↓ Archives ↓

Let me be CRYSTAL clear…

Those who took the time to read, and hopefully comprehend, my last entry, thank you.  You may understand where I am coming from now.

But in case you missed it, and this is very likely, I want to be clear.

If you have an opinion that has been formulated on inaccurate information or incomplete information, I am suggesting that you obtain more information, open your mind, apply that information and determine your new opinion.

But, very few people do that.  And that is why I do not respect their opinions.

I do not respect the opinions of those who think that the United States government was behind the 9/11 attacks.  [The ignorance of this zealots has been exposed repeatedly.  Besides, I have no faith that there are enough competant people in government to have kept this secret.]

I do not respect the opinions of those who do not think that Barack Obama is a natural born citizen of this country.  [I do not care WHERE he was born, he was born of an American mother.  Just like John McCain.  That is enough for me.]

That is why I do not respect the views of ANYONE who thinks that this bill, signed on Tuesday by President Obama, is good for anyone.

First, as I have illustrated AD NAUSEUM, this does NOT address the causes of our problems.  In fact, it gives more power to the causes of the problems.  A reasonable person should come to the conclusion that this will make things worse.  But, as I am learning, these are not reasonable people.

Second, there are many parts of this bill, and for those of you who read it BEFORE it passed, you did not read the same bill, that are outside the scope of the Constitution.  Remember, and many of you have forgotten or never learned this, the Constitution is a document FROM the people giving CONSENT to be Governed, not the other way around.

To that part, Jon Dougherty addressed that in his recent blog entry:


Jon is a member of the Missouri National Guard who is currently serving in Afghanistan.  He is entitled to his words, and he is actually taking action to be sure that the rest of us can too.

Let me recap things here.  You can have your opinion.  You can have an opinion based on flawed information.  I will point out your ignorance, as expressed by your opinion.  I will not respect those flawed opinions.  That may lead me to have less respect for you.  [Not that you should care.]

But let me close with this thought.  Incomplete and inaccurate information can lead to poor planning or poor decisions.  Don’t think so?  Well, many of those who hold opinions that I do not respect are the very same people who called a previous administration “liars” for that administrations opinions based on incomplete and inaccurate information.

Maybe you want to admit to being a complete hypocrite.  I don’t, that is why I back things up with facts and detailed information. 

And so far, no one has taken on the facts that I have presented.  Only my opinion, even though it is on solid ground, unlike their own.

By the way, if you want to believe that giving “health insurance” to those who are unwilling to provide it to themselves is compassionate AND makes you a better person than me, how about backing it up.  Buy some health insurance for those who don’t have it out or your own damned pockets and don’t FORCE me, under threat of my personal liberty, to do so.  Then MAYBE you would be a better person.  But until you do so, you remain a hypocrite.

If you are OK with that, fine.  Again, I am not.


  • Mar 26th 201011:03
    by Topher Kersting

    In many cases, however, you seem to be mistaking ignorance for honest differences of opinion. Do I think this bill will solve the health care problems of this country? Absolutely not. Is this bill good for some people? Absolutely. Anyone who is currently without health insurance because of an existing condition will certainly benefit. Employees of small business may benefit if their employers decide that they are able to provide them with health insurance as a result of the bill. Many other people may also benefit, but many people will not, and many people may end up paying significantly higher taxes and higher medical costs because of this bill.

    Frankly, you should have trouble respecting the views of anyone who doesn’t think this bill will be good for someone.

  • Mar 26th 201011:03
    by Administrator

    At what cost?

    At what cost?

    I do not respect someone, ANYONE, who views this as MORE good than bad. And I do not respect ANYONE who has NOT gone back and looked at the causes of the problems that we have. Have you done that? If you have, you have NEVER addressed them with me. You choose to split hairs.

    Will it help some? Yes. But it hurts many more, via increased taxes and the inevitiable rationing of health care services. And if you do not think that is inevitiable, look at what HAS happened in Medicare.

    Oh, and who will provide health care services when NO ONE wants to become a health care provider due to this action.

    My point is, and always has been, this is bad for the many. The needs of the many out weight the needs of the few.

  • Mar 26th 201011:03
    by Administrator

    Again, an opinion based on bad, faulty, incorrect or incomplete information needs to be re-evaluated when the new information is presented. And the problem is, I have provided SOME of that information and invited everyone to double check me, show me where I might have missed something. I am not infallable. Obviously.

    But the arguments that I get come from a position of ignorance. And that is a position BY choice.

