I keep getting forwarded e-mails from “conservative Republicans” moaning about Obamacare. Of course, none challenge the ethical idea behind it – this notion that people have a right to medical care and it is the obligation of others to provide it, at gunpoint if need be (the latter ugliness never mentioned, even in passing).
These Affordable Care Act critics will cackle all day long on Fox News about the “glitches” plaguing the Obamacare web site, about the rising cost of premiums, over policy cancellations because the old policies didn’t meet the new Obamacare Mandatory Minimums. But they won’t touch upon the only question that matters.
I despair, because the battle’s been lost – and these fools don’t even realize it.
Imagine whining that a bully used brass knuckles instead of his own knuckles to break your nose. This is the essence of the Republicans’ utilitarian objection. Not that the bully broke your nose – but how he did it. If he did it some other way, then it would ok.
Hence, the bacon-faces in the Senate will talk about reforming Obamacare, or starting over… with a “new plan” (their plan) which of course will be a better plan.
What none of them will talk about – not even Rand Paul – is questioning the very idea of bacon-faces in Congress (or jug ears in the White House) force-feeding their got-damned plans to anyone. That maybe medical care is, like any other work of human hands, the rightful property of those who create and provide it – and of those who buy it, with their own got-damned resources.
It is tragic that there are people who are ill or debilitated. They are entitled to sympathy – arising from empathy. Certainly, they ought to be helped.
But they are not ethically entitled to use violence to obtain so much as a tongue depressor. One man’s misfortune is not a claim enforceable at gunpoint on another.
Civilization is premised on this concept. That people are not beholden to one another except in terms of treating one another with respect and civility absent just cause (such as in self defense against aggression) to do otherwise. If that critical prop is kicked away – if it is replaced by the odious notion that one man may legally, via the mechanism of the ballot box, take from another, may enslave him (to any degree) in order to improve his own condition, with violence or its threat as his cudgel – then the death warrant of civilization has been signed.
It remains only to be executed.
Obamacare enshrines this notion – and thus, signs and executes the death warrant of whatever remains of the free society America once was but is no longer – because so many of her people have rejected ethical action and embraced the Republicans’ utilitarian human hyena-ism.
If, after all, every person is entitled to “care” – that is, to force others to provide it merely because he needs it and they posses the means to provide it – then surely every person is also entitled also to every other thing they need – from a roof over their heads to clothes on their backs to food in the ‘fridge. And not merely a roof – but a nice roof (perhaps architectural shingles) and designer clothes and rib eyes in the ‘Fridge – plus a flat screen TeeVee and an Escalade parked outside, too.
If not, why? What is the ethical argument in opposition?
All that’s left is squabbling over how much, who from – and how. This is mass-murderer Vladimir Lenin’s formulation of government: Who does what to whom.
And the Republicans? They are like the woman in the story attributed to Winston Churchill (or perhaps it was WC Fields, it doesn’t really matter). He offered a woman $1 million dollars if she would agree to sleep with him. The woman readily agreed. Whereupon Winston (or WC) inquired: “Well, how about $10?” The woman, greatly offended, shrieked back: ‘What kind of woman do you think I am?” Winston/WC shot back: “Madam, we have already established that. We are now haggling over details.”
That is what Republicans gave away when they refused to take an ethical stand against the underlying premise of Obamacare. Not that it “won’t work” or will “increase costs” and ought to be “repealed and then replaced.”
They should have said, simply: It is wrong to use one man’s misfortune as the basis for imposing misfortune on another man. Charity is good, neighbors and friends and families voluntary coming to each others’ aid in times of need, superlative. It brings out the best in people. Using bayonets and billy clubs, threats and cages – brings out the worst in people. It turns them into animals – scavengers – fighting over the corpses of their fellows.
This argument holds water. It is five feet thick – and re-bar reinforced. It leaves the proponents and defenders of Obamacare no choice but to bare the fangs behind their disingenuous smile of “progressive” and “liberal” (and yes, “compassionate” conservative) false humanity. For there is nothing less humane than slavery – the chaining of one human being to another. But this form of it is particularly odious because of its subtlety.
Rather than a single master, we each become one another’s master.
It pours acid over empathy – and gradually extinguishes the natural and normal desire of men to help one another. Instead, people grow to resent one another. Your neighbor is no longer your neighbor. He is a guy whose “health care” imposes an obligation on you and your family no different than if you’d borrowed money from him at interest. Only he gets to set the amount of the principle – and the rate of interest – and you will never be able to pay off the “debt.”
If you think things were bad, pre-Obamacare – denial of coverage for pre-existing conditions, stifling bureaucracy, high cost – just wait until the full weight of Obamacare descends and nothing about your life and how you live it is yours (and your own business) anymore.
Smoke? Your neighbors now have a claim on you – to be enforced at gunpoint. Eat red meat? The same. Exercise not “enough”? Duly noted; it will be reflected in your premium. By the way, how are your relations with the wife? Do you get angry much? What kinds of books do you read? And so on – with everything.
It is the natural, the inevitable consequence of accepting the utilitarianism that underlies Obamacare. And the only antidote is the rejection of utilitarianism – and an insistence on ethics. The ethics of the golden rule, of non-aggression and self-ownership and voluntary cooperation.
The result of that would be people taking care of each other – rather than preying on each other.
But don’t expect to hear it from a Republican.
Throw it in the Woods?
PS:This site is almost entirely reader supported now. No Google. (They blacklisted us – so we dumped them. See here for the full story about that.)
So, please: We need your support to make a go of it and keep EPautos rolling. If you like what you see, consider supporting this site. The link to our “donate” button is here. You can also mail stuff our way – if you prefer to avoid PayPal. The address is:
721 Hummingbird Lane, SE
Copper Hill, VA 24079
Mama Liberty had positive experiences as a hospice nurse. She knows how hospices are supposed to work.
The problem is that the new bioethics—which has been phasing in over the past 20 years, long before Obamacare—has changed hospice like everything else. No one dares discuss this openly in the lamestream media, but hospice is now a place to go to be killed, not to die painlessly of natural causes.
