The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersAudacious Epigone Blog
$100 Healthcare Bill Lying on the Sidewalk
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Single-payer healthcare, or Medicare-for-all, is a very popular issue. You wouldn’t know it from watching any of the Democrat presidential debates, though. There may not be any issue that more starkly divides the progressive left from the corporate left, and it is of course the latter that controls the corporate media organizations hosting the debates.

Big pharma and the insurance companies shell out a lot of cash to underwrite the events. The moderators, good marionettes that they are, ask questions that frame the issue the same way the pharmaceutical companies do during the commercial breaks. “Senator Sanders, how will you possibly pay for this pipe dream without raising taxes infinity billion dollars on the middle class?”

There’s a huge opportunity for a Democrat contender to thread the needle, to own the popular position while being able to distinguish himself from the rest of the field of favor of Medicare-for-all-without-a-private-payer-option prodigals: Restrict it to American citizens. If she’s called out for having expressed support for Medicare-for-the-world in the first debates–all of them did–she explains that in order to address the real concerns raised by the costs of such a program, her team figured out a way to make it affordable without having to raise taxes on Americans.

Sure, Jorge Ramos will call him names, but Hispandering doesn’t work. They don’t much vote, blacks don’t like being second-class victims, and woke whites are more concerned about him decrying kids in cages than making single-payer any harder to turn into a reality than it already is. How are Beto, Booker, and Castro–the three amigos who spoke in Spanish in the first debate–faring at the moment? Dropped out, about to drop out, and set to drop out the week after, that’s how.

For those with triple digit IQs, she can further explain that under her plan, no one will have to worry about being unable to afford going to the doctor. But there are a finite number of doctors in the country, so sometimes people could have to wait. Unlike the plans on offer from X, Y, and Z, under her plan Americans won’t be stuck in limbo because American doctors will be treating American patients. There won’t be people from all over the world line-jumping ahead of our fellow Americans who need medical help.

America first without calling it America first.

 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: Election 2020, Healthcare, Ideas 
Hide 113 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. this is exactly the right idea, and you deserve a ton of credit for articulating the (only, imo) way that America First policies will ever succeed.

    if a Democrat were to actively campaign on smaller schools, higher wages, and better healthcare as driven by restricting immigration and benefits to immigranta, that candidate would win by a million and the country would be better for it.

    had hope Bernie would pull it off, but seems he got scared by the Coalition of the Fringes making noise about kids in cages etc etc.

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
  2. anon[123] • Disclaimer says:

    There’s a huge opportunity for a Democrat contender to thread the needle, to own the popular position while being able to distinguish himself from the rest of the field of favor of Medicare-for-all-without-a-private-payer-option prodigals: Restrict it to American citizens.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
  3. I don’t know that argumentation would do much.

    Most of my friends are dems. They don’t think about any of the stuff we think or talk about. They just assume that if we (the people of the United States) wanted to, we could easily provide free health care to anyone in the world, instantly and without sacrifice on our own part.

    They’re not dumb, exactly, they’ve just never really thought about this stuff. And they’ve never experienced real want themselves, so they can’t really conceptualize going without. When they don’t feel good, they go to the doctor and insurance pays for it. Why should it be any different for anyone else?

    So if you ask them to make a serious decision (like voting) based on giving the issues of the day serious thought, you’re like to be disappointed. People aren’t good at thinking about large numbers and most serious policy discussion is predicated on this ability.

  4. Ever since the Democrats managed to expand affirmative action to include immigrants from India in the 1970s, they’ve written off the working class white vote — and that’s if you buy their con game that Kevin Phillips was anything but the Karl Rove of the Nixon era: Utterly ineffectual at best, probably a useful idiot or, at worst, a de facto traitor.

    Democrats already have something far better for their core constituency:

    Medicaid.

    Medicaid is far better than Medicare because it covers all costs of unlimited childbirth and rearing to demographic voting booth stuffing age — but only if you are below the poverty line and just can’t remember who the baby-daddy was.

    • Replies: @Jay Fink
  5. Dave Pinsen says: • Website

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
  6. Woke whites are so in love with Mexicans and Hondurans right now that I honestly think they would put up with a hobbled healthcare system as long as these paragons of humanity got their sniffles and ultrasounds taken care of first. (I think they figure — if Mexicans are getting good U.S. medical care, I’ll get my taco salad with extra guac on time.)

    Left-wingers are mentally ill traitors. Whether their love for Mexicans extends far beyond the departure of one DJT remains to be seen.

  7. iffen says:

    Many poor working people are priced out of the health care industry, just like they are priced out of the housing market. Medicare for All is a less than perfection solution to this problem and is juxtaposed against the no solution at all pushed by the Republicans.

    • Replies: @MarkinLA
  8. @Bragadocious

    If you have ever looked into Mexico at a US border town, e.g., El Paso, Laredo, what you see is the future of what American will be like. Importing people from certain Turd World countries will result in our society resembling these countries and societies exactly.

    They come here not to be or become Americans, but to stay Mexicans, Nicaraguans, Guatemalans, Haitians, etc, etc, ad vomitum.

  9. @Daniel Williams

    They’re not dumb, exactly, they’ve just never really thought about this stuff. And they’ve never experienced real want themselves, so they can’t really conceptualize going without.

    Sorry to be direct, but….yes, they’re dumb. What you described is a definition of “being dumb”.

  10. For those with triple digit IQs, she can further explain that under her plan, no one will have to worry about being unable to afford going to the doctor. But there are a finite number of doctors in the country, so sometimes people could have to wait.

    Unlike the plans on offer from X, Y, and Z, under her plan Americans won’t be stuck in limbo because American doctors will be treating American patients. There won’t be people from all over the world line-jumping ahead of our fellow Americans who need medical help.

    White Core America has plans to rhetorically pop both the Democrat Party AND the Republican Party on putting the interests of foreigners ahead of the interests of US citizens.

    White Core America will put the interests of US citizens first and foreigners will be immediately removed from the United States.

    White Core America will put the interests of senior citizens and veterans and young people and regular decent Americans first and foreigners will be removed from our land.

    I wrote this about the honorable and common sense political tactic of pointing out that the ruling class of the American Empire and its puppet politician minions puts the interests of foreigners ahead of the interests of US citizens. From 2013:

    NH Sen. Jeanne Shaheen has joined with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to cut veterans benefits. Reid refused any attempt to amend the budget deal provision that targetized veterans hard earned benefits. Why did Reid go out of his way to avoid fixing an obvious error? Reid is now operating in a totalitarian manner redolent of Mao or Stalin.

    Reid has begun eliminating the traditional and historic steps legislation customarily must follow. Shaheen is helping Reid streamline the U.S. Senate down to Stalinist levels of efficiency.

    Shaheen had the chance to simply add an amendment that would have swapped out illegal alien swag for the full restoration of veterans benefits. Shaheen rewarded illegal aliens with her lack of action.

    Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions attempted to fix the foul-up. Reid, supported by Shaheen, stopped him. It was a raw display of malignant power.

    Sen. Sessions stated, “Removing this unbalanced treatment of our military retirees ought to be one of the key actions we should take before this legislation moves forward. In fact, greater savings than this can be achieved by passing a legislative fix recommended by the Inspector General of the U.S. Treasury that would stop the IRS from improperly providing tax credits to illegal aliens.”

    Shaheen and Reid are playing dangerous games of power in the U.S. Senate. Shaheen made sure that illegal aliens continued to get massive amounts of loot at the expense of veterans.

    Shaheen has chosen to side with illegal aliens rather than wounded warriors. Shaheen will allow illegal alien invaders to grab ill-gotten gains while giving veterans a bad deal.

  11. @Bardon Kaldian

    People can be very smart in the general sense of cognitive ability and even be extremely competent in their profession or avocational interest… but they’ve usually never applied this ability to social or philosophical problems.

    Keep in mind had a dozen years or more of government education to train them this way… with daily refreshers from all the telescreens.

    Give them a bunch of raven’s progressive matrices and they’ll do awesome.

  12. There won’t be people from all over the world line-jumping ahead of our fellow Americans who need medical help.

    The above must be repeatedly pounded on rhetorically like somebody banging on a hollow log.

    REPETITION is everything in the New Hampshire presidential primary. I’ve watched some presidential aspirant dolts who sound like stumbling bumbling fools develop into great candidates because they hone their message through repetition. Some of them really get good at it.

    I’m sure it’s the same in Iowa and South Carolina and the other early primary and caucus states.

    I would say it differently, but you must repeat this basic message a million times until the audience and the electorate know it in their bones:

    There won’t be people from all over the world line-jumping ahead of our fellow Americans who need medical help.

    I wrote this in 2013 about a New Hampshire politician who puts the interests of foreigners over and ahead of the interests of American citizens:

    U.S. Senator Jeanne Shaheen’s attacks on regular New Hampshire residents continue. Shaheen is an upper-class politician from a mostly white town. Shaheen looks down on those of us who live in Laconia, Concord, Manchester, and Nashua.

    Shaheen’s latest outrage is the hijacking of the U.S. governments monetary and fiscal power. Shaheen wants to borrow and print billions of dollars so she can give luxury Medicaid health plans to the tens of thousands of refugees she wants to flood our cities and towns with.

    Shaheen wants to expand secret deals for the political insiders. How much corrupt clam-raking from Medicaid will Shaheen get away with?

    Shaheen is using mass immigration to lower labor costs for her puppet-masters. Shaheen is a fully ensconced puppet for the evil globalizers who use multiculturalism and monetary monkey business as a weapon against true Americans.

