Kim Wade - No Excuses!

When people make statements that are completely at variance with reality and they continue to repeat them and you know they are not crazy, it’s only natural to wonder, what’s going on?
I’ve concluded that for some people on the left, political beliefs are like a false religion in which the parishioners become unable to distinguish myth from reality. How else can you explain the statements of Donald Berwick, President Obama’s recess appointee to run Medicare and Medicaid, on his way out of office the other day? For starters, he claimed that the Affordable Care Act (what some people call ObamaCare) “is making health care a basic human right.” Then he went on to say that because of the new law, “we are a nation headed for justice, for fairness and justice in access to care.”

Now I can’t claim to have read everything in the 2,700-page law, but I can assure you that “making health care a right” just isn’t in there. Nor is there anything in the new law that makes the role of government more “just” or “fair.” To the contrary, a lot of knowledgeable people (not just conservative critics) are predicting that access to care is going to be more difficult for our most vulnerable populations. That appears to have been the experience in Massachusetts, which Obama cites as the model for the new federal reforms. It’s not that Massachusetts tried and failed to expand access to care. It didn’t even try.

True enough, Massachusetts cut the number of uninsured in that state in half through Governor Romney’s health reform. But it didn’t create any new doctors. The state expanded the demand for care, but it did nothing to expand supply. More people than ever are trying to get care, but because there was no increase in medical services, it has become more difficult than ever to actually see a doctor.
And far from fair, the new federal health law will give some people health insurance subsidies that are as much as $20,000 more than the subsidies available to other people at the same level of income. In fact, the new system of health insurance subsidies is about as arbitrary as it can be. Berwick isn’t alone in making bizarre statements about health reform. Right after the passage of the Affordable Care Act, administration health advisors Robert Kocher, Ezekiel Emanuel and Nancy-Ann DeParle announced that the new health reform law “guarantees access to health care for all Americans.”

In fact, nothing in the act guarantees access to care for any America, let alone all Americans. Far from it. Again, take Massachusetts as the precedent. The waiting time to see a new family practice doctor in Boston (63 days) is longer than in any other major U.S. city. In a sense, a new patient seeking care in Boston has less access to care than in just about every other U.S. city!  The disconnect between belief and reality is not unique to our country. With the enactment of the British National Health Service after World War II, the reformers claimed that they too had made health care a “right.” The same claim was made in Canada after that country established its “single-payer” Medicare scheme.
Yet in reality, neither country has made health care a right. They didn’t even come close. Neither British nor Canadian citizens have a right to any particular health care. A patient with a mysterious lump on her breast has no right to an MRI scan in either country. A cancer patient has no right to the latest cancer drug. A cardiac patient has no right to open heart surgery. They may get the care they need. Or they may not. Sadly, all too often they do not.
The British and the Canadians not only have no legally enforceable right to any particular type of care, they don’t even have a right to a place in line. For example, a patient who is 100th on the waiting list for heart surgery is not entitled to the 100th surgery. Other patients (including cash paying patients from the United States!) may jump the queue and get their surgery first.

Imagine a preacher, a priest or a rabbi who gets up in front of the congregation and gets a lot of things wrong. Say he misstates facts, distorts reality, or says other things you know are not true. Do you jump up from the pew and yell, “That’s a lie”? Of course not. But if those same misstatements were made by someone else during the work week you might well respond with considerable harshness. What’s the difference? I think there are two different thought processes that many people engage in. Let’s call them “Sunday morning” thinking and “Monday morning” thinking. We tolerate things on Sunday that we would never tolerate on Monday. And there is probably nothing wrong with that, unless people get their days mixed up.

In my professional career I have been to hundreds of health policy conferences, discussions, get-togethers, etc., where it seemed as though people were completely failing to connect with each other. One day it dawned on me that we were having two different conversations. Some people were engaged in Monday morning thinking, while everyone else was engaged in Sunday morning thinking.