Too many stories are appearing online of people’s loved ones entering hospice today and suddenly dying tonight or tomorrow. Too many other stories are appearing of loved ones being dehydrated/starved to death in hospice a la Terri Schiavo. The model of giving enough pain medicine to allow a dying patient to go in dignity while still being able to enjoy family and last meals is going fast. My dad knew personally of two people who died within a day or two after entering hospice, and because of their circumstances he had to conclude that hospices are now actually practicing euthanasia under the table, so to speak.
There are good reasons to avoid doctors and hospitals like the plague these days, and these reasons were in place long before Obama. His signature legislation simply codifies and entrenches these practices. At hospitals now, families all over the US for the past several years have commented about finding “DNR” (do not resuscitate) orders on an elderly loved one’s paperwork, even though this was quite contrary to that person’s expressed wishes. The medical staff’s response? “Oh, I don’t know how that got on there.”
Doctors are less and less trustworthy. Obamacare will simply speed up the process of losing trust. The trend was already in place before the legislation.
DrDoo, and your point is? Naw, just messin with you. Go tell your neighbor. They’ll either gasp and slam the door or say Ain’t it a fact? Well, you’ll know where each other stands. I have to drive to go ask my neighbor…but not nearly long enough.
The fucking terrorist parasites that call themselves “Voters” and “Government” want you to live for them…and they ARE the numerical MAJORITY. Democracy IS terrorism.
Hi, DrDoo –
You make a really good point. Democracy is terrorism. Random, unknown strangers inflicting violence on you. Taking your stuff whenever they want to.
Hat tip, sir!
IMHO, those posting Hospice horror stories usually don’t have realistic expectations about their loved ones’ prognosis.
If your elderly LO has been wheelchair or bed bound for years they’re at risk for dying pretty much anytime.
I saw my mom (diagnosed around age 50 with a rarer form of dementia) spend her last several years in bed suffering from repeated infections, which one would expect (humans aren’t meant to lie in bed for months or years on end).
We treated those aggressively with oral antibiotics (her written directive prohibited IV antibiotics), but in hindsight all that did was extend the length of her terminal illness by nearly six years.
After witnessing the above, my written advanced directive will be modified to specify “no antibiotics, period” for any dementia diagnosis.
I have no desire to lie in bed suffering from the typical complications that come – the first round of pneumonia (or other infection) can be the last as far as I am concerned.
Ohio Amish Girl & Family Flee To Avoid Chemotherapy
Registered nurse and attorney Maria Schimer, who can now make medical decisions for the girl instead of her parents.
“All I know is that she and her parents don’t seem to be at her house,” Clair Dickinson, an attorney representing Schimer, said, adding that the last time the 10-year-old received a round of chemotherapy was in June.
Maria Schimer an unspeakable banshee ghoul, may she rot in hell some day.
“Every day that goes by without treatment, Sarah’s chance of surviving her cancer is diminished.’
With chemotherapy, her chances of survival increase to 85 per cent.
By associating with the predatory state, and becoming a soul-less parasite, my chances of making money off innocent a suffering Amish girl increases to 100 per cent.”
Ravenous succubus patior-phile Clair Dickinson
“I will use treatment to help the sick according to my ability and judgment, but never with a view to injury and wrongdoing. I will abstain from all intentional wrongdoing and harm, unless I can get a lot of publicity and also my name in the paper and therefore further my career.”
Sorry I couldn’t get the link for this article I found on Yahoo! News today.
But as usual big Pharma think one size fits all, and parents have no rights.
“Amish Girl With Leukemia, Family Flees US to Avoid Chemotherapy
“A 10-year-old Amish girl with leukemia and her parents have left the country to seek alternatives to chemotherapy, according to the family’s attorney.
Sarah Hershberger and her parents oppose chemotherapy, and have been fighting the Akron Children’s Hospital in court after the family stopped Sarah’s treatment. Her parents said the treatments have caused their daughter a great deal of pain, and they’d rather focus on herbal and natural remedies.
“It’s the constitutional right, but [there’s a] moral right to refuse conventional medical treatment,” the Hershberger’s attorney, Maurice Thompson, told ABC News Wednesday.
“Ohio Hospital Can Force Chemo on Amish Girl, Court Says
“An appeals court ruling in October granted an attorney, who’s also a registered nurse, limited guardianship over Sarah and the power to make medical decisions for her. The court said the beliefs and convictions of her parents can’t outweigh the rights of the state to protect the child.”
Linda, here in Tx. not only did Republicans decide nobody should get abortions but they passed an equally bad bill that put the fate of the person on life support, not on his family or anyone who might have something to contribute but solely on the doctor who has to answer to no one and gives him and hospital administration total immunity from legal action. Insurance companies and hospital bean counters were very happy. If you know someone who will or might end up on life support, get them the hell out of Tx. Just remember, hospitals and insurance have their own priorities.
Hospice Data. Real life conduct.
As libertarians/anarchists/christian conservatives we are often forced to parse and reason in thick of the briar patch of statism, so that we can determine what is currently happening, and what we can do to make things better, make ourselves freer.
We are building better future realities, yet also dwelling in the current statist shacks, but with our eyes and minds wide open.
The only lasting solution, as Mama Liberty points out, is a free unfettered market. But what is to be done today, in the interim?
2011 Hospice Results
1.65 million patients received
services from hospice including:
• 1.06 million patients who died under hospice care in
• 313 thousand who remained on the hospice census at the
end of 2011 (known as “carryovers”)
• 278 thousand patients who were discharged alive in 2011
for reasons including extended prognosis, desire for
curative treatment, and other reasons (known as
“live discharges”) .
3,300 Hospices and Businesses – Are they hiding the truth?
My friend Jenny (1980-2013)
She was to undergo a complete bone marrow transplant and cutting edge therapy, but at the last minute she failed a leukemia test and was rejected from the program as not a viable candidate. This left her with no options, the hospital’s “bag of tricks” was exhausted.
Towards the end, all her blood cells turned into white blood cells and she had dozens of different types of leukemia all at the same time.
She was live discharged to her home as part of the hospital’s hospice protocols, and died within 24 hours at her own home. I’m unsure of the details of how this was executed, but I know this was her choice.