    Shaheen will print and borrow, in your name, to give refugees Medicaid health care plans that you can’t afford.

    Perhaps, if Shaheen was not flooding our big towns and cities with Medicaid-consuming refugees, we might be able to set up bare-bones health savings accounts.

    Shaheen and her husband, billy, who rudely accused President Obama of youthful drug use while shilling for Hillary Clinton, don’t care about regular New Hampshire people. The Shaheen’s believe in increasing their wealth while crushing the young under horrible debt burdens.

    Shaheen’s bought- and- paid- for support of the Rubio/Shumer illegal alien amnesty — mass immigration surge bill will lower wages and increase debt. Shaheen’s immoral stealing of Medicaid health care dollars from long-time New Hampshire residents should not stand. Patriotic political leaders should not allow Shaheen’s squalid healthcare thievery to continue.

    God bless the good and to hell with the evil globalizers.

  13. @Bardon Kaldian

    You have a very specific definition of dumb. Sometimes I think I’m dumb for caring so much about politics.

    • Replies: @Bardon Kaldian
  14. I doubt restricting Healthcare for all, or Medicare for all to citizens would make the program solvent. I’d have to see the numbers.

    But, I’d oppose it, anyway. Massive government care programs are ultimately bad for people. They seem like the most humane thing in the world — make sure nobody goes without healthcare, or goes hungry. etc. — but that’s surface thinking and it doesn’t correspond with the actual observed history of such programs.

    What we see is:

    A) Even in the so-called socialist Scandinavian states always held up as paragons
    they’ve all experienced solvency problems. The socialist problem of running out of other peoples’ money can’t be escaped. These problems have gotten worse as their societies have gotten more “diverse.” What manages to struggle along (I wouldn’t say works) among a highly-cooperate, highly evolved Nordics doesn’t stand a chance with most other ethnicities.

    B) This is probably the most important point: it ennervates both those who fund it and those who are on it. Those who grow up as wards of the state never stop being wards of the state. This quashes individual achievement, independence innovation and ultimately human dignity. To those who are the workhorses of the Medicare for all regime, they become bitter and uncharitable: your instinct for charity is killed with A) the government promises to take care of everything and B) what you could have used for charity is taken from you at the barrel of a gun to provide for people who didn’t work for what you have.

    C) People don’t make decisions on a cost-benefit basis for goods when they’re not paying for them. This removes all market signals from an economic sector and leaves you by necessity running on a command economy. Need I remind anyone here the horrible record of command economies? No bureaucrat in Washington can tell if so much money really needs to be spent on procedure X vs. procedure Y because he has no information on the real value of the procedures to the population, because everybody just signs up for procedures they want whether they are high value or not. Procedures, personnel and equipment are restricted by people far, far away from the point of care with no real understanding of the consequences of their decisions.

    D) These systems are horrifically inefficient not just due to the lack of economic signals, but because everyone is incentivized to jump on the gravy train — both in terms of obtaining care and providing care, and get as much as they can out of the system. The system will become bogged down with career bureaucrats and the groups with the biggest lobbyists, and the last people to be considered will be the patients, because they have no power. You don’t have to be psychic to understand this. You just have to have eyes and a brain.

    • Agree: Mark G.
    • Replies: @Tlotsi
    , @Audacious Epigone
  15. Meh. All roads lead to the Medical-Industrial-Complex looting the USA to the point of destitution.

    Denninger is the only sane (albeit annoying) voice on this subject.

    Right now, the game is played by providing medical services of unlimited cost to Patients, billing almost entirely either Uncle Sammy or Big Med-Insurance (the former has, of course, a No-Limit-MasterCard while the latter gains profits as billings RISE, due to being guaranteed a set profit margin), rinse and repeat.

    The more services (hospital, ambulance, doctor, medicine, appliances, etc.) cost, the happier is EVERYONE!!

    The only horror stories are the rare occasion when someone with assets to seize and inadequate medical coverage gets crushed between the what,-costs-matter? service providers and financial reality.

    There is zero accountability for rising costs in this system. Americans apparently think that “more-is-better” applies to spending on medical services as well as adding “the diverse” to towns, cities and neighborhoods. It’s all the same collective delusion.

    A new cure for Hep C? $40,000 (and who gives a shit if the patient can afford it…we ALL can!)
    A new treatment for cystic fibrosis? $117,000 (per year???) And who pays? WHO CARES!!!!!

    All roads lead to a collapse in this house of cards; the only question is when, and at the rate we’re going, it could be next year and it could be 2050. Who knows?

    • Replies: @Justvisiting
  16. @Daniel Williams

    One is fundamentally stupid if he lacks a combination of basic reflexes & a rudimentary imagination, plus basic knowledge.

    Is dumb someone who has tiger as a pet? Definitely.

    Is dumb someone who thinks that Africa, India, Borneo, virtually all of Brazil, … are safe places for back-packing white young female tourists? Definitely.

    Is dumb someone who thinks that females are athletically as strong as males? Definitely.

    Is dumb someone who thinks that, with some help, Haiti, Liberia or Togo could build the civilization of more or less the same level of prosperity & security as, say, Hungary, Czechia or South Korea? Definitely.

    So there you are…

  17. @dc.sunsets

    Denninger is the only sane (albeit annoying) voice on this subject.

    lol

    The Fed Reserve and other Ponzi schemes are continuing longer than any of us could have imagined possible.

    At this point you can just protect yourself and yours as best you can and try to remain calm.

    I did learn this from Karl–do _not_ be annoying, no matter what. 😉

    • Replies: @dc.sunsets
  18. MarkinLA says:
    @iffen

    M4A will turn out to be a nightmare of small businesses cheating to avoid paying any healthcare taxes as they do now. Large buisinesses will drop their healthcare plans if paying the taxes is cheaper. Contractors will find a way to make 10,000 dollars a year to get healthcare for free. There is no way employees don’t pay taxes. Low income employees who are young won’t like smaller paychecks.

  19. MarkinLA says:

    The same cries about wasting money sending people to the moon while Kanisha needs a new Cadillac here on earth will be part of the mess of M4A. Money that might have gone into research will end up being spent to keep the poor quiet. Research and development will slow as decisions about adopting new therapies will depend on a shrinking budget to the point that they never get to the critical mass needed to work the bugs out.

  20. anon[345] • Disclaimer says:
    @Bragadocious

    (I think they figure — if Mexicans are getting good U.S. medical care, I’ll get my taco salad with extra guac on time.)

  21. As a dumb person allow me to throw my hat into decreasing healthcare costs by bot providing any — forcing people to take more of their care into their own hands and make better choices regarding the same.

    It’s easy to become complacent about one’s health in our convenient food delivery system. I am not a vegan. But I was astonished to learn that Roman Gladiators diets consisted of primarily vegetarian fare. I still have a hard time buying it.

    —————————-

    government healthcare.

    Orthopedic Surgeon:

    “Well, Mr Wilson, we think your muscle strain is the result of some intense psychological stress and we are going to have spend some time with the psychiatrist to get some answers.”

    Psychaiatrist:

    Well, Mr Wilson based on our assessments, you seem to be suffering from an acute case of gender dysphoria. This stressful condition is causing severe tension in your back muscles and placing undue pressure on your spinal column. And the solution is 1 year of hormone treatments and two years of constructive surgery.”

    Mr. Wilson:

    “Wow. All this time I though the stress was from my being lead tech on the bomb squad.”

  22. @Bragadocious

    I have a theory about woke whites; There are only about 12 of them in existence. News media outlets actually invented this unicorn horde and liberal whites can be persuaded to pretend to be woke on camera but only in order to see their faces on TV.

    They are kind of like vampires; a myth that has the support of Hollywood.

    There. I said it. Now, flog me and tell me I’m retarded.

  23. There won’t be people from all over the world line-jumping ahead of our fellow Americans who need medical help.

    I wrote this in March of 2019 about the immigration and sick care issues:

    A winning strategy against Trump and the GOP Cheap Labor Faction in the GOP presidential primary would be to state that ObamaCare steals money from Medicare to give luxury health care to illegal alien invaders.

    The GOP challenger to Trump could state that Trump is refusing to deport the upwards of 30 million illegal alien invaders in the USA and that ObamaCare provides the illegal alien invaders with luxury health care.

    This GOP challenger would have to call for the elimination of money-grubbing insurance companies and other scum who profit from the sick care industry in the USA.

    Trump has crawled into bed with the GOP Cheap Labor Faction and the sick care insurance companies that profit from the corrupt sick care system.

    You could also suggest a single payer health care plan that is paid for by a tariff on imported goods and services. You could call it FAFTA — Fit As (A) Fiddle Tariff Act.

  24. @Daniel Williams

    “They’re not dumb, exactly, they’ve just never really thought about this stuff. ”

    You may be right, Daniel. I think that it ain’t a case of being dumb. It’s more like mongoloidism.

    • Replies: @Daniel Williams
  25. Why are you all arguing about whether most people are dumb? Of course they are. The average IQ is 100, and that isn’t all that smart.

    • Replies: @Hail
  26. @Twodees Partain

    I wish “wokeness” was just a fevered nightmare caused by listening to a few of my relatives with dementia.

    Unfortunately there is data out there suggesting it actually exists:

    https://www.npr.org/2019/10/01/763383478/how-white-liberals-became-woke-radically-changing-their-outlook-on-race

    • Replies: @Twodees Partain
    , @anon
  27. @Justvisiting

    What a relief. For a second there I thought you were posting some proof, but it’s just NPR. Whew! That was close. 😉

  28. anon[217] • Disclaimer says:
    @Justvisiting

    The sane cannot share territory with the delusional. Separate countries. One way or another.

