Five Reasons to Oppose Universal Health Care?

...in no particular order:

Reason #1 people are opposed to Universal Health Care (UHC): We Can't Afford It.
Of course, this argument assumes we can afford our current system of Corporate Profit Based Health Care(CPBHC). Insurance premiums have increased over 70% from 2000-2006 while income has increased about 12%. How is this economic model sustainable? Clearly, it is not. It is the reason many Americans are unable to save for retirement, pay their bills, or have any extra cash for other things. The increases in premiums are consuming more and more of our wages each year. It is well documented in numerous studies across varied populations that every nation that has UHC pays less than we do for health care. We know that UNH costs less than CPBHC - so why do people ask if we can afford it?

Reason #2 people are opposed to Universal Health Care (UHC): We Do Not Want Someone Between Us and Our Doctor.
Again, this is based on the false assumption that CPBHC does not put someone between one and ones doctor. The fact is that CPBHC puts an army of regulators between one and ones doctor. There are actuaries who calculate the financial odds of all medical procedures and medications. These bean counters watch the bottom line at all costs. The ultimate goal of most corporations is profit; invest one dollar, expect to get two in return. There is nothing wrong with profit - in most cases. However, in the case of medical care, as in the case of a house on fire, a lost child, a friend lost at sea, the profit model is not appropriate. Yes, with UHC there someone between one and ones doctor, but this person or group is concerned with a fair & efficient appropriation of public funds for all in need. There is no profit motive. It works well in our public schools, roads & highways, fire departments, US Coast Guard and other socialist services we accept in the USA because it is the right thing to do.

Reason #3 people are opposed to Universal Health Care (UHC): "I Know Someone From Europe or Canada who is Not Happy with UHC".
Yes, I am sure there are people with UHC who are not pleased with it and I am certain that there are a number of these who would prefer CBPHC. No system is perfect and we must not allow perfect to be enemy of the good. Once again, this is based on the false assumption that a majority of those with UHC would prefer CBPHC. We all know that the nations with UHC are democracies. Canada, Great Britain, Germany, France and the rest all elect a government that is one of the people's will. Surely, if the majority of any of these nations wanted to switch to our system, they have the means and system to do so - and yet there is no significant movement in any nation with UHC to switch. So, while you may know one person here or there, the huge majority prefers UHC.

Reason #4 people are opposed to Universal Health Care (UHC): I Do Not Want To Be Forced to Pay For Someone Else's Medical Care.
Okay, here we go again. This assumes that we are not already doing that. Why does an aspirin in the hospital cost $10? One reason is that, by law, the hospital cannot refuse emergency treatment to those who cannot pay. They cover this cost by inflating costs to those who can pay. On that note, please know that hospitals can refuse maintenance care to those who cannot pay but not emergency care. It's like not wanting to pay for the oil change of your neighbor's car but willing to pay for a complete engine overhaul. It's madness. Plus, it ignores the fact that we, as citizens of this nation, pay for each others education in public school, roads, military, and the rest of the socialist institutions that make our nation safe and secure.

Reason #5 people are opposed to Universal Health Care (UHC): I Do Not Want The Government Running My Health Care.
This brings to mind the posters of some Tea Party members that read "Take Your Government Hands off my Medicare"! About 40% of Americans are already covered by some form of government health care. If we are lucky enough to reach our retirement years, all of us will be covered by Medicare. Our men & women in the military are covered by government health care, and so on. Then there is the matter that "The Government Can't do Anything Right". This is not true. The government, like private business does many things right and has experienced failure. It was the US Government that discovered the AIDS Virus and put a man on the moon. It was private business that gave us Enron and the Edsel.

So please, reply to this blog if still prefer Corporate Profit Based Health Care and Tell Me Why!