I’d like to see Christianity take a seat at the discussion of health care, but I have great misgivings about these issues from the 1500s.
Discovery of the New World – Churches made common cause with kings and Europeanized it by force.
Institution of sex-prohibition/celibacy in the Catholic church. Very 1984esque – priests are celibate. They have always been celibate.
Failure of churches to partake in the industrial revolution or in international free trade. They seem eager to hold everyone back, freeze the world in its pre-1500 state forever.
Persecution and torture of scientists by the church. The churches are unreasonable about scientific methods and advances. Does not science and technical knowledge also come from the Creator?
Prophets and Jesus discuss holy writ as the good news. Not the only news nor a source of imposing a “Thought Monopoly.”
Religious owned and operated hospitals seem to have adapted and accepted modern reality, but at the Pastor and Priest level,
not so much.
Christians and Health Care
The Christian Tradition of Healthcare
– uggh. how many millions die needlessly from malaria, yet all the Christians and Socialists can talk about is mosquito nets. Freaking butchers is what they are.
Hospice Reality Check
* If the Gov gave a crap about improving health care, they would take action to increase the numbers of providers. Cut the red tape. Maybe provide tracks for chiros, vets, PAs to be doctors. Tracks for nurses to be chiros, vets, PAs.
Allow for free travel of health providers throughout the world. Create health special economic zones, where there are no bureaucratic regulations whatsoever.
1. End of life care. The US is ranked number 9. Commonwealth nations, Holland, and Germany do it better. What improvements could be made to improve our standing?
2. Death, although inevitable, is distressing to contemplate and in many cultures is taboo. Even where the issue can be openly discussed, the obligations implied by the Hippocratic oath—rightly the starting point for all curative medicine—do not fit easily with the demands of end-of-life palliative care, where the patient’s recovery is unlikely and instead the task falls to the physician (or, more often, caregiver) to minimize suffering as death approaches.
We should invest in innovative solutions, convene strategic partnerships, remove market distortions, and seek solutions and discussion on challenges. Seek to increase excellence in eldercare.
We should get people thinking and talking about a universally taboo subject —death & dying—and to highlight the urgent need for improved care for the dying.
3. I should like us to have the same plethora of new options with end of life medical care that we have with online shopping. What would the health version of Amazon, Netflix, and Craigslist look like?
4. We should discuss accusations and praises of hospice. For our purposes, providers of hospice are no more sacred than deliverers of pizza. Here we table all the bluster, boasting, and old authoritarian tricks, and soberly examine each brass tack.
5. In many cases, hospice takes action at the behest of one family member, and other members out of the loop, or in denial, will wrongly perceive it is hospice acting on its own. If hospice “killed Kenny” perhaps someone asked them to do so.
Hospice killed my mom – (fringe discussions)
I have a much better idea, Tor. How about freedom? The absolute free market, where each patient, family, provider and professional make their own choices, decisions and agreements.
The government doesn’t give a crap. It never has, and it never will.
Music to my ears, ML. Mexico and Singapore for instance seem anecdotally to be much better on that score.
Medical Freedom Zones – Wyoming Liberty Group
Getting to Medical Freedom – Daily Anarchist
Health Freedom Movement
Obamacare – one giant leap in the wrong direction
The main problem with health care in the USSA is that the people receiving the care, i.e. the patients, are not the ones who have the final say, or who pass the bucks around.
The only reason I go to a doctor sometimes, is to get a prescription. Because the laws say that a pharmacy cannot freely sell to me unless a state-licensed doctor has given me permission. They also say that a doctor cannot write a prescription for more than 12 months — that they must see me at least once a year. In a sense, I’m treated like a child.
Some say that people are not competent to make their own decisions in medicine. But I think people should be presumed competent, just like the presumption of innocence.
People are afraid of mistakes in medicine which they don’t understand, and so the perceived costs of actual mistakes on people, and the costs spent to avoid mistakes (like malpractice insurance), are artificially high. Guess who pays?
If we were responsible for our own care, and if the true costs were reflected directly at the doctor’s office or hospital instead of being hidden behind an arbitrary price system created by insurance companies and governments, then people could make rational decisions on their health care.
If we had ownership of our own health care, and if instead of doctors and insurance companies making the decisions for us, we made the decisions, then we could be free, and health care costs would go way down. But are not free, and are instead controlled by a pharmacracy of insurance and drug companies in bed with the government.
Single payer is not the way to go — that only concentrates power even further into the hands of a few, who will surely be listening to lobbyists and political donors and drug companies, more than they will be listening to you and me.
Single payer puts too much power in the hands of one agency, who, no matter how much funding it receives, cannot omnisciently predict all of the needs out there and allocate resources accordingly – the economic calculation problem.
We need to separate medicine and state. Make medical decisions individual rights.
We lost medical freedom with the passage of prescription drug laws around the same time the Federal Reserve was created — coincidence? Prior to that, you could buy any drugs at the pharmacy without prescription.
People had the freedom and responsibility to make medical decisions wisely. Going to the doctor wasn’t as expensive as it is now, so an accident or illness wasn’t financially life-threatening.
Now, with third parties paying directly for our medical care, be it insurance companies or government, we are not allowed to make the decisions, nor can we feel the true costs of medicine (they are artificially inflated or subsidized), nor do service providers compete for our patronage, because insurance companies or governments pay for it directly either way, and because the buck doesn’t stop with the patients but goes to third parties.
We’re like helpless children, and the government likes it that way, as do some elites and some people who would rather not be responsible for their own health care.
The main fallacy is to assume that the costs that exist now, are that way by necessity, and that any reform must take on these costs head-on.
No, they are that way because the feedback loops which regulate prices in a free market, are missing. People obviously want health care, but since they are not the ones paying for it, and since there’s not free competition in medicine where the customer is king, there’s nothing to tell doctors and hospitals what should be the best allocation of their resources. They just guess, and when they are wrong, pass the costs onto everyone.
If a single-payer system were adopted, and government regulated costs by force, then we would have shortages and angry people on waiting lists willing to pay more, but unable to receive care, because there would still be demand, and the state forcing the costs down would prevent communication of that demand to providers and de-incentivize new providers.
