One of the nice things about blogging is all the cyber friends I now have. What my readership lacks in quantity, it more than makes up for in quality. Let's see there's Rachel, Kim, and Toren. There are many more, but I correspond on a regular basis with these three folks outside of blogosphere comments on our sites. I also get most of my referrals from these three, so I know they read me on a regular basis. Ann Coulter, in a column about Barbara Olson, wrote that she wrote her columns for Barbara Olson to read. I find that I'm now writing my stuff for Rachel, Kim, and Toren to read. Well, I also write for my sister, but she gets pissed off when I use fuck too much.
Toren wrote an interesting post on September 24 called First, do no harm. Dammit, Toren, how do I link directly to that post? In it he bemoans the fact that the trial lawyers, with their constant litigation, are destroying the health care system in this country. I posted the following comment:
The Dimocrat socialists are lovin' every bit of this. When health care gets too expensive and hard to get, the people will come crying to the gummint to 'do something!' And the gummint will come ridin' to the rescue with socialized medicine. It's coming. Hold on to your wallet and hope you don't get sick.
Usually, I write a comment on a site and promptly forget it. I comment to add another point of view and in some cases (awright, I admit it, in a lot of cases), publicize my site. Toren sent me a note today alerting me that someone had posted a comment about my comment in case I wanted to comment on the comment about my comment. Is that clear? Since no one will send me hate mail and since all the comments on my posts so far are all positive and supportive (Did I mention that my readers, besides being folks who appreciate good writing are all also incredibly intelligent?) I'm forced to go to another site and use those comments. Anyway Ross wrote:
Denny,
I just want to make sure I understand your viewpoint: it's bad for the
"gummint" to come riding in to the rescue in the name of health care
access, because that's what the "dimocrat socialists" want, but it's good
for the "gummint" to come riding in to the rescue of the insurance companies
(#4 on the GOP donor list, according to Open Secrets) and health care
professionals (#11 on the GOP list).
Ross totally missed my point. The goal of the Dimocrats is socialized medicine ala Hillarycare. They want the trial lawyers to get larger and larger settlements so as to drive up the cost of malpractice insurance and force doctors to practice defensive medicine by ordering more tests than needed thus driving up doctor and hospital prices and insurance premiums. Then, health insurance will be so expensive, it will be out of reach of more and more people. There will be screams for gummint to 'do sumpin'!' That sumpin'! will be socialized medicine and the greatest health care system in the world will have been destroyed. The irony of all this is once that happens, the trial lawyers won't be able to get large settlements anymore, because they'll be trying to sue the gummint and the socialists won't let that happen.
As for his second point, the health insurance companies are trying to limit amounts on settlements to try and keep malpractice premiums low. Anytime someone gets a huge settlement (of which the lawyer probably gets at least one third) that money has to come from somewhere. It comes from higher insurance rates and that gets fed back to the users (that's you and I) in higher costs.
As a libertarian, I like to see as little gummint intervention as possible. But gummint is notorious for creating problems and then offering solutions. Gummint is also notorious for incrementalism AKA the camel's nose under the tent. For those unfamiliar with what I'm talking about it goes like this. A camel sticks his nose under a tent. The tent owner says, 'Hey, get out!' The camel says 'It's only my nose. What harm is that?' Next, it's the neck. Same conversation until the camel is completely inside the tent.
Want an example? Remember a few years back when the Family Leave Act was passed? It allowed employees to take off, without pay, up to 12 weeks (I think) for things like child birth or medical emergency. Business was against it because they would have to hire a replacement for the worker taking leave. The Dimocrats said it was, after all unpaid leave (Unlike European countries where it is more generous and paid. And do you wonder why they have a higher unemployment rate?) and it would only affect businesses above a certain size. The camel's nose is now under the tent.
Hey, didja hear what they just passed in the People's Republic of Kalifornia? Why, I'll be durned, it's paid family leave. Dammit! That freaking camel got his neck into the tent. Not to worry say the politicians, the employees are paying for this. Huh? When a politician tells me not to worry about sumpin' it scares the shit out of me. And another thing I worry about is most trends start in Kalifornia. When is that freaking earthquake gonna hit?
And, now that brings us to one of the biggest scams of our gummint. I am, of course, talking about Social Security and Medicare. Let's see, the politicians claim Social Security is not a ponzi scheme, but is an insurance program. What we pay into Social Security and Medicare are insurance premiums. Well, I know that's bullshit, but, just for once, let's pretend they're telling the truth.
Remember the tax cuts? The Dimocrats were bemoaning the fact that the only people who got tax cuts were 'the rich'. 'Tax cuts for the rich.' Tax cuts for the rich.' I get so freaking tired of hearing those bastards say that over and over. Ask a Dimocrat what he means by the rich sometime. No answer. To a Dimocrat, 'the rich' is anyone who makes over $75,000 per year.
The Dimocrats made a big fuss about the fact that the poor didn't get a tax cut. Well that's because the poor didn't pay any fucking taxes! How can ya expect to get a tax cut if ya don't pay any taxes in the first place? But, to the Dimocrats this is blatantly unfair. Their solution? Let's give the poor a break by cutting their payroll taxes. Payroll taxes? Yeah, Social Security and Medicare taxes. But ... but ... but ... I thought those were just insurance premiums? No, you silly cripple, they're actually taxes.
And here we have but another example of the camel getting into our tent. The grand scheme of the Dimocrats, with very little opposition from the Republicans, is to eventually shift the entire tax burden on to the top 49% of the population. Already 54% of the income earners in this country pay 100% of the income taxes. Not too much more to go there. Now if they can just figger out a way to get Social Security and Medicare on to the top 49% we will be well on our way to becoming the Peoples Republic of the United States of America.
Hey Kim. What kind of a gun would you use on a camel?
Posted by denny at September 25, 2002 09:07 PM