How Can Health Care Reform NOT be Socialist?

Sunni's picture

I ask the question not from the context of the reality that the current health care system is shot through with socialism; but from the context of reading that Our Great Leader and his minions object to that term being applied to his proposals. Simply examining the process reveals how completely the socialist model suffuses it.

It begins with the idea that one individual—who doesn’t have the unanimous consent of all those whose lives his actions will affect—can decide to completely overhaul such a fundamental aspect of each person’s life. Continuing down the line, why do so many people apparently unquestioningly accept that 535 additional individuals get to vote on how that overhaul will happen—especially when they themselves do not have to live under the rules they enact for the rest of us?

A Bloomberg article highlights another layer of the process. Six Lobbyists Per Lawmaker Work on Health Overhaul is the title, and it neatly sums up the disgusting sausage–making going on with regard to how Americans can get and pay for health care. Here are the first three paragraphs—that’s all I could stand to read before my eyeballs threatened to pop out of my head (links not preserved; all emphasis mine):

If there is any doubt that President Barack Obama’s plan to overhaul U.S. health care is the hottest topic in Congress, just ask the 3,300 lobbyists who have lined up to work on the issue.

That’s six lobbyists for each of the 535 members of the House and Senate, according to Senate records, and three times the number of people registered to lobby on defense. More than 1,500 organizations have health-care lobbyists, and about three more are signing up each day. Every one of the 10 biggest lobbying firms by revenue is involved in an effort that could affect 17 percent of the U.S. economy.

These groups spent $263.4 million on lobbying during the first six months of 2009, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, a Washington-based research group, more than any other industry. They spent $241.4 million during the same period of 2008. Drugmakers alone spent $134.5 million, 64 percent more than the next biggest spenders, oil and gas companies.

How can anyone realistically think that all that time, money, and energy are being invested into influencing those 535 because they genuinely care about Americans’ health? That’s the biggest con of all in Congress. Money talks to those bastards—and it talks loudest when it comes in concentrated form from some corporate entity that has convinced them its interests must be protected for some ridiculous reason such as being “too big to fail”, or an irreplaceable American icon, or too important to the economy and/or “national security”. Not coincidentally, those same entities often contribute to re-election campaigns. Individual taxpayers do too—some of them, anyway: but an individual’s interests and needs are quickly swamped in cacophany of the larger and more powerful waves.

Those “waves” have only one goal in mind, and it is to preserve their place in the economy—to keep the money flowing in and to lock out real alternatives (viz. the effort to choke the “natural healing” movement that emphasizes wellness, sound nutrition, and herbal/food-based medicine rather than reliance upon doctors and pharmaceuticals). And while it is true that some groups have lobbyists who do represent taxpayers’ interests, the money they spend is dwarfed by the socialist side.

How can this process alone not be a shining example of rampant socialism? How can anyone fail to see that any individual or entity who stands between a person and his physician, nurse, therapist, counselor, or whomever he engages for some aspect of health care has socialized it? Out of a basic desire to do good—the private societies (sometimes church-related, but not always) that sprang up to help members through tough times—has much harm come. I’m pretty sure it was from that model that the idea of employer-supported medical insurance came.

I am fairly certain that none of the individuals involved in this process will ever visit this small outpost on the internet. All the same, I state this for the record, with firm conviction and as much clarity as I can muster:
Each of you socialists can bluster and blather and argue details and dollars all you like. My money is not yours to spend via mandated insurance or any other diktat. My health, and my choices regarding it are not your responsibility. You have no business making rules that meddle in my private choices, in ANY form whatsoever. I will not cooperate with your rules and restrictions, whatever form they may take.
If you don’t like that, then I kindly suggest that you write out my words on cardboard, then use it on yourself as a suppository.

You're in trouble now...

...then use it on yourself as a suppository.

Practicing medicine without a license, huh?

:-)

(Good rant, by the way.)

Indeed

then use it on yourself as a suppository.

Yeah, and without lubricant.

somewhat related

Speaking of "sausage-making" - saw this linked from Drudge this morning:

Obama Campaign Ad Firms Signed On to Push Health-Care Overhaul
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aV3dLt6wmZH4

There's plenty of cynical chuckles throughout the piece - this one caught my eye:

"We were one of the president’s ad firms, and so we have familiarity with how he spoke about health care during the campaign, what his viewpoints were on health care during the campaign," he said. "And so I think if you’re interested in reform, we bring some valuable insight in that regard."

That's it... "valuable insight" - exactly what I've come to expect from Madison Avenue!

What’s the valuable insight of the LCD?

Lowest common denominator, not liquid crystal diode ... isn’t that what Madison Avenue caters to?

Ah, forgive the cynicism ... it’s been a long, rough week already and it’s gonna get worse before it gets better.

alternate answers

The ideas that John Mackey presented in the WSJ last week have a lot of promise; if only a few of those allegedly "progressive" folk who're now boycotting his store for some dumbass reason would get a clue and get on board ...

[I first listed similar things about 2-3 years ago at Medical Freedom Channel (as well as at Free Market News ... for some reason it was the last column they ran of mine ... hmmm!). I added a couple of them, including opening the process of "healing" to wider participation (thereby taking away the largest trade union's monopoly privileges?) and promoting "wellness" as the primary goal (instead of "aftercare"), but his basic list was pretty solid.]

But I digress ...

Healthcare "reform" CAN occur without socializing the health & wellness field; the sooner we make that point, the sooner this pro-insurance- (and Big Pharma-) industry scam gets flushed out, and real (cost control and paradigm shifting) change can occur.

Many ways to resist, here's one . . .

Admittedly, this might not satisfy anarchists perfectly, but it'll do in a pinch --


Its views on YouTube climb steadily, going parabolic . . . How long before the copyright Nazis attack...?