Showing posts with label health care. Show all posts
Showing posts with label health care. Show all posts

Thursday, January 13, 2022

How Needs Get Met

Nature, or Nature's God, has provided us with, among other things:
  • Water in certain places
  • Plants, animals, and edible fungi in certain conditions
  • Some caves in certain places
Without work, only a few people could live in a few places on Earth: any place in which 1) a cave, free of venomous animals, will provide sufficient shelter; 2) edible plants/plants with edible parts/fungi grow in sufficient abundance; 3) potable water is available in sufficient abundance. Has there been such a place outside of Eden?

Even then, there would likely still be work in obtaining the water to drink and the plant/fungus material to eat, and the plant/fungus material would likely not have all the nutrients we need to thrive. And you're out of luck if your eyesight needs correction, or you get a serious injury or infection that requires medical care.

Here's the point.

Everything we have is ultimately the result of work and trading. Even things we have inherited or someone has gifted/donated to us are the result of work and trading. 

Very few people drink all their water, untreated, directly from, and at, a stream. 

Just about everything we eat, no matter how "natural," has been cultivated for beneficial changes over hundreds or even thousands of years, and is provided by many people working.

Whether we live in a hut, recreational vehicle camper, a tiny apartment, or a palatial estate, the shelter exists because of work.

Clothes, medical treatments, transportation, energy, mass communications, entertainment, art galleries, museums - everything is a result of work and trading.

The exception involves a non-consensual transfer, through things like force, extortion, confiscation, plunder, enslavement, and various forms of theft not yet mentioned. That still involves work. It is just that there isn't a voluntary trade.

Working and trading is how needs get met.

The more interference in these things, the more theft and destruction, the fewer needs that will be met. 

Example: Printing money or confiscating it from people who are working and using it to pay people to NOT work.

If you want food, you either have to grow it and prepare for it yourself, or trade for it. Or, someone else has to work and provide it to you out of charity or force.

Who is best at knowing what you need? You. Maybe your spouse. Not some strangers in Washington, D.C., not some strangers in New York, not some strangers in Europe.

It should be YOUR responsibility to look after your needs and those of anyone for whom you responsible, like dependent children. The less those strangers in D.C., NYC, or Europe interfere in your work and trading, the better.

Thursday, September 16, 2021

Rights Are Not Hand-Outs, and Hand-Outs are Not Rights

Over and over again, we see politicians, academics, activists, pop artists, and media propagandists proclaiming that we have a "right" to things such as health care, education, retirement pay, mass transit, housing, a job with a "living" wage, food, abortion, and doctor-assisted suicide, all funded and/or arranged for by the government.

This is not how the people who created and adopted our Constitution saw rights.

They saw rights as something we naturally had, something coming from "nature's God", and that it was the government’s role to protect, not grant, rights.

Living as we do in a bountiful, wealthy society of hundreds of million of people, it is tempting to look around and think you deserve - and therefore have a right - to something you see around you and that you want. But again, that is not how the people who created and adopted our Constitution saw rights.

Take the right to free speech.

Your right to free speech does not mean anyone should be forced to listen to you.  They can walk way, and it wouldn't be a violation of your right to free speech. Nor does your right to free speech mean someone else has to provide you with their billboard, printer, telephone, satellite, high speed Internet line, cable, or broadcasting system for you to get your message out. You can pay them to provide those things.

You have a right to free speech because God gave you the means of communication – the physical abilities to communicate.  If you found yourself on an island where there was no government employees, no politicians, no telephone, no radio – you would still be able to talk with or sign to or write to anyone you encountered. You could believe and worship (freedom of religion) as you saw fit. You could use a rock or anything else you could get your hands on to defend yourself (right to bear arms).

You could take care of yourself, you could learn, you could store up for the future, you could build a cart or raft, you could build a hut, you could decide to make things or do things for other people in exchange for what they had to offer you, you could eat what you had access to, you could fling yourself against a boulder to kill the life within you, you could jump off of a cliff to kill yourself... HOWEVER, you could not FORCE someone else to perform surgery on you, or teach you something new, or take care of you just because you are old, or haul you around in their cart or raft, or build a hut for you, or to give you something to do and pay you whatever you want, or to go get food for you, or to perform an abortion on you, or to kill you gently – not without violating THEIR rights to choose what they want to do. You could make VOLUNTARY exchanges and arrangements with them, if they chose to be near you.  Maybe they would even CHOOSE to do some of those things for you for free.

The government is not "someone else".  It is us. It is funded by us. Now, we can collectively use force (via laws, backed up by the military, law enforcement, etc.) to FORCE a doctor to perform surgery on someone, and then pay them what we decide is fair or not pay them at all. That is possible. But that doesn’t make it right, and it doesn’t make it a right.

If you look at what the founders of the U.S. put in place, you’ll find a system where our natural rights are recognized and protected, and where everything else is based on a voluntary exchange in which force need not be involved, except to expose and counter theft and other denials of natural rights - crimes which involve force or deception themselves. Health care provided by someone else is NOT a right. It is something provided on a voluntary basis by doctors, nurses, hospitals, pharmaceutical companies, etc. who have put a lot of time, effort, and money into getting to the point where they can provide those services and products.

Everyone should be able to offer their services and their property to whomever they choose, for the compensation they choose. Sometimes that compensation will simply be a warm heart (that’s called charity). Whoever is offered those goods, services, and property should have the choice to refuse, or make a counter offer on the compensation, or to agree to it as-is. Likewise, if you are seeking goods, services, and property, you should be able to approach whomever you want and offer whatever you want as compensation, and go from there. That is liberty. That is freedom. That protects rights.

If you opened up a shoe store, you wouldn't want government force to be used to set your prices, determine what kinds of shoes you will sell, or to force you to sell shoes to someone, even if that person will immediately take that shoe and throw it at other people. People need shoes in the same way they need specialized health care. Why should the doctor, nurse, hospital administrator, insurance company worker, or pharmaceutical researchers be treated that way?