Myth Buster Number One

This is the first of what I hope will be a long list of myth busters. Today's accepted myth is that "The Illegals do Jobs that Americans Will Not Do". Like many deceptive statements, this is a half truth with a deliberate intent to deceive us into thinking that American labor is lazy and that the buyers of labor (the wealthy) in the USA have no option but to hire illegally.
When one man buys the labor of another, it is no different than when two individuals engage in any commerce where there is a buyer and a seller. In a free market, both legal parties are allowed to negotiate and when an agreement is met, in the case of labor, a wage is agreed upon. When I say "legal parties", I refer to the requirement that the seller has a legitimate right to sell and the buyer has a legal right to buy. For example, if a man buys a stolen car from another man, he does not have legitimate ownership of that car regardless of the agreement because the seller did not have the right to sell stolen property. But what happens if the legal buyer will not offer what the legal seller wants? In a free market, we have no deal.
So, when we say that illegals will do jobs that Americans will not do, what we need to add to complete the statement is - The sellers of American labor will not do jobs that the American buyers of labor are offering. In a free market, the remedy of this stalemate would be for the buyers to offer more money, or elect to do the labor themselves. However, the buyers of labor in America, with assistance from their cronies in government, have decided that the free market is not for them and they now are hiring illegal labor. I know that some of you will say that you know an illegal who is doing some job for $10 or $20 an hour and that's good money. As good as it might be, it is still less than the amount that is being asked for by legal sellers. The dollar amount has no influence on the legality of the transaction. If I buy a stolen car for market value, I do not get to keep it once the illegal transaction has been discovered. $10-$20 may sound like a good wage to you for a particular job and if that's the case, you may want to take that illegal's job, but my guess it that you would not because to do that job you would want more - just like the legal American Laborer who wanted more.
And who hires the illegals? While I am sure that we can find some poor people and middle class who occasionally hire an illegal, the lion's share of illegals are hired by the very wealthy. A recent sting operation on Martha's Vineyard netted several illegals, all working as gardeners, housekeepers, cooks and general laborers for the residents of that lavish island that is covered with millionaire vacation homes. Tell me that they could not afford to hire legal labor! Oh sure, maybe if they did so, they would have to cut back from four BMW's to three, but it could be done and in doing so, they could hire local Massachusetts kids home from college who could use the cash to pay tuition. But why bother when you can get an illegal at half the price! Another recent case involved Robert Kraft, owner of the New England Patriots and worth a staggering $1.1 BILLION DOLLARS. After a recent snow storm, Mr. Kraft needed to clear the walkways and seats in his football stadium and decided to hire a third party labor supplier who had the lowest bid, facilitated by his use of illegal aliens to clear the snow. Thanks to laws that insulate business owners from liability if they hire a third party labor supply, Mr. Kraft is in the clear and legally has done no wrong. But when unemployment in Massachusetts is 8% and neighboring Rhode Island is 12%, did Mr. Kraft really have to resort to hiring illegals? Well, he could have hired legal labor if he truly wanted to, but a man worth $1.1 Billion has to cut corners somewhere.
In summation, it is a myth that illegals do the jobs that Americans will not do. The truth is that illegals do the jobs that Americans will not do for the illegal wages that wealthy Americans are offering.

Corporations are not evil.

That's right, you heard it here first. Corporations are not evil - 0r greedy. I'll go one further, corporations are not kind or caring. Fact is that corporations are much like trees, only focused on their own life, their own growth. Nothing else matters. Like a tree, corporations lack the empathy to be kind or greedy. All that matters is growth. All growth can be measured with an economic yardstick. One dollar today, two tomorrow, three the next, like leaves on a tree.
Walmart is a corporation. Walmart cares about its own growth and nothing else matters. Walmart's growth requires that products be sold at prices lower than any other retailer. Quality and service and so on do not matter. All that matters is low price. Low prices help Walmart grow. That requires suppliers to find the cheapest sources for products. That has resulted in the closing of thousands of American factories and the loss of millions of American jobs - because American labor and environmental standards lead to higher costs of goods produced. But Walmart is not aware of labor or environmental standards anymore than a maple tree is aware of such things. All that matters is growth. The products that Walmart demands now come from China, a nation with horrid labor standards and and an abysmal environmental standards, standards that hurt human beings and the planet, but standards that allow for Walmart's growth. Nothing else matters. Only Walmart matters. Yes, I am sure that there are those of you out there who will say "But Walmart gives money to local charities, and Walmart gives us $4 prescriptions"- yes, that is true, but Walmart only does that because it keeps people shopping at Walmart which helps Walmart grow. Mother Theresa did not help the poor so that poor people would keep coming to her. Her actions were not calculated relative to return on investment, but rest assured that everything Walmart does is focused on Walmarts growth. Nothing else matters.
The good news is that if you are concerned about corporations like Walmart, you can do something about it. Remember that they only care about their own growth. Tell them that unless they change, you will not buy from them. Tell Walmart that unless they allow their employees the right to form and join a union, free of harassment from Walmart, you will not shop there. Tell Walmart that until they demand higher standards from their suppliers - standards that do not allow dangerous working conditions and environmental terrorism, you will not shop there. Tell Walmart that you want products that are made by Americans, a system that will help get us out of this Great Recession and close the growing gap between rich & poor.
Of course, if you are like Walmart and that tree, you may only care about your own growth and you may decide is it better for your own best interests to shop at Walmart and places like Walmart. You will continue this global trend where gigantic corporations are destroying the environment an claiming the rights to our resources and our governments... and just remember that eventually, Walmart will have to decide about their continued growth and your welfare, and we all know who will win.
Make a stand.

