"President Barack Obama is warning Americans not to believe “rumors” that the health reform initiative he’s pushing will lead to a government-run health care system or push Medicare recipients to die rather than running up a hefty tab for medical services. ", and I heartily concur. Don't believe rumors, check them out. See for yourself whether or not they are true.
Here's one rumor that needs quashing right off the bat, coincidentally it is one begun by da prez himself:
"Let me start by dispelling the outlandish rumors that reform will promote euthanasia, or cut Medicaid, or bring about a government takeover of health care. That's simply not true," Obama said in his weekly radio and Internet address released Saturday morning."
Simply Outlandish! How can he say such a thing?
Well, if his positions on healthcare reform are anything like his positions on economic reform, the answer is simple: He's a Marxist. He cares nothing for facts, let alone principles. His concern is solely for advancing his agenda, which boils down to: what he wants to be true, he demands that we accept as being true. He knows nothing of the principles of economics (let alone of liberty), or of the massive economic disruptions that are caused by govt interfering in peoples choices, or the stifling effects to real freedom and liberty that follows from such actions by an interventionist government.
He knows not, and he cares not (for a truly revealing look at the full meaning of nObama Care, see this from my local St. Louis Tea Party and summed up by Gateway Pundit here).
He knows even less about that 1/7th portion of our economy (which, btw, 'economy' refers to the decisions and actions of free people making choices in their lives, within a free market - aka Liberty and Freedom) which is referred to as Healthcare.
Now, actual facts are abundantly available, as are the principles which elucidate them, principles which brings the seeming random cacophony of disintegrated data into intelligent relief (See Bastiat's "What is seen and what is not seen" or Adam Smith and many more), he knows nothing of the real facts of European (see Theodore Dalrymple's recent "Is there a 'Right' to Healthcare" for the euro-perspective of a 'healthcare' provider) and Canadian (Krugman dis's himself) healthcare which clearly point to the results he here denies as 'outlandish'.
He no's only what he wants to believe. He is, in fact, one of those modern children of Descartes I referred to earlier who see conspiracies everywhere, who thinks that what he believes deeply and sincerely, must obviously be true, as he could imagine it being no other way.
Øbama said "This isn’t about putting government in charge of your health insurance; it’s about putting you in charge of your health insurance. Under the reforms we seek, if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan,” Obama insisted."Uh-huh. Perhaps if he actually read some of the reform bill he supports he wouldn't be so quick to 'behave stupidly'.
Let's make sure we don't fall into the same trap, ya with me? Ok then, let's refer him to those pages in 'his' healthcare bill which refute his platitudes in the lingo of governmentalese black 'n white, shall we?
First from my friends hit parade of citations:
""Pg 30 Sec 123 of HC bill - THERE WILL BE A GOVT COMMITTEE that decides what treatments/benefits you get"
When we look at that page (linked to above), we find the following text:
"SEC. 123. HEALTH BENEFITS ADVISORY COMMITTEE.
12 (a) ESTABLISHMENT.—
13 (1) IN GENERAL.—There is established a pri
14 vate-public advisory committee which shall be a
15 panel of medical and other experts to be known as
16 the Health Benefits Advisory Committee to rec
17 ommend covered benefits and essential, enhanced,
18 and premium plans."
It then goes on to list the numbers of people who will either be Federal Employees, or not Fed employees, but appointed by the President or the Comptroller, or other functionaries of the Federal Government. Nice useful distinction there, don't you think? I somehow miss out on the 'Private' decision making nature of that apparatus.
No matter, reading a bit further on, down at the bottom of
Pg 31, and carrying over to the next page, we find this section describing what sort of people these non-federal employees, who are appointed by federal employees, are to be:
"(5) PARTICIPATION.—The membership of theMy oh my, I don't know about you, but my concerns about a govt committee deciding what is best for me, about it ceasing to remain a private decision, are fully alleviated by the portion that says "...and at least one practicing physician or other health professional and an expert on children’s health and shall represent a balance among various sectors of the health care system...", isn't that comforting!? At least One Practicing Physician (... OR...) health professional (you might want to look up just what is meant by a 'health professional'... unless you have an aversion to administrators and bureaucrats being involved in your health care, that is) will certainly balance out any undue influence caused by those pesky non-federal employees, who are appointed by federal employees.
24 Health Benefits Advisory Committee shall at least
25 reflect providers, consumer representatives, employ-
1 ers, labor, health insurance issuers, experts in health
2 care financing and delivery, experts in racial and
3 ethnic disparities, experts in care for those with dis
4 abilities, representatives of relevant governmental
5 agencies. and at least one practicing physician or
6 other health professional and an expert on children’s
7 health and shall represent a balance among various
8 sectors of the health care system so that no single
9 sector unduly influences the recommendations of
10 such Committee."
And don't you just love the inclusion of "...experts in racial and ethnic disparities..."? Isn't it comforting to know that Gov't Committee's on the make up of healthcare services will be sure to move beyond any chance of acting stupidly and letting issues of race or ethnicity, become involved in our healthcare concerns? I just feel warm and tingly all over.
A little further down, we find this,
"11 (b) DUTIES.—Ladies & Gents, this "...shall take into account innovation in health care and consider how such standards could reduce..." should strike fear into your hearts. If not, pull your head out of your ... er... the sand... and look at the long and pitiful history of govt 'helping' any portion of any industry to innovate and reduce its problems.
12 (1) RECOMMENDATIONS ON BENEFIT STAND
13 ARDS.—The Health Benefits Advisory Committee
14 shall recommend to the Secretary of Health and
15 Human Services (in this subtitle referred to as the
16 ‘‘Secretary’’) benefit standards (as defined in para
17 graph (4)), and periodic updates to such standards.
18 In developing such recommendations, the Committee
19 shall take into account innovation in health care and
20 consider how such standards could reduce health dis
21 parities."
You should seriously be beginning to flag in your mind whenever seeing the word "Healthcare" to consciously begin seeing the word "Healthcontrol", because that is what will be done, every aspect of will fall under govt standards and controls, and what always results from such measures, will assuredly result in your declining health.
Some things that should pop into peoples minds are the other things gov't has done to care for other sectors of the economy - remember telephone 'service' under the governmental 'one provider' policy of Ma Bell? Remember the wage and price controls of Richard Nixon? Remember the gas station lines of Jimmy Carter?
Or how about this, in the 1930's, gov't mandated regulations to improve the security of banks, peoples access to them, and their reliability. The results? There were huge numbers of panicked runs on banks, and thousands of U.S. Banks collapsed along with their patrons assets. Across the border in Canada, which had no such 'govt help' and attention in their banking system during the same worldwide economic crisis? Zero bank runs, and zero bank collapses (See: FDR's Folly: How Roosevelt and His New Deal Prolonged the Great Depression).
You had better get busy forecasting the same lesson being applied to healthcare. Thomas Sowell points out in a recent article:
"An old advertising slogan said, "Progress is our most important product." With politicians, confusion is their most important product. They confuse bringing down the price of medical care with bringing down the cost. And they confuse medical care with health care.
Nothing is easier than for governments to impose price controls. They have been doing this, off an on, for thousands of years-- repeatedly resulting in (1) shortages, (2) quality deterioration and (3) black markets. Why would anyone want any of those things when it comes to medical care?
Refusing to pay the costs is not the same as bringing down the cost. That is why price controls create these problems. When developing a new pharmaceutical drug costs roughly a billion dollars, you are either going to pay the billion dollars or cause people to stop spending a billion dollars to develop new drugs."
If you still have access to some cash, get yourself a copy of Thomas Sowell's Applied Economics: Thinking Beyond Stage One,
"When we are talking about applied economic policies, we are no longer talking about pure economic principles, but about the interactions of politics and economics. The principles of economics remain the same, but the liklihood of those principles being applied unchanged is considerable reduced, because politics has its own principles and imperatives."
If anyone thinks that they will be able to separate their govt aided health and medical care from the state of our govt aided economic care, I submit that you are mortally mistaken. Buy Sowell's book, pay particular attention to Chp. 3 "The Economics of Mecidal Care", or at least take a gander at his article "Alice in Obama Medical Care Land".
For myself, I hereby willingly and knowingly 'dis' Obama's healthcare information.