What most people mean when they call for "universal health care" is that they want someone wealthier than they are to be forced to provide something to them. There are wealthier people who call for such schemes, too, but almost invariably they do so because they think it will get them some personal advantage such as being able to use their connections in the government to be able to gain a monopoly or to skim money somewhere in the system. When a company that manufactures medical equipment endorses increased government involvement in medical care, you can be sure it is because they are confident that they can manipulate the system to their advantage. It is far easier to manipulate something when the power is centralized in Washington D.C. or Sacramento than when the power is with multiple organizations consisting of voluntary membership or spread among millions of families and individuals making their own choices.

Health care is not a right. It costs money, and while it certainly is a wonderful thing when a medical professional chooses to take care of someone who will not be able to provide material compensation, that professional should not be forced to work for free or less than his or her worth.

If you make voluntary plans and arrangements that provide you with what you need and want in the areas of health care, education, retirement income, transportation, housing, work/wages, and food, then good for you. Voluntary agreements (which don’t include any conspiracies to steal from, assault, or murder someone because they victim is not a volunteer) ARE something to which we have a right. Exercise those rights, instead of counting on "someone else" to take care you simply because you are alive.

Tuesday, December 1, 2020

AIDS Wasn't Reagan's Fault

[I'm bumping this up.]


It's been over 30 years since the onset of AIDS. Bob Smagula of Santa Barbara wrote in a couple of years ago to the Los Angeles Times to do the requisite swipe at President Ronald Reagan.
I remember vividly how Ronald Reagan's administration chose to ignore this plague. His followers created a poisonous atmosphere by blaming the victims. His indifference was such that he never publicly uttered the word "AIDS" until his seventh year in office.

He goes on to attack President George W. Bush, morality, and even those who doubt that the universe, despite everything we know, magically created itself and that life, despite a complete lack of evidence, magically arose from nonlife through some process yet to be discovered.

The chief complaint about these types appears to be that with the onset of HIV/AIDS in the USA, Reagan didn't drop everything and focus on something striking a tiny portion of the population, a disease that is almost entirely avoidable through some basic morality. Yes, there were people infected through tainted donated blood or through accidental or malicious needle pokes, but the vast majority of people acquired HIV through shooting up illegal drugs with a needle already used by another junkie, or through engaging in rough sex, especially receiving bleeding and/or anal sex from someone who had been having sex with someone else or shooting up illegal drugs. These Reagan-bashers wanted Reagan to take money by force from Watchtower followers and everyone else in the nation, and throw it - not at other diseases less preventable and killing more people - but HIV/AIDS, mostly because it was making it scarier for them to get high or engage in orgies.

Am I saying that people who did those things "deserved" to get AIDS and die, more than then next guy? Nope. But let's not pretend that people hadn't been warned to avoid such behavior. Be honest. How many of these people have sympathy for chain smokers who get lung cancer and want Obama to do more about lung cancer?

As far as Reagan's lack of focus on HIV/AIDS, I can see why people are so upset to this day. After all, it is right there in Article II, Section 5 of the Constitution of the United States:
The President shall respond to new diseases spread by behavior typical of junkies and homosexual males by taking money by force from everyone and spending it on treating and preventing the spread of the disease, all other issues, including diseases killing more people, be damned.
Oops. That part of the Constitution doesn't exist. Which means it wasn't Reagan's place to do anything. I suppose he could have used his bully pulpit to look into the camera and say:
It is your duty to yourselves, your family, your country, and our God that you stop buggering different people and stop sharing needles. If you're a man and refuse to stop engaging in homosexual behavior, then stick to true monogamy. Not that “monogamy” where you can still have sex with other people as long as your partner is there, or your partner is out of town, or you are out of town, or you're in a club, or in a restroom. If you're a junkie and refuse to stop shooting up, then use clean needles.

Somehow, I don't think those whining about Reagan's refusal to take unconstitutional action on this matter would have been happy with that.

Meanwhile, most people recognize that Reagan did a lot of good for the world, even if they don't like everything about his Presidency.

And here's a hint before we’re hit with the next new disease: Avoid substance abuse. Do not share needles. Save sex for marriage, marry someone who will be faithful, treat that person right, and stay faithful to them.

Also: Under GWB there was more AIDS funding than under Clinton or Obama.

Wednesday, January 25, 2017

If You Don't Want Babies Slaughtered You Have to Grow OSHA or Something

You've encountered this in different forms, probably, but we'll deal with this specific example for now.

Notice they don't deny that elective abortion kills innocent humans.

Instead, they try to either silence pro-lifers or co-opt them into Leftism by listing off a bunch of other things these Leftists CLAIM must be part and parcel with being pro-life.

Yes, "chemical" spills (I assume they mean toxic substances) into water can kill people. Dumping of toxic substances into the water support is already banned, and I don't know of elected or significant Republicans who are trying to make it legal.

Gun rampages anywhere are already illegal, too, and again, I don't know of any Republican who is trying to make them legal.

Monday, January 23, 2017

Not Marching in Lockstep

A letter from "Adele":
I am in such a discouraged funk about our culture lately. The argument about birth control versus the freedom of religion was the straw that broke this camel’s back! Any discussions about the subject I hear are always women vs. the big bad everyone else. So, here goes...Hey women’s libbers; Hey Planned Parenthood, Hey liberal media...STOP using me as your ploy!! You never asked my opinion so stop speaking for "women" and start speaking for "some women".


You don't speak for me. I am an American; I am a voter; I am a mother of 5; I am a wife and I am a doctor. I do believe the freedom of religion is more important than the birth control pill. I do believe our constitution and it's amendments, fought for by the blood of our fathers, sons and brothers is vastly more important than an employee being forced to pay for something that will allow our sisters, daughters and friends to continue to perpetuate a "safe sex equals freedom" culture: A culture that has left us with an amoral society where young women think 'shacking up' is an integral part of a relationship. A culture where dismembering a 5, 6, even 9mt old baby in a mother’s womb while alive is considered a choice and not murder.