If a doctor’s prices are regulated from going up during periods of increased demand relative to supply, there will be less incentive for doctors to enter practice and there will be shortages. This is an economic law with the same force as the law of gravity, yet many people deny it or think that it can be escaped through man-made laws.
Also the state’s experts, not matter how smart they are and no matter how much they try to predict, can never reach optimal allocation of resources for health care because there is always something they will miss and will assign too few resources to, or something they will over-allocate for.
No system will be perfect, but one in which the decisions are made locally and freely is more desirable than one where decisions are made far away by disinterested or conflicted parties.
These things are best communicated through a price system, which can smooth things out, and where private actors closest to the action feel the costs and take the risks.
The problem is that right now the price system cannot work because people receiving care are not the ones paying, and people are not allowed to buy medical goods or services without extensive state regulation, which imposes rules on the relationship and imposes high startup costs which are passed on.
Also, the rules imposed by governments and insurance companies are very black-and-white. Instead of a price being able to communicate a relative value taking local information into account, prices are fixed by fiat.
Or instead of allowing a price to reflect a relative risk which can be offset depending on a patient’s preferences, a rule is imposed arbitrarily to control that risk without the patient’s consent.
When these things happen, the inevitable economic consequence is that the price is going to be reflected elsewhere, either in a hidden cost paid somewhere else, or in a shortage of medical services to society, or in patients who avoid medical care until it becomes critically necessary.
Prices often convey information which is unarticulated by the parties, such as relative preferences among alternatives.
If prices are not allowed to work freely, and are replaced with another system like prices set by insurance companies and governments, then lots of hidden information which gets communicated through pricing but which isn’t articulated or even known by the respective parties, gets lost.
Separate medicine and state. Abolish prescription drug laws, and all other drug laws. Teach medical awareness and self-responsibility early in life.
Allow those who are competent, to make their own medical decisions with or without a doctor. Remove third-party payment providers. Separate health care from employment — put ownership of health insurance back into the hands of the beneficiaries.
Put ownership of people back into their own hands for everything. Ownership, and responsibility. Who decides who is “competent” or not?
And a good way to start the process is to TAKE ownership of yourself. Quit taking the chemical medicines and find alternatives. Quit going to the doctor unless something is REALLY broken or leaking bad… Learn how to strengthen your immune system, your whole body, with good nutrition and stress management.
Quit enabling those who have already decided that you are not competent.
As far back as the 19th century, Britain introduced “poison books” at chemists, so that people contemplating poisoning would know that they would be spotted and to make it easier to catch anyone who tried it anyway. The idea wasn’t to interfere with sales for other reasons, but the law did affect how business was carried out. Didn’t the U.S.A. even have the equivalent of that before the 20th century?
PM, it may have existed but I bought cyanide as late as the late 80’s. I don’t recall buying it but twice in my life, the first time being in the early sixties and both times for varmint control. You could buy cyanide guns baited with fat to shoot in the mouth of a predator like coyotes. It was so popular around 1960 that people literally vanished the coyote population. So how that work out? Not too good since rats took over and rabbits ate crops by the droves. We had people buy us bricks of .22 ammo so we could shoot dozens of rabbits per night using spotlights. We thought it great fun at the time I was buying some cyanide one day at the pharmacy and since I was the only one there the pharmacist, a good family friend asked me if I was having varmint problems. I think I said something like No just problems with mama or something like that.. He laughed and said that should fix it.
Tor, the person who complained about her mother being murdered is rightly chagrined but only if her mother wasn’t going to die. Mama takes me to task over what I said. We have a failure to communicate. My father was going to die, sooner or later, in a matter of days or a couple weeks. Euthanasia would have much preferable from my point of view. If you enjoy watching your loved ones gradually succumb to the inevitable, then by all means, torture them. I am a realist. I kill animals so I can live, I’m not a touchy, feely kind of fool who doesn’t understand life and death. My sisters probably were and the surviving one probably still is. Once again, I guess you can’t please everyone although you could have pleased all of us if I had just announced my father and I had gone to look the cattle over in the pasture and only one had come back alive….if I was the one pulling the trigger. I’m guessing, somewhere deep inside, I loved my father more than they did because I would have been willing to end his sorry life. In his right mind, he would have agreed with me. My sisters have/had a serious disconnect between living and dying, killing and eating. I can only wonder how many people like them would finally come to understand the living of on animal is due to the death of another. Unfortunately that disconnect bleeds over into the lives of family and that’s a shame. If you want hospice to slowly let your loved one die, fine, If you can live with that, I can too, it won’t be on my conscience. I have a problem with it though when it comes to people I love.
Mama, I’m proud you did your best and glad there are people like you. Bottom line, euthanasia should be an option. Back in the day when everyone including the patient knew death was soon, doctors gladly allowed euthanasia. I have sat and watched a loved one die from an OD and saw that pain on their face turn to peace. I guess I’m just too old to understand the New Way, the way of the new age, of people who don’t understand death and dignity. When the time comes, I hope I can go sit against the tree, give the old earth one last look and send my brains skyward. I only wish the state would let me stay there for my loved ones sake, certainly not for my own since my worries will be over. Hey coyotes, badgers, skunks, rats, dinner is served.
I don’t support making euthanasia “illegal” but I don’t think “The person was going to die anyway” is an argument. Everyone is going to die anyway, eventually. Where do you draw the line for how long one has before “Going to die” is imminent enough to justify euthanasia?
Its one thing to take someone off life support. I see nothing wrong with that, if they aren’t going to survive, let them die naturally. Its another thing to deliberately kill someone because “They’re going to die anyway”. I don’t think that’s ever morally acceptable. Legally, yes it should be up to the patient or, if necessary, his closest relatives, but I don’t think active euthanasia could ever be moral.