    • Agree: MBlanc46
  29. If you’re a foreigner in a European country and you get sick, you get covered fully under their socialized medicine programs. And I’m talking about 30 years ago, before all the immigrants to Europe. So I don’t see what the problem is. Somehow they manage to do it. I have a feeling there is a lot more money laying around in offshore shelters than anyone realizes except the rich people who stole it.

    • Replies: @Hail
  30. @EliteCommInc.

    Most of the food the Roman army ate was vegetarian. Mostly bread and oil and beans. A typical Roman soldiers day: march 30 miles with full kit; fell enough timber to build a log fort; build the fort, including watchtowers, berms, and moats. Erect tents and make dinner. Get up and do it all the next day.

    Those vegetarians were tougher than any modern human being will ever be.

  31. Jay Fink says:
    @Daniel Williams

    What’s worse being dumb or being smart and not thinking? A lot of what we call “normies” are in the second group.

  32. Jay Fink says:
    @James Bowery

    Medicaid is an example of economic liberalism causing social liberalism, in this case the breakdown of the family. Note that Republicans do absolutely nothing to cut Medicaid for unwed mothers (in an effort to appease pro-lifers?) yet they fight tooth and nail to prevent Medicaid from being expanded to anyone else, including part of their voting base.

  33. Single-payer healthcare ….

    If America goes single-payer or Medicare for All, worrying about whether or not persons not legally present in the US are covered is like re-arranging the deckchairs on the Titanic while waiting for her to sink.

    We could go back to individuals paying for their healthcare with chickens or eggs if they don’t have the cash and probably be no worse off.

    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
  34. @Twodees Partain

    You may be right, Daniel. I think that it ain’t a case of being dumb. It’s more like mongoloidism.

    Hiss! Remind me to stay on your good side, lady.

    But seriously, surely you have friends with whom you have shared interests outside of politics?

    • Replies: @Twodees Partain
  35. @Jay Fink

    What’s worse being dumb or being smart and not thinking?

    But most of the people I’m talking about do think. Just not about public policy. It’s a fringe interest. That’s why we associate on this website—there isn’t this huge number of people who spend a great deal of time thinking about this stuff and concluding the same things we (generally) do.

    My friends think about the circle of fifths, or material failure, or any of a million other things that occupy people’s minds other than immigration and group IQ differences.

    Expecting them to have a coherent opinion on those subjects isn’t reasonable, so my point was don’t hold your breath on certain kinds of people being brought around by argumentation predicated on this kind of thinking.

  36. @Jay Fink

    What’s worse being dumb or being smart and not thinking?

    Thinking is hard work.  Not too many people have the energy to do extra thinking they’re not getting paid to do, and that goes double for people without the “muscles” to make it effortless.

    Confronting your prejudices is a whole ‘nother level of difficulty.

    • Replies: @dc.sunsets
  37. @Justvisiting

    Karl is a first class asshole, someone I’d undoubtedly punch several times in the face were I subjected to him in person. (FWIW, he’s younger than me, but looks older and is frankly tiny by comparison. He brags about the 5k’s he runs. I’d more happily match bench press numbers.)

    That said, he’s hilariously behind the curve you highlighted. He was still talking up the Libertarian Party long after anyone with the proverbial 3 digit IQ laughed his way off that bus (anyone who spend more than a couple months on that oxymoron–an anti-political political party–is too short for most rides.) But while his rants are monomaniacal, and they have absolutely zero predictive capacity, he’s correct about the numbers.

    “Healthcare” spending in the USA is a positive feedback system; the higher it goes, the higher its rate of increase. There is no adult in the room, only children who want more-faster-better-etc. and the candy-crapping unicorn in the backyard, the one with a no-limit MasterCard, is “paying” for it.

    When interest rates are near zero (and they’re rapidly approaching that again), it tells us that the VALUE of saved capital is essentially zero. We’ve operated on that system for decades now, and it’s frankly astonishing to see how much ruin there is in a nation, because those decades are characterized by capital consumption that’s without precedent.

    The music hasn’t stopped.
    The music might play a lot longer, given that it did so these last 25 years.
    But the music might stop next week, next month or next year, too.
    When the music stops, to mix metaphors, we’ll find out who’s been swimming naked.
    Don’t swim naked.

  38. @Mr. Rational

    Thinking is hard work.

    It’s also unnatural, when the Impulsive Mind has a ready, low-effort position provided by the HERDING CENTER of the brain.

    People herd.
    Fashion is simply another word for herding.
    So are political views.
    Our modern world has, as its political fad, all the sacraments of modern Leftism.
    Those inclined to “think” the same as those around them (herding behavior) will thus be Leftists.

    It’s a waste of time to attempt to persuade someone away from a herding-based viewpoint. They’ll literally die before changing beliefs; ask Amy Biehl (well, ask her father, who embraced the men convicted of stabbing her to death.) Ask Mollie Tibbets’ dad. When you see those men, you see the power of herding. It has an IRON GRIP on their minds.

    They are far from alone.

  39. Pontius says:
    @Twodees Partain

    You’re not retarded, you’re “neuro-diverse”.

    I nearly crapped myself laughing when I read that a few weeks ago.

  40. SafeNow says:

    William Buckley wrote, at the time of Camp of the Saints: “What will you do? Will you shoot them? Will you starve them?” His questions were of course rhetorical. The corollary question, equally rhetorical, is “Will you let them be sick, sometimes fatally.” Buckley also wrote at the time that immigration laws appear too harsh and inhumane when applied to individual cases. Thus, the moral question settles it. As Christopher Caldwell has written, once that happens, discussion of costs is blocked.

    So there must be health care for everyone in the U.S. The only answer is to double the number of doctors — urgently. That’s 7 years, sorry. This is also the road to the White House, for either party. Virtually all U.S. citizens would want this. It’s like the near-unanimous approval you see in places that have banned leaf blowers.

  41. @SafeNow

    “What will you do? Will you shoot them? Will you starve them?”

    I cannot say what I would do given the schoolmarm, but I can say that we would NOT have a problem with invaders under my administration… and fish meal and pig slop would get appreciably cheaper.

    Make examples of a few, and the rest will stay away.  We should be willing to be harsh, even cruel, to invaders because any threat to our own is intolerable.  You. Always. Sink. The. Ships.

  42. SafeNow says:
    @Mr. Rational

    “We should be willing to be harsh.”

    We should be, but sadly we are not — not toward the invaders. But I have seen a lot of sentiment on this website for being very harsh on employers of illegals; severe e-verify enforcement. (One commenter suggested, metaphorically I think, execution.) And then, without jobs, the self-deportation might occur. The alternative to self-deporting would be the poorhouse.

    • Replies: @Hail
    , @RadicalCenter
  43. At least a small step in that direction should be taken, from my blog:

    Feb 12, 2013 – Lower the Medicare Age!

    There is crazy talk that we should raise the Medicare age to 67 to save money. Why? Do our 65 and 66 year olds no longer need medical insurance? This would simply shift costs to Medicaid (insurance for the poor) and for average incomers who use the local hospital ER and never pay. It would also force millions of elderly Americans to keep working another two years, thus increasing unemployment by an equal number of young workers.

    Our nation should move the other direction and lower the Medicare age to 62. This would save Medicaid and local hospitals billions of dollars and allow millions of Americans to retire at age 62. Many Americans have enough income to retire with Social Security at age 62, and would like to stop working, but can’t afford ultra-expensive private insurance, so they hang on until age 65. Allowing them to retire to 62 would open jobs to millions of younger unemployed Americans now on welfare related programs.

    This is win for everyone, except the private insurance racketeers who would lose a few million customers to the far more efficient Medicare system. For those Americans misinformed by our corporate media, America’s mostly private health insurance system costs twice as much per person as other industrialized nations, yet is rated below average, as another independent study recently confirmed.

    This idea would shift costs from welfare programs supporting young, healthy unemployed Americans over to Medicare. Local hospitals would save billions of dollars as they no longer get stuck with huge bills for uninsured Americans age 62-64, thus lowering medical costs for everyone. The billions saved from welfare related programs could be used for deficit reduction. Medicare would need additional funding, which is possible by simply raising the payroll tax for Medicare from 1.45% to 1.8%. This is an expansion of a flat tax that imposes an equal burden on all workers, who would all be eligible for Medicare at age 62. Unfortunately, our nation’s powerful insurance racketeers hate this idea, and are pushing their front men in Congress and the White House the opposite direction.

    • Replies: @Mark G.
  44. Illegals getting Medicare is another insurance industry talking point. They do not, since a verifiable social security number is required. Most “libertarians” who oppose medicare for all already get government subsidized healthcare, but don’t realize it or are just greedy. Many Americans don’t understand our corrupt the system. An example from my blog:

    Mar 31, 2013 – Organized Crime at your Pharmacy

    One simple solution to our nation’s high medical costs is for the government to allow Medicare to negotiate medicine prices with large pharmaceutical companies. This is done by the Veterans Administration and large insurers. This would save Medicare and taxpayer billions of dollars a year, money that now goes to easy corporate profits.

    The current issue of “Consumer Reports” magazine provides examples of how med prices are greatly inflated. For example, a 30-day supply of Lipitor costs $17 at Costco (you don’t have to pay their $50 annual membership fee to use their pharmacy), but costs $144 at Target and $150 at CVS! Plavix costs $15 at Costco, but $50 at Walgreens and $137 at Rite Aid! These mark-ups are so high that one might assume Congress would intervene. Price gouging people buying medicine!

