So, in a stunning demonstration of lack of reading comprehension, some rando left me a comment on one of the posts this week. It had a million (highly insane) links, give or take, so of course, it wasn’t approved. Besides, I think it was a first comment, so it was pending anyway.
In the post I mentioned I don’t think it will be as bad here as it will be in Europe. In the context it was obvious what I meant is that I don’t (at this point. More idiotic lockdowns or whatever these crazy people come up with next) envision us having actual starvation in the US.
The reasons for this are obvious: look, we are a continent-wide nation and also have some of the most productive farms in the world. In fact we can feed ourselves and most of the world. The fact that international trade has stalled and international charity is difficult in the middle of the aristo-imposed covidiocy doesn’t affect our food supply. Food distribution might be something else, but Americans are actually contrary to various rumors the most generous people on Earth. Also, the most adaptable.
Most of us have been making arrangements to ensure we don’t starve (we really don’t expect much of government) and those who haven’t will probably still be taken care of.
Anyway, the first shock of this comment was the fact this person was disputing that America was better off (in the matter of feeding everyone) than Europe, because “no one accepts American bonds as collateral, not even for overnight loans.”
Uh, besides the fact that I know this is bullshit (yes, okay, our monetary system is jacked up. So is most of the world right now. And we lost less to covidiocy than… oh, Germany) because if it weren’t — if the world really stopped keeping dollars as world-currency — we’d already have collapsed completely as far as monetary value, the idea that he was disputing food or lack thereof with monetary system was almost awe-inspiring stupidity.
He then went on to reassure me even the poorest EU countries had access to cheap loans. What? Are these people such complete nincompoops and children that they don’t understand the concept of “things money can’t buy”? As in, if there isn’t enough food to go around, I don’t care what you’re offering for food. There isn’t any to buy.
Apparently the AOC school of economics now not only thinks you can print money indefinitely without affecting the value of money, but that money itself is food. Government is like onto the Lord himself, able to pour Mana down onto them. In fact no one needs to toil. Things will just rain down on them.
Which probably would still have gotten approved (I know how much you guys love chewtoys) except for the very last paragraph about how he/she/it had a friend being taken care of by some sort of socialist national health boondoggle who “would have died inn the US, since she’s unemployed and doesn’t have insurance.”
I’m sick and tired of this article of faith on the part of various Europeans. We keep telling them it has happened to no one EVER in the US. In fact, most of our ICU beds etc. are taken up by people who not only can’t pay, but who aren’t even citizens or even legal residents of this country. In fact, a great part of why healthcare is so expensive in the US is that we treat anyone who crawls over the border, no matter what medieval diseases they’re carrying.
At one time, when my then nom the blog (took her out in the woods, shot her in the head. She was threatening to take over. Never name a thing) was on some site, I think Free Republic, we discovered that a bunch of Europeans commenting believed this, and we started yannking their legs. I think we were all the way up to “live in a cardboard box, in the middle of the highway, drink a cup of cold poison, polish the dirt” before they started SUSPECTING we were pulling their legs.
It’s not their only bit of insanity, mind you. A good number of them — despite the fact that their own mental health policy has saddled them with the same issue — believe our homeless are homeless because there are no jobs, and no charity organization will look after them. Instead of mentally ill people who resist or are refused treatment, criminals, and people with substance abuse problems. (Or some overlap of all three.)
And we won’t even get into the fact they believe our crime is much, much worse than theirs. For that I blame Hollywood, mostly, because I remember believing the same. it was still a surreal experience to sit in a Portuguese shop whose windows had medieval-thickness iron bars, in a country where even nice houses in good areas have bars on windows and tall walls, and have the shopkeeper tell me — back then living in Colorado Springs, downtown, and often forgetting to lock my car or my front door, and more than once accidentally leaving my purse in the car for a couple of days, with no untoward incident — that America seemed like a lovely country, but she didn’t want to live with that much crime.
But those at least are not part of government propaganda. The health care thing is. I’ve caught programs while I’m visiting about how bad healthcare is in the US and how, without nationalized health, they’d be left to die, like in America.
Now, I have been watching Foyle’s war, and the last season they crawl up an ideological hole and die there. The first episode is about how much NHS was needed, and how people were just left to die if they didn’t have money, and–
I have no idea. England right after the war was a strange place, and I can’t say I’m proficient. Maybe it was true.
But I know what they say about the US and all my hackles rose. Besides, I know that in Portugal in the 60s for those not covered by Universal health (long story) healthcare was expensive as heck. My parents often say that they could have built another house, twice as large, for the money they spent taking care of my various ailments and pulling me through childhood. I believe them, though most of the “being rushed to the hospital to be given oxygen” was before the age of 6 and therefore fuzzy. However my parents who were more or less broke, were never turned away at the hospital (save that I was denied incubator space, which honestly I think it’s because I could have messed their statistics.)
I know they sometimes went into debt, and paid it off, but were never turned away.
So I have serious doubts about the heartlessness of pre NHS British hospitals. I mean, it’s possible, the past being another country and all, but at this point I’m not even sure we could find out if it was true. Because all sources have pretty much been corrupted.
But still, you might ask why a program in the 20tens (I don’t remember the exact time) needs to harp on how much NHS was needed, how bad things were before. And why the continuous barrage of “if you were in the US you’d be dead,” even though it’s not in any way shape or form true. AND why they feel the need to come to OUR blogs and tell us that, as though, you know, if we were dropping like flies we wouldn’t know it?
The answer is simple, and what I shouted at the TV “at last pre-NHS no one actively prevented you getting treatment, if you could get the money.”
I.e. the more their system circles the drain, the more they feel the need to invent “how bad it was before stories.”
But our reasons to oppose a universal payer system are very simple. Besides the obvious throttling of innovation, besides all other issues, there is ALWAYS the main problem (which has infected some of the US system since Obamacare.)
If you’re not paying your own way, you’re not an asset, you’re a liability.
I.e. in the US if you come in even without money, if you agree to pay for treatment, you’re an asset. Eventually, you’ll pay (over three years, completely broke us paid 20k for first son’s delivery bill.) They will do what they can to take care of you because, ultimately, you’re taking care of them. The doctors are not slaves. They’re being paid for their work. It might be delayed, but they’re being paid.
OTOH when you are part of an universal system, you become “one more liability.” “Sure we can save this person with marginal health, but they’ll just get sick again and cost us more money. I say we put them in the (what was it?) Liverpool (?) pathway. Humane death for them, no more trouble for us.”
Now for those idiots who want free housing, free college, free everything: the same inexorable logic applies to all of it.
When you are reliant on society to provide everything you need, you’re a liability to society. You are going to be evaluated in terms of what you cost versus what you can give.
Imagine that, if you will. How much can you give back in terms of creating houses or degrees or whatever for others, as you age? And if you’re just receiving from everyone, why should they give you the best/keep you around?
Honestly, it’s easier to believe that tasty, tasty Euros will feed the Europeans through the winter ahead than to believe that society is going to love you and look after you in every possible way through a useless (or merely expensive) lifetime.
The reason socialism/communism always kills, either slow (no births, euthanasia, etc) or fast (the mass graves of communist dictatorships) is that in the end humans become ciphers in an endless accounting book.
And beyond those who love us and whom we love, all of are, after all, a lot less trouble and expense when dead.
So the all caring state ultimately makes sure each of its subjects gets to the grave fast enough not to cost too much.
And that is what the “free shit” brigade here and in Europe should think about.
Not that they will, since they don’t know history. And thus, as Heinlein pointed out, have neither past nor future.