Who’s going to pay?

March 29, 2010

Children rebel

Are you ok with this?

The short answer, to who will pay, is EVERYONE. 

Low income individuals will pay with the lowering of overall standards of living.  If they thought they weren’t doing well before, they need to ask how they feel about the longer lines they will find for the so-called free healthcare.  They need to ask how they will deal with the impact of reduced capital investment from businesses that will result in fewer jobs.  They need to ask how they will deal with high prices on about everything (capital investors will pass on high cost to their consumers).  We need to understand that jobs are created when someone with money decides to take risk and invest in business enterprise which they think will increase their original investment.  We need realize this is not something that any government does well.  You may ask why this is….or you may ask yourself isn’t this what China does and they seem to be doing well…. 

Ask anyone who’s been to China, I have, if they were impressed by their standard of living (it is really bad folks – maybe less than 1/2 the level we see out poorest dealing with).  This standard of living is the result of their “centrally planned” economy.  Ask that same person how they’d compare what they saw to USA standards.  You won’t find a sane or rational person say that China’s better off – seriously, unless you like doing a #2 into a hole (the majority of restrooms are of this design), you can’t say they have a better standard of living.  Toilet paper?  HA! 

So, why the diff you say?  Simple, they have a few people who decide on just about all capital investment.  These few people have an idea of what’s “best” and invest based on this logic (they’re not bad people and they do have what they think are the best interest of the maximum number of people).  But, in a capitalist system everyone gets to decide:  consumers decide what’s best for them and make purchases, capital investors decide where they will get their highest rate of return on their money and invest on this logic.  Since each is acting selfishly, everyone can be assumed to maximizing their benefits based on their decisions.  Read that again “everyone can be assumed to be maximizing their benefit”….EVERYONE! 

We see some in the government say they are doing what they’re doing to maximize the general good and that some of us make poor decisions – flawed logic certainly.  Sure, they can make a small point that some people will make decisions that don’t improve others position, or even their own very well (i.e. illegal drug users), but overall we do a better job individually than any central planner could ever – it’s simple, a central planner can’t possibly know what’s best for everyone during every minute of the day, but any individual can and does know.  And, a business person making investment decisions will track this behavior and invest in those areas, lowering cost and increasing availability of those goods and services we want the most. 

Another way of looking at the problem is through the eyes of individuals.  Most people will answer “yes” if you ask them “do you make decisions based on what’s best for you most of the time?”  But, you will find people almost equally divided when you ask them “do you think others make decisions that are best for them?”  hypocrisy by some?  Maybe, but that’s not what motivates some people to say no. 

The crux is that some of us have faith in others and some have little faith in others.  Funny, it almost sounds religious but I won’t go there.   

It boils down to this simple logic.  Imagine living life in mortal fear of other people around you, the decisions you would avoid, the joy avoided!  Personally, I feel sorry for these folks that have little faith in their fellow humans.  Imagine if you too thought this way, how happy would your life be?  We’ve all met unhappy people.  Does getting mad at them help their situation at all? 

If you’ve made it this far, you are probably wondering what the so-called “RICH” folks will do with all this new debt.  Simply put, they will still get richer but maybe a bit more slowly.  Some people reading this will think “sure they will they will play dirty to keep what they have”, and a bit of that may be true.  But, the big reason why they will stay rich and get richer is the same reason these people are rich in the first place.  They are rich mostly because they’re willing to focus their efforts and attention on the things that improve their position financially.  They will work harder, they will invest in themselves, they will invest in others – all to improve their financial position.  In the process they will create jobs too!  When did this group of people become indebted to everyone?  When did the promise of America change from success to entitlement?  Ok, I would agree that some are born with a silver spoon, but the majority of today’s wealthy and the same was true in the past are self-made rich people – ask anyone if they have the “right” to be rich.  I can’t imagine too many people saying no. 

Are we now a country driven by entitlement mentality?  If it is, it’s all our own fault.  We vote on who will give us what we want instead of voting on who will follow the principles in the constitution.  THIS MUST CHANGE OR AMERICA FAILS!  I think it’s not too late, in fact I believe we are still destined to be the light of liberty to the world. 

