Wednesday, December 23, 2009
Will You Be Selected?
Within Lewis’ essay, he highlights just a few of the dangers of government decreed healthcare, specifically the dangers of the arbitrariness implicit within the bill, H.R. 3962. Here is one example.
“If the secretary estimates for any fiscal year that the aggregate amounts available for payment of expenses of the high-risk pool will be less than the amount of the expenses, the secretary shall make such adjustments as are necessary to eliminate such deficit, including reducing benefits, increasing premiums, or establishing waiting lists” (Sec. 101). Who gets care, and what it will cost, will be up to the secretary. (bold by ed.)
When I read those words from the bill, and Lewis’ comment (in bold), I immediately recalled the selection process of the Nazis in the concentration camps, and Googled the following: nazi deathcamp selection procedures, and discovered the following essay written by William E. Seidelman MD. Nuremberg Lamentation: For the Forgotten Victims of Medical Science from which the below quote is gleaned.
Half a century after Nuremberg it is opportune to go back to the beginning and examine how the best and the brightest people in medical science could become parties to evil. Physicians need to examine the historical, social, and legal basis of their profound powers and influence, including the tragic example of the exploitation and abuse of those powers by the foremost medical and research communities of the day. The medical profession needs to examine what can happen when medicine is influenced by political ideology.
Don’t kid yourselves. There is a real and extreme danger, an evil danger, to all Americans if the United States government implements any type of health care bill.
Will you be selected?
From a post at the Mises Economics Blog titled Conserving conserves nothing, which in and of itself is worth a read, but it is the following comment appended to the post, by one Ned Netterville, which I reproduce in full below, which really caught my attention.
I have a libertarian-teaching routine that I use with cashiers at retail establishments almost anywhere—except in New Hampshire and a few other locales. It goes something like this:
Clerk: Your total is sixteen fifty, sir.
Me: No it isn’t.
Clerk: (Looking at the cash-register tape or computer screen). What do you mean?
Me: The prices marked on the shelves are six dollars for this screw driver and nine for for the propane torch.
Clerk: That’s right.
Me: No, that’s wrong.
Clerk: (looking perplexed): What do you mean?
Me: I mean the total you gave me is wrong. Six plus nine equals fifteen dollars—not sixteen fifty.
Clerk: (reviewing the register tape for a few moments before understanding suddenly dawns): Oh, yes, that’s right, fifteen dollars plus ten percent tax is a dollar fifty which adds up to sixteen fifty, like I said (looking rather relieved and sounding a bit condescending).
Me: Oh, no, you’re still wrong. The prices marked on the shelves are six and nine dollars. There is no mention of any tax.
Clerk: Everything is taxed; everybody pays.
Me: I don’t.
Clerk: (agitated): Sir, I have to collect the tax. You can’t have the items if you don’t pay the tax.
Me: Oh, so you’re a tax collector.
Clerk: No sir, not me. The state gets the tax,; the computer adds it to every transaction.
Me: Who is going to collect the money from me; who do I have to give it to?
Clerk (now sheepishly) I guess that’s me.
Me: If you are collecting the tax, you are the tax collector, are you not?
Clerk: If you say so.
Me: What do you mean, if I say so? If you don’t collect it from me I won’t pay it. Isn’t that so?
Clerk: I guess so.
Me: How much of the tax do you get to keep?
Clerk: I don’t get any of it; it all goes to the state.
Me: How much does the state pay you to collect its taxes?
Clerk: The state doesn’t pay anything.
Me: So you do the state’s dirty work for nothing?
Clerk: Yeah, I guess so.
Me: Hmmm. Very interesting. Do you know what Jesus said about tax collectors?
Clerk: No (sounding defensive).
Me: He likened them to prostitutes, but said both were entering heaven ahead of the scribes and Pharisees. You’re not a Pharisee too, are you?
Me: Well, I don’t want to get you in trouble so here’s the sixteen fifty. The extra dollar fifty is less than a prostitute would charge. Have a good day.
Actually, I’m usually less blunt, more polite and conclude by smiling and saying, “I’m just teasing. I know it’s not your fault that you have to work for the state for free.” In my experience it is the rare clerk or cashier who had ever thought of himself or herself as a tax collector until it was brought to their attention.
Yale, that alleged bastion of higher education, is also evidently a bastion of cultural sensitivity. Too sensitive if you ask me.
The Freshman Class Council has run into controversy with its T-shirts for The Game…The original design, which won out over five other entries, displayed an F. Scott Fitzgerald quote in the front — “I think of all Harvard men as sissies” — in bold white letters. The back of the long-sleeved, navy blue T-shirt said “WE AGREE” in capital letters, with “The Game 2009” scrawled in script underneath it.
But the term ‘sissies’ is considered offensive and demeaning, and as well as a “thinly-veiled gay slur,” said Julio Perez-Torres ’12, a member of the LGBT Co-op.
Based on the quote, above, you can pretty much figure out the rest of the story. What a bunch of Marys.
The Horror, The Horror
Drudge links to a DenverPost.com article headlined Political activist pleads guilty in window-smashing with the headline Transgendered anarchist arrested for smashing windows at CO Dem headquarters…
The horror, the horror. “Anarchists,” and transgendered ones at that, are in our midst. That’s some scary stuff, hey?
In actuality, if you read the DenverPost.com article, you will learn that a punk named Joseph Schwenkler broke a bunch of windows with a hammer, got caught in the act, and alleged “anarchist websites across the country” raised money for this punk’s bail.
This Schwenkler, and those of his bail raising alleged “anarchist” ilk, are a bunch of disaffected punks who have no clue, whatsoever, that without rule does not mean violence, but the ability to act, morally and ethically, without the whip of government on your back.