    Our corporate media remains mostly silent about this ongoing scandal. Consumers with insurance don’t notice because they assume their “discount” saves them money. In many cases their insurance medicine copay is greater than the full cash price at Costco! This explains the criminal conspiracy known as Medicare Part D, which arose during the Bush Administration and costs our government and elderly billions of dollars a year. The cash price at Costco is usually cheaper than the Medicare Part D co-pay, AND the pharmacies bill Medicare for the rest, which is pure profit!

    For example, a senior who watches lots of TV might feel comfortable choosing the Medicare Part D Rx plan offered by AARP for $28.80 a month, so they only pay $43 each month for Lipitor. But they can buy it for $17 at Costco with no monthly membership fee! We don’t hear anything about this racket when our two corporate sponsored political parties debate budget problems or medical costs. Some have suggested that we simply eliminate Medicare Part D and tell seniors to buy their meds at Costco, but that makes too much sense.

    • Replies: @Tlotsi
  45. “So are political views.”

    No one who has ever had to explain what they believe and why, minus leaning on another’s voice is probably doing a fair amount of thinking.

  46. dfordoom says: • Website
    @EliteCommInc.

    As a dumb person allow me to throw my hat into decreasing healthcare costs by not providing any

    Great idea. If all those sick people would just die we could save so much on healthcare. Sick people are so icky anyway. If people choose to get sick they deserve everything that happens to them.

    Letting old people die would save even more money. If people choose to get old they deserve everything that happens to them.

    I just don’t understand why so many people think right-wingers are heartless monsters.

  47. @Daniel Williams

    I’m a man. Of course I have friends with interests in common with me that are outside of politics. I don’t have any friends who are democrats because all the democrats I know drag politics into everything. My condolences to you for having only democrat friends.

  48. @Pontius

    Neuro- diverse….Does that also cover delusional? That’s what I’m usually accused of being when I trot out one of my theories.

  49. @dfordoom

    Why is medical care referred to by the euphemism “healthcare”? Is it because so much of what passes for medical care these days isn’t actually care of any kind? What do you mean when you mention healthcare?

  50. @SafeNow

    “What will you do? Will you shoot them? Will you starve them?” His questions were of course rhetorical.

    Knowing WFB, I’ll buy that they were rhetorical, but should they be rhetorical? I’m with Mr. Rational.

  51. JackOH says:

    Well, to each his own, I suppose, but there’s something unsavory and disingenous about folks who’ve been fattened up by massive employer-paid group health insurance subsidies or Medicare subsidies, two profligate and politically motivated schemes that forced America’s cash patients into involuntary medical indigence, and then having them discuss the merits of denying health care to others.

    • Replies: @Twodees Partain
  52. “Great idea. If all those sick people would just die we could save so much on healthcare. Sick people are so icky anyway. If people choose to get sick they deserve everything that happens to them.”

    Laughing and laughing hard.

    I think my review is far more refined than that. People do get ill. And they get ill from no fault of their own behavior. I was riding my bike in the correct lane , with the correct gear and the correct clothing and have been smacked by cars twice. People who are athletes get sill, even get catastrophic illnesses despite engaging beyond normal health practices.

    My point is not to advance the hardlined, “let them eat cake” or Scrooges admonition that they had better just die off and do the rest of a favor, that simply lacks any real moral force and denies reality that there are things that effect people that is die to no fault of their own.

    What I am saying is that there is plenty the US citizen can and should do to take responsibility of our health. And we as a country should do so. No one has to engage in start athletic performance, not does anyone need an athlete’s physic to improve. However,

    some attention to weight
    some attention to moderate exercise
    some attention to the impact of what we eat
    some attention smoking, drinking, drug use

    would go a long way to improving the general health of the public and thereby reduce both catastrophic care needs and other negatives as well. I am not sure how you avoid it with any manner of subsidized care. But we as a people should tend to eat as a matter of overall health. It might be a good idea to bring back PE programs to education.

    The repeated use of false extremes to bend comments out of reality is something I understand very well. Liberals can’t help themselves but muddy every pool they enter for the sake of making baseless arguments to malign another’s character or the intent of what they are actually contending.

    This from people who actually support murdering children in the womb —

    Only a liberal would contend that suggesting a look at vegan diets to improve health thereby curtailing a need to get catastrophic or general care as something heartless.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  53. “William Buckley wrote, at the time of Camp of the Saints: “What will you do? Will you shoot them? Will you starve them?” His questions were of course rhetorical. The corollary question, equally rhetorical, is “Will you let them be sick, sometimes fatally.” Buckley also wrote at the time that immigration laws appear too harsh and inhumane when applied to individual cases. Thus, the moral question settles it. As Christopher Caldwell has written, once that happens, discussion of costs is blocked.

    So there must be health care for everyone in the U.S. The only answer is to double the number of doctors — urgently. That’s 7 years, sorry. This is also the road to the White House, for either party. Virtually all U.S. citizens would want this. It’s like the near-unanimous approval you see in places that have banned leaf blowers.”

    Ohhh good grief,

    talking morality lessons from someone starts out by making a false argument is like visiting a candy store to have dental work. No one here is talking about denying healthcare. They are talking about how best to care for citizen’s health and provide care and for anyone making decisions about governance those are basic and mandatory considerations. The morality of governance demands taking those issues into account. That morality includes mismanagement by robbing peter to frank.

    Your morality is can certainly be challenged here. You introduce a response to a book of fiction about a scenario that is not happening and not even reflected in the worst of immigration quandaries merely to make arguments that are not related — what disingenuous claptrap and rhetorically abusive. No one is strangling refugees, refugees and or immigrants are throwing food supplies overboard. If we are going to start with morality tales. You should at least start off by referencing the real world, not novels of fiction that don’t reflect the issue on par.

    We have already answered Mr. Buckley’s supposed inquiries and no one is ignoring the various facets of moral presentation.

    You have the audacity to tag Mr. Buckley;s comments to your own personal assessment without noting that your sentiments are not his own and based on the same presentation not in any way connected. And then slip and slide into Christopher Caldwell’s reference to morality — without noting what issue of morality he is talking about and even this were the case, Mr. Caldwell is not advocating for national healthcare but on immigration Mr Caldwell submitted the following:

    https://www.nationalreview.com/magazine/2019/08/26/the-coming-migration-out-of-sub-saharan-africa/

    And you conclude — healthcare for all as though that has any moral force when your real gambit is about elections. No one here is advocating that people be denied care. But as Mr. Caldwell notes in his article on immigration — managing a social dynamic so that it is beneficial and fair is the issue.

  54. Hail says: • Website
    @Cloudbuster

    Has anyone ever tried to calculate the average IQ of US voters (those who cast a ballot for president), over time, say 1840 to 2020? (This not being the same as average resident IQ for obvious reasons).

    That would be quite a task, but would love to see it.

    I imagine the basic trendline is gradually down, and lately the same but less gradually; I imagine we’ve lost quite a few points by 2020 over the peak.

  55. Hail says: • Website
    @SafeNow

    Apparently Donald ‘Tweetman’ Trump goes on rants to his advisers against e-verify, how bad it is. Which explains why has made no moves on nationwide e-verify.

  56. Hail says: • Website
    @obwandiyag

    I’m talking about 30 years ago, before all the immigrants to Europe. So I don’t see what the problem is.

    You yourself identified the reason the European systems worked.

    Read this line you wrote again:

    I’m talking about 30 years ago, before all the immigrants to Europe

    Do you see what the problem is now?

  57. Bill says:
    @Daniel Williams

    Most of my friends are dems. They don’t think about any of the stuff we think or talk about. They just assume that if we (the people of the United States) wanted to, we could easily provide free health care to anyone in the world, instantly and without sacrifice on our own part.

    That’s how it worked in Elysium.

  58. Mark G. says:
    @Carlton Meyer

    “Allowing them to retire to 62 would open jobs to millions of younger unemployed Americans now on welfare related programs.”

    If you let people retire early so younger people on welfare can have their jobs the government will have to pay less for welfare for younger people but more for Social Security and Medicare for older people. So you aren’t really saving much money doing that. There may a societal loss because if the younger unemployed workers are not currently being hired by employers it may be because they think the older workers are more experienced and therefore more productive and that is why the younger workers are currently unemployed and the older workers are employed. So replacing older workers with younger workers may slow economic growth. If you are going to have a welfare state healthcare system it is better to have one that provides assistance only to those who truly need it and let everyone else pay for their own healthcare. A system where you pay taxes to pay for my healthcare and I pay taxes to pay for your healthcare doesn’t really benefit either one of us. The only beneficiaries are the tax collectors who get government jobs.

  59. @JackOH

    “massive employer-paid group health insurance subsidies or Medicare subsidies, two profligate and politically motivated schemes ”

    Medicare subsidies fit your description of profligate and politically motivated schemes, but employer paid health insurance subsidies were instituted as a way of giving employees a raise without increasing the tax load for both employers and employees. Politicians eventually found a way to wipe out that tax shelter.

    Employer paid insurance did change the way medical care was defined and had an effect on the cost of medical treatment. I think it led to the push for Obamacare finally. The Affordable Health Care Act never really addressed the provision of medical treatment for those without insurance. It focused on making that insurance mandatory, instead of addressing the cause of the high cost of medical treatment.

    • Replies: @JackOH
  60. dfordoom says: • Website
    @EliteCommInc.