The constitution is a template for our country.  That template is as good today as the day it was written.  The group of people who signed it risked their lives, their families, and their livelihood because they KNEW that this form of government would work.  They took pieces of ancient governments and chucked pieces that they knew didn’t work.  When America was formed our form of government “for the people, by the people” was something radically new.  We aren’t new anymore, but we must take personal responsibility if this grand experiment is to survive. 

Our current government is playing with fire as they add size and complexity to our system.  They are not following the template they were sworn to uphold.  They are making a new system, they are dumping the old template.  This is not what my relatives fought and died for.  If people don’t believe in our system we must help them or ask them to leave.  The option to “change” the system is a false option – we already have the best, maybe not perfect but to anyone that’s traveled it truly is the best system on this planet. 

Each of us has a responsibility.  We must vote and we must make a point to have our friends and family vote.  We must re-engage a rich public debate to ensure all ignorance is cleared from our countrymen’s decision-making.  Some of this is happening now, but it’s still too small.  Get your neighbors, family, coworkers involved now or kiss your kids chances goodbye. 

How do you start simply – begin by understanding the nature of another person’s mind, just ask them if they think others on balance make decisions that improve their own wellbeing.  If they say no, you need to help them.  They need your help since they are carrying a greater amount of fear than most people do, a fear that causes them to give away their liberty.  Avoid political discussion and focus on the nature of man – make that your point of discussion.  Buy them lunch and start a healthy discussion on what makes them tick, and on what they think makes others tick. 

Tell them – B.Franklin said, “those who live on hope will surely die of starvation” and ask them what they think he ment by that. 

Tell them – Jefferson said, “if you would trade safety for liberty you deserve neither” and ask them what that means to them. 

Most people who fall in love with socialism or communism or Marxism have done so because of the fear mentioned earlier.  And, the simplest way to get past it is to face it.  So, engage the people around you in a conversation that helps them see the fear for what it is, an illusion created by power-hungry leaders.  Yes, many of our leaders understand these concepts and use them to gain more power.  Hey, don’t get me wrong, power is neither good nor bad, but when it’s taken for the wrong reasons it’s going to have a negative effect on the maximum number of people.  Power given and used within the template of the constitution is a good kind of power in my book. 

I wish we were talking about how we give more power to be used for good….the topic of my next blog… 

Signing off – Poorjames



  1. Very good blog, James. Thanks!

    Rob Hanson at Chrislip Journal

  2. Pretty clearly-stated opinions, James, but nothing I haven’t heard before, and you are taking too long to get to the point. These are blog posts, not magazine articles. You go much over a thousand words, and you’re really pushing it.

    I have traveled, and apparently to places you haven’t. To me, our health care system isn’t even close to being as good as what many others have, and they all pay less for it. At this cancerous stage, you have to begin by lopping off some limbs and removing organs. It’s not pretty. Too bad. We all let it go too long untreated.

    We don’t have the best system of politics either, though I do support our overall 3-branch governmental system. We need the representation of other parties besides the filthy, bloated duopoly we must choose from now. This restriction of only “either/or” makes the act of voting a cruel joke.

    • Let’s see, I’ve been to mainland china, India, Hong Kong, Tiawan, Singapore, Japan, Australia, New Zealand, Germany, England, France, Austria, Canada, Brazil, Mexico, south Korea, Vietnam. Multiple times in most places. You assume you’ve traveled more than I, and you don’t even know me, now that’s “pushing it”. A mistake in your logic I might add that just weakens your point from my POV. None of these countries offers anything near to what I’ve found in the US, and I’ve been in all but one or two of the states and territories. Where’d you see better? Interesting you left that out of your comment…hmmm…maybe you just don’t like what I said so you want to fight my observations.

      The length of my writing isn’t something I need help with, or spelling, or word choice for that matter – suggest you find a blog on writing theory. Not sure what you mean by “pushing it”, maybe you need help with your writing? HA!