Want to help grow the US Economy? Get Sick!

If you're anxious about the state of the economy and your prospects for a secure future, there is hops. While we are in this Great Recession, there seems to be no clear way out, until now. Yes, manufacturing is gone and according to our Republican leaders in Washington, it's never going to come back. Yes, the wealthy and the connected on Wall Street have found their way to prosperity, thanks to the helping hand of "Big Government". Funny, isn't it, that Ronald Reagan told us that "Government was not the solution, government was the problem!" and we all took the bait. We agreed to take government controls off of Wall Street (Glass-Stegall) and when it all blew up, government suddenly became "the solution" again, but only for the rich.
We are now in what is called a "jobless recovery", meaning that the rich people are fine, but the rest of us can go suck eggs - or is that "Eat Cake"?
We can't find good paying jobs in manufacturing anymore, so what are we to do?
My solution?
Get sick!
We have heard the Republicans and the Tea Party whine that we can't socialize health care because health care is 18% of "The Economy". How dare we try to enter into a world class health care model shared by virtually every western nation on earth, one that costs less and provides for better health, when we can, instead, grow the economy with health care?
We are currently near epidemic levels of obesity, depression, diabetes, and and other ailments that are largely the result of eating the wrong food - and too much of it. Now you might say, "Why don't we just change our diets" - and I would remind you that doing so would hurt our economy. We must over consume food in order to drive sales for food corporations like MacDonalds, Tyson, ADM, Monsanto, and other gigantic corporations that, like Goldman Sachs and AIG are too big to fail.
There is ample evidence that our current diet, rich in corn and soybeans at its base, it woefully deficient in Omega-3, an fatty acid that is key in preventing depression, heart disease, diabetes and even schizophrenia! This consumption of toxic foods helps support many corporations like Pfizer, Merck, and Eli Lilly by helping to boost sales of drugs to combat the aliments that our corporate diet has given us.
It's a win/win!
What's more, there are now so many side affects to these medications that new medications have now been developed to deal with those, more medications to buy, buy, buy, all great news because it grows the economy!
I know some of you are thinking, wouldn't it be better for us if we ate a different diet and maybe got more exercise, and in so doing improved our health? Of course! But that would be selfish. We need to think about The Economy and The continued growth of the corporations. It's not unlike the science fiction movie "The Matrix" where humans are used as an energy source for machines. Only in this reality, humans are used as a growth source for corporations.
If we all changed our diet to get way from corn and soybean based foods, and if we demanded that our government stopped subsidizing the production of these foods with our tax dollars, we would all live a healthier life, especially if we added in exercise and other things that corporations can't sell - but at what cost? The health care industry that is 18% of our economy would suffer. Healthy people do not fill hospitals or buy prescription medication. We need hospitals filled and more drugs consumed if we want our economy to grow! Corporations like Hospital Corporation of America, and Pfizer would suffer. Wall Street would suffer, and the DOW would not be healthy. Our economy needs more sick people each and every year if corporate earnings are going to reach projected sales goals!
If you accept the notion that a healthy Dow Jones is a healthy you, if you agree that corporate growth is good and anything that prohibits it takes away "your freedom", if you think that medical care, the compassionate assistance from one human being to another is a commodity to be traded and exploited to assist in the growth of corporations,I urge you to get sick and help grow the US Economy. It's your civic duty.