I'll leave it up to your own judgment whether or not you should do the same. Here are some helpful study guides for you, passed along from my friend David. Do yourself, and our future, a favor - read them - if even 1% of them mean what it seems they mean, and they are passed, we are doomed.
This is not a healthcare bill, it is a lifecontrol bill.
This is not a bill to argue on the merits of whether it will accomplish this or that at more or less cost, this is a bill to be identified and fought on moral grounds of Right and Wrong. The govt has no right to intrude into and control our lives in such ways.
This thing means evil to our lives and liberties, pure and simple. Read it. Identify it. Fight it.
As David would say Make a Difference!
***UPDATED***
Congressmen/Physician lays out "... a charade that will destroy healthcare in America":
(all links are to that page in the actual house bill).
22 of the HC Bill MANDATES the Govt will audit books of ALL EMPLOYERS that self insure!!
30 Sec 123 of HC bill - THERE WILL BE A GOVT COMMITTEE that decides what treatments/benefits you get
29 lines 4-16 in the HC bill - YOUR HEALTHCARE IS RATIONED!!! You can only get so much "care" per year
42 of HC Bill - The Health Choices Commissioner will choose your HC Benefits 4 you. You have no choice!
50 Section 152 in HC bill - HC will be provided to ALL non US citizens, illegal or otherwise
58HC Bill - Govt will have real-time access to individs finances & a National ID Healthcard will be issued!
59 HC Bill lines 21-24 Govt will have direct access 2 your banks accts for elective funds transfer
65 Sec 164 is a payoff subsidized plan for retirees and their families in Unions & community orgs (ACORN).
72 Lines 8-14 Govt is creating an HC Exchange to bring private HC plans under Govt control.
84 Sec 203 HC bill - Govt mandates ALL benefit pkgs for private HC plans in the Exchange
85 Line 7 HC Bill - Specs for Benefit Levels for Plans = The Govt will ration your Healthcare!
91 Lines 4-7 HC Bill - Govt mandates linguistic appropriate services..... Example - Translation for illegal aliens
95 HC Bill Lines 8-18 The Govt will use groups i.e., ACORN & Americorps to sign up individually for Govt HC plan
85 Line 7 HC Bill - Specs of Benefit Levels for Plans. #AARP members - your Health care WILL be rationed
-102 Lines 12-18 HC Bill - Medicaid Eligible Indiv. will be automat.enrolled in Medicaid. No choice
124 lines 24-25 HC No company can sue GOVT on price fixing. No "judicial review" against Govt Monopoly
127 Lines 1-16 HC Bill - Doctors/ #AMA - The Govt will tell YOU what you can make.
145 Line 15-17 An Employer MUST auto enroll employees into public opt plan. NO CHOICE
126 Lines 22-25 Employers MUST pay for HC for part time employees AND their families.
149 Lines 16-24 ANY Emplyr w payroll 400k & above who does not prov. pub opt. pays 8% tax on all payroll
150 Lines 9-13 Biz w payroll between 251k & 400k who doesnt prov. pub. opt pays 2-6% tax on all payroll
167 Lines 18-23 ANY individual who doesnt have acceptable HC accrdng to Govt will be taxed 2.5%
170 Lines 1-3 HC Bill Any NONRESIDENT Alien is exempt from individual taxes. (You and I will pay for them)
195 HC Bill -officers & employees of HC Admin (GOVT) will have access to ALL Americans financial/personal recds
203 Line 14-15 HC - "The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax" Yes, it says that
239 Line 14-24 HC Bill Govt will reduce physician services for Medicaid. Seniors, low income, poor will be very affected
241 Line 6-8 HC Bill - Doctors, doesnt matter what specialty you have, you'll all be paid the same
253 Line 10-18 Govt sets value of Dr's time, professional judgments, etc. Literally value of humans.
265 Sec 1131Govt mandates & controls productivity for private HC industries
268 Sec 1141 Fed Govt regulates rental & purchase of power driven wheelchairs
272 SEC. 1145. TREATMENT OF CERTAIN CANCER HOSPITALS - Cancer patients - welcome to rationing!
Page 280 Sec 1151 The Govt will penalize hospitals for what Govt deems preventable readmissions.