      You say we don’t have the best form of politics but offer none as example that are better. Another error in your logic that weakens your points and overall arguement.

      Good luck Mikey – you will need it if you keep trying to win the arguement without examples, maybe you should try spending a little more time developing your thoughts.

      You might want to take away from my writing that I’m not trying to win an arguement but simply share my experience, observation and conclusions.

      Finally, try adding examples and explaination to your claims – without them they are naked and not convincing.

      • OK, the examples are Iceland, the Netherlands, and the UK. I haven’t been to Finland, but they also have better stats than than the U.S. on life expectancy, preventative medicine nd aby other areas of health care you want to examine. I’m not really trying to win. I’m just trying to show you that other places exist that have better solutions.

      • Wow, you responded – great! I didn’t expect that!

        You do bring up good examples and I’ve got friends in the Netherlands and the UK who all without exception are asking me why the USA would follow their example – they say to me that they have waits and rationing they hate. Sure, there’s parts they like but overall they’d rather come here for their care.

        So, I agree that some of our care practices could be better but that’s not at all what our new HC law says – all we did was regulate insurance to cover eveyone without doing anything about the supply side – that equals lines and rationing no matter how you look at it.

        The simple fact is that we could have adjusted how we regulate medical care (i.e. allowing CNA and CN’s to allow them to handle minor issues), which would have created a new care model at much lower costs while increasing supply. There’s more we could have done too….but, this new HC law is a turd.

        BTW – are you ok with the chipping part of the law? I haven’t met too many people that appreciate the fed will be injecting a RF chip in their arm. And, this is a requirement for all medicare and medicaid patients. When will this hit the news you think? It’s in the bill, I’ve read it.

        Net-net, the government could have fixed big parts of the problems by getting out of some of their regulations of medicare not increasing them. And, the new system will result in the failure of the existing insurance companies that operate on very thin margins – I don’t beleive the government can do it more efficiently.

        We will have a failed insurance system soon with 100% government control. That to me is a structure that will fail when compared to what we have now.

        Last point – I had a discussion about a year ago with a canadian who was very happy we were taking care of everyone. I pointed out that in the US no person can be refused care at any emergancy room – her response was “then why in the hell are you going the way we are, you guys have great care and ours sucks!” Information is the key to people’s attitudes, and the reality “sucks”.

        Thanks for the response!

  3. And thanks for your response too, James.

    I have a lot of work to do today, so I’ll just address your concern over the so-called chip requirement in the bill.

    The misinterpretation of pages 1000-1008 in the bill concerning creation of a National Medical Devices Registry is nothing more than a conspiracy theory offered by politicians and others with a vested interest in obstruction of anything Obama and the Dems try. Here are various versions of discussions over this lie:

    I could go on, but that’s enough examples to indicate that I do my homework.

    What’s more important is to point out that the language in the bill has nothing to do with mandatory implantable microchips or the surveillance of patients. It simply creates a database to make sure that companies aren’t selling knee and hip replacements that don’t cause problems for patients later in life.

    The FDA already monitors reports of adverse events in drugs and devices. For instance, a certain type of hip replacement sold by Stryker and other companies squeaks. The replacements aren’t painful or otherwise faulty — just noisy.

    The device registry would require companies and health officials to collect post-market surveillance data on devices in an electronic database, accessible to the public, in order to make sure that surgical devices used on patients don’t go bad months or years down the line.

    The term “postmarket device surveillance” is merely the standard industry jargon used to describe the routine process of making sure a device is safe after it’s approved and on the market. Sometimes a product seems safe and passes the FDA, but problems — such as Stryker’s squeaky joints or heart problems with Vioxx — don’t show up until years later. The bill merely standardizes the data collection process and requires that the database be electronic and accessible to the public (a lot of FDA post-market surveillance ends up stuffed into filing cabinets in Silver Spring. Md.). If you read the section carefully, there’s actually a requirement that makes sure patient privacy is protected by stripping all patient-identifying information from the database.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: