The Charlotte Observer crafts another pitch for government growth and redistribution around this highly dubious study from the Annie E. Casey Foundation. Among the more dubious bits the Observer gloms onto?
"But more commitment of resources and attention are needed to address dire problems afflicting the state’s children. More infants die before their first birthday in North Carolina than in almost any other state — nearly 9 of every 1,000 births. The state ranks 46th. North Carolina has a higher percentage of low-birth weight babies than the nationwide average." -Max Borders
Hmmm. How do we know that low birth-weight isn’t a result of increased heroics in delivering and saving premies? That’s a good thing right? How do we know that this stat has to do with poverty? And if it does, could low birthweight be a result of drug dependence and not tie directly to poverty? This article suggests that these problems have to do with how much money government spends. But there are states in the study who spend far less per capita on ‘anti-poverty’ measures and yet score better than NC on these metrics.
Here, the Observer lauds the socialism of Emperor Easley:
"Such legislation and hard work could bear fruit on another front soon. Last week, Gov. Mike Easley signed into law a new state budget that will make affordable health insurance available to nearly 40,000 uninsured children. The N.C. Kid’s Care program broadens the income level to help children in families between 200 percent and 300 percent of the poverty line. Help is based on need, and families participate in paying the costs through deductibles, co-payments and premiums subsidized on a sliding scale."
Subsidizing socialized medicine for the middle class. That’s brilliant. I suggest here that many poor people could afford healthcare for their kids without more socialized Medicine. What Kids’ Care does is make healthcare more expensive for everyone as younger, healthier people are removed from the private market. -Max Borders