me here:

      You can also learn about the Austrian free-market economics that Ron Paul supports here:

      Also you can do a search for “Economics” here for additional articles (Above-right).
      Just start reading and you’ll get the gist of things.

    • longshotlouie

      Corporatocracy is a sypmtom of the plutocracy, which is enabled by government

    • Libertarian777

      well I think we need to answer Wil’s question more directly.

      He’s basically asking what stops companies from getting huge and taking over the world. And yes, that is possible to some extent, however no company that I know of has done it for very long.

      E.g. General Motors 20 years ago was so large and powerful they could pretty much do whatever they wanted to. Now? They hardly exist.
      Toyota fought to be the largest maker of cars, which they succeeded in, at the expense of quality controls. Now? they’re losing market share to Ford.
      And so it goes on.

      What everyone else is alluding to is, if government really does get out of the way, and limits its powers to things like orderly bankruptcy, enforcing contracts etc. and ensuring no one party is favoured over another, then the free market itself will take care of these companies over time. However, what currently happens is due to political lobbying, companies get the government to enact legislation that favours one party in favour of another (e.g. health insurance bill just passed, favours the 3rd party payer system, and consequently strengthens health insurance companies’ position; but weakens any hospital that does NOT want to do a 3rd party payer system or does not want to use a health ‘insurance’ type of system).

      A couple of other examples are Lehman Brothers, Bear Sterns, Wachovia, Countrywide etc. had massive excess risk (and return to the CEOs / executives), but the free market punished them. However the government stepped in (not to get into that discussion of whether it was necessary or not), and changed the rules of the game midway through.

      A good example of free markets, in my opinion, are micro-loans. These are loans that even banks are not willing to take (too much risk, too much administrative costs), but there are organisations (not run by the government) that enables micro businesses to start by loaning small amounts (literally like $20) to various individuals who need capital to start a business (mostly in the developing world).

      An opposing example is government and Freddie Mac/Fannie Mae and the resultant ‘sub-prime/ Alt-A’ blow up, where those two quasi-government entities were basically instructed by congress to make loans to everyone, business sense be damned. Countrywide made bad decisions and went under, yet Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac who made those same decisions still exists.

      P.S. The federal reserve now owns $1.25TRILLION worth of securitised mortgages from Fannie Mae / Freddie Mac.

  • Kay

    What scares me even more than Obamacare is the government’s forcing harmless people to take dangerous psychiatric drugs against their will. That is one of the biggest violations to freedom and the Constitution.

    It especially is upsetting that so many children and teenagers, especially foster kids, are forced to take these psychiatric drugs. I know that some of these kids have suffered very painful side effects from these drugs, and some of these kids have even died as a result of these drugs.

    Dr. Ron Paul, I really would love for you to run for President in 2012 so that I and many others can feel safe living here in America.

    Someone mentioned recruiting Sarah Palin as your running mate should you decide to run. Although I don’t know how she stands on all of the issues, I do like the fact that she supports limited government and personal freedom. I’m sure that there are also a few other good politicians that you could choose from as your running mate. Also, if your son shares your general views, then maybe he could be your running mate.

    But whether you decide to run or not, please continue to broadcast your views to the public, the media, and other leading politicians so that America will no longer remain an unsafe place to live.

  • Machine

    Right to take care of yourself…”
    I do not associate myself with the republican or democrat party…I simple choose to (hmm) think outside both those boxes. History shows that both parties – over the past 100 plus years – does not have “the peoples intest”. The Obama Party is no different. If national health care is “for the people” than it should be voted on by the people…Not elected greedy liars who are pressured by their party and baught out by corporate lobbiest.
    I – like many of my family and friends – work hard…which enables me to take care of my needs. However, I cannot afford to pay for medical insurance; and if the company I work for ( a local mom and pop buisness) is FORCED to provide health insurance they WILL go belly up. Todays health insurance policies are for BIG corporations, the rich and elite…It will be no different with a socialized system; it will continue to rob Peter to pay Paul.
    So what I am saying is that YES we need to do something to change the way health insurance works/costs in America. However we MUST Not allow government to CHEAT us from our individual rights as Americans…We have already suffered enough at the hands of government swine.

  • Not even the uninsured will benefit from this government owned health care bill. We are all going to be taxed if we don’t chose what healthcare the government wants us to get.

  • Fred, too bad that one track mind of yours is so void of economic knowledge.

    • Fred the Protectionist

      This decade was projected to be a Free Trade utopia by Libertarians, Neocons, and Clinton Democrats. Oh what success. You destroyed the economy then turned around and handed the government over to socialists and Green Commies.

      Oh I forgot, you disowned WTO/NAFTA/CAFTA/etc when things started to turn south.

      • longshotlouie

        They lied to you and you fell for it, hook, line, and sinker.
        There wasn’t any free trade, or didn’t you notice?
        Just government trade.

        Now you’re mad at us?
        You screwed up. Own it.

        • Fred the Protectionist

          WTO/NAFTA/CAFTA/etc is free trade, why do you deny reality?

          • longshotlouie

            Sorry Fled, you’ve been duped.

          • Fred the Protectionist

            Why would a Free Trader like yourself want to get rid of NAFTA that would raise tariffs? You use doublethink liberally.

          • longshotlouie

            Fled, are you lined up with all ten planks of the communist manifesto?

          • Fred the Protectionist

            Are you calling the ‘founding fathers’ (and every Republican up till the 1920s) Communists cause they relied on the Tariff?

            How dare you call the ‘founding fathers’ Communists.

          • longshotlouie

            Which whine do you enjoy with red herring?

          • Fred the Protectionist

            Oh how cute, you are denying reality.

  • I believe the GOV has no right to intrude in my life. If I have not broken the law and pay my taxes they have no further right to force me into a health care plan I don’t want. It’s the forcing part that is the worst. The bill itself has some good parts as far as reining in the High cost of Health Ins. and the pre-existing condition reform that helps people get Ins. (I still think it will be to costly). But to play poker with the numbers and spend money betting on the come is just poor judgment. The country got in trouble for making bad decisions with money, betting on the come and spending money you ‘May’ make is fool hearty and that’s called living beyond your means. What part of BUDGET do the DEMS not get? Then again the GOP has not been much better. Get in office Ron Paul and get Sarah Palin to be your running mate. She’ll clean up the waste, you run the country. God Bless America

    • Fred the Protectionist

      Ron Paul and Sarah Palin, oh that’s a good one. Man people are so ignorant.

  • Fred the Protectionist

    Boy Ron Paul has a one track mind, to him everything in the world revolves around the Federal Reserve.

    Well I have a one track mind too; you types destroyed the middle class (here) with free trade and other cheap foreign labor exploitation techniques.

    • Machine

      Please Fred share with me what you would do if you could have a “wack” at the country. Where would you start…Foreign Policy, Economic Policy, etc.

      …or who do you feel is the person for the job…Obama? or???

      Seriously I’m currious.

      • Fred the Protectionist

        Tariffs, Tariffs, and then more Tariffs. Not embargos, not quotas, Tariffs.

        • Citizen

          Dear Fred the P.
          Clearly you are neither well read or well informed about the NEGATIVE effects that TARIFFS have on an economy.
          We’ve experienced TRADE WARS of various types in the 19th and 20th Centuries, they devastate the economy and impoverish the nation in the process. Only the Government and Big Business get rich and Jobs are NOT Created,
          We’ve been there, Done that, TARIFFS DO NOT CREATE JOBS.

          NOW can you contribute a comment on the current topic, that
          Government health care is both Theft and Coercion???

          • Fred the Protectionist

            Every founding father and every Republican up till the 1920’s would disagree with you.

            Tariffs DO CREATE JOBS along with generate revenue for the federal government, and free trade destroys jobs among other things like promote socialism and destroy national unity.

          • longshotlouie

            Not sure whether Fled is afflicted with selective memory or full-bore ignorance.

            Every founding father and every Republican up till the 1920’s ?
            Where should we rank this on your TOP 10 dumbest statements?

          • Fred the Protectionist

            Why do you hate history? The founding fathers (and every Republican up till the 1920’s) were big believers in the Tariffs. Before the 16th amendment, Tariffs was the only way to tax, that also makes you a 16th amendment lover.

            So not only do you hate history, but you love the 16th amendment.

        • longshotlouie

          Tax, Tax, and then more Tax

          Thanks, Fled.

          • Fred the Protectionist

            Actually you free traders are the “Tax tax then more tax” types. This is because by nature Tariffs are more subject to the Laffer curve, where income taxes are not.

            If a Tariff is too high, it is quite easy to move a factory to the US. If an income tax is too high it’s not so easy to escape it, the only sure way to escape income taxes is to change nationalities; or hold your money, but you have to eat and sleep somewhere, and you can’t hold onto your money forever.

            You free-traders basically gave the Federal Government free reign to tax your brains out.