The New Paradigm

Conservative?
I suppose some would wonder how I could be a supporter of President Obama, against the Tea Party shenanigans and call myself a conservative.
Let me explain a few basics.
When I call myself a conservative, I use the term relative to my stand in American political/economic/social policy. That stand is relative to the ways that the aforementioned policies affect the world in which I live, the nation as whole, and the earth in general. It's not all about me. Some would argue that I have it pretty good in this life and that's reason enough to support the status quo. Others might say that I should stop my whining and just work withing the existing system to better myself. Well, no. Man is a social animal. None of us can live on our own in this world. We survive as a group and if we are responsible human beings, we support and work towards individual and group behaviors that assure the survival of that group. Our nation's constitution begins We the people, in order to to for a more perfect union, not me, the rugged individual, in order to to reach greater self fulfillment. (To me, libertarians and the current mob of tea baggers are nothing more than weak sociopaths who will, if left unchecked, allow corporations to completely devour our nation, our rights, and our future as a free society.)
When I call myself a conservative, it is a description of how a person selects policies to support. In simple terms, a conservative defends existing institutions because their very existence creates a presumption that they have served some useful function or because eliminating them may lead to harmful, unintended consequences.
Ronald Reagan called himself a conservative. Ronald Reagan saw a tax code and labor laws that had helped create a thriving middle class. If you are a baby boomer, you grew up in a time that was unprecedented in America, with a vibrant middle class and an expectation in that middle class that their children would be at least as secure as their parents. During the Eisenhower administration the top tax rate was 91%! (more on that on a later post) Ronald Reagan, with willing approval of Republicans in large part and Democrats in small part, took that tax code and those labor laws to the scrap heap and took a liberal approach to a new tax & labor direction - ignoring the goodness that the existing institutions provided. Almost 40 years later, we now know the results of that change. The middle class is shrinking. People working at our nations number one employer can no longer afford to support a family on one income, most people can no longer afford to save for retirement, buy health insurance, or put money away for a rainy day. Who benefited from this change? In short, the upper 5% of our nation and huge corporations (who are seen as individuals in our current legal and economic world) . Their wealth and security skyrocketed to historical highs. And they are now using that wealth to gain more wealth, and more after that. There is no limit. There is no limit because they have, so far, successfully convinced the American people that limits are un-American. They cherish the "free market" and then work rig that market behind the scenes to assure that they and only they will prosper. Walmart believes in a free market for themselves, but not for their employees. Monsanto believes in a free market for their corporation, but not for farmers. Pfizer believes in a free market for themselves, but not for ill Americans. When the employees or the farmers or the sick try and limit the abuse set upon them by Walmart, Pfizer, Monsanto, and the rest, these corporations run to the Constitution and cry out against the government limiting our freedoms.

In sumation, from my conservative perspective, I have witnessed the existence of a strong, vibrant, and growing middle class, the liberal removal of those institutions that helped create and nurture that middle class, and the resulting deterioration of that middle class.
The question then becomes, is an America with a strong middle class a better nation than one without?
This conservative says "yes" and this conservative is working to return to the principles, values, and institutions that that we know will work to being it back.

USA, USA, USA!

Have you noticed how so many nations and people in the world want to be just like "Americans"? You can see a news clip of a kid in Somalia and he's wearing a NY Yankees T-shirt. You can visit Paris and see a McDonald's. In China, Coke is served at restaurants. Almost anywhere you go on this globe, you can see other people tying to be like Americans. Americans rule! We're number one. We kicked ass in WWII and we put a man on the moon! Any nation in their right mind wants to be like us, right?

Now answer me this: Why is no other nation, people, culture, or foreign concern of any type trying to copy our method of delivering health care?

My take on the medical care debate.