Here’s the problem. Whether the beliefs are true or false, if people didn’t come to their religious convictions by means of reason, then reason isn’t going to convince them to change their minds.
This same principle applies to collectivism and health care. If people didn’t come to the false religion of collectivism by means of reason, you are not going to talk them out of it by means of reason. If you remember this principle, you will save yourself the agony of many, many pointless conversations.
 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
John C. Goodman is president and founder of the National Center for Policy Analysis, a free-market think tank established in 1983. Goodman’s ideas on health policy can also be found at his own blog, where he provides daily analysis and lively discussion on a wide range of health care topics.

Kim sat in for Matt Freideman on August 20th, 21st and 24th. Each show is in three parts.

Kim has been a regular talk show host on WJNT News Talk 1180 am in Jackson, MS and more recently has been and is a guest host on the Matt Friedeman Show on AFR Talk on the American Family Radio Network. His is a fresh, vital voice to Christians of all races to get involved in political activism for the Kingdom's sake. Listen to Kim's perspective by clicking on the play button below. You will be enlightened and challenged!

The programs are dated: July 9, 10, 14, 15, 16, 2009 respectively.

Click on the play buttons below to listen to the show. There are three parts in order from top to bottom.

Sadly I don't think there are a large number of people who could actually benefit from this book but I think YOU will!

Get it & read you won't be sorry. Click on the book cover to learn more about it, read excerpts, and order the book.

“Is it not High Time for the People of this Country explicitly to declare, whether they will be Freemen or Slaves? It is an important Question which ought to be decided. It concerns us more than any Thing in this Life. The Salvation of our Souls is interested in the Event:

For wherever Tyranny is establish'd, Immorality of every Kind comes in like a Torrent. It is in the Interest of Tyrants to reduce the People to Ignorance and Vice. For they cannot live in any Country where Virtue and Knowledge prevail. The Religion and public Liberty of a People are intimately connected; their Interests are interwoven, they cannot subsist separately; and therefore they rise and fall together. For this Reason, it is always observable, that those who are combin'd to destroy the People's Liberties, practice every Art to poison their Morals.

How greatly then does it concern us, at all Events, to put a Stop to the Progress of Tyranny. It is advanced already by far too many Strides. We are at this moment upon a precipice. The next step may be fatal to us. Let us then act like wise Men; calmly took around us and consider what is best to be done. Let us converse together upon this most interesting Subject and open our minds freely to each other. Let it be the topic of conversation in every social Club. Let every Town assemble. Let Associations & Combinations be everywhere set up to consult and recover our just Rights.”

" The Country claims our active Aid.
That let us roam; & where we find a Spark
Of public Virtue, blow it into Flame."

VALERIUS POPLIC0LA.

Samuel Adams - October 5 1772
http://www.fullbooks.com/The-Writings-of-Samuel-Adams-volume-II-1770-5.html

Above excerpted from:
 
ARTICLE SIGNED "VALERIUS POPLICOLA."1

[ Boston Gazette, October 5, 1772.]

Messieurs EDES & GILL,

"Is there a Prince on Earth, who has power to lay a single Penny
upon his subjects, without the Grant and Consent of those who are
to pay it, otherwise than by Tyranny and Violence? No Prince can levy it unless through Tyranny and under Penalty of Excommunication. But there are those who are Bruitish enough not to know what they can do or omit in this Affair.

