I have a serious What-If question for all my Libertarian and libertarian-leaning friends, concerning the rapidly approaching health care takeover by the Federal government.
First, a basic assumption:
Let's assume that the Senate shows the same lack of spine that it has many times over and passes a compatrable version to the House abomination, it gets to the President's desk, he signs it, and eventually we end up with the predicted "Single-Payer" health system run entirely by the Federal government, based on taxation, cooercion and theft.
Now, I know, there are still a lot of potential roadblocks to that end-point, but let's assume that it DOES end up there, for the sake of the question I want to ask.
What do we, as Libertarians committed to FREE exchange, VOLUNTARY association and the rest, DO? Do we use that system at all? Do we set up a medical "underground"? How do we live in a system where just breathing requires you to participate in theft and coercion?
Wow! There's a LOT of stuff being hotly discussed on the ol' Internet these days! And that's a GOOD thing. Getting thing's out and talking about them is always helpful.
But you know what?
I really don't care all that much about a lot of it. << MORE >>
First of all, you didn't embarass me. You didn't insult me. You didn't do anything wrong. So don't worry.
So why was I making such a point about NOT qualifying for the "Senior Citizen" discount you rang up?<< MORE >>
Here's the situation, gentle reader: There are no Libertarians in National Office. The Republicans are already caving, with language like, "If the Democrats are going to pass healthcare ledislation anyway, then shouldn't it at least...?" The Democrats are looking down through their pince-nez at anyone daring to criticize the plan to their faces. It's beginning to look like a fait-accompli and a bigger win for the Democrats than even most opponents of the current health care legislation have realized.
It could, in fact, mean a Democrat lock on power for a VERY long time indeed. And it won't matter at all if the worst doom-and-gloom predictions of their opponents come true, and the country ends up with sub-basement quality care, rationed access and stifled innovation.
It will only matter WHEN that happens.<< MORE >>
We've developed a shorthand in the last few years for categorizing issues as IMPORTANT or 'trivial'. Or more precisely, the media has developed a lazy shorthand, and we mere pledian wankers have all happily followed suit. We've picked up the lingo and so we no longer need to waste any time on unproductive and wasteful things like critical thinking.
I refer, of course, to the use of the suffices "-gate" and "-er".<< MORE >>
This is to everyone who is concerned about things like the recent DHS report tagging returning veterans, Ron Paul supporters, people who know about that pesky little thing called the Constitution, and many many more as "possible threats" and "potential terrorists."<< MORE >>
I have a medical insurance coverage issue. Here it is in a nutshell:
I'm out of a job
I've been out of a job for almost 6 moths
Group Coverage from my last job is over
Savings are running out
I'm a diabetic
The medictaions and supplies I have been using come to more than $1200 retail every month
Individual medical coverage that gives anywhere close to the same benefit levels I once had will cost me (...wait for it...) more than $1200 every month
So you see, I'm rapidly heading up a certain creek while not in possession of a certain implement of locomotion. Beyond the ongoing monthly expenses (just one of the two insulins I currently take comes to $800 a month - the other is $300) I've had two eye surgeries in the last year - one on each eye. I;m faced with diminishing resources, escalating costs and no easy prospects in sight. And that's assuming the eye surgeries both worked well, otherwise NOTHING is in sight, except getting a dog and a cane. (But hey, I miss having a dog, so maybe there's an upside, even there.)
With all of this, you might wonder if I'm feeling a little more amenable to "universal healthcare", in any of its many proposed form. After all, I'm now down in (or at least very close to) the foxhole with the other [insert your favorite number] uninsured Americans.
Well, for anyone out there readingthis who is a fan of any of these plans, let me ask you a few simple questions:
Would you think it was OK for me to go out on the street and stick up a few passersby to pay for my medications? How about a bank? Or maybe one of those evil rich people, who got "obscene bonuses"? Or maybe I should just go to tghe pharmacy and take it! Why not? And I could always go to the doctor who did my eye surgeries, or my endocrinolgist and get them to treat me at gunpoint.
This is really the bottom line question that everyone on the march for "universal healthcare" wants to dance around:
Exactly what in my predicament - real as it is - would give me the right to take money, supplies, time or skill away from someone else at gunpoint? And, if I don't have that "right", what on earth makes it right for one, or a dozen, or a hundred, or a thousand, or a million of YOU to HIRE someone else with guns to take it from one, or a dozen, or a hundred, or a thousand, or a million of "THEM" (whoever "they" are) and give any part of it to me?
I don't know how many of you are old enough to remember when television actually ran advertising for cigarettes. You've probably seen some of the old ads on YouTube. If you haven't here are some pointers to some, so you young whipper-snappers can get an idea of what they were like:
So - Why do I say bring them back?
Because the other side is getting airtime. You can't watch a day's television without seeing one of those "Truth.com" ads.
Now, let's be clear on my position and opinions: ...<< MORE >>