Here’s the latest reader rant, with my comments below:
Dave writes: I went for years as a healthy individual until a staph infection last April. Almost died. I am 75. You never know when it is your turn to be sick. So I am on the state insurance called Medicare. They gracefully exempted from Obamacare only because you cannot get blood out of turnip.
I believe the medical system of this country needs to change. We need a Medicaid type system that includes everyone and pays everything.
The current system is communist. It depends on how much money you make. It pays less if you earn more money.The bum down the street on welfare doesn’t pay anything for his health. He gets it from medicaid. It used to be any veteran anywhere could get healthcare until Bush put communistic wage qualifications on it in 2006. That was illegally done with an executive order as an emergency legislation by the president. Emergency? It was a ruthless change of our health benefits for risking our lives for our country.They did exempt people all ready using it and Vietnam Veterans. Why work if everything you ever work for and save goes down the toilet with one major illness? That bum is smarter than both of us.
Obamacare is unconstitutional. Getting paid off supreme court justices to admit that might be a task. Anyone with half a brain knows it was legislated as “not a tax.” It was put in and administered as a tax. It has to be passed by a Congress as a tax before it can be applied. Otherwise it was put in under false lying circumstances to the legislature. They were conned. That in itself is illegal. Unless a judge says different and they did. The only explanation that makes sense is they had to have been bought off.
Italics added by Eric.
My reply: You write, “I believe” and “we need.” What if I believe differently – and do not agree that “we” need a mandatory, all-encompassing (coercive) system?
You have every right to speak for yourself – and do as you think best for yourself. But I very much disagree that you have any right to presume to speak for me or any other person who has not given you specific proxy power to do so – and absolutely no right to impose your beliefs on others by force.
And that is what “we need” comes down to, Dave. In fact it means some people believe they need (insert here) and demand it be imposed by violence on others who would rather not have anything to do with it.
I agree that you never know when it is your turn to be sick. But that is not the issue. The issue – the moral issue – is whether your sickness and associated expenses impose an obligation upon me enforceable at gunpoint. And mine on you. My position is that they do not. That your life is yours and mine is mine and we each ought to be free to live our lives as we think best; to plan for life’s exigencies and regardless of them, accept that our problems, whether the result of irresponsibility or not, don’t give us the moral right to pick up guns and point them at other people.
Your position – coercive collectivism – is the same position that is the foundation of the very communism you say you object to. If it is morally acceptable to force me to buy “coverage” or to take my money by force to subsidize a collective system, then it is by the same principle also ok to force people to hand over money (which amounts to handing over their liberty) for any purpose that “we” – meaning, the handful of people who arrogate to themselves the Vox Populi – decree worthy. It means the end of freedom, in principle and shortly, in fact.
And that is why Obamacare is loathsome.
. . .
Got a question about cars – or anything else? Click on the “ask Eric” link and send ’em in!
If you like what you’ve found here, please consider supporting EPautos.
We depend on you to keep the wheels turning!
Our donate button is here.
 If you prefer not to use PayPal, our mailing address is:
EPautos
721 Hummingbird Lane SE
Copper Hill, VA 24079
PS: EPautos magnets are free to those who send in $20 or more. My latest eBook is also available for your favorite price – free! Click here. If you find it useful, consider contributing a couple of bucks!  
I love the part where he says:
“We need a Medicaid type system that includes everyone and pays everything.
Well, uh…if it includes everyone (and almost everyone uses healthcare- and the more so when it is “free” or cheap], who exactly will pay that humongous bill???
These communist pricks never think of that!!!!!!!!!!
Dave reminds me of one of my sisters: A parasite all of her life, who has been on entitlement programs all of her life, and raised 5 kids at taxpayers expense. Now on Socialist Security and living in a subsidized apartment where she pays only a token amount for rent (in an area when market rent is dirt cheap)…and complains that she’s getting fleeced because her electric bill is too high, and it’s consuming too much of her free money…specially after cable and smartphone service.
Hey Dave, YOU pay for that shit if you want- but please leave me out of it.
Morning, Nunz!
Yes. I tried to get that same point across to Dave. He began his rant by mentioning his illness – as if that someone imposes an obligation enforceable at gunpoint on others to “help” him. If so, then need is all you need to claim other people’s property – which is the same thing as saying, their liberty. Your kid needs education. You need health care. You need food, an Obamaphone.
