Paul Krugman has a blog post today implicitly illustrating this bracing concept. His example, the cost of prescription drugs in the market model of Medicare-D vs. costs in the nationalized model of the VA, is exemplary in illustrating why so many folks on the far right side of the fence are still touting a solution that has already proven to be the poorer of two options.
Obama called for using Medicare’s purchasing power to reduce drug costs; Paul Ryan, in hisBut you see, Medicare-D doesn't work as well as the VA model. It just doesn't. It costs a lot more, and does less to control those costs. But Ryan is already convinced that market forces will always provide the better solution. So when faced with the reality that the VA in its non-market, socialized approach, has costs which are 40% lower, he does the only thing he can do: ignore reality, and press harder for what he knows must be right. And when I say convinced, I mean conviction in the most religious sense.
hissy fitresponse, held Medicare Part D — which specifically denies Medicare the ability to bargain — as an example of the cost savings that can be achieved through privatization
There is no difference between political ideology and religious faith when approached this way; if I suddenly had incontrovertible proof that there was no afterlife, I doubt that many religious people would simply shrug and stop believing.
Ideological beliefs must be approached less as universal dictates and more as moral guides. When your beliefs are countered with a reality that sings a different song, you need to reconsider your approach, or face the wrath of heaven.