So, all of you who are fighting for the 'cause of women', who are standing up and banging the podium women must have the freedom of choice...ask me my choice! Stop speaking for me! You have made it so when I hear the words 'women’s health' I cringe because I know I am about to be grouped into some ideal that is against every core of my being. Do not group me with your ideals; do not include me with your rhetoric. If you are so concerned about choice then stop stifling mine!


Personally, I think these groups should held accountable for slander. No where in the media do you hear the words "some women". This means I have to be looked at as agreeing simply because I am a woman. I would like a group to speak for all men and see what happens.
That is one of many great letters you can find at DrLaura.com. Good job, Adele!

[Bumped up due to current events.]

Saturday, July 9, 2016

A Prime Example of a Delusional Democrat Voter

A Leftist posted this:
This nation is in trouble, so let's be clear:
Someone's been listening to Obama speeches! Trouble, eh? Hmmm. Who's been President the last 7.5 years?
If you're still talking about Hillary Clinton's emails
Dismissing what Clinton did as just about "e-mails" is like dismissing what Nixon did as "just about tapes". Actually, Nixon did far less. And fellow Republicans dropped him and he resigned. You Democrats are not calling for Clinton to drop out.
instead of the urgent need to get weapons of war out of the hands of civilians, you are part of the problem.
What exactly qualifies as a "weapon of war"? I'm guess it is a gun that is currently legal to own somewhere in the country that this guy thinks is too big. Or maybe he's talking about all firearms. Whatever. Well, considering there are millions of people - PEOPLE, meaning things that are 100-300 pounds and need shelter, food, etc. so they can't exactly stay stashed under a floorboard - who came into this country and are here illegally and we "can't" find them or stop more from coming here, then how in the world would we effectively prevent firearms from being smuggled, at great profit, into this country?!? And is this guy talking about confiscation? So he's in favor of something that would certainly lead to stand-offs, barricade situations, groups retreating into fortified armed compounds with their children, and resulting shootouts???
If you're planning to vote for a corrupt businessman whose chief concern is his bottom line with no concern for the small businesses and workers who got him there, you're part of the problem.
I'm no fan of Trump as a candidate. He might be an awful President. He might be a great one. We know Hillary Clinton is corrupt, thinks she can get away with anything, and would do harm to this Union.

And don't feign ignorance. Clinton's biggest concern is her own finances, hence the Foundation shenanigans. Trump's successes and even some of his failures at least helped many other people.
Let's not even get into his overt racism, misogyny, and avocation of violence against his opponent's supporters.
Of course you're not going to get into it because you're probably thinking of parodies of what he actually has said. For example, saying that some illegal aliens coming here are murderers and rapists is not racism. And it is fact.
If you believe your 'good book' means that civil rights and equal rights doesn't apply to gay, trans, or other historically oppresses minorities, you are part of the problem.
The Holy Bible says that there are two sexes, marriage unites the sexes, and that sex is for marriage. That has nothing to do with denying anybody any rights. And MLK Jr. was a REVEREND. I know you like to forget about stuff like that. By the way, my argument against judicial neutering of state marriage licenses didn't invoke the Bible or appeal to theology or religion.
If the congress critter you elected has voted more than once to repeal the affordable care act or defund Planned Parenthood or for lower taxes on the rich, you are part of the problem.
So if  you don't want your tax money used to slaughter innocent human beings for convenience, if you don't like being forced by the federal government to buy a service, and if you think people should be able to keep more of their own money to invest (and grow the economy) as they see fit, then that's a problem?!?
Right now we need to be united as a nation
HA!!! This is from someone who aligns with people who are constantly trying to label and divide people and treat them differently based on their skin color, national origin, religion, sexual desires, and so forth!!!
to reform ourselves into a society where there is really respect for all,
Why are we supposed to respect clumps of cells/collections of molecules? And reform... wasn't Obama going to "fundamentally transform" the USA? Is he a liar or failure?
no poverty
There will always be poverty if for no other reason than Leftists will always say people who have less wealth are poor.
where healthcare is a right
Healthcare is already a "right". Say, didn't you mention Obamacare above? But true rights do not obligate others without their consent unless a crime is involved.
education opportunities are the same for the child in the highest income neighborhood as the poorest
So you're for vouchers? Yeah, didn't think so. There's no way to achieve this other than to criminalize private education, tutoring, and to get all children out of their homes (which may be chaotic) and stick them in uniform government dorms. After all, their parents might subvert the law and give them some sort of educational advantage if they are left with their parents. Say, who runs those school districts in the "poor" neighborhoods? Around here, Leftist Democrat Unionists do. Hmmmm...
and we live in a way that values natural resources
Selling oil does value natural resources!
so we can start making real inroads against global climate change.
I don't believe he really cares because he's not living in a cave with nothing manufactured.
The good news is there is a path forward and it starts this November by getting out the vote and installing elected officials who will actually work toward a progressive future.
So, Obama wasn't it? You were screaming "Yes we can!" when he was elected. I saw you.
We cannot stay on the path we're on today and expect workable solutions.

On that we agree.

Monday, January 11, 2016

State of the Union 2016 Wish List

With BHO up there, it would be great to see everyone fall asleep, not just a judge or two.

I know most of these positions will be completely avoided by President Obama, but permit me to dream. Also notice that with most of these, I'm calling on the President to encourage action by the people, not to use the force of law.

Explain That the Federal Government Is Not the Answer to Every Challenge, Problem, or Choice - Rather, it is the Last Resort Answer to Very Few. That is what freedom and liberty are all about. Challenge individuals, businesses, congregations, nonprofits, and local and state governments (where appropriate) to take action instead of relying on the federal government. The federal government is there to protect the union from foreign threats and to and resolve some disputes between states.