In a video being shown on You Tube, Stephen Hemsley, CEO of United Health Group is quoting as saying, “The mission at United Health Group is to help people live healthier lives.” In a word, this is bullshit. The mission at United Health Group is to buy risk at a price that they calculate will be lower than then risk calculated by person who is selling it. What do I mean by that? Let me put it this way. We, as consumers, pay insurance companies to assume our risk. We give them, say, $10,000 each year in our assumption that someday, our medical costs will be well in excess of the 10K we’ve been giving to our insurance company – and if we have to collect, we’ll be ahead, financially. Of course, it’s not quite that simple, but the principle remains. Insurance companies make a living by buying risk at a price that ultimately returns a profit. If any of us thought that we had more than enough money to pay for any medical care – or that the price of the insurance was far more than we would normally expect to have to pay over the course of our lives, we would no more buy medical insurance than we would buy plumbing insurance or lost sock insurance.
The real mission at United Health Group is to buy risk, and make a profit on that purchase. The real mission at United Health Group is to take in more capital in the way of premiums than it pays out in terms of benefits. Anything else is a bold face lie. Mother Theresa’s mission was to help people live healthier lives. The mission of our local food pantry is to help people live healthier lives. My mission with my sons is to help them live healthier lives. Our mission in all these examples is lacking the fundamental ingredient that separates our mission from that of United Health Group and that ingredient is profit.
Insurance companies and gambling companies both employ statisticians who calculate risk and the companies use that knowledge to run their business with a profit. Insurance companies call these people actuaries. Actuaries carefully calculate the probable medical costs of an individual for a specific term, and then insurance company offers to assume the cost of that for a price that is larger. The difference between the policy price and the payout is profit for the insurance company. Sometimes the insurance company loses, just as sometimes people leave Las Vegas with more money than they came with. But we all know that the money of losers built the new hotels in Vegas, just as the money of losers paid the $3.2 million dollar salary of Stephen Hemsley.
United Health Group and all other medical insurance corporations in America have one mission and that is to turn a profit for their investors. Don’t think for a minute that Mr. Hemsley conducts his quarterly reviews with his department heads and asks them, “How many people have you helped live healthier lives this quarter?” Do not assume that the way up the corporate ladder at United Health Group is to be the employee who has helped the largest number of people live healthier lives. United Health Group is no different than any other corporation as it rewards employees who rake in the biggest pile of cash.
Now don’t get me wrong. I am not against insurance, profit, corporations, CEOs or Las Vegas. I just do not think that gambling and profits should play that prominent role in a nation’s medical care.
Medical care is not like most things that we buy, and buying insurance to cover those possible costs it not the same as buying insurance to cover a replaceable house or car. Our children are not replaceable, nor are our own lives, but yet we are somehow asked to deal with these as one would insure a 2003 Toyota Corolla.
We do not shop for a good value in setting broken bones, or clip coupons for half off an MRI treatment. Medical care is more like the police officer that we call in the middle of the night when our car is stolen – or the fire department that responds to our 911 call when our home is on fire. Can you imagine having our police or fire services operate on the principle that they need to return a profit to their investors? “We’re sorry; the co-pay to assist you in finding your lost daughter is now $150. Please pay the cashier” Can you imagine a world where one calls for the fire department and is told “Sorry, your application states that you live in a two story home and not a split level. Your policy is therefore void and we cannot serve you.”
But in fact, these things happen in the medical care sector of our nation every day. Men like Stephen Hemsley make decisions as to who will get medical service and who will not – and what drives that decision is not “Will this help someone lead a healthy life”. No, what drives that decision is, “Will this adversely affect our quarterly profits. Will this be seen as bad news to the Wall Street investors?”
Those opposed to any meaningful reform or government system try to scare me with the idea that some bureaucrat in the government will be standing between me and my doctor. I'll tell you this, I'll take that bureaucrat over men like Stephen Hemsley - men who place corporate profits ahead of my well being, and then lie about it in public.
There must be an awful amount of money at stake here because men like Stephen Hemsley are spending more than a million dollars a day, every day, to protect their position and maintain a medical care model that is based on the profit motive. Now that we know that this money is not being spent to “help people lead healthier lives”, why aren’t more of us upset?