Striving For Average

so you need to be educated.

The American public…just like your teenage kids, aren’t acting in a way that they should act,” Dr. Chu said. “The American public has to really understand in their core how important this issue is.

*

are best made by the individual affected. *

A decent place to start…

Cost and control, pre-existing conditions and covering the uninsured, those are the problems with our current system. The care part of our healthcare is very good. Eliminating or minimizing government’s role in your healthcare (or your life in general) is even better.

In pretty much all things, I fall back to the belief that decisions affecting an individual, are best made by the individual affected. The arrogance of making those decisions for someone else because they might make the wrong one just doesn’t sit well. Of course poor decisions are sometimes difficult to live with, but there is something extra maddening when those decisions most affecting you are made by someone else.

When it’s your life, you should have control over it. I do believe that was the intent behind the life part of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness.

via Ace…

Short. Simple. To the point.

I’ve said this before but what the hell: When people say they want “health care reform,” they all mean the same thing. They all want better service than they’re receiving now and they want to pay less money for it. In other words, they want the government to subsidize them. Which means they want some other taxpayer partly paying their expenses.

I’m not against the government getting involved in healthcare specifically, I’m against the government getting involved in anything it can avoid. Admittedly, there are problems (preexisting conditions, insurance tied to employment, other stuffs too) with our current system but addressing those problems seems to be only a starting point for throwing the entire system under the bus in a move to get the government more involved.

I don’t care what it is, I dont’ want the government more involved.

I prefer my government to be small and out of the way and fairly unobtrusive in the manner it interacts with my life. I understand the need for some taxes to fund some of the essentials (defense, law enforcement, the building and maintenance of some highways maybe) but otherwise I’d like to not be overly reminded of its existence. But now it looks like there’s a movement to insert a little bit more of the government’s view of things into the art world.

This is a perfect example of why I want the government to be small and unobtrusive. People always have an agenda, everyone does, and they will always find a way to try to further it. That is human nature. So from where I sit the problem isn’t so much that the NEA might be trying to do this, I think that is pretty much to be expected, the problem is that they have been provided with the tools to do this at all.

via Ace

Is it Just?

Their conception of justice is based on the idea that certain goods like health (and education? and food? where do you stop?) should be made available to all through coercive redistribution by the state. If, on the contrary, we define justice in terms of liberty, then justice forbids coercing some (taxpayers, doctors, and nurses) into providing health services to others. Providing voluntarily for your neighbor in need may be morally good. Forcing your neighbor to help you is morally wrong.

Because it’s an emergency and we don’t have time to wait…

the fact that I am not familiar with that particular provision…just a minor detail, one you really shouldn’t concern yourself with.