In his column in today’s New York Times, David Brooks rapidly trots out three standard conservative fairy stories (a charitable way of describing willful and outright lies) that are at the core of conservatives’ attempts to prevent affordable healthcare in America and ensure the profits of their masters in the insurance, pharmaceutical, and hedge fund industries.
Actually, the column is about Chuck Hagel, but Brooks has chosen to get there by telling scary republican campfire stories about healthcare.
Follow below the orange squiggle of sanity for a reasonably complete destruction of Brooks' silly screed.
The first scary, scary myth is that the cost of healthcare must rise, “like a jet taking off from LaGuardia.” The second is the idea that we are talking only “Federal Healthcare Spending,” as if healthcare spending by the government is divisible from private healthcare spending and all other healthcare spending will be just fine as long as we don’t pick at it. And third, that there are, “No conceivable tax increases that can keep up with this spending rise.” All of these ideas are outright lies, but let’s pretend that David Brooks isn’t merely fulfilling his duties as a feckless shill for the political agenda of the pro-corporate right and actually, simply has no idea what he’s talking about. Again.
Let’s look at these conservative “just so stories” and let’s begin with the middle one: “No conceivable tax increases can keep up.” Now Brooks may simply be being literal, that he himself cannot conceive of such a tax increase and so, he believes, no one else can, either. In that case, he’s simply an idiot and why is he typing for a national newspaper like the Times?, I wonder. But, of course, what Brooks means is that such a tax increase is utterly impossible and, more to the point, undesirable. He “supports” his claim one way by stating, “The Democrats had their best chance in a generation to raise revenue just now, and all they got was a measly $600 billion over ten years.” Umm, David, you do know that the Democrats weren’t out in the Mojave desert peeking under rocks, looking for lost nickels, right? You do understand that the reason the Democrats “failed” to raise more revenue was the concerted efforts of the Republican party to ensure that America’s healthcare needs (or any others) are not paid for, right? That when it comes to a choice between saving American lives or propping up the enormous wealth of the ultra rich (American or not), Republican politicians don’t give a rats ass how many Americans die, penniless and abandoned in the gutter, as long as the rich lose nothing in the deal (and, of course so long as they, the Republican politicians, get their own socialized, gold-plated, taxpayer-funded healthcare in perpetuity). It was the Republican party that actively and deliberately prevented more revenue from being raised, not some imaginary Democratic incompetence, or the wilful failure of the Democrats to do the right thing. So the reason that such a tax increase is “impossible” is that republicans won’t let it be possible. No matter how necessary it might be.
Brooks also trots out a swath of unsupported claims about healthcare spending versus military spending, an imaginary European “Welfare State” crisis, the usual Republican calumny that European states are impotent and too weak to defend themselves or perform any military function at all. He balances it all on a citation from the hoary ghost of Oswald Spengler whom, I am sure, he presumes no one reading his column can identify, but who has a sufficiently scary, foreign-sounding name (He sounds German!) that is intended to send a shiver up the spine of his provincial readers. Spengler, he writes, “...was certainly correct when he told European leaders that they could either be global military powers or pay for their welfare states, but they couldn’t be both.” (Presumably, “European leaders” were told this during a seance, since Spengler has been dead for 76 years.)
For a little context, Oswald Spengler was a German writer (see! He is German! And scary!) who published a two-volume treatise on society and politics, Der Untergang des Abendlandes (the Decline of the West) during and just after World War One(!), that was a primary contributor to the philosophical roots of Nazism and fascism. Spengler predicted that “The West,” meaning Europe and America, but also including the majority of the world influenced by Europe and America, were destined for failure and decline because they were “enlightened civilizations” and thus inherently weak (basically just toss Nietzsche, Hobbes, and Goethe into a blender and hit purée). So essentially, Brooks is arguing that the writings of a Nazi sympathizer from a century ago are the sole basis for the European States’ support of universal healthcare which, in turn, is the sole cause of European military weakness and impotence. Quelle horreur! (And, just as an aside, again it can be seen that modern Republican political ideology has the same underpinnings as fascism and Nazism, and Republicans know this, they just hope no one else notices.)
Brooks is using Spengler to make the Guns vs. Butter argument of Joseph Goebbels (again, that Nazi thing): “We can do without butter,” said Goebbels, “but, despite all our love of peace, not without arms. One cannot shoot with butter, but with guns.” Of course ‘Guns vs. Butter’ with butter being the more moral superior, was a core principle of Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society and most Americans are conditioned to make that association. And, of course, this causes modern conservatives to denigrate the idea that butter might, in any way, be better than guns. Interestingly, it was Republican calendar girl Margaret Thatcher who said, “The Soviets put guns over butter, but we put almost everything over guns.” Oops. Also, it was Republican war hero and former President, Dwight D. Eisenhower who so forcefully and urgently warned us against the power of the Military-Industrial Complex which, even in his day, had taken a strangle hold on America. So Brooks is really arguing that the ideas and ideals of a man like Spengler are more informative of the Republican world-view than Margaret Thatcher or Eisenhower a generation and more later. Well, we cannot expect conservatives to be honest or consistent in their ideological underpinnings. As with everything, they pick a desired outcome and cherry pick their facts to support that outcome.