Esteem Human Life. Vow to prosecute anyone who is transporting people across state lines for abortions to cover up statutory rape or anyone transporting human tissue, obtained without the consent if the individual, across state lines. Encourage people to think of human life as important and valuable, whether young or old, sick or healthy.

Tout the Successes of the War on Terror. Laud those military, intelligence, and law enforcement personnel who have uncovered and prevented terrorist plans and actions.Stress that ISIS and other such organizations must be obliterated, and point to recent terrorist attacks as reminders the threat it still very real.

Border Control Is a Matter of National Security. Explain that allowing illegal aliens any advantage in gaining permanent legal status ahead of legal immigrants is a slap in the face to legal immigrants and naturalized citizens. Announce that, effective immediately, the National Guard will secure our borders to prevent terrorists, disease-carriers, and smugglers from entering the U.S. They will stay there until suitable barriers and checkpoints are constructed – however long that takes. We will NOT encourage further invasion by offering amnesty, health insurance, and other tax-funded benefits for citizens of other countries who illegally enter/stay in the U.S. Speed up the process for legal immigration for those who want to come to the U.S. legally to become citizens and can find sponsors who will ensure they will stay off of public assistance. As for illegal aliens currently living in the United States – do not offer amnesty; they can go through the same channels of those who are trying to immigrate legally. If the border is secure, this problem will eventually take care of itself because their children born here are citizens and the illegals can continue to function as they have until they die off, if they don't want to go the legal route. Any illegal alien who serves honorably in the U.S. armed forces should be granted citizenship. If a true shortage of labor occurs (meaning American unemployment is low and employers need more temporary labor), a true guest worker program can be developed.

We're One Race - Human. Yes, "race"-based slavery was our national birth defect, and injustices persisted after slavery was abolished, but hostile racists have very little power now in our overall system. Law enforcement must have limited powers, and rioting shouldn't be tolerated.

Break the Street Gangs. Pledge federal agencies to assist state and local law enforcement "sweep and hold" gang-infested urban areas.

Encourage Responsible Gun Ownership. As it is the duty of every able person to stand up to evil & crime in protection of the innocent, responsible gun ownership, training, and practice should be encouaged, and state and local laws should allow for this

Declare the Growing National Debt Unacceptable. Explain that it is a basic function of the federal government to adopt a budget, and that it is unsustainable and immoral to accumulate increasing debt, thereby burdening future generations. The government should not encourage further dependency on government.

Don't be Santa Claus. Don't propose new federal programs and expansions of existing federal social programs. Enough already. There are 50 states in the union and a few territories that are supposed to be handling their own matters – that is, the matters that are not supposed to be left up to "the people".

Stop Using the Tax Code For Social Engineering. Tell the Congress that instead of taking the carrots (taxes) from the people and then dangling some of them back in front of the people, that the people should keep their carrots in the first place and do with them what they will. Call for tax simplification and a move away from income/payroll taxes. If someone pays taxes, everyone should pay taxes.

Individuals Should Plan for the Future. Talk about the numerous options individuals and families have for saving for the future. Encourage them to save and invest for the future and not rely on the federal government to take care of them in their senior years. Point out that a reduction in federal spending will allow people to keep more of their own money to aid in saving for retirement.

Explain that Planning for Your Health Care is Part of Planning for the Future. Call for more freedom, competition, and private decision-making in health care.

Equal Access to Free Markets. Explain some of the major benefits of free markets, and that the best thing the federal government can do to foster a good business climate that provides jobs is to provide protection from interstate crime and foreign terrorists, and to be involved as little as possibly in voluntary employment and business transactions, not picking winners or losers in business, subsidizing some and restricting upstarts while protecing established businesses.

Property Rights and Personal Freedom. Most Americans understand that people should be considered as individuals and based on their behavior and abilities, not as members of a non-ideological group (ethnicity, etc.). Therefore, the federal government should no longer be involved in preventing people from renting, selling - or not - to whomever they choose for whatever reason, and should no longer be involved with who an employer hires and fires and why. Airlines, for example, should not be forced to carry anyone who makes the majority of their employees and passengers uncomfortable. It is clear that people can succeed in the USA regardless of skin color, sex, or sexual orientation, and focusing on slights, imagined or real, based on these personal characteristics, is fostering hostility and division and self-defeating thinking, doing more harm than good.

Encourage private innovation and solutions to reducing reliance on terrorist oil.

Education Is a Private Responsibility. Given the state of American public education since the Carter administration, call for the dismantling of federal involvement in education.

Strong Marital Unions Are Good For the Union. It brings together both sexes to raise the next generation of citizens. Men and women are different, and unifying them in the marital union forms a strong, inclusive building block for society, benefiting the individuals and society. Encourage people to voluntarily take marriage seriously, thinking for the long term, getting good pre-marital counseling - and counseling during marriage as necessary. Encourage individuals, families, congregations, businesses, and the media to respect and value marriage, and support marriages instead of undermining them. Encourage individuals to save sex and childrearing for marriage, because doing so is good for them and good for the country. Call on the states to reforms laws and polices that punish people, especially men, for marrying.

Encourage Proven Conservation Techniques. Quote the scientists and activists who, in the 1970s, warned that we were heading for a new ice age, and quote those who said that by 2000, the rainforests and the oceans would be destroyed. Go on to say that we must not hastily and uncritically accept alarmist warnings and use federal government force to impose destructive restrictions on the people and business that may not result in significant environmental benefit.

Civility. Call on partisans to vigorously debate the issues, but refrain from threats of violence and character assassination, as they renew their vow to defend the Constitution.

Friday, January 24, 2014

My State of the Unions 2014 Wish List

I know most of these positions will be completely avoided by President Obama, never mind that they wouldn't have a chance of being implemented with the current Senate, even with a Republican POTUS.  But permit me to dream. Also notice that with most of these, I'm calling on the President to encourage action by the people, not to use the force of law.