    However,

    some attention to weight
    some attention to moderate exercise
    some attention to the impact of what we eat
    some attention smoking, drinking, drug use

    would go a long way to improving the general health of the public and thereby reduce both catastrophic care needs and other negatives as well.

    Those would be good things. But I don’t like the idea of coercing or even pressuring people into conforming to someone else’s rules about what they should eat or how much they should exercise. Encouraging healthy habits is fine but the danger is always that liberals will try to enforce such rules.

    This from people who actually support murdering children in the womb —

    I’m very very anti-abortion.

    Only a liberal would contend that suggesting a look at vegan diets to improve health thereby curtailing a need to get catastrophic or general care as something heartless.

    I’m no liberal.

    Veganism is a silly fad. That’s the problem with the healthy lifestyle thing – much of it is nothing but fads pushed by cranks.

    The repeated use of false extremes to bend comments out of reality is something I understand very well.

    I admit that I was caricaturing your position.

  61. “But I don’t like the idea of coercing or even pressuring people into conforming to someone else’s rules about what they should eat or how much they should exercise. Encouraging healthy habits is fine but the danger is always that liberals will try to enforce such rules.”

    I did not state anything would be forced. I stated it as a fact. People making healthier choices would significantly reduce leaning on healthcare professionals and reduce their need to pay for unneccesary care or care that could be avoided. However anyone who has actually had health insurance knows that said companies can require adherence to certain behaviors and said adherence has impact on coverages. Your complaint about what you like as to imposition is easily dismissed. We live in communities, and those communities acknowledge and expect adherence to certain standards. And anyone who thinks the government is going to provide unlimited care or even partial without demanding something of them regarding behaviors is not operating in a real world. And that conversation about end of living panels is not theoretical, its real and care systems in Europe consider when costs exceed the need to keep patients alive, “afterall they have lived fruitful lives.”

    And frankly, the public providing said healthcare has a responsibility to ensure cost effectiveness . . .

    —————————–

    “I’m very very anti-abortion.”

    Only a liberal would contend that suggesting a look at vegan diets to improve health thereby curtailing a need to get catastrophic or general care as something heartless.

    I’m no liberal.

    Veganism is a silly fad. That’s the problem with the healthy lifestyle thing – much of it is nothing but fads pushed by cranks.”

    I certainly support your understanding that human life starts at conception and oppose killing children at any stage of their development.

    On dieting, its safe to say that you have no idea what you are talking about. Vegetarians have been around – for centuries. And based on the record it has provided citizens with healthier lives. It’s only fad if you think it arrived on scene yesterday.

    The Vegatarian community

    https://www.vegansociety.com/about-us/history

    https://www.vegansociety.com/about-us/history

    As to caricaturizing of my comments

    What you did was make false claims about my position, that was not a mistake but deliberately misleading. No one operating with any level of sincerity thinks that healthy lifestyle eating is an idea advocated by cranks and that is the entire point of healthcare — optimal healthy living.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  62. @The Alarmist

    Almost all people don’t have farm products to trade. And a chicken or eggs or a pig or whatever won’t cover expensive diagnostic procedures, surgeries, or even expensive medication. I know, you said we could ALMOST go back to that arrangement.

    As for noncitizens, though, it would make a meaningful difference to disqualify all noncitizens from government-funded healthcare or healthcare insurance. There are several tens of millions of illegal aliens, and Many millions more legal permanent residents. It matters quite a bit, fiscally, whether they get taxpayer-funded benefits like this.

  63. @SafeNow

    Not really. In California, illegal aliens get medical insurance provided by the taxpayers, and I think recently daycare as well. Starting in 2016, we CA taxpayers were forced to pay for medical insurance for illegal aliens up to age nineteen:

    https://www.coveredca.com/individuals-and-families/getting-covered/immigrants/

    Since a bill enacted in July 2019, CA taxpayers are forced to provide medical insurance for illegal aliens up to age 25.

    So with or without a job, legal or otherwise, everyone here gets medical insurance at least till age 25, and we can expect the Dems to extend that to all illegal aliens of any age soon enough.

    That’s a meaningless incentive to stay in the USA without a job. Pump up some babies with someone who is at least a legal permanent resident, and share in the food stamps and cash assistance that the taxpayers will fork over.

    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
  64. JackOH says:
    @Twodees Partain

    ” . . . [E]mployer paid health insurance subsidies were instituted as a way of giving employees a raise . . “.

    That’s widely believed, but untrue. If my memory’s okay, both the War Labor Board and Supreme Court in 1944 disposed of the notion that group health insurance was a sort of alternate wage, noting that unlike a wage, the employee who benefited had no control over whether the cost of the premium should be spent buying insurance or whether it ought to be included in his pay as cash. (I think the Office of Price Administration claimed it was an illegal work-around wage and price controls.)

    This example may make it easier to see the non-wage nature of group health. We have a local school administrator, a widower with grown kids, earning $120,ooo annually. When his wife was alive and kids were young, they were enrolled in a so-called family plan costing these days about $13,000 annually. When his wife died, he was enrolled in a single plan costing these days about $5500 annually. What kind of pay raise can it be if it’s clawed back lawfully and without protest upon the death of a spouse?

    There’s plenty to demonstrate that the commonly held beliefs about group health insurance are just not true. The reality is that group health insurance enrollees believe what they want to believe about the extraordinary advantage they enjoy. There’s just no political space for anyone to speak to the contrary. That’s pretty much why, in my opinion, health care debate goes wobbly right away.

  65. dfordoom says: • Website
    @EliteCommInc.

    “But I don’t like the idea of coercing or even pressuring people into conforming to someone else’s rules about what they should eat or how much they should exercise. Encouraging healthy habits is fine but the danger is always that liberals will try to enforce such rules.”

    I did not state anything would be forced.

    I know you didn’t. I said “the danger is always that liberals will try to enforce such rules” which is I think pretty much true. I wan’t suggesting that you personally believed in forcing people to adopt “healthy” lifestyles.

    Vegetarians have been around – for centuries. And based on the record it has provided citizens with healthier lives. It’s only fad if you think it arrived on scene yesterday.

    I have no quarrel with people who might be vegetarians for religion reasons. But modern veganism as a healthy lifestyle is the province of cranks.

  66. Buck says:

    Yes, limiting any healthcare programs to civilians would make it viable IF there was also a way to get market forces to make people good consumers of healthcare dollars. At the end of the day, federal and state governments already cover over half the cost.

    As a percentage of GDP, that’s about what other countries pay FOR single payer systems. Unfortunately, their systems aren’t great. There is rationing of services and they are chronically underfunded. Wealthy citizens end up going to private hospitals and pay for private insurance. That’s what Medicare-for-all would end up becoming, a two tiered system of mediocre care for the masses and great private care for the wealthy.

    It doesn’t have to be that way. Most elective procedures, where consumers pay the cost, have come down in price simply because Americans are great consumers when it is their money. That’s how markets worth. Lasik no longer costs $15,000. “Medical spas” have popped up all over suburbs providing all kinds of procedures for the upper middle class and wealthy.

    So how do we do it for everyone? Give every citizen money to buy the insurance of their choice, start a HSA and be able to roll any extra monies over year after year in their invested HSA. Americans are good consumers. Most will choose a bare-bones high deductible insurance plan and pay out of pocket through their HSA’s. It’s what many working Americans do right now.

    The thing is, we only heavily consume healthcare a few times in our lives (unless we have a medical condition). When we are born and when we grow old are when we spend the mass majority of our lifetime healthcare dollars. Parents’ insurance can cover birth and HSA’S built up over a lifetime can help cover old age.

  67. @RadicalCenter

    MeaningFUL incentive, that is. Doh.

  68. @Mr. Rational

    3rd worlders only understand harsh punishments. To them, being “nice” is the same thing as being weak, soft, naive, and easily exploited.

    This is something most white people do not understand. They think that if they are just a little nicer to Mohammad and N’gombe they are suddenly going to get along fine.

    I can tell you from my professional experiences: if you present yourself as ruthless, pompous, and dominant the rainbow peoples will bow down to you, and may even be pleasant. You can have a decent relationship when they respect you. But otherwise they are ruthless, pompous, and dominate you. I can tell you they do not respect 90% of white people.

    Equality only works between whites. Being “nice” only works between whites. Deal with it and start acting like a man.

  69. “I know you didn’t. I said “the danger is always that liberals will try to enforce such rules” which is I think pretty much true. I wan’t suggesting that you personally believed in forcing people to adopt “healthy” lifestyles.”

    I have news for you. Anyone on a government programs will be expected to abide by certain mandates. And I suspects that tax payers are going to be fine with mandates about their lifestyle habits including what they eat trying to turn that expectation into a liberal turn misses the point that managing said healthcare will include those expectations. If drinking cause scerosis of the liver and you are on a government program, that part of that care would reasonable addressing the use of alcohol — the dangerous behavior would be to ignore the cause because it is an offensive expectation. And in my view, liberals would be more inclined to challenge that manner of managing.

    Nice try, vegans are vegetarians and there is nothing “crankish” about their view that eating a certain set of vegetables provides better health benefits. Since they have been around sine the 1940’s I think it is safe to say their view of what type and how to prepare vegetarian meals is hardly faddish.

    Laugh, the population that maintain a vegetarian diet do so for a host of reasons, number one of among them is better health.

  70. just to be clear: My comments are not an advocacy for any particular diet, But that in considering issues about healthcare responsibility is a legitimate issue. And there are some things citizens can that don’t require medical treatment to improve their health and reduce costs.

    I could not in good conscience say that any one diet, exercise, etc. works for everyone, that is not my issue. But it is not as if citizens of the US are helpless in decreasing catastrophic and long term heatlh issues.