David, I hope you’re not paraphrasing me. Wait till you are the go to guy for somebody who has maybe a couple suffering weeks to live and the only thing they want to do is die and sooner rather than later and then you’ll have an idea of what people go through daily. I”ve seen people who were previously radical bible beaters begging to die. There are times people are injured to the point survival is not possible and they’re suffering so much they beg to be killed. You wouldn’t do that for them? I never implied it was easy….just the right thing to do. I’m not speaking of hypotheses, I’m speaking of real life experience, a big difference.
Euthanasia might be a solution for the few who make up their minds too late to take their own life, but it should always be clearly the wish of the patient. Otherwise, it is much too easy to cross over that line into murder. This is especially why health care professionals should never be involved.
You see hospice as somehow allowing a person to die slowly, suffering. That may well happen in some cases, but not for lack of trying to provide quality time and comfort. Regardless, this is the choice of the patients and families, not anyone else. What you or your family prefers is not relevant to the choices made by others. What seems rational and loving to you would be a total horror to others who are just as rational and loving, by their own lights.
In the 14 years I spent as a hospice nurse, most patients and families were glad to have the time together, to contemplate life and often to savor it, repair relationships where possible, or just do whatever it was they wished to do. Most of them had the option of suicide in reality, at some point. Not everyone chooses that.
All votes are counted before they take a vote, and any leftover opposition positions are sold to the highest bidder to look good for their constituents. The bills are always a lock beforehand.
But the system is crashing like the Titanic anyway, unless they can talk enough healthy young cows to join the insurance actuary pool. If not the system self destructs under its own weight. Just say NO, as in middle finger, would be my advice to the young workers. :
Then this from Carl Denninger at market-ticker.org
As the Obama administration’s health overhaul sputters in its opening weeks, insurers and advocacy groups are pursuing a new strategy in the quest to get millions of young people to sign up for health insurance: They’re appealing to their mothers.
In one cheeky campaign, AARP is urging mothers to send e-cards to their children reminding them to sign up. One e-card reads, “As a reward for signing up for health insurance, I’ll defriend you on Facebook.” Another group, Organizing for Action, is seeking to steer holiday conversations toward health care by encouraging parents to have “the talk” with their adult children. And a Colorado group is promoting an ad featuring a hapless young man who calls his mother from the golf course: “Yo, Mom, do I got insurance?”
Here would be my answer if my Mom was to send something like that to me:
Go **** yourself. With a chainsaw.
Theft is wrong. Intergenerational theft is doubly-wrong.
Hope you got a nice 401k and are completely self-sufficient as you age and ultimately die because if not you’re gonna be eating catfood and my door will be double-bolted when you get older.
And by the way, if you’re young and wondering how bad you are about to get cornholed by this crap I’ll tell you because I used to insure a lot of young people when I ran my Internet company. It was about $100 a month for a healthy young non-smoking person to buy insurance on the private market prior to
Obamacare, or a bit over $1,000 a year. That’s even with the insane price increases of late.
All the numbers I’m seeing for Obamacare policies aimed at the young 20-something person are at least double that price and instead of the $1,000 deductible they’re $5,000 deductibles in most cases, or five times as much if you actually get sick and need to use the so-called “care.”
And don’t start this crap about it being a “good deal” to stay on your parent’s insurance either. It’s not. The same screw job applies there too. It was cheaper for you to buy your own policy all-in and you got better coverage (by far) doing so than to be “covered” under your parent’s policy too as theirs is going to be gang*****d just like yours — if not now, next year when the corporate policies have to comply with Obamacare rules.
Incidentally if you’re wondering how bad that’s going to be there are estimates that as many as 80 million employees will be thrown off corporate policies. Why? Because they don’t cover men for pregnancy among other things. That would be about half of all corporate policies, which would be just about in-line with what I’m expecting to see. That’s not a mistake either — Obama knew damn well at least three years ago that would be the intended outcome of this law and he has lied to you and everyone else about it since.
Never mind that for this exorbitant price they’re now “covering” young women for prostate cancer and young men for endometriosis. If you don’t understand why that’s stupid you failed biology class in 9th grade and should immediately turn into your alleged “diploma.”
They can try to force people. But anyone who voluntarily plays along is a tool and a fool – and deserves what they get.
Don’t even visit the “marketplace.”
For me, this is an issue right up there with gun confiscation. They will have to come and get me, if it comes to that.
So be it.
I still find the act of forcing someone to buy something (regardless of the merits of the good/service) whether it is desired by the individual or not to be odious and not right.
In the case of health insurance: If this is such a good product, why is it necessary to make it mandatory at the point of a gun?
I see this mandatory plan as a means of corporate welfare for insurance companies. The insurance companies get the money from people that they can use to graft politicians to get more regulations/laws to favor their industry.
The insurance will not provide better health for an individual. It will make access to health care more restricted and expensive for more people than before this abomination of law.
The Affordable Boat Act of 2014
I am saved. Thanks to the ABA 2014.
Will I get horses for my boat or do I have to bring my own?
Adult kids and I have already had that ‘talk’. F**k BHO in the cornhole except rumour is he likes that too much. Conclusion – resist in the manner that causes them as much personal pain as possible while keeping the ratio of risk to the endurable minimum- hope for the best while preparing for the worst.
Grifters, busy-bodies, and narcissists having their sick, twisted decrees enforced by armed psychopaths in state approved costumes may be Just Karma for the willfully ignorant and the permanently foolish who gleefully voted to be enslaved but do the rest of us deserve to suffer under such evil?
UK Hospice run by Sister Frances Dominica arranges prostitute for 22 year old virgin suffering from Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy
Sufferers usually die by their thirties. The young man told staff that he wanted to experience sexual intercourse. He explained that he had hoped to form an intimate and loving relationship with a woman, but his disability had acted as a barrier.
According to him “it took me two years to decide this and I discussed it with my carers and my parents. Telling my mother and father was the hardest part, but in the end they gave me their support”.
Arrangements were made and he finally got the visit of a prostitute. He said it was not emotionally fulfilling, but the lady was very pleasant and very understanding.