Explain That the Federal Government Is Not the Answer to Every Challenge, Problem, or Choice - Rather, it is the Last Resort Answer to Very Few. That is what freedom and liberty are all about.  Challenge individuals, businesses, congregations, nonprofits, and local and state governments (where appropriate) to take action instead of relying on the federal government. The federal government is there to protect the union from foreign threats and to and resolve some disputes between states.

Tout the Successes of the War on Terror. Laud those military, intelligence, and law enforcement personnel who have uncovered and prevented terrorist plans and actions, pointing out that is has been over twelve years since terrorists have carried out a major attack in the U.S. Apologize for Benghazi and what happened in the wake of that terrorist attack.

Border Control Is a Matter of National Security. Explain that allow illegal aliens any advantage in gaining permanent legal status ahead of legal immigrants is a slap in the face to legal immigrants and naturalized citizens. Announce that, effective immediately, the National Guard will secure our borders to prevent terrorists, disease-carriers, and smugglers from entering the U.S. They will stay there until suitable barriers and checkpoints are constructed – however long that takes. We will NOT encourage further invasion by offering amnesty, health insurance, and other tax-funded benefits for citizens of other countries who illegally enter/stay in the U.S. Speed up the process for legal immigration for those who want to come to the U.S. legally to become citizens and can find sponsors who will ensure they will stay off of public assistance. As for illegal aliens currently living in the United States – do not offer amnesty; they can go through the same channels of those who are trying to immigrate legally. If the border is secure, this problem will eventually take care of itself because their children born here are citizens and the illegals can continue to function as they have until they die off, if they don't want to go the legal route. Any illegal alien who serves honorably in the U.S. armed forces should be granted citizenship. If a true shortage of labor occurs (meaning American unemployment is low and employers need more temporary labor), a true guest worker program can be developed.

Break the Street Gangs. Pledge federal agencies to assist state and local law enforcement "sweep and hold" gang-infested urban areas.

Encourage Responsible Gun Ownership. As it is the duty of every able person to stand up to evil & crime in protection of the innocent, responsible gun ownership, training, and practice should be encouaged, and state and local laws should allow for this. Apologize for Fast & Furious.

Declare the Growing National Debt Unacceptable. Explain that it is a basic function of the federal government to adopt a budget, and that it is unsustainable and immoral to accumulate increasing debt, thereby burdening future generations. The government should not encourage further dependency on government.

Don't be Santa Claus. NO BAILOUTS FOR FAILED (= Democrat) CITIES! Don't propose new federal programs and expansions of existing federal social programs. Enough already. There are 50 states in the union and a few territories that are supposed to be handling their own matters – that is, the matters that are not supposed to be left up to "the people".

Stop Using the Tax Code For Social Engineering. Tell the Congress that instead of taking the carrots (taxes) from the people and then dangling some of them back in front of the people, that the people should keep their carrots in the first place and do with them what they will. Call for tax simplification and a move away from income/payroll taxes. If someone pays taxes, everyone should pay taxes.

Individuals Should Plan for the Future. Talk about the numerous options individuals and families have for saving for the future. Encourage them to save and invest for the future and not rely on the federal government to take care of them in their senior years. Point out that a reduction in federal spending will allow people to keep more of their own money to aid in saving for retirement.

Explain that Planning for Your Health Care is Part of Planning for the Future. Call for more freedom, competition, and private decision-making in health care. "Reform"  Obamacare.

Equal Access to Free Markets. Explain some of the major benefits of free markets, and that the best thing the federal government can do to foster a good business climate that provides jobs is to provide protection from interstate crime and foreign terrorists, and to be involved as little as possibly in voluntary employment and business transactions, not picking winners or losers in business, subsidizing some and restricting upstarts while protecing established businesses.

Property Rights and Personal Freedom. Most Americans understand that people should be considered as individuals and based on their behavior and abilities, not as members of a non-ideological group (ethnicity, etc.). Therefore, the federal government should no longer be involved in preventing people from renting, selling - or not - to whomever they choose for whatever reason, and should no longer be involved with who an employer hires and fires and why. Airlines, for example, should not be forced to carry anyone who makes the majority of their employees and passengers uncomfortable. It is clear that people can succeed in the USA regardless of skin color, sex, or sexual orientation, and focusing on slights, imagined or real, based on these personal characteristics, is fostering hostility and division and self-defeating thinking, doing more harm than good.

Encourage private innovation and solutions to reducing reliance on terrorist oil.

Education Is a Private Responsibility. Given the state of American public education since the Carter administration, call for the dismantling of federal involvement in education.

Strong Marital Unions Are Good For the Union. It brings together both sexes to raise the next generation of citizens. Men and women are different, and unifying them in the marital union forms a strong, inclusive building block for society, benefiting the individuals and society. Call on the Federal government to help by continuing to affirm, as Presidents Clinton and Bush did, that marriage unites a man and a woman, and pledge that the federal government will not force states to recognize counterfeit marriages. Encourage people to voluntarily take marriage seriously, thinking for the long term, getting good pre-marital counseling - and counseling during marriage as necessary. Encourage individuals, families, congregations, businesses, and the media to respect and value marriage, and support marriages instead of undermining them. Encourage individuals to save sex and childrearing for marriage, because doing so is good for them and good for the country.

Encourage Proven Conservation Techniques. Quote the scientists and activists who, in the 1970s, warned that we were heading for a new ice age, and quote those who said that by 2000, the rainforests and the oceans would be destroyed. Go on to say that we must not hastily and uncritically accept alarmist warnings and use federal government force to impose destructive restrictions on the people and business that may not result in significant environmental benefit.

Civility. Call on partisans to vigorously debate the issues, but refrain from threats of violence and character assassination, as they renew their vow to defend the Constitution.

