Wolf Blitzer asked what to do about a young healthy guy, who decides to forgo health insurance but gets into a catastrophic accident he can’t afford.  Paul said he should be responsible for himself.  That sounds fine.  What it means, technically, is that an accountant is pulling the plug on a sick man who has a chance to live.  He mentioned the community coming together.  They certainly did that when his former campaign manager, who couldn’t afford COBRA, died of pneumonia and left $400,000 in medical bills to his loved ones.

I understand that Paul came up during a time when it was still possible to pay all non-catastrophic medical bills out of pocket.  Call it the era before MRIs and neo-natal NICU.  His campaign manager was a well connected man in the public eye, and had some wealthy friends.  That’s not most people.  All the church bake sales in the world can’t pay for a traumatic motorcycle accident, much less a micro-preemie.

If we had single payer, the guy in Wolf’s question, who had a job that paid well, would have contributed through his taxes.  And I know it’s unpopular to point this out, but public health is a public concern, just as air and water quality affect us all.  Complain about the nanny state all you want, but it benefits even the hoarders of money to have their burgers flipped by serfs who are not financially prohibited from getting their hepatitis treated.

Paul would require a woman to stay pregnant against her will, because “life is sacred”, but would let her die if she couldn’t pay her hospital bill from intensive care.  That means life is more sacred than liberty, and money is more sacred than life.  It’s not exactly hypocritical, but it’s certainly monstrous.

Advertisements