317 L 13-20 OMG!! PROHIBITION on ownership/investment. Govt tells Drs. what/how much they can own.
317-318 lines 21-25,1-3 PROHIBITION on expansion- Govt is mandating hospitals cannot expand
321 2-13 Hospitals have oppt to apply for exception BUT community input required. Can you say ACORN?!!
Pg335 L 16-25
341 Lines 3-9 Govt has authority to disqualify Medicare Adv Plans, HMOs, etc. Forcing all into Govt HC plan
354 Sec 1177 - Govt will RESTRICT enrollment of Special needs
379 Sec 1191 Govt creates more bureaucracy - Telehealth Advisory Cmtte. Can you say HC by phone?
425 Lines 4-12 Govt mandates Advance Care Planning Consult. Think Senior Citizens end of life. Seniors will be interviewed every year for health issues and decisions made as to what care they can or can't receive (This was even too much for the Washington Post:"If Section 1233 is innocuous, why would "strategists" want to tip-toe around the subject? Perhaps because, at least as I read it, Section 1233 is not totally innocuous.")
425 Lines 17-19 Govt will instruct & consult regarding living wills, durable powers of atty. Mandatory!
425 Lines 22-25, 426 Lines 1-3 Govt provides apprvd list of end of life resources, guiding you in death
427 Lines 15-24 Govt mandates program for orders for end of life. The Govt has a say in how your life ends
429 Lines 1-9 An "adv. care planning consult" will be used frequently as patients health deteriorates
429 Lines 10-12 "adv. care consultation" may include an ORDER for end of life plans. AN ORDER from GOV
429 Lines 13-25 - The govt will specify which Doctors can write an end of life order.
430 Lines 11-15 The Govt will decide what level of treatment you will have at end of life
469 - Community Based Home Medical Services=Non profit orgs. Hello, ACORN Medical Services here!!?
Page 472 Lines 14-17 PAYMENT TO COMMUNITY-BASED ORG. 1 monthly payment to a community-based org. Like ACORN?
489 Sec 1308 The Govt will cover Marriage & Family therapy. Which means they will insert Govt into your marriage
494-498 Govt will cover Mental Health Svcs including defining, creating, rationing those services
838 - sections 440 and 1904 "Dirty secret No. 1 in Obamacare is about the government's coming into homes and usurping parental rights over child care and development."(Editorial online)
and look at the long and pitiful history of govt 'helping' any portion of any industry to innovate and reduce its problems.
ReplyDeleteI'll repost from this discussion:
All those libertarians who believe that nothing good can come out of centralized government programs should get the fuck off the Internet and go back to Compuserve, Tymshare, and AOL. Go on, grab your copies of The Fountainhead and git.
It isn’t often appreciated how the Internet is an almost-perfect example of how big government should work. The feds sponsor long-range research without immediate commercial applications. The work is carried out by a collection of academic (MIT, Stanford) and quasi-governmental research institutes (BBN, SRI, ISI), along with a few monopoly corporations who can afford long-range research (ATT, Xerox). As the system evolves, self-organizing groups appear to manage the standards. Eventually the government hands the system over to commercial providers, and the Internet as you youngsters know it is born.
The government did just what it was supposed to do — creating the research, standards, and initial infrastructure and guiding them in such a way that an open system was the result. The commercial network providers would never have done anything remotely like it, as can be seen by their efforts mentioned above. And of course, the resulting open network is infested with adolescent idiots braying about the big bad government.
Actually the best way to understand libertarians is to envision a 14-year-old boy bravely telling his parents “you’re not the boss of me” while still living at home and stuffing his face with Doritos from mom’s most recent Safeway outing.
mtcraven said "All those libertarians who believe that nothing good can come out of centralized government programs should g..."
ReplyDeleteWhat does libertarianism have to do with anything I've said? I am not an libertarian, I do not advocate libertarianism, and am deeply, at the most fundamental levels, opposed to libertarianism, as I've noted
before:
"Truth be told, most libertarians (of the Murray Rothbard variety) fall into this same trap, when they declare that all taxation is theft, that the government can have no right to their money. But just as my relative sought to construct a hypothetical which required property rights to exist, in order to attack them, the anarcho-libertarians attempt to use the concept of rights, which are reliant upon a proper government to uphold and defend them, in order to attack government for violating them. But you can have no political right to weaken or do away with that which makes political rights possible (more on this when I get to the end of my posts on Justice)."