Saturday, November 23, 2013

The Moral High Ground

It is immoral and counterproductive for the government to take money by force from one person or group of people and give it another unless the recipient is performing a Constitutionally assigned function or the function is otherwise a Constitutional mandate. - Personal Declaration of The Playful Walrus

Leftists want everyone to believe that people like me want poor people to die painful deaths in the streets, because people like me oppose unconstitutionally expanding federal government powers, higher income and capital gains tax rates, and paying for new programs with either increased debt or printing more money (which devalues the dollar).

Charity can't do it all, our Leftists friends say. But the fact is, this side of eternity, nobody can do it all.

Private, voluntary efforts could certainly do a lot more if the government eased up on micromanaging and let people keep more of their own earnings. With just about anything, private, voluntary efforts are more efficient than federal government. This is why the Constitution gives the federal government limited powers, and tells the federal government what it can do, not only what it can't do. Want a huge new federal program to fight "poverty", despite the spectacular failure of those that came before? Pass a Constitutional Amendment. The Constitution isn't there just to make sure you can pee all over The Bible and call it art.

Our Leftist friends what to confiscate, with guns draw if it comes to that, that for which people have worked, and give it to people who choose not to work, or to make unwise decisions about finances. That is immoral.

I want to help the needy. That is why I give to voluntary efforts. More of my Leftist friends could do the same if they worked harder and were better with what they earned. Leftist Billionaires can already give their money away, to charity or the U.S. Treasury, if they want to.

Monday, July 2, 2012

Relying on Big Brother For Everything

I found this list posted by a Leftist who is dutifully repeating Central Government's talking points.
HORRIFYING OBAMACARE!!!
What is so terrible about:
Keeping your kids on your policy until they reach the age of 26.
If you want to do that, and your insurance company agrees, fine. This is not something that should be forced upon anyone by Central Government.
Eliminating the lifetime cap on benefits.
If you want to do that, and your insurance company agrees, fine. This is not something that should be forced upon anyone by Central Government. What if someone could force you to keep working for them?
Stopping insurance companies from canceling your policy if you get sick.
Insurance companies should keep a contract with you if you keep our end of the contract. I'm not sure why this is a Central Government matter. There are civil lawsuits a person can bring, and your state has an Attorney General and perhaps an Insurance Commissioner.
Lowering the cost of care and medication for Medicare recipients.
Costs are not being lowered. What is going on is that people who aren't getting the service are going to have to pay more for others to get the service. Do you like being forced to pay for services other people you don't even know receive?
Covering preventative care at no charge.
If you want that, and your insurance company agrees, fine. This is not something that should be forced upon anyone by Central Government. Preventative care costs money when it is performed – even if it saves money down the line. (By the way, preventative care that does not actually detect anything harmful is an added expense, and more people will be demanding preventative care.) Clearing brush off of your property is "preventative care" for your home in terms of fires. Should Central Government force your homeowner's insurance company to cover the costs of brush clearance? Do you want someone being able to force you to work without getting paid?
Strengthening fraud protections by increasing penalties.
Great. Fraud should be prevented and punished, and it if happens interstate, then the federal government should be able to assume jurisdiction.
Stopping insurance companies from denying coverage to children with pre-existing conditions.
Don't like the terms of insurance a company is offering? Go to another insurer, or go without insurance. Should my homeowner's insurance company be forced to extend coverage if I want to add a house that is in the path of a raging wildfire?
Stopping insurance companies from arbitrarily jacking up rates.
Don't like the terms of insurance a company is offering? Go to another insurer, or go without insurance. Should Central Government have the power and the bureaucracy to tell other private businesses whether and when they can raise their prices? Would you want some Central Government stranger to come in and deny a raise you just asked for from your boss?
Getting a rebate if your insurance company spent too much on ads and CEO bonuses.
Don't like how an insurance company is spending its money? Go to another insurer, or go without insurance. Should Central Government have the power and the bureaucracy to tell other private businesses how much they can pay their employees and how much money they can spend on ads? Would you want a Central Government stranger taking money from your bank account and giving to back to your employer because someone didn't like an ad you put on a website, or thought you were paying your plumber too much money?
Tax credits to small businesses so they can afford quality health coverage for their employees.
Why should Central Government encourage small businesses (at the expense of other businesses, individuals, families, etc.) to provide health insurance to employees, while not doing the same when it comes to motor vehicle insurance, homeowner's insurance, renter's insurance, etc.?
Building and improving community health centers.
Why should this be Central Government's responsibility? So many hospitals were built or started by churches. Why not leave this to voluntary associations such as businesses and nonprofits and charities? Or even state and local governments?
Giving working Americans a tax credit so they can afford insurance (begins in 2014).
Why should Central Government encourage working Americans to buy health insurance? What other products and services should Central Government encourage working Americans to buy?
Also in 2014, ending discrimination against adults with pre-exiting conditions.
Don't like the terms of insurance a company is offering? Go to another insurer, or go without insurance. Should my homeowner's insurance company be forced to extend coverage if I want to add a house that is in the path of a raging wildfire?
Preventing insurance companies from charging higher prices to women based solely on their gender (2014).
Don't like the terms of insurance a company is offering? Go to another insurer, or go without insurance. Why not have Central Government prevent life insurance companies from charging men more even though men die younger, and car insurance companies from charging young men more than young women, even though young male drivers cost more? I know this will come as a shock to the gender confused, but men don't get pregnant, never get injured in abortions (although plenty of boys are killed), never give birth, never need lactation consultants, don't get ovarian, uterine, or cervical cancer, are less likely to get breast cancer, etc.
Creating insurance exchanges where people can shop and compare and get the most for their health insurance dollars (2014).
People can already shop and compare health insurance plans now. They could do that a lot more if government retreated from some of their existing controls on insurance companies.

More government involvement in health insurance and health care will make those things less affordable, not more. Government control of something never makes things more affordable. Rather, costs are redistributed, and additional costs are often added in the process, especially if an individual or company thinks "someone else" will pick up the tab so that they will not have to deal with the financial impact of their decisions.

