Obamacare is Prime Example of Leaving Less Income For the Poorest 10 Percent

by Lon Hosford

The income of the poor decreases when a government increasingly chooses to control the economic freedom of its citizens.

On the other hand the income of the rich seems to continue to grow despite less economic freedom. Hence the cliche “the rich get richer and the poor get poorer”.

Income Share Constant For Poor

You can see the impact of reduced economic freedom on the poor in these graphs published by http://www.freetheworld.com.

Over the last decade, income share for the poorest 10% remains fairly constant between all countries: 2.5% – 2.76%. This means folks in the lower 10% have the same portion of the pie regardless of how much government intervenes into its citizen’s economic freedom.

But as government reduces economic freedom, the income for the lower 10% drops.

Mexican View of Obama

Obamacare is an example of restricting economic freedom. Already the United States sees the economic freedom of millions drop with higher health care costs, loss of full time jobs to part-time jobs, cut backs on hours of part timers and in general loss of jobs due to the government program, other than in the government itself. Arguments for Obamacare helping the poor look genuine on the surface. Those arguments mask theses results, that in the economic flow, the poor will lose in some other way. Basically they become poorer.

In the end Obamacare only ingratiates the wealthiest that supported it. In some ways directly by having the government bring insurance and pharmaceutical companies new customers and donations to political campaigns. It doles out a lower quality product to all whether or not they pay for it. The rich get richer and the poor pay for it with government control over their economic freedom.