    • Replies: @dc.sunsets
  71. anon[355] • Disclaimer says:

    Single-payer healthcare, or Medicare-for-all, is a very popular issue.

    Wait, I thought Obamacare solved that problem for ever and ever. And ever.
    Did I miss a memo?

  72. @SafeNow

    Reality is full of axioms–laws of Nature that are utterly inviolable.

    An axiom of economics (the descriptive science, not its pseudo-cousin, economic engineering) is that you will ALWAYS get more of what you throw resources (money) at.

    If you throw money at homeless people, you will expand their numbers.
    If you throw money at single mothers, you’ll get more single-motherhood.
    If you throw money at dysfunctional people (in general), you’ll expand their numbers.

    If you throw money at “sick” people, you’ll get more sick people.

    Think about it. Today’s Big Pharma sifts the weeds for new “maladies” all the time. There now exist dozens of “illnesses” that didn’t even exist a few years ago. High cholesterol? There’s a drug for that (and no, it’s not limited to the tiny percentage of people born with a metabolic defect.) Bipolar? ADHD? Drugs for those. (Bipolar people have existed forever…they were just called “mercurial” or simply “assholes.”)

    There are pretty good studies that reveal NO widespread or statistically-relevant benefit of CABG (Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting) yet both my In-Laws had the procedure done (all the better to milk Medicare, of course, and keep chest surgeons’ mortgages on their Caribbean getaways current.) The same is true of mammography. All “early detection” does is result in lots of procedures where 9-in-10 times the tumor would simply fade away. But every woman diagnosed via mammography and who undergoes a procedure now dons the mantle of “cancer survivor” and gets to march in parades and be interviewed on TeeVee. It’s a feedback loop, but don’t look for anyone to admit that publicly.

    Since “health” is a state of mind as well as body, demand for “health services” is quite literally infinite.

    Spending on “medical services” is on a ramp to crowd out every other item on Mankind’s wish list, and much of it is going on the National MasterCard today.

    I don’t know how this song ends…I don’t know if the Tuba player has a heart attack, or the conductor has a stroke, or the crystal meth the band members keep snorting to stay awake runs out…but someday all of this is going to stop…and I suspect it will not be because the music calls for diminution from FF to pp.

  73. @EliteCommInc.

    An economic axiom: The disutility of labor.

    AKA “people are lazy.”

    As long as someone promises to provide “a pill for that,” making lifestyle changes to improve health will be the last thing on a vast percentage of people’s minds.

    Medical Services in the USA are heavily subsidized (socialized), so the cost of pills and procedures is not borne by the patient. This makes pills and procedures even more attractive when deciding whether to seek medical care or change one’s lifestyle.

    It’s absolutely fascinating to me. I am bright, have two degrees in the biological sciences, worked in both clinical and research labs and made a career of it with Big Pharma spending my working days in doctors’ offices….and I avoid physicians like they’re carriers of Ebola.

    Medical Services in the USA are seen as somehow magical, freeing people to behave however self-destructively their impulsive minds desire, “safe” in the knowledge that Dr. Smith (or more often now, Dr. Hasan, Dr. Abudjia or Dr. Hussain-Chen) will simply “fix” what’s broken.

    Nothing could be further from the truth.

    There are wonderful, stunningly beneficial medical procedures and pharmaceuticals that truly help people today, but I’d wager that for every one of the “good” things, there are twenty bads.

    • Agree: Mark G.
  74. @EliteCommInc.

    Government healthcare’s not like that in the NHS. You sometimes have to poke/nag your doctor to get a scan done.

    They have a finite amount to spend and while there are plenty of inefficiencies, it’s unlikely they’ll deliberately over-doctor you (unless they’re corrupt and there’s money in it).

    I knew someone who went private on their insurance and had the cheapest treatment (which turned out not to be good enough) for what killed her. The NHS would have done better.

    Dangers are more likely from

    a) being starved to death when you’re old – google ‘North Staffs Hospital” for details

    b) doctors who can’t or won’t get a second opinion, ask for help or refer to a consultant when they don’t know. A 12 year old boy died recently in Wales of a treatable but rare illness which he’d had for months, because the doctor wouldn’t refer him, and an 18 year old Irish girl bled to death when the surgeon was too stiff necked to call colleagues in to help him. But it’s not the norm, and rightly makes headlines.

    https://www.thejournal.ie/jessica-sheedy-inquest-4882074-Nov2019/

    Catherine Browne, a theatre nurse who was assisting Mr Lal said during the surgery she “witnessed a huge gush of blood” “filling up” inside Ms Sheedy’s abdomen.

    She claimed “Mr Lal refused” offers from her to get other surgeons to help him. She said she asked him if he needed help, but, “he said no”.

    Theatre nurse, Elaine Lyons, said she also asked Mr Lal if he needed help, but that “he said no”.

    She said she telephoned on-call consultant vascular surgeon, Mr Eamon Kavanagh, and told him, “we are in trouble in Theatre Six, Mr Lal is refusing help”.

    “Mr Lal said he didn’t want any help,” she told the inquest before returning to her seat and broke down in tears.

    Dr Eoin Fahey, who also assisted Mr Lal, said there was “a sudden rush of arterial blood” during the operation, and Ms Sheedy’s blood pressure “dropped rapidly”.

    He said theatre staff in the room had “sought help”.

    Dr Helen Earley, a junior registrar, said she also asked Mr Lal “if he needed help, and he said no”.

    There are also a few incompetents, mostly brought in from overseas.

    • Replies: @dc.sunsets
  75. @YetAnotherAnon

    There are also a few incompetents, mostly brought in from overseas.

    And complaining about them will get you labeled as a “racist,” and apparently then you’ll be kicked out of the NHS and you’d better be able to afford private care.
    http://www.unz.com/sbpdl/in-united-kingdom-national-health-service-to-deny-treatment-to-sick-people-if-they-are-deemed-racist-or-sexist/

  76. @dfordoom

    Damn those heartless monsters for not realizing that healthcare is an unlimited resource and can be provided to everyone to the full extent they request it for free!

  77. Tlotsi says:
    @Cloudbuster

    You also need to consider that you’ll be putting your medical care under the control of the Democrats. “Well, Mr Smith, it seems you made an insensitive joke about trannies on Twitter thirty years ago, and that disqualifies you from cancer treatments.”

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @Justvisiting
    , @Cloudbuster
  78. @Tlotsi

    “Well, Mr. Smith, our records show that your second cousin just put up a web page with hate speech attacking our wonderful government. You need to convince him to take down that web page if you want medical care….”

  79. Tlotsi says:
    @Carlton Meyer

    I don’t know about Medicare, but I got prescribed Lipitor recently, and it cost me $0 at Walmart. This was with Blue Cross Blue Shield insurance, a Silver Plan.

  80. “Medical Services in the USA are heavily subsidized (socialized), so the cost of pills and procedures is not borne by the patient.”

    I don’t have much comment here. The US is over medicated. Medications have not had much impact on long term illnesses and themselves expensive and no government program to decrease cost has effectually done so. They have by most measures guarantee higher prices as has healthcare in general.

    Note: One of the main issues I had with all medical professionals was their insistence that I take painkillers. Having not even used aspirin since the early 1980’s, it’s a safe bet my advocacy against medications of all kinds, including prescriptions suggested by psychiatry.– I came to that place in the 1993 (?).

    One exception localized pain relief for surgical procedures.
    ————————————————–

    • Replies: @dc.sunsets
  81. “Government healthcare’s not like that in the NHS. You sometimes have to poke/nag your doctor to get a scan done.”

    I am hard pressed to protect government services. I go think the one example though anecdotal represents what may be routine for healthcare services. And until there is a method for holding the medical profession accountable that is consistent and actually encourages effective treatment as opposed to creating a fear based system by which physicians are constantly operating to protect themselves from suits or accountability – it is safe to say, a single payer system will only make matters worse.

    However, the leading causes of death:

    https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/news/media/releases/study_suggests_medical_errors_now_third_leading_cause_of_death_in_the_us

    https://www.healthline.com/health/leading-causes-of-death

    https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/leading-causes-of-death.htm

    for senior citizens

    https://www.ibtimes.com/dementia-overtakes-heart-disease-leading-cause-death-2446035

    I think our professional medical services are vital and we should take action to ensure that when care is needed it is available. But before we launch into a enmasse system, we should be examining seriously its implications and nothing about the growing call by liberals, democrats or millenials suggests they have any serious critical thinking ability or intent to walk that lane objectively.

  82. excuse the add on

    https://chriskresser.com/medical-care-is-the-3rd-leading-cause-of-death-in-the-us/

    The medical profession is one arena in which importing noncitizens and adopting loose immgration practices has been the norm

    I don’t think it has in any manner been helpful to the country.

    We should place a moratorium on all immigration for at least five years and this candidate

    Pete D’Abrosca in North Carolina is spot on. And though Miss Coulter and myself are at some distance lately, I agree with Miss Coulter on his candidacy – we need more like him.

  83. @anon

    They say I’m a dreamer but I’m not the only one!

  84. @Big Dick Bandit

    Don’t look at Bernie’s newly released 2020 immigration platform.

  85. @Dave Pinsen

    No Democrat is going to call for mass deportation–they can’t even pay lip service to targeted deportations of known criminals anymore–but there is still a chance one could say Medicare-for-all-Americans is better than fantasy Medicare-for-the-entire-world.

    I didn’t mention it in the body of the post, but support for Medicare for all/single payer runs close to 70%, while support for giving free Medicare to illegal aliens runs at around 30%. Big gap to be exploited here.