Will some individuals come out ahead because of Obamacare? Yes. Some people come out ahead by robbing others directly too. The difference is, someone who has been robbed by a mugger may get their money returned or may at least see the person who forcibly took money from them brought to justice. People who use Central Government to force strangers to pay their way through life may never have to face those strangers.

There are "hard luck" stories out there, to be sure. But those stories do not justify usurping more choices in voluntary interactions in Central Government, and turning even more of economy over to federal bureaucrats.

That SCOTUS has ruled Obamacare Constitutionally permissible under taxation powers doesn't mean it should stay in place, or that it will make anything better.

Tuesday, May 8, 2012

Epic Stupidity From Being Liberal

This is the kind of crap that "Being Liberal" (which is really Being Leftist) spreads on Facebook. And I have to ask... "Really?" If this was true, then you could spend your own money on your own health. You don't need to ship your money off to Washington, D.C., to someone who doesn't know you, to make your decisions and spend your money for you. You... can... do... it... yourself. Also, if you want to spend your money on someone else's health, you can still do that without involving the government.

No, what these people really want is to force people who have been high earners (and really, the high earners of the future) to pay for the health insurance of strangers today, including those who loaf around all day and abuse their bodies. Or worse, they want the strangers to spend the money on them. But "Hey, I want to be generous with someone else's money" or "I'm selfish, entitled brat" doesn't sound so good. So they spout this ridiculous statement.

Well guess what? Want to do that? Pass a Constitutional Amendment that makes it Constitutional.

Otherwise, see my national health care plan.

Substitute other things to see just how ridiculous Being Liberal is in spreading this crap. "Who asked for free dinner? I want MY gov't to spend MY taxes on MY food." Some Leftists are asking, "Yeah, what's your point?" Sad.

Monday, April 30, 2012

Thank You, Andrew Klavan and Bill Whittle

And thanks to Tammy Bruce blogger Maynard for calling our attention to this:

Monday, March 19, 2012

When is a Private Citizen No Longer Private?

In a response to a column Meghan Daum discussing Rush Limbaugh's comments and Bill Maher's comments towards women, the Los Angeles Times printed some letters of note. (Note that clicking the link adds to your monthly total of visits to LATimes.com, which has a pay wall after a certain number of visits per month.)

Christine Gregory of Beverly Hills wrote:

It is true that Bill Maher has insulted Sarah Palin, but she is a public figure who put herself into the public square — and condemnation and reverence comes with the territory.

What crossed the line is Rush Limbaugh calling a private woman who desires birth control a "slut" and a "prostitute."
Are we really to believe that Fluke did not put herself into the public square? Where, when and to whom did she make the statement to which Limbaugh reacted?

Nor was Limbaugh criticizing her desire for birth control. He was criticizing her insistence that it must be provided by a Catholic university.

Likewise, Sidney Morrison of Los Angeles wrote:

But Limbaugh crossed the line when he attacked a private citizen, a young woman exercising her right to express her views.
Doesn't the same right to express views apply to Limbaugh?

With freedom comes responsibility. Some has the freedom to choose contraceptives or abortive chemicals. Others should have the freedom to opt out of paying for it.

Wednesday, February 22, 2012

The Republican War on Women

Only in the world of the deceptive propagandists of the Left and their useful idiots is saying that the federal government should not force religious organizations to pay, contrary to long-held and stated religious beliefs, for birth control for people who are voluntarily associated with those organization... a "war on women."

Here's a couple of ideas:

Pay for your own birth control.

Work for someone else.

Saturday, January 28, 2012

Letters to LAT

The letters printed in the Los Angeles Times can sometimes be insightful, sometimes an indicator of societal decay.

Rosemary Hagerott of Sierra Madre had a great letter:
I agree with your subheadline's characterization of what the president said in his State of the Union address: "Obama says all must pay 'fair share' of taxes."

I'd like him to start by collecting taxes from the nearly half of Americans who pay no federal income tax.
Right on!
And how about all those Americans who don't file tax reports? And how about all those who earn most of their money "under the table" and report very low income?
Such is a problem with income taxes.
Once he addresses this issue, I might listen to him about the "rich" paying their fair share. Right now, the "rich" are the only group of taxpayers paying their "fair share."

And when did it become anathema in this country to achieve the American dream by becoming rich?
When too many people decided it was better to slack off, make poor choices, and let Big Brother take care of them. And then link to blogs like this and complain about it rather than learning from the simple steps to avoid poverty.

Eugene Sison of San Dimas may have Bush Derangement Syndrome:
It has been said that men such as Obama must be "twice as good" as the George W. Bushes of the world to succeed at the same job.
Huh? It this a racial reference? If so, Obama only has to be 50% better.
So, as president, Obama listed his administration's accomplishments: preventing a second Great Depression while saving the auto industry, ending the Iraq war while getting Osama bin Laden, passing healthcare reform while reining in Wall Street. Two words came to mind: Mission accomplished.
Obama's stimulus effort made things worse.

He didn't save the auto industry - he bailed out American Big Labor.
Pulling troops out of Iraq was made possible by the decisions of the Bush administration in addition to all of the hard work of the military and contractors.
Yes, it is good that he kept up the pursuit of OBL, and didn't wimp out when it came time to kill OBL.

Healthcare reform? He inserted the federal government into private health insurance matters and is creating an new dependency program.

What exactly has he done to "Wall Street"? Wall Street PAID FOR OBAMA'S CAMPAIGN.

What a bunch of hooey.

In response to an item in the Business section, "How the wealthy get tax breaks," Business, Jan. 24, Anthony Maenza of Oceanside wrote:
If a criminal stole 35% of my money last week and 15% this week, would The Times write that the criminal's actions this week helped to increase my wealth? If not, then how does The Times justify writing that "wealthy people grow even wealthier with the help of the tax code"?

