Single-Payer Advocates Don’t Care About Facts

Kevin, MD links to the latest salvo in the ongoing debate between David Hogberg and Matthew Holt over the quality of American health care. Because Holt is hopelessly outclassed in this contest, Hogberg easily mops up the floor with him, concluding with the following question:

Why do you want to give the U.S. a health care system that leads to more sickness and death?

The answer, unfortunately, is that advocates of government-run health care aren’t really interested in outcomes. Indeed, they aren’t especially interested in health care. As I discuss here, it’s all about piety. They believe that the morally superior person is for socialized medicine, so they loudly proclaim their allegiance to the cause.

That is why Holt and his fellow travelers are impervious to objective data. No matter how many times you show them that ”single-payer” health care is inferior, they remain unmoved. For these people, arcane studies comparing health care outcomes are useful only as sources of easily memorized talking points. They don’t actually think about the facts they contain.

UPDATE:

The Health Wonk Review features Holt’s puerile response to Amy Ridenour. I notice that Holt has been strangely silent on this subject since Hogberg slamdunked him on his ostensibly unanswerable questions.

Comments 2

  1. Matthew Holt wrote:

    I’m glad that in you Mr Browning has a new friend, equally happy to besmirch anyone he’s doesn’t agree with. And the “facts” that you have that I’ve missed are which exactly?

    Posted 26 May 2007 at 10:42 pm
  2. Catron wrote:

    My point isn’t that you have “missed? facts. It is rather that you don’t care about them, which makes it easy to ignore data or tailor them to fit your position on health care reform. An example of such tailoring is discussed in greater detail here.

    As to a willingness to “besmirch? people with whom one disagrees, your comment is a study in unintentional irony. Your blog is a cornucopia of ad hominem attacks. In this post, for example, the gratuitous cheap shots begin in the title and continue throughout.

    Posted 27 May 2007 at 6:44 am

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *