Obama - Economic Magician?

Stossel, talking about invalid criticisms of Obamacare, does what he does so well - tell a compelling story anyone can understand:

"But even if some conservative Republican critics are wrong about Section
1233, there is good reason to worry about Obama's nationalization
scheme.
The reason can be found in Econ 101. Medical care doesn't grow on trees.
It must be produced by human and physical capital, and those resources
are limited. Therefore, if demand for health care services
increases-which is Obama's point in extending health insurance-prices
must go up. But somehow Obama also promises, "I won't sign a bill that
doesn't reduce health care inflation."
This is magical thinking. Obama, talented as he is, can't repeal the
laws of supply and demand. Costs are real. If they are incurred, someone
has to pay them. But as economist Thomas Sowell points out, politicians
can control costs-by refusing to pay for the services.
It's called rationing.
Advocates of nationalization hate that word because it forces them to
face an ugly truth. If government pays for more people's health care and
wants to control costs, it must limit what we buy.
So much for Obama's promise not to interfere with our freedom of choice.

This brings us back to end-of-life consultation. As the government's
health care budget becomes strained, as it must-and, as Obama admits,
already is under Medicare-the government will have to cut back on what
it lets people have.
So it is not a leap to foresee government limiting health care,
especially to people nearing the end of life. Medical "ethicists" have
long lamented that too much money is spent futilely in the last several
months of life. Are we supposed to believe that the social engineers
haven't read their writings?
And given the premise that it's government's job to pay for our heath
care, concluding that 80-year-olds should get no hip replacements makes
sense. The problem is the premise: that taxpayers should pay. Once you
accept that, bad things follow.
In the end, perhaps the biggest objection to nationalized health care is
the "principal-agent problem." For whom does the doctor work?
Ordinarily, the doctor is the agent of the patient. But when government
signs the checks and orders doctors to reduce spending, it is not crazy
to think that this won't influence their "advance care planning
consultation."
Freedom is about self-determination. Obama's health care scheme would
undermine both. "
http://www.reason.com/news/show/135549.html