    • Agree: Dave Pinsen
  86. @Cloudbuster

    Abstractly, I’m with you.

    One huge practical problem with the current American arrangement is that healthcare is effectively tied to employment. This hinders entrepreneurialism, and it’s getting worse as healthcare becomes more expensive. I know people personally who want to work for themselves but the healthcare concern keeps them from pulling the trigger.

    The subscription models that are starting to pop up in various places show a lot of promise. The political problem, of course, is that they don’t address that hard cases that make hearts bleed.

    To the extent that I’m well-enough resigned to Medicare for all is that if you (and your children) don’t have serious, recurring health problems, physicians mostly just exist to rubber stamp the amoxicillin prescription you’re forced to have before swinging by the pharmacy to get what in a sane world you would’ve been able to get OTC. Our insurance allows these rubber stampers to make over a quarter million dollars a year. Under Medicare for all, they’ll eventually make one-third of that.

    • Replies: @Cloudbuster
  87. @EliteCommInc.

    Gladiators loaded up on carbs to look like offensive lineman. That’s the body build best able to sustain a succession of body blows (see sumo wrestlers).

  88. @Twodees Partain

    I’ve been to a few college campuses during the Great Awokening. It’s really bad. Worse than you think, I’m certain. There may be a silent majority, but they’re not a super majority and they’re silent. The crazies are salient and vociferous.

  89. @Pontius

    These euphemistic neologisms used to be funny. Now they just bring on a mix of nausea and despair. I feel the raindrops on my skin and I know there’s no way Noah is letting me in.

    • Agree: dc.sunsets
    • Replies: @EliteCommInc.
  90. anonymous[246] • Disclaimer says:
    @Bardon Kaldian

    Barbados reached Czechia levels of income. Botswana is roughly where Hungary is in material prosperity.

  91. @EliteCommInc.

    In fact, ancient Romans classed meat as “soft” food and bread and beans as “hard” food. Because bread and beans had to be crushed and smashed and boiled and manhandled to make it edible. Thus, vegetarian eating was manly. Meat for pampered sissies.

  92. @EliteCommInc.

    One exception localized pain relief for surgical procedures.

    You mean “anesthetics.” Not the same thing as analgesics.

    The US is over medicated. Medications have not had much impact on long term illnesses

    Yep. “There’s a pill for that” is a mental disease…which is funny, given that I find the term “mental illness” a lying piece of propaganda; in 99.999% of the cases, “mental illness” is simply a description of human behavior deemed outside of a particular set of “approved” actions. Note that pneumococcal pneumonia (a somatic disease) is the same today as it was a thousand years ago, but what was once “mental illness” isn’t anymore, while other things that were common and accepted have now been defined into being “mental illness.” Only a very few human behaviors characterized by the term “mental illness” have demonstrable, physical abnormalities. All the talk about neurotransmitter differences is pure, unadulterated bullshit.

    my advocacy against medications of all kinds, including prescriptions suggested by psychiatry.

    No drug on Earth can fine-tune cognition (which is upstream of behavior, which is how “mental illness” is defined.) Anti-psychotics simply put people into mental loops by deadening their cognitive processes as a whole. ADHD meds are, oddly enough, simply stimulants in the same vein as caffeine or amphetamines; everyone can concentrate better when taking stimulants, the effects are very general. Anti-depressants simply don’t work, as evidenced by the fact that their “controlled studies” are bullshit; if you give the control group a true placebo and the study group a drug that can and will have side-effects, the latter can infer from the presence of the side-effects that they’re on the study medication, rendering void the entire notion of blinded use of the drug. This easily accounts for the nearly negligible “treatment effect” found in studies. In other words, totally useless. But they sell a crap-ton of that snake oil to people whose real problems are actually a choice.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  93. @Audacious Epigone

    That’s accurate. But that their duet was comprised largely of vegetables that that it could be noted in their bone chemistry today is for e interesting.

    I have no dissenting view they represented an elite athleticism. And clearly carbs are great for burning energy, but protein is is what builds muscle and there is where the turn, they obtained the majority of their proteins from vegetables as well.

  94. “There’s a pill for that” is a mental disease…which is funny, given that I find the term “mental illness” a lying piece of propaganda; in 99.999% of the cases, “mental illness” is simply a description of human behavior deemed outside of a particular set of “approved” actions.”

    Laughing. Uhhhhh. No. It is not that said chemicals don’t work. It’s whether they are too readily applied across a broad spectrum of the populace, as they don’t work across the board similarly to people, despite a similar ailment, in my view.

    Not going to address mental illness. I simply think that it includes that part of the over medicated issue. I don’t doubt that there are medications that help deal with issues physical or psychological. I am saying that our reliance on their efficacy is probably over the top.

    Nor would I agree about the impact that chemistry can have on any part of cognition. Our bodies are chemical. I have no doubt that the drugs prescribed to alleviate my pain would have done so. It’s that my long standing position against the possible consequences gives me pause. There;s nothing wrong with using medical prescriptions, but like drinking alcohol, I am am overly cautious about the end game.

    There is simply no doubt that chemicals can have a positive effect on every issue of human illness. Pain killers work. That is not in doubt. No doubt certain chemical combinations alleviate mental stresses — no doubt. That we have come to heavily dependent on them across such a broad spectrum is deeply disconcerting. I am not an advocate for alcohol or other mind altering substances either.

    • Replies: @dc.sunsets
  95. “In fact, ancient Romans classed meat as “soft” food and bread and beans as “hard” food. Because bread and beans had to be crushed and smashed and boiled and manhandled to make it edible. Thus, vegetarian eating was manly. Meat for pampered sissies.”

    Laughing.

    I would need to see the support for those references. What caught me off guard is how much protein can be derived from a vegetarian/vegan diet.

    Well, sissy or not, it may take a a bit before I give up meat fats and proteins. But if it helps rebut chronic and catastrophic health issues. Then I owe it to myself to consider it.

  96. Personal note: my behavior regarding my own purchase of pain medications after being hit is not what I reccommend —- for several weeks I did think death was opening my door. if not for having weened myself off of drugs for twenty years as practice — I could not have done it. Nor do I reccommend — that was me and about me — my housemate to this day remains angry that I kept her for weeks — screaming in pain (whining)

    Laughing.

  97. correction: “this day remains angry that I kept her up nights for weeks . . .”

  98. @Audacious Epigone

    Our insurance allows these rubber stampers to make over a quarter million dollars a year. Under Medicare for all, they’ll eventually make one-third of that.

    Doctors are not the primary beneficiaries in the explosion of healthcare costs. Driving down doctors’ wages, even if only for “rubber stampers” as you call them (also known as primary care physicians) will simply drive the more talented individuals to more lucrative career paths and what you will be left with in primary care is grifters, mediocrities and dubiously-credentialed foreigners. People who will be unqualified to alert you that your cold has actually progressed to pneumonia or that your fatique is an impending heart attack. If you think we’re there already, don’t worry. It can get much worse. Whee.

    • Replies: @dc.sunsets
  99. @EliteCommInc.

    Nor would I agree about the impact that chemistry can have on any part of cognition. Our bodies are chemical. I have no doubt that the drugs prescribed to alleviate my pain would have done so.

    You have no doubt, yet you have (1) no personal experience and presumably (2) no direct observational experience.

    Talk about a nice distillation of today’s epistemological morass.

  100. @Cloudbuster

    and what you will be left with in primary care is grifters, mediocrities and dubiously-credentialed foreigners. People who will be unqualified to alert you that your cold has actually progressed to pneumonia or that your fatique is an impending heart attack.

    In spades.
    Today in the USA medical care is run by MSO’s (Medical Services Organizations.) These tend to be near-monopolies, regionally, and they’ve turned “medicine” (as a practice) into an open asset-stripping scheme.

    Medical schools cost, what? In the USA, probably close to half a mil for an M.D., now. In India, Pakistan, or China? Um, not quite that much, I’m sure. (Laughing mirthlessly.)

    Who can afford to take a lower-paying position? Achmed-the-Greenie, John Smith (of the Mayflower Smiths) or La’Dash-A Washington, the Affirmative Action Admission?

    MSO’s are hiring wet-backs. Credentialed wet-backs, but wet-backs nonetheless.

    We should have mowed our own lawns, run our own Help Desks and picked our own cotton. Importing “the help” is a screaming path toward eventual ruination. The parallels between North America and the Ancient Roman Empire (about 1/4 of the way from peak to dissolution) are many.

    • Agree: RadicalCenter
  101. “You have no doubt, yet you have (1) no personal experience and presumably (2) no direct observational experience.

    Talk about a nice distillation of today’s epistemological morass.”

    Ohhh nonsense.

    You might want to pay attention to the content as opposed to your agenda. Medications have been around longer than the medical profession as we know it.

    Now personal experience has some value, but when we talk about the impact of chemistry, it is something that can be measured and evaluated. My position is clear, medications provides some relief and some aid. Whether it that is the case for all medications and to all patients, I openly admit the evidence says no. One treatment does not fit all cases. And that is the broad spectrum approach — and where I think the efficacy validity comes into play.

    Furthermore, I did not and don’t refute your observation about medical studies, especially in relation to medications intended to improve one’s mental state.

    Ohhh no, not the credential complaint, I will play a tad, as i hate the ploy.

    I have described my personal experience as it relates to me and what I think might be applicable to the general —-

    My other experiential and observational experience comes in no small part to my time as a facilitator for the Navy/Marine Alcohol Training programs, operated from ASU(?) department of psychology, as I recall (NADSAP) great program, great experience. It involved no drug use.