Because the article wasn't about subsidies given to the rich but instead about the wealthy keeping a larger share of their own money, one must conclude that The Times believes the money belongs to the government, which then favors the wealthy by letting them have a disproportionate amount of said government's money.

How about mentioning the earned income tax credit, which "refunds" unpaid taxes to the poor — taxes paid by others (likely the wealthy)? That would be honest journalism.
Perfect.

Al Barrett of Santa Monica is clueless, and so must be right at home in the People's Republic of Monica ("Santa" should be banned for being religious.):
Keeping Mit Romney's income tax rate no higher than 15% is necessary to help him create jobs, according to some economics experts.
Hey genius, that the personal tax rate on capital gains, which is investment income. The money used to invest has already been taxed, and the profits are taxed again before they are paid to Romney (and elderly widows), who then have to pay taxes on the money AGAIN.
It doesn't seem to be working.
Actually, Romney's efforts have created a heckuva lot of jobs. Jobs NOT dependent on taxes, unlike so many "green" jobs.

Apparently, high school economics courses need to be required and improved.

Monday, January 23, 2012

Two Leftist, Libertarian Issues at the Back of the Line

Libertarians and many Leftists want legalization of all drugs and elimination or almost complete opening of national borders.

The most compelling argument against drug legalization is that more people will use currently illegal drugs if they are legalized. That is based on alcohol consumption per capita before, during, and since Prohibition. Is that enough of a reason to refuse legalization? I'm not sure.

What I am sure about is that I will not be motivated to support legalization until AFTER:

1) Taxpayer money ceases to be spent on health care

2) I am allowed to control and defend my property and myself, meaning I do NOT have to rent to a druggie and I can carry a loaded firearm and shoot a druggie who is a threat to me or my family

3) Employers are allowed to not hire, hire, promote, demote, and fire people for any reason, including being a druggie.

Make THOSE parts of the libertarian dream happen first. Good luck getting the Left to go along with that.

As far as border control/immigration issues... we're always going to need some defense of our borders for national defense purposes, but see what I wrote before about "comprehensive immigration reform". I'll care a lot less if someone wants to hire an illegal aliens if society is otherwise mostly libertarian. Again, good luck getting the Left to go along with that.

So drug legalization and letting illegal aliens come and go as they please, work here, etc., are things that have to go to "the back of the line". They do not make sense unless our society is more libertarian already.

Tuesday, January 3, 2012

When Government Gets Really Hands-On

Will Californians really vote to require condomns in "adult movies" filmed in California? What about "mainstream" movies that push that boundary?

What will the ads for this campaign be like?

Mind you, this is a state where 14-year-old girl can have her baby sucked into a sink without her parents ever been notified.

How will this be enforced? Will state government workers have to be on-set, or just view videos after they are produced and try to determine if they were produced in California or not? How will all of this work, given strict sexual harassment laws and policies?

The adult video industry in California has already suffered due to foreign competitors and the ubiquity of amateur porn. Will the industy move out of California? And will the tax loss be worth it?

Speaking of amateurs, what if a couple films themselves for their own viewing, then later that couple sells the video, or, as with certain celebrities, the video get's "stolen" and distributed. Will anyone be fined for not wearing condoms?
Prostitution, in which a man (it is almost always a man) pays someone else for sex will still be illegal, but if instead a third person pays that man and woman and films them, it will all be legal as long as the man being filmed wears a condom, right?
Does workplace oversight by the state really allow the state to do this, without allow the state to mandate it when no camera is around?

Do hear fiddling? Do I hear deck chairs being rearranged?

Tuesday, August 23, 2011

What's the Associated Press' Plan For Supporting the Constitution?

Sometimes, just the headlines are enough to get me sighing like Al Gore. Take this one from the Associated Press:
Perry Says No to "Obamacare," But What's His Plan?

Maybe the person who picked that headline for the AP missed a day or two of school, but they can still look up the Constitution for themselves and read Article II.

It... is... not... the... role... of... the... President of the United States... to... offer... a... health care insurance plan.

But since the AP wants one, how about this one:

My National Health Care Plan

1. The federal government stays out of health care as much as possible. See Amendments 9 and 10 of the Constitution. The federal government can get involved in breaking up monopolies, and prosecuting interstate crime such as fraud.

2. The state government stays out of health care as much as possible.

3. No government medical facilities for anyone other than military (including veterans) and perhaps prisoners.

4. Every person is free to pursue a career in medicine, subject to the same laws as anyone else.

5. Property owners have broad freedom to host medical facilities on their property.

6. People are free to develop medical procedures, medicines, and medical equipment.

7. People are allowed to support #3-6 with donations and investments of time, money, their body, etc.

8. Every person is free to seek medical care (or not) from anyone anywhere in the world. They can demand to see licensing, such a medical license or nursing license, or certification of medical treatments from any number of organizations and watchdogs.

9. Every person is free to treat (or not) another person, and what to accept, if anything, as compensation, and when it will be due. Granted, anyone who wants a government license needs to stick the government rules. Any medical professional who wants to keep an association with an employer or insurance company will have to abide by their rules as well.

10. Each individual is free to either negotiate how he will compensate those who treat him or to make arrangements to that effect. They can negotiate directly with their doctor or the doctor's representative, or delegate negotiations to an insurance company, charity, their union, their employer, their religious congregation, or some other voluntary association. Their friends, family, and strangers who believe they have a right to subsidized health care are free to pay for it, too.

All of this involves personal liberty and voluntary associations. Strictly speaking, nobody is forced to do anything - and that includes paying for anything.

Wednesday, August 10, 2011

APA Needs Head Examined

The American Psychological Association, or at least a group within it, has come out in support of neutering marriage. The excuse they give for their political move is essentially their support for a placebo effect. You can find out how I feel about that and how my childhood is to blame over at The Opine Editorials.