Such is the language of a great and good Historian and Statesman,
a Subject of France . Had the English Politicians and Ministers
been either half as honest or half as wise as he, they would never
have driven the American Revenue without the Grant or Consent of
those who pay it, to such a length, as to cause an Alienation of
affection which perhaps may not easily if ever be recovered. By
this kind of politics, says the worthy Frenchman, Charles the
seventh brought a heavy Sin upon his own Soul and upon that of his
Successors, and gave his Kingdom a Wound which would continue long to bleed. The British Ministers, possibly, may entertain different Ideas of Morals from those of the French Historian, if indeed they have any such kind of ideas at all. However, the Nation, I fear, will have Occasion to rue the day, when they suffer'd their
Politics so far to prevail, as to gain such an Influence in their
Parliament as they certainly did in the last, to say nothing of
the present. The Impositions upon the French, says Mr. Gordon,2
grew monstrous almost as soon as they grew arbitrary. Charles the
seventh, who began them, never rais'd annually more than one
hundred and eighty thousand Pounds. His Son Lewis the eleventh
almost trebled the Revenue; and since then, all that the Kingdom and People had, even to their Skins, has hardly been thought
sufficient for their Kings." An awakening Caution to Americans!
Lest by tamely submitting to be plundered, they encourage their
Plunderers to grasp at all they have.

The Merchants of this Continent have passively submitted to the
Indignity of a Tribute; and the Landholders, tho' Sharers in the
Indignity, have been perhaps too unconcern'd Spectators of the
humiliating Scene. Posterity, who will no doubt revenge their
Fathers Wrongs, may also be ashamed, when in the Page of History they are informed of their tame Subjection. Had the Body of this People shown a proper Resentment, at the time when the proud Taskmasters first made their appearance, we should never have seen Pensioners multiplying like the Locusts in Egypt , which devoured every green Thing. I speak with Assurance; because it seldom has happened if ever, that even a small People has been kept long in Bondage, when they have unitedly and perseveringly resolv'd to be Free.

At that critical Period, we hearkened to what we then took to be,
the Dictates of sound policy and Prudence. We were led to place a
Confidence in those, whose Protection we had a right to claim, and
we hoped for Deliverance in dry Remonstrances and humble
Supplication. We have petition'd, repeatedly petition'd, and our
Petitions have been heard, barely heard! The Grievances of this
Continent have no doubt "reached the Royal Ear"; I wish I could
see reason to say they had touch'd the Royal Heart. No - They yet
remain altogether unredress'd. Such has been the baneful Influence
of corrupt and infamous Ministers and Servants of the Crown; that
the Complaints of three Millions of loyal Subjects have not yet
penetrated the Royal Breast, to move it even to pity.

Have not our humble Petitions, breathing a true Spirit of rational
Loyalty, and expressive of a just Sense of those Liberties the
Restoration of which we implored, been followed with Grievance
upon Grievance, as fast as the cruel Heart and Hand of a most
execrable Paricide could invent and fabricate them? I will not at
present enumerate Grievances; they are known, sufficiently known,
felt and understood. Is it not enough, to have a Governor, an
avowed Advocate for ministerial Measures, and a most assiduous
Instrument in carrying them on - moddel'd, shaped, controul'd, and
directed-totally independant of the people over whom he is
commissioned to govern, and yet absolutely dependent upon the
Crown - pensioned by those on whom his existence depends, and paid out of a Revenue establish'd by those who have no Authority to
establish it, and extorted from the People in a Manner most
Odious, insulting and oppressive. Is not this, Indignity enough to
be felt by those who have any feeling? Are we still threatned with
more? Is Life, Property and every Thing dear and sacred, to be now
submitted to the Decisions of PENSION'D JUDGES, holding their
places during the pleasure of such a Governor, and a Council
perhaps overawed! To what a State of Infamy , Wretchedness and
Misery shall we be reduc'd if our Judges shall be prevail'd upon
to be thus degraded to Hirelings, and the Body of the People shall
suffer their free Constitution to be overturn'd and ruin'd.
Merciful GOD! Inspire Thy People with Wisdom and Fortitude, and
direct them to gracious Ends. In this extreme Distress, when the
Plan of Slavery seems nearly compleated, 0 save our Country from
impending Ruin - Let not the iron Hand of Tyranny ravish our Laws
and seize the Badge of Freedom, nor avow'd Corruption and the
murderous Rage of lawless Power be ever seen on the sacred Seat of Justice!