Brooks wants us to believe that the European choice to focus on the physical welfare of their people rather than world domination and the profits of the Military-Industrial Complex is an either/or choice and that they, unlike mighty America, have made the foolish choice to be weak but healthy, rather than powerful and sick. That European leaders might actually know what level of military strength they want and need, and know how much healthcare they need and can afford, and have made a reasoned, adult choice that serves both their military and social welfare needs equally and fairly never seems to occur to Brooks. It must be one or the other and they have chosen to we wimps!
Now, the point of Brook’s column is to abuse Obama and Chuck Hagel and “argue” against Hagel’s confirmation, but let’s continue demolishing his supports, first.
Brook’s other presumption, that there is no conceivable way to pay for the coming healthcare cost increases is ridiculous on its face. The cost of healthcare is not some monolithic monster which will be and is and can be unchangeable no matter what we do. Nor is it impossible to pay for. If it were, rational business people would be jumping out of the healthcare business like rats leaving a sinking ship, rather than getting into it, as they are. If the care is necessary, but there is “no way” to pay for it, why would any investor enter that business? You would have to know you were never going to get paid, right? But Brook’s point is not that America cannot afford the coming healthcare crisis, it is an argument against sensibly managing it and paying for it in the most cost-effective way. Rather, he wants to ensure the largest amount of money possible is extracted from the boom and shoved into the pockets of the hedge fund managers who are buying up hospitals and medical practices, and into the pockets of the for-profit insurance industry. Seen from a purely business perspective, the coming healthcare crisis is a dream come true: Billions in profits to be extracted from millions of sick people who cannot say no to the cost (well, they can say no, but then they die sooner and suffer more. So it’s really a kind of win/win). The only way you could say no to that scenario is if you have absolutely no regard for human life or the suffering of millions of people. You know, like a Republican.
Will there be a large health care bill coming soon? Sure. Millions of Americans are entering their old age and will require a lot of medical care. Will it be impossible to pay for this care? Presumably not, again, thousands of very rich people are betting that it will not only be paid for, but that they will be the ones to get paid.
The issue is not that America does not have the money, but how that money gets spent and how much it will cost. So Brooks is simply lying when he says there is no conceivable tax increase that can pay for the upcoming boom. Do Americans want a huge tax increase? Well, no, of course not. Would Americans like to see themselves and their families get the healthcare they need at the lowest reasonable cost? Yes, they would. Will they get that low, reasonable from the hedge fund managers and the insurance companies? No, of course not, the investors want the biggest profit possible no matter what happens to America in the process. So what is the solution? Well I’m sure you’ve guessed that I support a European-style single payer healthcare system, similar to our single-payer socialist military system (but well-managed, instead). But this isn’t a diary about how to pay for health care, but one to point out that David Brooks is an idiot or a liar, or both. So, let’s move on.
Brooks proceeds to trot out a lot of numbers and apparent absolutes, to insult and make shit up about advocates for education, children and the poor abandoning any possibility of seeing anything but ignorant, poverty-stricken children in America’s future because we have to pay for the impossible health care costs for ourselves, our parents, and our grandparents (those damned greedy old people sucking the food, education and wealth out of the pockets of our children!). Really, he’s just tossing whatever he can into the pot and stirring it as fast as he can to make as toxic and incomprehensible (and scary!) a brew as he can. His ultimate “argument” is that this unmanageable and impossible to pay for health care thing will beggar America and force us to make the weak choice of abandoning our mighty military strength (and, presumably, our Precious Bodily Fluids).
To this end, Obama has selected Chuck Hagel to begin the horrible decline of America into weakness and impotence. Yadda, yadda, yadda. The only way to save America is oppose Hagel! Yada, yadda, and more yadda. Obama bad, four legs good. Whatever.
Let’s just get this over with.
Now, if the health care crisis is as implacable and inevitable as Brooks wants us to believe, and the ONLY possible choice is between said health care and the decline of America into weakness by foolishly abandoning our military might, how does Hagel matter at all? Won’t ANY defense secretary have to make serious choices about how to reduce America’s military expenditures? How will opposing Hagel make any difference? Or is Brooks arguing that we should simply throw our elders under the M1 Abrams Tank and barrel full speed ahead over the screams and crunch of shattering bones to keep us strong and let the devil take the weak and feeble old people? Who knows? I’m sure Brooks doesn’t either. He is just fulfilling his job of scaring America and muddying the waters to keep us stupid.
Brooks’ job, in this column, is simply to throw crap at Hagel because he is Obama’s choice and nothing Hagel has ever done or said mitigates the Republican’s visceral need to toss their feces around like band of crazed, cocaine-addicted howler moneys.
The truth is, America has the resources to have good health for all its people, a strong military, an educated, well-informed populace, a strong middle class, good jobs, and a bright, safe, and positive future. But not if David Brooks and the Republicans get their way. Their way is the dark path to endless war, endless fear, sickness, death, and perpetual destitution and suffering for all but the top 1%.
And they will say anything, tell any lie, and do as much damage as they can to America and the hopes and dreams of her people in order to bring about that dismal, horrible future. Brooks current column is just more of the same. Same as it ever was.