I believe there is a far more insidious side to the Affordable Care Act than merely throwing a few bones to the insurance wolf pack, vote buying from the elderly, infirm and indigent, or even the additional tax revenue from those unable to afford the premiums. No, this is far worse than that. We have all these folks that have paid into the medicare / medicaid and social security systems expecting a return on their “contributions.” The PTB are well aware that the long term unfunded liabilities of these systems are going to be impossible to meet. Increased taxation will drive the economy down decreasing revenue. The “ins” know this. Monetary inflation (money printing) and borrowing are merely temporary “life support” measures and will eventually fail. There will be many angry and armed people looking for the heads of the aristocracy at the feet of Madam Guillotine at that point.
So what can they do to mitigate this potential threat? Why they must indoctrinate our young to their way of thinking and execute the old and the infirm. The Common Core of Learning does the indoctrinating and the Affordable Care Act will do the killing. How will they kill us? There are an estimated 12,000 to 42,000 deaths in UK hospitals and nursing homes each year due to acute kidney injury and dehydration. There are reports of the elderly drinking from their flower vases because they aren’t being given drinking water. This is how the PTB will take care of the problem of pensioners and their burgeoning healthcare costs without breaking the bank; they’ll simply let them die of thirst. Anyone that doubts that the people who run this country are incapable of doing this by medical proxy need look no further than what this same group of sadistic sociopaths has done by military proxy to children in Iraq and Afghanistan.
“I believe there is a far more insidious side to the Affordable Care Act than merely throwing a few bones to the insurance wolf pack, vote buying from the elderly, infirm and indigent, or even the additional tax revenue from those unable to afford the premiums. ”
I think so too. When holy government promises to provide for every need of its worshippers, it fails to mention that to do so will require taking everything they have and all they can produce for the rest of their lives. Government “provision” is a farce. What it provides for first is itself, its workers and upper level managers.
When those feeders at the trough are fed, there’s nothing left over to hand off to the supplicants who fell for their con job. Back in the early ’90s I read that 85% of funds appropriated for “social services” went to administration costs. So, our providential overlords take a thousand dollars from you, promising to give it back several times over in benefits, but they rake off $850 and shove it in their own packets before letting any of it go towards providing anything they promised to provide.
“There are reports of the elderly drinking from their flower vases because they aren’t being given drinking water. ”
Death by starvation and dehydration is what hospice care is all about, too isn’t it? The patient is kept drugged and allowed to die of dehydration and starvation while the “caregivers” tell the family that “the body is shutting down”. It would be revealing to find out how many elderly people who don’t have chronic, fatal diseases are being sent into hospice care.
There seems to be a common theme regarding people who subscribe to the idea of central control of everything: they always get around to the subject of killing off scads of people “for the greater good”. The end result of collectivism is always mass graves.
“Death by starvation and dehydration is what hospice care is all about, too isn’t it? ”
Good God no!! I spent 14 years in hospice care. Most hospice patients are able to stay in their own homes for the duration of their lives. Patients and families are active members of their care plans and nobody is ever denied food or fluids. Hospice nurses work very hard to provide whatever the patient and family needs or wants to promote their comfort, to make whatever time they have left the best quality time possible. This includes IV fluids and even tube feedings, many other therapies that did not used to be part of hospice. I suspect that hospice care will become even more widespread in the coming years, and hope it is always a choice made by patients and their families.
When the body DOES begin to shut down, the patient is treated with utmost respect and never allowed to suffer if it is humanly possible to prevent. Nobody lives forever, and we all must die somehow. If you prefer to be in a hospital, and die surrounded by machines and strangers, I do hope you get your wish. But such vicious and untruthful denigration of hospice is totally uncalled for.
” Death by starvation and dehydration is what hospice care is all about, too isn’t it? The patient is kept drugged and allowed to die of dehydration and starvation while the “caregivers” tell the family that “the body is shutting down”.
That drugged part is right on. Ever hear of Vitamin H? I guess old homes are notorious for giving out the Halidol to old folk. Give them a large dosage and they will be confined to their chairs just like Jack Nicholson.
God forbid that any of us have to die in a government facility. I don’t know about you folks but when its time for me to die I’m packing my hobo bag and going into the woods alone. It might be cold out in the wilderness, but not as cold as a government institution.
Hospice care not involving a certain facility is a great different from being transferred to the Hospice building(insert fancy name here, local politician). Once they see(weeks after everyone else can see it if you have that really good insurance)there is no coming back then you are moved to the Hospice facility where you are actually starved to death instead of a big old shot of morphine as they used to do with family gathered round.
Hospice care of people in their homes is completely different from the Hospice facility. Had both types, know it well.
On Obamacare, who is really upset with it? The people who lost their insurance and why are they upset? It’s going to be much more costly. I have friends who work alongside insurance and it’s easy to see the insurance companies just got a big handout, a huge handout in fact. You don’t see them complaining.
Don’t know where you are, 8, or what sort of hospice providers are there, but our company (a nationwide provider) had both home and some inpatient facilities, mostly nursing home type placements. The same nurses and other professionals, with the same philosophy, care for all of the patients wherever they live. Nobody is drugged or starved to death, EVER. Pain and symptoms are controlled, and all other needs met as long as possible. There does come a time when the body no longer requires or can utilize food, though hydration is necessary to the very last hour.
And these ugly myths about hospice simply drive away people who would definitely benefit from it. I’m simply appalled that anyone here would believe such lies.
If YOU or anyone has definite proof of wrongdoing by any hospice provider, one would hope you reported it, and saw to it the wrong ended. But don’t cast aspersions on all providers.
Mama, the hospice facility my father was in was very caring, if that’s what letting someone gradually die over a couple weeks is. Since he was incommunicato and had drugs to sedate him, who could say if he suffered or how much. The point is, in the old days the family could gather and be there when a lethal dose of narcotic was administered and actually be there for their loved ones death. No more, you just never know when it’s going to come about and for all intents and purposes, it’s a moot point in certain respects. Home health care is excellent but as all govt. and big health care goes, overdone. My wife had plenty of care, too much in fact. Nurses competed as did physical therapists to “service’ her. I just saw a lot of wasted money, not knocking the care or quality at all. And for the record, I told no lies. Maybe I just revere the dignity of dying in a different way.