Is it not High Time for the People of this Country explicitly to
declare, whether they will be Freemen or Slaves? It is an
important Question which ought to be decided. It concerns us more
than any Thing in this Life. The Salvation of our Souls is
interested in the Event: For wherever Tyranny is establish'd,
Immorality of every Kind comes in like a Torrent. It is in the
Interest of Tyrants to reduce the People to Ignorance and Vice.
For they cannot live in any Country where Virtue and Knowledge
prevail. The Religion and public Liberty of a People are
intimately connected; their Interests are interwoven, they cannot
subsist separately; and therefore they rise and fall together. For
this Reason, it is always observable, that those who are combin'd
to destroy the People's Liberties, practice every Art to poison
their Morals. How greatly then does it concern us, at all Events,
to put a Stop to the Progress of Tyranny. It is advanced already
by far too many Strides. We are at this moment upon a precipice.
The next step may be fatal to us. Let us then act like wise Men;
calmly took around us and consider what is best to be done. Let us
converse together upon this most interesting Subject and open our
minds freely to each other. Let it be the topic of conversation in
every social Club. Let every Town assemble. Let Associations &
Combinations be everywhere set up to consult and recover our just
Rights.

" The Country claims our active Aid.
That let us roam; & where we find a Spark
Of public Virtue, blow it into Flame."

VALERIUS POPLIC0LA.

1 Attributed to Adams by W. V. Wells. See above, page 256.
2 Rev. William Gordon, of Roxbury, author of The History of the
Rise, Progress, and Establishment, of the Independence of the
United States of America .

By Capitalist in Chief

Those rich people don’t need all that money. They don’t pay their fair share of taxes. And a lot of good can be done if all that money is taken away from those people, who don’t need it anyway, and is given to other less fortunate people so that they can have better opportunities to advance their lives.

The above paragraph seems to be the essence of liberal economic thought. I realize that many liberals these days object to the notion that what they really want is socialism. However, arguing nomenclature is of no substance. Therefore, I’m just going to say that the philosophy described above falls under the umbrella of socialism, and just call it that.
We can argue fairness all day long, but for now I want to tell you what happens when socialism or whatever you wish to call it, is deployed in an attempt to correct the perceived economic (or “social”) injustices of the world.

Many people who support socialism, do so because they want a fair, poverty free world, with justice for all. Therefore, if you support socialism, i.e. wealth redistribution and a large government that deploys a heavy set of social programs to achieve all that, I would just like to let you know of the following:

The socialist methods deployed to supposedly achieve a better world unleash an AVALANCHE of negative side effects that utterly dwarfs any of their original intentions, and brings more poverty, more inequality, more injustice, less prosperity, and more misery. This is because those methods go against an essence of human nature that cannot be changed even by people with the best of intentions.

Yes, socialism exacerbates the very problems it claims to solve.

Disagree? Then read on!

Unintended Consequences of Socialist Policies
There are several reasons why socialism, and specifically wealth redistribution by means of taxing the rich, does not work. All of these reasons stem from one important fact of life:

People have a strong desire to do whatever is in their own perceived self interest!

The following are detrimental unintended consequences of socialism that stem from the above fact and undermine everything socialism is meant to accomplish:

Much of the money that goes to the government ends up being wasted, resulting in ineffective government programs, and less wealth for EVERYBODY. 
Many are tempted to assume that money collected by the government goes to help the poor and downtrodden. However, much of that money ends up in the hands of the rich and politically connected, those who have the most resources and ability to lobby for it.

Socialism concentrates money and power in the hands of the government. When government grows, the greedy and corrupt don’t go away. Conversely, they now have a more powerful tool in their hands, the government itself.

The richer you are, the easier it is for you to avoid increasing taxation and leave the bill to the middle class. Learn more.
A soak-the-rich, high tax strategy inhibits the economy. And who is hurt the most by a slow economy? Not the rich!