  • Mar 26th 201011:03
    by Jon Dougherty

    Jay -

    Well said. The most important thing you say about this new entitlement is the same thing that can be said for all of the previous, now untouchable, entitlements: That the federal government is taking, by force of law and threat of punishment, the fruits of one person’s labor and giving it to someone else who neither earned it nor is truly “entitled” to it. That is a form of slavery, because it enslaves those of us who are productive to those who are not.

    See you soon, my friend.

  • Mar 26th 201012:03
    by Topher Kersting

    First, you know me well enough that you should just assume that I’m not writing without doing research. I’ve read most of the bill that was passed (and no, that wasn’t a treat), and I know the reasons the current system is broken: government-subsidized employer-provided health insurance and Medicare/Medicaid. We are in almost full agreement on that. And I agree that this bill was not the right direction. Where we disagree is over the degree that this bill will hurt America.

    Frankly, my issue with your rants is that you think that this new bill is really going to screw things up, when things were already screwed up beyond repair. I just don’t think the bill makes anything significantly worse–the government was already going to pay for more than 50% of U.S. health care by 2012–and it does fix a few things that needed fixing. No one truly knows how the bill will affect health care expenses: Anyone who says they do is full of it. I don’t expect that the rate of increase, already far too high, will get much worse–it might actually improve if people actually take advantage of the preventative care measures promoted in the bill–and I don’t expect that there will be too many starving doctors or nurses out there. But, like I said, all the data right now is pure guesswork.

    The bill doesn’t fix the core drivers of increasing medical costs: exorbitant damages on malpractice suits and a lack of competition in the health insurance industry. The bill does try to address the second, but what I read doesn’t seem to make much sense: having a convenient marketplace won’t drive down prices if there are only a few companies selling.

    Finally–and I am only saying this because I care–there are a lot of decaffeinated brands on the market that are just as tasty as the real thing.

  • Mar 26th 201013:03
    by Administrator

    The problems with this bill are, and you acknowledged some of it, are that it does little to nothing to addressing the root causes. If you don’t know how you got somewhere, how can you turn things around and get back on track?

    But you focus on Health INSURANCE. I am saying that we need to focus on HEALTH CARE. There is a difference. And if not for the debacles that have been Medicare and Medicaid, combined with the dependence on employer purchases health insurance and the bulk deals that they have all made, most people would be able to afford their non-catestrophic health care costs out of pocket. And catestrophic health care insurance would be VERY affordable. But again, the current situation has been put in this situation that you label as beyond repair BY those programs. That is why it makes NO SENSE to give those programs twins to screw it up more….and screw good hard working people over too.

    Finally, I didn’t know that there was caffiene in my bourbon. If there is, which brands do you recommend?

  • Mar 26th 201013:03
    by Administrator


    I am glad the Thirteenth Amendment is there to protect us. Oh wait, that is part of the Constitution so it doesn’t count. My bad.

    Dinner with you and Mrs. D….on ME as soon as you get your ass back in THIS country.

  • Mar 26th 201014:03
    by Topher Kersting

    Well, I know how I would fix it:

    1. The government pays for basic health care for everyone–essentially what catastrophic health insurance would cover. A yearly physical, standard vaccinations, and whenever the feces hits the blower. The government tells you where to go and who your doctor is, but they pay for it.
    2. If you want more than that, you buy supplemental insurance. You want a different doctor? You don’t like the hospital they assign? You want treatment for a condition that isn’t life-threatening? Either purchase supplemental insurance or pay for it yourself. (I would have the supplemental insurance pay the *difference* for the preferred coverage.)
    2a. For Medicare and Medicaid recipients, have patients select a supplemental program from a list of providers (similar to how Part D is run now). The cheapest program would have minimal out-of-pocket costs. Eventually, I’d like to phase this out in favor of having them pay for it entirely from their retirement income, but it isn’t fair to just pull the rug out from people.
    3. Deregulate the insurance market. Allow insurers to compete across state lines, and reduce state and federal mandates for what insurance must provide. Give people as many options from as many insurers as possible.

    Now, the reason for #1 is pretty simple: U.S. manufacturers can’t compete overseas because they have the huge burden of employee health care that is, in effect, a huge subsidy from foreign governments. Yeah, it would be preferable to privatize health care as much as possible, but if the rest of the world isn’t going to do it, we need to level the playing field for U.S. companies. As such, having a clean split between what the government provides and what private citizens and companies provide is the only practical solution I can see.


  • Mar 26th 201016:03
    by Administrator

    Pass the Fair Tax then we don’t need to level any playing fields and US Manufacturing takes off again, due to foreign investments coming to the world’s biggest tax shelter.

  • Leave a Reply