While it may be that I come into conflict less often with libertarians than with leftists, the conflicts I do have with them are far deeper and far more substantial, and I believe their errors more perilous to 'Liberty' than the leftists (such as yourself) outright assault. Libertarians attempt to base a philosophy upon an offshoot of a third level aspect of philosophy, necessarily making their support for Liberty, not only a shallow one, but one that is ultimately destructive to the very concept of Individual Rights, Property Rights, and Liberty itself.
However, Libertarians in no way have a lock upon the concept of disliking govt expanding beyond its proper boundaries. The Founding Fathers did not oppose Government, they opposed govt that trampled upon their rights to 'life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness', as do I.
"It isn’t often appreciated how the Internet is an almost-perfect example of how big government should work. "
One of the more ridiculous things I've seen you say. Even less appreciated, is the way that people such as yourself (as my history with you elsewhere has shown) who have zero grasp of property rights, let alone individual rights, make the positions of a "14-year-old boy" seem mature in comparison. The 14 year old at least attempts bravery. The childish leftists merely whine "I WANT IT! You have to give it to meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee! "
If you manage to come up with something intelligent to criticize about what I've actually written, I'll be happy to examine it.
Heh. I would think Mtraven would've at least learned that you ain't a libertarian by now, Van.
ReplyDeleteI get the feeling that he just doesn't allow for reading comprehension before criticizing on stuff completely unrelated to what you post (or what you believe in, for that matter.)
At any rate, I don't expect any coherent refutations to what you actually posted on or even a half-hearted attempt to do so, since nationalized healthscare is indefensable.
Of course, Mtraven shoudn't despair, you're only looking out for his liberty too, although he apparently doesn't realize it (or value it, if he supports socialization).
On a bright note (for him) he can at least snitch on you for telling the truth about Obamascare.
Excellent post, Van!
The devil is literally in the details, and there's lots of confusing details in this Obamanation of health care tyranny.
Much obliged for the detailed breakdown and references.
I suspect the donks are working feverishly to rewrite the language while keeping their socialized intents the same.
For awhile I was getting sick of constantly seeing Obama talking about how: we MUST pass (insert latest government control mechanism here) RIGHT NOW!!! or we will all DIE!!! BROKE!!! WITHOUT A CAR!!! AND WITHOUT THE BEST IN SOCIALIZED>>>UH, um, er, I mean PERSONAL CHOICES that is, because you have a right, uh, yes, a right to quality healthcare and it will FIX THE ECONOMY!!! YOU CAN"T AFFORD NOT TO HAVE OBAMACARE!!!
And it's, um NOT SINGLE PAYER!!! I was MISQUOTED AND taken out of CONTEXT...SEVERAL TIMES!!! EVERYONE WILL PAY!!! Huh? Er, I mean it's FREE!!! except for, um, the greedy rich fat cats who have DESTROYED THIS ONCE GREAT NATION!!!
But the mopre Obamuh talks and the more desperate he looks while attempting to pass his Marxist agenda and destroy our liberties, the more he shows his true colors.
Obama is a Chicago thug, huckster, shyster, con man, racist, and extortionist, and he has brought those tactics to the Presidency.
When he speaks of "the mob" he is talking about how he runs things, like a mob (mafia) would do.
So I hope he keeps talking and using his despicable tactics, because even folks who don't do any research into politics are beginning to see what he, Pelosi, Reid, Durbin, Boxer, Schumer, Baird, et al are all about, and it ain't about "choice" or "liberty" or "freedom" but rather the opposite.
Plus, he's losing his charm it seems. To much overexposier, I think.
Keep up the Good fight, bro! :^)
Ben said "The devil is literally in the details..."
ReplyDeleteSure got that right - for them, as well as us.
I suspect the idea of holding an open vote in congress of it now... has little or no chance of success. But. I also suspect they'll try to do a 'Reconcilliation' type midnight run to pass it anyway 'for our own good' and no doubt much blather of how they were only 'standing up to obstructionists!'.
It will be interesting to see what happens after that.
Thanks Ben -