The transfer of earned wealth that socialist policies mandate are a detriment to entrepreneurship and innovation. Entrepreneurship and innovation are driven by the potential for material rewards. If we take away or reduce the material rewards, we’ll have less innovation. Less innovation means less of all the cool, useful, and life-saving stuff we all love.

High taxes and government regulations make it more difficult to start and grow a business, thereby leaving much greater opportunities for those who are already rich and have the resources to overcome those difficulties.

Social programs create more demand and need for those very programs in a self perpetuating cycle because given government handouts, people come to expect and rely on them. And therefore, you can never spend enough, because the more you do, the greater the need to do so becomes. 

Social programs are a disincentive to work and act responsibly. After all, if some or all of your needs are taken care of, and if someone else picks up the tab whenever something goes wrong, why would you worry about such minor details as work ethic, productivity, financial responsibility and family obligations? Consequently, when productivity takes a downturn, leading to a shrinking economy, guess who suffers… everybody! Oh and as always, the rich suffer the least. 

A combination of the above points causes a vicious cycle of decreasing revenues and increasing demand for social spending that results in a socialist government running out of money and having ‘no choice’ but to perpetuated tax increases to every level of society, rich and poor.

Because of the avalanche of problems socialist policies cause, no amount of social spending and taxation will ever overcome the problems it is supposedly set out to solve.

The Road to Poverty, Inequality, and Injustice
Socialism causes poverty because it slows economic growth and progress through government waste, taxation on productive economic activity, discouraging innovation and the creation of hurdles for business. In addition, socialism causes poverty because it creates adisincentive to work and act responsibly.
Socialism causes inequality because much of the money that goes to the government ends up in the hands of the rich and politically connected, it’s easier for wealthy individuals to avoid taxes, and itcreates hurdles for business that the wealthy find easier to overcome. Socialism is a way for the rich to shut the door behind them, preventing those who are on their way up from reaching their destination.

Liberalism tends to liken inequality to injustice, therefore, just by using the standards set by liberal thinking, socialism causes injusticebecause of the inequality it promotes. But more directly, socialist policies (wealth redistribution, social programs, and regulation) necessitate a larger, more powerful, more meddling, government that becomes a powerful tool for the wealthy, politically connected, and bureaucrats on “power trips” to take advantage of the rest of society.

The Price of Socialism
Because of the avalanche of unintended consequences, socialist policies are at best extremely limited in what good they can do. Yet, many politicians represent those as some grand solution to humanity’s problems and completely neglect all the problems socialist policies cause. This is akin to touting a “miracle” cure for cancer, yet failing to mention it causes blindness, brain damage, and eventual cardiac arrest. Socialism’s avalanche of unintended consequences cuts deep into any benefits that society might derive from social programs. And anyone, especially voters and politicians, should be aware and honest about the real price that socialism demands.

First, there is little chance that, on average, a middle class person would come out ahead with government entitlements he/she receives after subtracting all the extra taxes and economic costs he/she bares for those entitlements. This is because, the government can not raise enough revenue just from those considered rich to cover the cycle of decreasing revenues and increasing demand for social spending brought on by socialist policies. We only need to look at the high level of taxation on the middle class of European social democratic states to see this is indeed the case.

If you are not a person who is poverty stricken, and you’re not going to run a welfare scam, then do not believe for a second that the government will take from the rich on your behalf. You will pay through income taxes, payroll taxes, sales taxes, property taxes, inflation etc.

And then there are the poor. They earn too little for the government to take anything of significance, and can come out ahead in dollar amount given aid from the government. It’s great for them if they’re perfectly happy being perpetually impoverished, living the austere life at a near subsistence level given to them by the government.

But overall, the poor will also pay a price! And so will everybody else… but as always, not so much those who are very rich. This price is lesser economic opportunity. Yes, the very thing that the socialists supposedly champion for the poor. More specifically, we have greater unemployment and less business opportunity. Western Europe for instance, with all its socialist policies and supposed compassion, has boom-time unemployment rates that are roughly what the United States gets during recessions.

