Laissez Faire Links: Government Shutdown, Delaying the Obamacare Mandate, the Morality of Abortion, and Myths Against Capitalism

What would a proper government shutdown look like?  Why will President Obama need to delay his mandate provision?  Can a woman be charged with homicide for aborting her baby?  Did capitalism cause the 2008 financial crisis?

  • Ari Armstrong over at The Objective Standard talks about a government shutdown that would be welcomed.  His brief piece Toward a Shutdown to Celebrate makes the point that most government functions are superfluous, and there are many.  Beneath the umbrella of laissez-faire capitalism, the proper function of government is strictly limited to protector of individual rights.  He states, “In order to protect rights, the government needs to run an effective military, police force, court system, and the aspects of government necessary to support them. Those, and nothing else, are the essential functions of government.”
  • Forbes contributor Scott Gottlieb discusses problems the new government healthcare exchanges are having out of the gate.  Why President Obama Will Have To Delay His Health Insurance Mandate makes the case that technical problems with the virtual exchange rollout will necessitate a delay in the requirement for those uninsured to purchase coverage.  His prognosis is not optimistic: “The Administration started building these systems late, and rushed them online, without perfecting these networks. Working them out now, in real time, is going to take months, and maybe a year.”  With that large of a delay, the Obama Administration will have to backpedal on its threat to penalize the uninsured.
  • Just a little more from our friends at The Objective Standard tells us about a possible Colorado ballot measure that would effectively criminalize any and all abortions, even in cases of rape and incest.  The measure would go further though.  In addition to calling for “homicide prosecutions for killing the unborn,” the “Brady Amendment” violates a women’s moral right to choose how she lives and what is best for her and her body.
  • Did Capitalism Cause the Financial Crisis?  This is a short, but invaluable video regarding the common myth that capitalism failed, resulting in the 2008 financial meltdown. Yaron Brook, Director of the Ayn Rand Institute, states that this is erroneous because a true system of laissez-faire capitalism did not exist prior to 2008.  What did exist was a degree of government intervention that distorted the market, leading to bubbles in asset prices that never would have existed under natural market forces.  It is no coincidence that the three most highly regulated industries – housing, banking, and mortgages – were those that failed.  Pay particular attention to his comments on the Federal Reserve system.  For more information, see my discussions of the Federal Reserve.


Laissez Faire Links: Myths Agaisnt Capitalism, Obamacare, Budget Talks, and the Index of Economic Freedom

Myths against capitalism, Doctors under Obamacare, budget cuts in lieu of growing government (how can that be?), and a decline in economic freedom for Americans are up for discussion today.

  • Check out Don Watkins’ new article over at the American on the common equation of successful businessmen with “greedy capitalists”.  The comparison often made between crooks like Bernie Madoff and successful businessmen such as Bill Gates or Steve Jobs are erroneous at best.  On the contrary, the two are polar opposites.
  • Ari Armstrong points out the new problem posed by Obamacare in Under ObamaCare, “The Doctor Can’t See You Now”
  • The Republicans are just as guilty as the Democrats regarding our growing welfare state.  Michael A. Laferrara discusses the supposed “cuts” from SNAP proposed by Republicans.  The important point to note, however, is that no entity in Washington questions the morality of federal assistance and its growing role in the daily lives of Americans.
  • Indeed, federal assistance has become its own institution in Washington, often dominating political issues as fundamental and basic as the fiscal budget.  The current shutdown is a result not of politics in itself, but a fundamental disagreement between left and right on the scope of government involvement, symbolized most prominently by Obamacare.  The Senate rejection of House budget proposals along with current polls of Obamacare indicate that Washington listens little to the people when making decisions that affect them on a daily basis.

In every poll conducted by eight major national pollsters this year, opposition to the Affordable Care Act outweighs support. In the September 2013 CBS News/New York Times poll, for example, 39 percent of respondents approve of the law and 51 percent disapprove. In the mid-September Kaiser Family Foundation poll, 39 percent have a favorable view of it and 43 percent an unfavorable one. The late September CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll found 38 percent in favor and 57 percent opposed.

Obamacare Exchanges Falsely Called ‘Marketplaces’

via Google Images

It seems the new propaganda coming out of Washington attempts to disguise Obamacare’s state-run health care exchanges as “marketplace” exchanges. The deceit is of course that Americans will retain their freedom of choice when purchasing health care, or for making the decision to purchase any care at all for that matter. Most of us realize the deception in this, but the following piece from the Daily Caller’s Twila Brase, President of the Citizens’ Council for Health Freedom, indicates the smoke-and-mirrors approach often taken by governments to pass and garner support for unpopular legislation.

The left-leaning Herndon Alliance reported on research that determined the best words to use to sell exchanges to the American public. The research found that the term “marketplace” was the best option, particularly with members of the public opposed to Obamacare or opposed to big government. Adoption of the word “marketplace” in place of “exchange” is now being promoted at both the state and federal level. For example, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services recently changed its exchange terminology. In an effort to build support for the exchanges, the HHS eliminated the term “health insurance exchange” and replaced it with “health insurance marketplace.” These efforts to dupe the public are disingenuous.

