OK, ONE MORE TIME: OBAMACARE IS NOT "INSURANCE"
I had a "progressive" troll respond to my pro-liberty response against government-sponsored healthcare argue I was saying (paraphrased), "Screw poor people and old people; let them die and decrease the surplus population." I probably didn't win friends and influence people with a "you idiot" response, but this was not a case of my trolling her and saying something provocative, which I occasionally do with left-fascists. I refuse to let myself be judged by someone who doesn't know me--I've done acts of charity, less than some, more than others. For crying out loud, when I started college, I was convinced I had a vocation for the Roman Catholic priesthood which meant serving the people of God and living a simple life. I have made countless sacrifices for students, clients and employers over the years, most of which were unacknowledged and unrewarded. But we who are Catholic Christians were taught not to publicize our sacrifices for personal honor. There are a couple of times I defended the honor of women who were being chased down by abusive men, screaming for help. In one case I blocked the man where the lady made her escape; he did not take it well and threatened to kill me. In the other case, she had a purplish eye swollen shut and I stood with her until police arrived on the scene and arrested him. My nephew wasn't so lucky; he got beaten up defending a lady's honor.But I honestly believe that the worst thing we could do to resolve the issues of the economically disadvantaged is to support a self-sustaining government monopoly on healthcare. The government's slide into healthcare intervention has existed for a long time, including caps on doctors/training, certificate of need, scope of practice, tax-privileged basis for employer-provided welfare, Medicare/Medicaid, bottlenecks in drug approval, etc. The government has exacerbated an inflation-bounded sector and has discouraged competition and innovation..
Let's be clear: insurance is about risks. In auto insurance, we aren't covered for gasoline purchases, road tolls, auto registration or traffic fines, parking, wiper, battery or tire replacements, oil changes or tune-ups; those aren't risks--they are ordinary expenses, part of what one expects to pay as part of the price of car ownership. There might be much to be said for bundled transportation services, but these expenses are expected, normal. What is not expected or normal are low-probability events, like a fatal collision (maybe a brake line snaps as you approach an intersection or you skid over a patch of black ice). Few of us have the immediate resources to handle car and hospital bills resulting from what we caused. I've never been in a serious accident and hope that I will never be in one (in fact, I've almost never had any tickets (while I was in grad school, I had to attend a lawyers' meeting in downtown Houston, ironically with my insurance company settling a claim resulting from a guy who rammed his car into my left fender while I was at a stop in a T-intersection; I wasn't familiar with Houston's maze of one-way streets. I turned the wrong way out of the parking garage (no traffic signs)--and suddenly realized traffic was coming in my direction. I quickly darted down a side street, but there had been a police car at the intersection. Yeah, one of the few times I ever saw a cop in Houston, and he happened to be there.). So I've paid more into insurance than I've ever collected, but I'm fine because it's a trade-off I'm willing to make against the unlikely prospect of a catastrophic accident.
When it comes to health insurance, we aren't talking about treating a cold or the flu, Janie's allergies, paying for birth control or even Junior's birth (many, if not most married couples have children; it's a predictable consequence of sexual activity); I don't need an insurance company or the government to explain the importance of a periodic checkup to me. I'm also not saying that health expenses, just like car expenses, aren't real or significant. But there are catastrophic expenses, e.g., heart disease, sepsis, cancer, etc., which could vaporize any savings I have, e.g., for retirement. Other than my weight, I've generally enjoyed good health, rarely taking a sick day over my job history. There have been consecutive years I've never seen a doctor, despite having employer-sponsored heath insurance (which I paid for, directly and indirectly). Me, I don't need insurance to pay for the occasional medical test, but the bills associated with being in the ICU for several days would more than offset any savings I've accumulated since year 2000.
We have a competition problem; we could and should have more doctors, more utilization of nurse practitioners, more hospitals and clinics; government has rigged the game against health care consumers by artificially limiting doctors (e.g., fewer medical schools, not recognizing internationally-trained doctors, restricting nurse practitioners from handling routine medical matters, etc.) Government put special-interest benefits and/or policies (community rating and guaranteed issue) into health policies, an indirect form of redistribution tax which technically doesn't show up on the government's books. Government raises the bar on new drug competition. Government has even restricted price competition by disallowing disclosure of pricing for self-serving, so-called "moral reasons". Government has restricted voluntary, self-insuring groups across states, not allowed competition of catastrophic plans. There are free-market groups (e.g., at a prominent surgery clinic in Oklahoma) which provide highly cost-competitive flat-fee services (but refuse any government-money-with-strings-attached).
Whereas many conservatives and libertarians want to spread the idea of tax-advantaged savings accounts, etc., I don't want government granting special deals in specific industries, whether we are talking real estate or health care. I want consumers to make decisions based on the intrinsic value of those goods and services, not with government's thumb on the scale.
On the Politics of Pit Bulls
As a teenage paperboy, I've encountered more than my share of relatively hostile animals and have never respected those who failed to control their aggressive animals. Do I believe in banning breeds like pit bulls? No. My middle brother owned one, which, to the best of my knowledge, never had a bad episode and eventually died from some health condition. But the other day one without provocation attacked my mom taking her beloved, sweet Miniature Schnauzer on a walk, killing it. My mom also reportedly suffered assorted scratches and bites. The aggressive dog was put down by police or animal control people; I have zero tolerance for violation of the non-aggression principle. I don't know if my mom will sue the dog's owner (it won't bring back her own dog), but even libertarians will hold you responsible for your property's damage to other people and things.
Christmas In July Is Over
I have sort of a love/hate affair with Hallmark's holiday movies. There are multiple commentaries over the life of the blog pointing out some of my favorites. Hallmark seems to like Santa Claus fantasies and the royalty theme (commoners marrying princes), along with its innumerable romantic comedies/dramas. (They also have a movies and mysteries companion channel which hasn't been on some cable packages I've had over the last 2 years--which does play more "classics".) There are a couple of fantasies I like (e.g., a female elf who is sent to cure a family's sagging Christmas spirit, and an old man who has been his town's Santa Clause for 50 years), but for the most part their recent 2-3 years of romantic comedies that played during their one-week break bore me: cookie competitions, etc. (I do like the one about the news reporter who gave a jaded disc jockey 12 gifts for Christmas; they had initially met over a holiday break when he was Mr. Christmas.) For those who missed it, they'll probably start again around Halloween through the end of the year. I already bought a copy of the one I like best: "Angels and Ornaments". This one is about a grandfather composer angel, killed during a world war, who unknowingly has been sent to help his granddaughter Corinne, an aspiring singer, find her one true love (she's working for him, the owner of a small music shop). It's not exactly clear why Gramps is still roaming the earth decades after his death wanting to reunite with his beloved wife, but I like the story.Congratulations to the AL All-Stars Once Again
As an American League fan who repeatedly saw the all-star team lose serially to the National League for year on end in my youth, it was good to see the AL finally even up its win-loss record and continue its current run, even with the home team advantage no longer at stake (which I think sucks).