The whole point, 8, is that the patient and family are in complete control over the amount of “service,” the amount of sedation or other drugs, and everything else. Nobody is forced to die alone, and even inpatient facilities have provisions for family members to be at the bedside at all times.
I’m terribly sorry if you had a poor experience, but that is not what hospice is, and most certainly is not the purpose of it all.
People in hospice are given the tools they need to live the last part of their lives with peace and dignity, as much as is humanly possible. Of course some have a better experience than others, and a lot of that has to do with their own choices and family dynamics, as well as the disease process involved. Some of them are simply terrible, and there is no soft or easy solution to the dying process then.
Giving someone a massive dose of narcotics to cut that process short is called euthanasia, and it is absolutely not any part of hospice care. Never has been, and I pray it never will be. People have the absolute right to end their own lives in any manner they choose, but it is not rational to expect hospice nurses or other health care professionals to participate in that act.
8 I have to agree they use tranquilizers all the time for hard to deal with patients. Can be dementia or just the elderly that argue. My grandmother was a big blabber mouth and could even drive me insane at times though I still loved her, and was prescribed some kind of sedative in an old home. Fortunately, my mom saw what was being prescribed on the billing and challenged it. The were giving her sedatives.
ML I believe you are sincere and probably wouldn’t participate in such behavior. But many old homes do practice in making health elderly into orderly vegetables with Haldol. Administrators do it all the time for economical reasons. Its a well known fact for anyone that has had a loved one put in a senior home. You got to be careful for what you ask for, my grandma always was telling my mom just to put her in an old home.
Here is a link to how haldol is called vitamin “H” in senior homes:
The link below is of an RN talking about her 90 year old dad:
“As a disabled RN, I know that Haldol is detrimental to our individual’s (ESPECIALLY to our elderly population). Recently, my dad was at deaths door due to Haldol’s side effects. Haldol causes tardive dyskinsia (muscle stiffness, alterted range of motion, etc). This week, I moved my 90 year old dad from a Rehab/nursing facility in NC – (I am dad’s POA & Health Care Surrogate). The physicians knew that they were NOT allowed to prescribe ANY medication for dad unless I was notified. I was horrified when I took dad from the facility in NC and discovered that they had been “zoning” him out with Haldol. (I thought that his memory and mobility problems were due to the his aging process). Haldol has too many side effects to even be on the market. I took dad home to FL (mom passed away a few months ago, so it was time for a move for dad). Dad’s legs were so swollen that they were purple: I immediately discontinued the Haldol. He was so ill from Haldol that the VA in Tampa had to a”
I can give case over case just like the above including my moms experience and of course 8’s. I know its hard to believe but some people in the medical profession really are cold.
As I said I’d rather die in the wilderness, no thanks to the nurses and the enemas. Fortunatley I have have a chance nobody will care or notice me as a senior as I have no kids and move regularly…smile
It started with the power to tax – any tax. This was always a part of every central government, from the fed to the smallest town. The power to tax is the fulcrum by which we are all despoiled and controlled.
How The Power To Tax Destroys https://mises.org/daily/1853
Where the state is, there is the power to tax; for rulers cannot rule without taxation. As Ludwig von Mises wrote: “The funds that a government spends for whatever purposes are levied by taxation.” Or as Murray Rothbard put it: “…all state actions rest on the fundamental binary intervention of taxes…”
Where the state is, there also is the growth of the state. Why does a state’s scope enlarge? One theory is that interest groups seek to use the state’s taxing power for their own benefit. As Richard Ebeling writes: “As long as many people want government to use its power to tax and regulate to benefit them at the expense of others, it will retain its power and continue to grow.”
Exactly so, ML. Thanks for mentioning Rozeff’s article, very enlightening read. Here’s the conclusion:
Purposeful choice in the realm of voluntary behavior among ordinary people tends to improve life. Purposeful choice among rulers tends to destroy life, because rulers act on their wants, not those of taxpayers.
“The power to tax involves the power to destroy”. Even if we ignore the moral argument that taxes are theft and ignore the consequentialist arguments that taxes hamper the pursuit of happiness and lower economic efficiency, the power to tax has numerous harmful incentives that indeed encourage destruction in many ways.
The bottom line is this. Place no hope of betterment in changing the party or man in office, for so long as rulers possess the power to tax, they will use that mechanism of state to the detriment of its subjects.
The power to tax provides the serpent of state with its victims, us. Taxes feed the monster whose growth spreads venom everywhere. Taxes with or without representation are evil, ever fostering harm and destruction. If we are wise, we will defang the beast of state by ending its power to tax.
The Fix was in to provide this cash cow to the insurance mafia regardless of who was selected as prez. Mitt/Barry? Does matter. The course of events in America would vary only in minor detail. Been that way back to the early ’60’s. Each prez intended to teach a certain lesson in learned helplessness to the American People.
Lesson from the last two cycles- citizenship no longer matters. The borders are open and will stay that way. Method of instruction? Both halves of the Unity Party run candidates who fail the Natural Born Citizen test for Constitutional suitability to serve as prez. Barry, Mitt, McCoward ALL flunk that Test! Coincidence? Doubtful.
The pattern further shows that each new prez after about two years makes the previous one look good by comparison. I hated Bush II but Barry makes him look good. Just as Bush II made the Kilintoons look not half bad.
Take away- Barry The Puppet Coupster has taken us so far down the road to hell that to make him look good by comparison a Dear Leader would have to be openly shooting people in the streets (wholesale not retail like now) and disappearing millions to FEMA accomodations. Only question is who will win the civil war- Red Guards or White Guards.
Replicruds…Democruds….two sides of the same coin. The last election was the death of the two party system in this country. The Republicruds can cry all they want but without a voting base they are powerless. Mass immigration killed small government and that is the intention of our overlords. As far as Obamacare…..Eric I disagree with this article. Obamacare is NOTHING but a giant additional mass tax that our broke government needs to survive a bit longer. It has nothing to do with healthcare. Even Obama admitted that with ACA if the medical condition is too expensive a painkiller will be provided….but what is too expensive? Obamacare (ACA), Homeland Security, Patriot Act are called these nice sounding names to cover their true purpose. The beast will soon reveal itself.
I realize I’m preaching to the choir here but anyone who paid attention to the 2012 Republican debates knows the Republican party and Democrat party are on the same team. “They” silenced Ron Paul because he speaks common sense and freedom (and that is entirely not allowed in government). Mitt Romney’s “plan” was to repeal Obamacare and replace it with the same thing under a different name.
To anyone reading this who didn’t already know what I just typed: “We” are screwed. The system is going completely insane and unless it collapses you have to actively work to not be enslaved by it. I like that this article (good article, by the way) pointed out that your neighbors can snitch you out if you’re a smoker and attempt to lie to the government about your health. That is just the tip of the iceberg. More and more incentives will be given to snitches to keep the system propped up. The snitches won’t realize until it’s too late (when they get snitched out by their snitch circle of friends) that trusting the government will only lead to enslavement within the system.
Now I’m off to work an honest living and witness masses of sheep who don’t understand any of this because the mainstream media isn’t force feeding it to them. (Gee whiz, I wonder why the mainstream media doesn’t want people to know these facts?….)
Americans are extremely charitable people. Government takes advantage of this fact and tries to dress up their welfare plans as necessary, because the “problem” is too large. Lots of people only see the potential, ignoring the reality. Yes, big government can accomplish many things (never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups), but is it the most efficient way? Not when 90¢ of every dollar spent on a project goes to overhead (a major expense, we’re told, is for accounting oversight so that we’re not defrauded… oh sweet irony).
And don’t forget the mindset of the typical bureaucrat. The last thing they want is to be effective at their job. If they do a great job at eliminating poverty, then they’ll be out of work. So not only do you do a lousy job, your boss makes sure to make it appear that you’re overworked so he can build his empire (monetary incentives being eliminated by unions and other parasites, the only thing that brings power in a bureaucracy is a lot of underlings). The best part is that because your union backs politicians who share the same idea of how things should be run, the whole system feeds on itself.
Proponents seem to forget that part. When it’s brought up, they usually blow it off: “yea, but still, greedy private industry is much worse.” Never stopping to think about that statement and what it truly means. “Greedy” private industry has to answer to a lot of people (every customer) for their actions. Government bureaucrats only have to answer to a Congressional committee who knows no one is paying attention.
You make an excellent point. The primary object of any privately owned/operated enterprise is to deliver a product or service at an economically viable price point. The primary object of any government bureau or department is to perpetuate itself.
It’s the DMV – vs. Apple computer.
So, not much difference, really.
Eric this is exactly the case I too believes was being orchestrated for the public entertainment. Democrats and Republicans will mend their differences and the American people will be saddled with the beast forever.
I did some research and the death spiral is not possible simply because ACA will subsidize the insurance industry if necessary. More government takeover either way. So much for the death spiral saving us. I’ll just have to find more legal tax write offs to try to compensate for the extra ACA penalties. Sick of the BS for sure.
My parents went on a vacation with a flight and they were ecstatic how nice TSA was to elders. No longer do they make them go through the X-rays and get the thorough testing like us younger plebes. I guess they figure they still need to intimdate us people who can fight back. Its always nice to buy the elder voters off though. All McCain has to do to win Arizona is visit all the senior homes and military bases and its a done deal. Something wrong with the elder generation (as much as I love and respect them) as its always ok if they don’t have to participate. I love my parents very much and am glad they backed off for the elders, but it just goes to show its all a publicity stunt anyway. We knew better, but a large percentage of the population still loves to kiss their rulers asses and be thankfull. I wonder if that generation will ever have to receive their Karma for being so lax about letting government get bigger? I mean Obamacare seems that ultimately it will hit the seniors, but it could be a generation or two (when we are seniors) before the full blown death panels come to exist.
Following are some thoughts relayed from a fellow patriot:
These people are either too superstitiously religious, or too cowardly for arms; they either can not or dare not defend ; their property is open to anyone who has the courage to attack them… The supposed quietude of a good man allures the ruffian; while on the other hand, arms, like law, discourage and keep the invader and the plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. The balance of power is the scale of peace. The same balance would be preserved were all the world destitute of arms, for all would be alike; but since some will not, others dare not lay them aside. And while a single nation refuses to lay them down, it is proper that all should keep them up. Horrid mischief would ensue were one-half the world deprived of the use of them; for while avarice and ambition have a place in the heart of man, the weak will become a prey to the strong. The history of every age and nation establishes these truths, and facts need but little arguments when they prove themselves.
Some writers have so confounded society with government, as to leave little or no distinction between them; whereas they are not only different, but have different origins. Society is produced by our wants, and government by our wickedness; the former promotes our happiness POSITIVELY by uniting our affections, the latter NEGATIVELY by restraining our vices. The one encourages intercourse, the other creates distinctions. The first a patron, the last a punisher.
Men who look upon themselves born to reign, and others to obey, soon grow insolent; selected from the rest of mankind their minds are early poisoned by importance; and the world they act in differs so materially from the world at large, that they have but little opportunity of knowing its true interest, and when they succeed to the government are frequently the most ignorant and unfit of any throughout the dominions.
Of more worth is one honest man to society and in the sight of God, than all the crowned ruffians that ever lived.
O! ye that love mankind! Ye that dare oppose not only tyranny but the tyrant, stand forth! Every spot of the Old World is overrun with oppression. Freedom hath been hunted round the globe. Asia and Africa have long expelled her. Europe regards her like a stranger and England hath given her warning to depart. O! receive the fugitive and prepare in time an asylum for mankind.
Hereditary succession has no claim. For all men being originally equals, no one by birth could have the right to set up his own family in perpetual preference to all others for ever, and tho’ himself might deserve some decent degree of honours of his contemporaries, yet his descendants might be far too unworthy to inherit them.
I offer nothing more than simple facts, plain arguments, and common sense.
THESE are the times that try men’s souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph. What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly: it is dearness only that gives every thing its value. Heaven knows how to put a proper price upon its goods; and it would be strange indeed if so celestial an article as FREEDOM should not be highly rated.
Thomas Paine 1737-1809
Common Sense, The Rights of Man, The Age of Reason