And to top it all off, there’s the price of slowed innovation, entrepreneurship and technological advancement.

Conclusion
The government can either completely help a small number of people, or slightly help a large number of people. What it absolutely can not do is completely help a large number of people. It’s just impossible to expect a small minority, i.e. the rich, to support the rest of the population. It cannot happen! The government can’t solve everybody’s problems. It has never happened, and never will happen.

But mustn’t we help people in need? Yes, we should help some who can’t take care of themselves. However, the more money we spend on this via the government, the more significant the unintended consequences become, devastating not just those whom we want to help, but many others. And therefore,wealth redistribution and social programs are not the answer to some great society and a better world order and should be kept to a minimum. But unfortunately, when faced with poverty and social problems, the socialist response is even more socialism, the very thing that makes those problems worse.

Learn more.

Monday, March 8, 2010, Jim Hoft

“Would socialized medicine lead to socialization of other phases of life? Lenin thought so. He declared socialized medicine is the keystone to the arch of the socialist state.” 1945 AMA Pamphlet Warning.

The Communist Workers Party published an article recently in defense of state-run medicine like the proposal that democrats are wanting to ram through in the next 10 days.

(Quipster)
From the Socialists Workers Party–
When the administration of John F. Kennedy discussed a plan for government health care that would cover people of Social Security age, the American Medical Association (AMA) fought back, along with the insurance and pharmaceutical industries, with a well-funded campaign–complete with a commercial featuring actor Ronald Reagan, who was determined to talk to America about an “imminent threat”:

Now, back in 1927, an American socialist, Norman Thomas, six times candidate for president on the Socialist Party ticket, said the American people would never vote for socialism. But he said under the name of liberalism, the American people would adopt every fragment of the socialist program…

One of the traditional methods of imposing statism or socialism on a people has been by way of medicine. It’s very easy to disguise a medical program as a humanitarian project…Now, the American people, if you put it to them about socialized medicine and gave them a chance to choose, would unhesitatingly vote against it.

…Of course, the danger of creeping socialism is a much less compelling argument today among ordinary people than it was during the Cold War. If anything, socialism is becoming a preferred alternative to the mess that capitalism has made of working-class living standards…

…According to the Physicians for a National Health Program’s (PNHP) Karen Palmer, the AMA assessed its members an extra $25 each to resist national health insurance, and in 1945, it spent $1.5 million on lobbying efforts, which at the time was the most expensive lobbying effort in American history. An AMA pamphlet warned, “Would socialized medicine lead to socialization of other phases of life? Lenin thought so. He declared socialized medicine is the keystone to the arch of the socialist state.”

We are only 10 days away (or less!) from the final vote on ObamaCare. If the House votes yes on the Senate bill that is now before it, THE GAME IS OVER. Since the Senate already passed it, once the House passes it on March 18, Obama’s signature on it (which will be immediate) MAKES IT LAW.

We are about to become a Socialist country. For if this passes, it will be virtually unrepealable. Health entitlement programs, once enacted, have proven to be permanent.

Think about it. Ten days from now: Permanent taxpayer funding of abortion. Permanent death panels (yes, those are in the bill), with no appeal of their decisions. Permanent forcing of pro-life doctors to refer for abortions, under penalty of loss of their license to practice. Within five years, no more freedom to buy private policies of your choice (only policies approved by the federal government). Small insurance companies, such as the one that took such incredibly good care of my husband during his illness, will very quickly be permanently out of business.

The Democrats KNOW that nationalizing health care is the single most effective step in making the USA a socialist country. Lenin said it first:

WE MUST DO WHATEVER IT TAKES IN THE NEXT TEN DAYS TO STOP THIS FROM HAPPENING!
Now is the time to act.
Hat Tip Kathy

http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/2010/03/vladimir-lenin-socialized-medicine-is-the-keystone-to-the-arch-of-the-socialist-state/