The reality is that on state insurance exchanges available health insurance plans will be limited by a host of federal regulations; personal privacy will be violated, because the exchanges will be connected to various state agencies and a wide variety of federal agencies — including the Department of Justice, the Department of Defense, the IRS, the Social Security Administration and the Department of Health and Human Services — that will share citizens’ data without consent; the federal government will use an individual’s income, tax, employment, medical, family and citizenship data to determine eligibility for coverage and premium subsidies; and it will be impossible to purchase health insurance without federal approval.

You can read the whole article here.

Dr. Yaron Brook on Government, Healthcare, and Individual Rights

The following is a brief address given by the Ayn Rand Institute‘s Yaron Brook on the inherent immorality of government involvement in health care.  As the Supreme Court finished up its hearings this week, much attention will continue to focus on whether the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act will remain in tact, broken apart, or simply overturned.  What is important here however, is Dr. Brook’s focus not on the constitutionality of Obamacare’s individual mandate, but on the moral rightness of individual freedom.  Dr. Brook points out that such morality exists solely from the right of ownership of one’s life.  It is critical to realize that this tenet lies at the heart of the American experience; it is the essence of what America was founded upon.  Obamacare, then, while seeking to provision health care to 40 million Americans simultaneously destroys the very foundation of western democratic society.



On an additional note, you can find the Supreme Court transcripts for the hearings here.

Related Posts:



Despite Vinson’s Ruling, Obama Dictates State Enforcement

President Obama may claim the new title “Dictator” outside the beltway, as he decrees to states the mandatory enforcement of ObamaCare despite Judge Vinson’s ruling against the individual mandate earlier this year.  Ethan Huff’s article from Natural News paints an eerie picture for the future of Washington politics and American citizens beholden to its policies.  Despite the individual mandate infringing on states’ and citizens’ rights, a deeply embedded principle manifested in the Constitution via the Tenth Amendment, Obama continues to trample upon the principles of liberty and self-determination.  One wonders how the President of the United States of America can sleep at night while he attempts by day to defy over half the states in the Union.

via Google Images

“At a recent meeting with US state governors in Washington, DC, President Obama made clear his intent to force the individual states to comply with his unconstitutional health care overhaul. Twenty-six states have already filed federal lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of the bill — and some judges have already declared it to be null and void — prior to the announcement….
In eerily dictator-style fashion, Obama stated to the governors that they are free to come up with modifications to the bill that will help make it enforceable more quickly, but that any attempts to dismantle it will not be tolerated. Such a proposition, of course, is a gross violation of the law, as a president cannot arbitrarily oppose the will of the judicial branch and demand that unconstitutional provisions be enforced.”

Click for full article→

Perhaps Judge Vinson’s recent stay with the condition that the Obama administration file an appeal within seven days or the ruling stands has lead the President to a fit of irrationality.  Not likely.  He is simply continuing the trend of government expansion characterizing much of American history since the New Deal, and Judge Vinson is none to happy.  In Vinson’s March 3rd ruling, he stated,

“So to ‘clarify’ my order and judgment: The individual mandate was declared
unconstitutional. Because that ‘essential’ provision was unseverable from the rest
of the Act, the entire legislation was void. This declaratory judgment was expected
to be treated as the ‘practical’ and ‘functional equivalent of an injunction’ with
respect to the parties to the litigation. This expectation was based on the ‘longstanding
presumption’ that the defendants themselves identified and agreed to be
bound by, which provides that a declaratory judgment against federal officials is a
de facto injunction….It was not expected that they would effectively ignore the order and declaratory judgment for two and one- half weeks, continue to implement the Act, and only then file a belated motion to ‘clarify’.”

Important to note here is Vinson’s emphasis on a “de facto” injunction.  For those unfamiliar with the term de facto, Black’s Law Dictionary defines it as “Actual, existing in fact: having effect even though not formally or legally recognized.” Judge Vinson, therefore, is saying that common knowledge of our judicial system establishes a tacit agreement to any ruling the judge declares.  That said, the hypocrisy coming from the Obama administration is blatant and smacks of a degree of arrogance usually reserved for the likes of America’s Dick Cheneys.  Such antics are viewed by most as an attempt to implement as many provisions of ObamaCare as possible before the courts get another say in the matter. Peter Suderman says of  Obama’s antics: “The thinking seems to be that the the [sic] more of the law that’s implemented, the harder it is to undo. Vinson’s ruling gives them the stay necessary to continue implementation, but says that they can’t postpone resolution forever.”

Make no mistake, implementation of ObamaCare represents a new step forward for federal rule with or without Vinson’s ruling.  But the Obama administration’s chicanery in response to the ruling signifies a new threat.  As Monty Pelerin (pen name) said: “From the Constitution and The Rule of Law flow all the greatness and goodness of this country. Without them, we are finished.”  It seems the ball is in the states’ court, as they must now decide just how far presidential authority can reach.  If they maintain resolve and continue to oppose ObamaCare’s implementation, they will force the president to abide by the law.   If successful, they will embellish the term “Union”  with a refreshed meaning and renewed vigor in the face of federal power.

Related Posts:


%d bloggers like this: