John Maynard Keynes, the economist who provided academic justification for statists to spend money and distribute political favors may have offered those same statists a solution for the high cost of health care too.

Keynes was the theorist who argued that deficit spending by government was necessary during recessions, which he said were caused by the inherent instability of markets. The government by his calculations would be the great stabilizer, making full employment possible. President Obama’s economic advisors and others like Nobel economist Paul Krugman, a columnist for The New York Times are so taken in by Keynesianism that the rest of the otiose media has fallen into line as well. Chris Matthews of MSNBC, whose episodes of frisson over Obama’s election were nauseating to watch, famously said, “We’re all Keynesians now.”

Today, the Congressional Budget Office released its estimates of the cost of the proposed health care reform proposal being worked on by Congress. Over 10 years the plan is expected to get coverage for a third of those currently uninsured, at a cost of one trillion dollars. Much consternation predictably followed concerning the projected three trillion dollars that would be required to get everyone covered. I noted one commentator who mentioned the calculation of $62,000 per person covered but offered nothing further. At $6,200 per year I’d say that could buy fairly decent private coverage right now. Why wait for 10 years? But, back to the problem that has captured everyone else’s attention: what to do about the projected cost of three trillion dollars to ensure everyone gets health insurance coverage? Let’s see what Lord Keynes had to say about too many people:

The time has already come when each country needs a considered national policy about what size of population, whether larger or smaller than at present or the same, is most expedient. And having settled this policy, we must take steps to carry it into operation. The time may arrive a little later when the community as a whole must pay attention to the innate quality as well as to the mere numbers of its future members.

Population control, that’s the ticket. Euthanize the weakest, or control birth rates and family sizes. How about getting rid of one or more identifiable groups? There you have it, the logical end of identity politics with a powerful central government. If you think it can’t happen again, consider that a lot of so-called Progressives were part of the eugenics movement.

Perhaps such concerns are not necessary though. With the inevitable rationing that will come with a government controlled health care system the result for some will be the same: a State death sentence.

©Copyright 2009 Edward Podritske