    ———————————————-

    All because I made the simple distinction that I don’t indict the entire system, despite its multiple problems with improper diagnosis, treatment and harms caused — My comments in this regard are quite clear to have included supporting data.

    ———————————————–

    Your soothsaying skills about my knowledge, experience, background and education are sorely in need of repair. And more importantly wholly inconsequential to the content of the discussion.

    Now spell out the epistemological morass you are referring to because as my comments make clear, I don’t readily support anyone’s epistemology minus some manner of support.

    I take it your next response will be unless one has a master’s degree or above in x field, they can’t comment.

    laughing — good grief.

  102. “Nor would I agree about the impact that chemistry can have on any part of cognition. Our bodies are chemical. I have no doubt that the drugs prescribed to alleviate my pain would have done so.”

    When I was kid I had a “cold”. My mom said here take this will stop you from coughing. i took it. I stopped coughing. When I was a kid I had an ear ache. the Dr. said here put this in your son’s ears and it will stop hurting. My mom did. My ear stopped hurting. When i was a kid I had a serious bout on pneumonia. I was hospitalized eventually, I couldn’t breath. The Dr. said, we’ll put him a tent to help him breath and something to put him to sleep. They did I breathed easier and slept. One night my IV itched my skin. it itched so much I tore off the tape to scratch it. Relief. Apparently when the nurse arrived and saw my IV spilling fluid onto my bed and floor, it caused some serious concern. The pneumonia nearly sent me to my grave. And they Drs. couldn’t understand why I pulled out the IV. I told them, i was just trying to scratch my wrist. Nonetheless a simple itch and scratch earned me a visit from the psych services. When asked why I pulled the IV out, I said, my wrist itched and I need to scratch. Several assessments later. It was decided that the IV came out as a result of my attempt to scratch an itch underneath the tape.

    In all that time I never knew that I was on death’s door, had a I known the question remains, whether it would have had much impact on my desire to scratch that very irritating itch that krept into my awareness despite a mountain of drugs to fight infection, help me breath and keep me asleep. It is entirely possible that I could have survived death’s threat even out the hospital. But the record shows that more children and adults alike survive more oft when under the care of medical professionals in cases of pneumonia.

    The reason that the medical profession is rife with problems is because they are so effective in so many areas we grant them the benefit of the doubt. And i think it is safe to say — that grant is greater than it should be. And in the field of psychiatry, the fact that they acquire a medical degree has enabled them a pass, to include areas in which the medicine is very speculative and a pass is the last thing that ought to given.

    The success of medicine is part of the barrier to better care.

    As I got older, I noticed that if i had a cold, it was never as severe as others and much shorter duration. I began to wonder and consider that just maybe being at death’s door and surviving actually did something to my immune system. An eventually gradually learned to make freinds with the idea of no medications, save what might be natural.

    But my experience is anecdotal ——

  103. dfordoom says: • Website
    @dc.sunsets

    given that I find the term “mental illness” a lying piece of propaganda; in 99.999% of the cases, “mental illness” is simply a description of human behavior deemed outside of a particular set of “approved” actions.

    Only a very few human behaviors characterized by the term “mental illness” have demonstrable, physical abnormalities.

    To a certain extent I agree with you. But I think 99.999% is going too far. I’d say it’s closer to 80-90%. But you’re correct that a very large amount of mental illness is just variability in human behaviour.

    Anti-depressants simply don’t work, as evidenced by the fact that their “controlled studies” are bullshit

    They’re certainly nowhere near as effective as they’re claimed to be. And they’re outrageously over-prescribed (and inappropriately prescribed).

    ADHD meds are, oddly enough, simply stimulants in the same vein as caffeine or amphetamines; everyone can concentrate better when taking stimulants, the effects are very general.

    Nicotine would probably work just as well. There’s no better drug than nicotine for improving concentration. In a sane world there’d be a lot of research into ways of delivering nicotine safely into
    the system.

    • Replies: @Cloudbuster
  104. The idea that “there is a limited number of doctors” should equally apply to any other system, not only to state-run healthcare. Is the 50%-private American system currently turning away non-Americans? If not, how does it work around this “extreme lack” of doctors?

    If you would be honest for a second, you would admit that there is some sort of access control, based on wealth, which works in any system, from North Korea to Trump’s Bornstein. I doubt you can walk into a doctor’s office and order him write after dictation. I also think you are not getting, like Prince, the doctor’s son deliver your prescription. Is your doctor injecting you with propofol on demand, like Michael Jackson’s? Have you been flown in from you Cape Cod latifundia, like Ted Kennedy? It’s probably the opposite. You have been waiting to see a doctor, weeks on end, because “the doctor is fully booked”. It’s fully booked for you, that is.

    To dispel any myths, rest assured that a state-run system has the same troubles. Even in Cuba, people who know people have been able to amass more wealth and get better access to healthcare, while those like you “wait for an appointment”.

    It would be nonsense to claim that your current or your future-Medicare-for-all waiting time is due to immigrants, unless you are poorer than the average immigrant, at which point you are just a poor pleb, immigration or not.

    Doctors are not like oil and coal, in “limited numbers”. In most countries, the supply of doctors is limited by the medical associations. Far more doctors could be educated by American / Canadian / Australian schools, if the current doctors would be taxed more. Muh immigrants are not changing any of that.

    At least in Cuba they do it the other way around. Someone else dictates to the doctors. I’d gladly have a Netanyahu control the doctors, instead of allowing them “self regulate”.

  105. @Tlotsi

    Right after that conversation, the official reports to the extermination chamber on his own initiative for use of the term “trannies.”

  106. @dfordoom

    In a sane world there’d be a lot of research into ways of delivering nicotine safely into
    the system.

    It’s called “vaping.”

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  107. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Cloudbuster

    In a sane world there’d be a lot of research into ways of delivering nicotine safely into
    the system.

    It’s called “vaping.”

    Yes I know. I was making an unsuccessful attempt to be ironic.

    • Replies: @Cloudbuster
  108. anon[201] • Disclaimer says:
    @Dacian Julien Soros

    The idea that “there is a limited number of doctors” should equally apply to any other system, not only to state-run healthcare.

    Obviously.

    Is the 50%-private American system currently turning away non-Americans?

    No. Perhaps you could try doing some research on the topic?

    If not, how does it work around this “extreme lack” of doctors?

    There are entire books written on this subject. It won’t be answered in a comment.

    Summary: there is a medical “pipeline” that starts in high school, then undergraduate college, then entrance exams, then medical school, then working with doctors in the real world, then residency. The number of seats in med school is a limiting factor, but even if more med schools were built immediately the number of residencies in finite.

    The US makes up in part by importing doctors from other parts of the world. There is also the fact that women doctors are different from men doctors in important ways, starting with “speciality” and “number of hours worked”.

    Medicare is already breaking down. Adding a few hundred million more patients to it will break it sooner. AE is hallucinating if he really believes that anyone in the Woke party would dare to exclude the rest of the world from US medical care. He truly is believing in rainbow unicorns.

  109. MarkinLA says:
    @Dacian Julien Soros

    It would be nonsense to claim that your current or your future-Medicare-for-all waiting time is due to immigrants, unless you are poorer than the average immigrant, at which point you are just a poor pleb, immigration or not.

    Nobody is claiming that. However, without them and their usual lack of insurance, the costs and availability of care to the rest of us would be better.

  110. @Dacian Julien Soros

    If there are more potential customers for a ‘free’ service without a corresponding increase in the supply of providers, wait times are going to be longer.

    The national average wait time for ERs is around 20 minutes. In LA, it looks like it’s measured in hours.

    I’m obviously a rank amateur here so I may be missing something obvious and my thinking on this isn’t sophisticated. Otoh, it doesn’t seem overly complicated.

    • Replies: @Dacian Julien Soros
  111. @Audacious Epigone

    There is no wait time for the rich. There are weeks of waiting for the white collar middle classes. There’s years and years of waiting for the farm workers, construction workers, butchers, Mcdonald’s lowest ranks who get “free healthcare” and other subsidies on paper.

    Most of the subsidies are eventually exploited by the organizations (hospitals, schools, road maintenance, ) catering to the middle classes, at least because their managers are most focused and able to restate their mission in misleading terms. In America, all the richest hospitals get discounts for drugs by exploiting 340B, a law meant to lower the bills of rural hospitals. In Romania, every private clinic figures a way to get subsidies from the state insurance, although they are typically providing to the wealthiest 20%, who pay upfront.

    At that same time farm workers don’t even know what they are supposedly offered. You may look up videos with volunteer dentists traveling across the rural states, pulling rotten teeth for free. All those people are, on paper, entitled to Medicaid-subsidized care. For them alone, there is a real doctor shortage.

    The immigrants are overwhelmingly in the third category. When I went to the doctors, in Romania, England or America, I did not share the waiting room with Romanians, Poles or Mexicans working on the farm – and I doubt you do.

    LA is a crowded shithole, just like London, Moscow, Tokyo, or Lagos. It’s true that many of the people in the LA ER are immigrants, but I think it’s as difficult to see a doctor in Lagos. You may be thinking there would be fewer people in LA if there were no immigrants. But LA is not even close to level we are packed in Bucharest, where we have much lower immigration. LA is also a magnet for 300 million Americans, so it will remain crowded as long as people think it’s paved with gold or that its cuisine is exquisite. Both are bullshit reasons, but they work for Lagos and LA.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Audacious Epigone Comments via RSS