Endless, because needs are.
This idea turns a society into a hyena pack, with the fiercest hyenas setting policy for the rest.
Good Morningggggggggg…..Eric!
Yes, it’s always the same…
While Dave seems to think that he is somehow opposed to communism, he is mimicking their very core credo: “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need”.
I need! I need! Therefore, someone else is obligated to provide. I’m sure if you were ask Dave (or just the average person today) if they approved of slavery, they’d emphatically state “No!” -but yet, their beliefs and actions are the essence of slavery- involuntary labor or the providing of goods and services at the threat of violence.
As if slavery is somehow O-K as long as it is conducted through the state/political system, as opposed to plantation owners.
I wish that such people were capable of grasping the contradictions and injustices of their ideas. They are essentially saying that the needs of some are not sufficient to warrant that they keep what is theirs for their own use…but yet the needs of some others are sufficient justification for the taking of what rightly belongs to another.
Nunz, I only had to read a few sentences into Dave’s screed to conclude, “Fuck Dave”. This thought didn’t trigger any need to respond to him, either. I suppose that comes from being on one forum or other since 1995 and seeing all the man-hours and bandwidth wasted engaging such ringmeat mongoloid dickweeds as dear old Dave.
Hi Ed,
I almost wrote something in reply to Dave’s statement about “serving his country.” But I didn’t because I figured disabusing him of the idea that “need” entitles anyone to other people’s property (which is to say, their liberty) was enough for one day…
But it is another day today.
I feel genuinely sorry for those who “served” under the delusion that they were fighting for this country or “freedom.” In fact, they were mercenaries for the Wall Street/DC axis which controls the cashflow (and thus, us). The last threat to the “freedom” of Americans presented by a foreign power occurred 1861-’65 and we all know which side won that fight!
I keep hearing commercials for “Health Sharing Plans” but have no experience. Most seem to be “faith based” but there may be others. This is not significantly different from the old organization-based pools of health costs, or the Amish concept of care for your neighbor, not the current American concept of beggar your neighbor. Odd Fellows, for instance, used this concept at one time, as did other large fraternal organizations. E.g. some of the immigrant groups of the late 19th, early 20th, centuries.
They seem like a good idea, if soundly implemented. The main thing that might be a shortcoming is that the cost is perhaps unpredictable if I understand the programs. Kind of like a condo agreement. You pay a fixed amount, but in certain cases, you pony-up for extremes.
They have two things going for them. They give you a Get-out-of-ACA card, and they are voluntary associations. I wonder if the law is structured so any “interest group” organization could set up a corresponding plan, or is it only a 1st Amendment loop hole.
If you think you’re regulated and under surveillance now, just wait until government collectivizes healthcare completely.
Nothing will be outside the realm of regulation, since everything you do, eat or drink will have financial impacts on everybody else.
Hi AF,
Yup. I mention this particularly with regard to guns, to my conservative friends. This is the means by which they’ll be taken. Not by force, per se. But by regulation. They will assign them a “high risk” categorization and perhaps require the possessor to purchase special insurance in order to legally have a gun, even in one’s home. Or be “screened.” Something.
It will get worse.
I would not be surprised about “physical jerks” in front of the TeleScreen every morning. Come now, comrades! Let’s put some effort into it!
This type of gun control is already happening to US Vets in the VA system.
Count on it…the hapless Mundanes already love and embrace the technology that enslaves them…”FitBits” for all.
Guns, human controlled fast cars, any type of food other than soy based “Nebuchadnezzar” style protein glop, bodily fluid exchanges (sex), any sort of risky behavior at all…the list is nearly endless.
I’m amazed “theye” have not declared jihad against motorcycles yet.
If we all go to single payer, that that mean that doctors will be compelled to provide care? After all, a hospital cannot turn down patients, and what’s a hospital but a building to house healthcare workers. I’m certainly no expert on slavery, but from what I’ve read the general consensus was that slaves were thought to be lazy and not very good workers. And I was taught that slavery was wrong anyway.
Maybe there will be a system of cash-only upgrades, payable directly to doctors and nurses, for improvements over baseline care….
Hi RK,
Indeed. And in that scenario – socialized medicine – one comes to loathe anyone associated with the “health care”system, as they have become parasites as bad as any government “worker.”
I once read about an epitaph that read: “God damn you all. I told you so.”
Suits me.
It used to be you could derive some comfort out of telling people who feeeeeeeesl a certain way “well then, it’s a good thing you’re not in charge!”
But with the advent of social media.. There’s no truth behind that retort.. we’re stuck standing by while the collectivists find creative new ways to call the shots. Because they feeeeeeeel they neeeeeed everyone to have it their way. And how do you even begin to turn that around? They don’t listen unless you’re imparting some piece of information with a source thats reputability is based on number of thumbs up.
Morning, Moose!
Cops also routinely justify abusing people based on their feelings. They don’t like it that you are filming from a public sidewalk. “Someone” called to “express concern” about a person walking down the street open carrying (in state where this is perfectly legal). Demanding ID because they want to know who you are. No legal authority to do any of these things. But they do them anyway – and even when video recorded doing them there are no repercussions.
Those videos make my blood boil. As the boo always says.. “Instead of following things to their logical conclusion”, they form half-assed opinions based on how they feeeeeeel.. And when multiplied by the number of clovers, becomes an undefeatable feeeeelings monster. Nevermind how ludicrous their ideas in the face of reality because none of them are bothering to pay that any mind anymore.
Amen, Moose.
I have been arguing for years that when a law enforcer is caught enforcing a made-up law, he should be automatically fired and precluded from ever working in a law enforcement again. And prosecuted for assault, in addition.
I’ve yet to hear a persuasive argument to the contrary.
And, meanwhile, if you or I or any other Mundane commits an offense of any kind in the presence of a law enforcer, we can expect certain punishment.
How much longer?
I’d be OK with people who act based on their feelings if they had half a brain and some common sense. When I was a kid a few friends decided that shoplifting was OK and attempted to bring me into their little crime ring. I declined based on my feeling that it was somehow wrong even in the face of their convoluted logic.
Morning, RK!
I have a couple of friends who’ve urged me to sign up for Obamacare; specifically, for the subsidized “programs.” I tell them I can’t – and continue writing what I write. Might as well quit in that case and just become a fully commissioned officer in the Free Shit Army.
To Hell with that.
I raise the Jolly Roger instead…
I go through the same shit with people I know who are aghast when they find out that at my advanced age I don’t collect Social Security and have not signed up for Medicare. When I tell them I don’t want to participate in the trafficking in stolen goods they just have a dim look of no-comprende.
Hi Jason,
Yup. And with Obamacare, it’s an active choice to “sign up.” I will not do so. I may, if it ever becomes feasible, purchase a catastrophic policy – on the condition it is exactly that and entirely private and not some flagitious wealth transfer scheme.
They can take away almost everything from me except my willingness to cooperate.
I agree everyone should have medical care I just disagree on how. They should have medical care the way everyone has a cell phone. Why does everyone have a cell phone? Because the free market made it cheap. Almost everyone can pay for their own. Those who can’t? It’s a burden that charity can handle because it is cheap.
Most people think that everyone should have medical care by stealing from other people to pay cartel high prices. That’s just plain wrong. But that’s what the government-corporate system has created. Intentionally. Most people simply don’t take the time to examine the issue.
Well-said, Brent!
Brilliantly said, in fact – hat tip for that one, sir!
This is the problem. There was a ballot initiative on the last election cycle for approving an increase in the number of beds in the Rifle (Colorado) hospital. Of course it passed. When I brought up to a friend that a free market system would have an abundance of hospital beds without voting, the answer was that having too many beds was inefficient. So somehow the intelligence of the wise hospital administrator deciding that more beds are necessary, and the uninformed masses who have to vote on the matter, which can only happen after a petition drive and approvals and passage before one shovel of dirt can be moved, is an efficient process.
Wouldn’t it make more sense if we trusted the entrepreneur who puts her (since women dominate the healthcare industry now) own future, and other’s investment money, on the line to fill the need? We’re not experts on how many hospital beds are necessary, that’s true. I shouldn’t need to be an expert on hospitals. I should just know that hospital X, which seems to be busy all the time, and is in my price range, is the one I should go to. But someone decided that healthcare is something that needs to be equal for all. It somehow isn’t “fair” that rich folks (or people in Pennsylvania) get better healthcare for their children than the poor (or people who live in Colorado). So instead of trying to improve healthcare for the poor, much better to restrict healthcare for everyone and dumb it down to the same level for everyone.
As long as the government is involved “healthcare” will be a problem. It’s as simple as that.
The government is the BIGGEST problem, followed by big insurance and big healthcare companies (mostly drug makers and hospital owners). The big companies have the government make so many regulations small operators can no longer exist.
The federal government makes it far worse by enabling large corporations to dominate the industry. They have consolidated hugely over the years and Obamacare sped that way up. In my area we went from six large hospital operators, ten years ago to two. Just TWO. And they have attempted to merge. This is an area with a 800,000 population, so its not due to the area being small (NW Indiana).
The state of Indiana has far less state regulation before Obamacare, then neighboring Illinois. So the area had developed a new industry of specialty clinics and small specialty hospitals (mostly owned by local doctors) that couldn’t exist in Illinois. But Obamacare put an end to that too. The big operators didn’t like patients being taken out of the big hospitals. So they regulated them away (you don’t have to ban most things now, just regulate them into bankruptcy). A few have held on, but most got scoop up by the big two.
They have turned doctors from small business owners into employees. That means few will have the money to invest into their communities like they did in the past. My late great uncle who was a dentist, made far more money from the OTHER businesses he started in his town over his long life. Employed many people (as a land developer and home builder) and developed at least a quarter of the town he lived it. Started other businesses he sold to other people, like the bank and supermarket.
The free market would solve all the problems of “healthcare” if it was allow to function (its not allowed). But for some reason people trust the incompetent government over the people in their communities that would do it if they were unleashed to do so. So we end up with warped system we have.
We all have a right to believe what we want. I agree. No matter what your opinion I would defend your right to say it and discuss it. Those differences are what make this country great. No other place in the entire world gives us as much freedom as we have right here.
The horses left the barn along time ago. Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, 401K, and much more are all ready in effect and cost everyone megabucks.
A typical young woman reaches a wage level of about 20,000. She then cannot work and collect the state dictated medical benefits and continue to work. IF she works past some arbitrary number then she will suddenly find herself with multiple bills she did not have before. A lot of those bills come from the medical industries.
The Congress solutions are exactly what you described. They have medical benefits. We pay for them with our taxes.
The cost of diabetic supplies elsewhere is negotiated down by the governments of the world. One drug in pen form alone last year went from $300 to $600. For a horse, they get a simular drug from $25.
It is basically the same drug we use only in a different and higher quantity.
You are right. We are getting ripped off.
What I personally want is what I want not what is necessarily good or bad. You are right about a lot of things. What I am trying to say is IF we have to have these things then make it non-discriminatory. Don’t put a penalty on you or me for being somewhat successful enough to afford things.
There is a very nasty backside to Social Medicine that almost no one talks about.
That is the liability of malpractice and letting people die instead of curing them.
In social medicine countries such as Europe and Britain, I have wondered what the statistics show concerning people dying instead of being cured of what they are sick from. One thing we have done right is holding doctors to a high standard of medicine. It is far from perfect. But the way the civil laws work is a different subject.
When I did retire in 2007 my secondary insurance was with a $600 deductable per family member per year. The renew was January 1 of each year so you start over every year.
Last year it was $6,000 per member per year.
The Medicare deductable is about $160 per year.
What mandatory insurance has done is allowed runaway inflation in the insurance industry.
From recent hospitalization for a life-threatening illness I have the equivalent right now of a small car payment for the next 3 to 5 years.
I do not have a solution that will not cost all of us more money.
Neither does anyone else.
How about getting GovCo out of the healthcare biz completely?
Totally.
Starting with the repeal of the Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906 and the Harrison Narcotics Act of 1914? Get GovCo out of the certification and regulation of ALL drugs and treatments. Get rid of the Certificate of Need laws that prevent competition. End the monopoly of the doctor’s union, The AMA, on who can teach someone to be a doctor and who can be a doctor. Begin allowing charity hospitals to exist.
This is just the opening salvo. End all this crap bestowed on us by those in the “Progressive Era”.
To say everyone should have the same level of treatment is to say you want to end the concepts of “rich” and “poor”. All will be equal but, some will still be “more equal” than others. I heard that somewhere.