Approaching a coworker, I asked, "Do you know where I can find G.?"
"It’s not my week to monitor her." was the humorous reply.
I am reminded of Genesis 4:9 and 10. "Then the LORD said to Cain, "Where is Abel your brother?" He said, "I do not know; am I my brother's keeper?" And the LORD said, "What have you done? The voice of your brother's blood is crying to me from the ground. "
You will notice that the LORD did not say that Cain was his brother’s keeper. As you read the Holy Bible, regardless of translation, you will see that God does not want us to keep each other but wants us to rely solely on Him for all our needs.
God requires us to love each other, seek justice, show mercy, and walk humbly with Him. God has promised to bless each of us so that we will be a blessing. Neither the Holy Bible nor the Constitution of the United States guarantees a right to health care.
In fact; it can be argued that it is unjust to require persons to provide medical treatment without full compensation. It is unjust to require someone to pay for the medical treatment of someone else. It is unjust to ask those who behave responsibly to pay for the consequences of poor choices made by others.
It can be argued that it is more loving to force lifestyle change upon an individual than to enable destructive behavior by subsidizing treatment for the consequences.
The hero in the celebrated parable of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:30) showed mercy by personally taking responsibility for the comfort and treatment of the unfortunate traveler. He was just as busy as anyone else. He paid his taxes just like the previous travelers who would not make the time to help the victim of violence. Yet he had the heart to show mercy and share his blessing.
The parable makes it pretty clear that we are to take responsibility for ourselves and show mercy when the opportunity arises. We are not our brother or sister’s keeper and we should not extort others to do what we think they should.
When you go through life humbly with God, you know you are NOT God’s partner in life and death. Only a dangerous narcissist would believe otherwise.
My Thesis: The argument that we have a moral imperative to provide healthcare to everyone is specious. Anyone making that argument is either ignorant of the moral basis of our society or is motivated by greed.
Friday, August 28, 2009
Saturday, August 22, 2009
Health Care Reform will Salvage Social Security
The celebrated progressive, Pres. Franklin Roosevelt, introduced Social Security to provide income for older Americans. Supposedly this would allow them to leave the workforce thereby opening up employment opportunities for younger workers. It is funded by a payroll tax on workers and employers.
The funds were originally kept in a separate account. This account was used to pay benefits and the surplus was invested in government securities. The growing surplus of funds made it increasingly attractive for politicians to offer more goodies. Additions included death benefits, income for children under 18 who suffer the loss of a parent, and disability income payments.
President Johnson convinced the congress to fund the Great Society by combining the Social Security Trust Fund with the General Fund. The Social Security Trust fund is nothing more than an account entry. The change is subtle but the effect was substantial. The old Social Security surplus was supported by treasury securities that could be sold on the open market at any time. Now the surplus is spent and the government gives an IOU which has no value. Social Security has access to this money only if congress appropriates the funds.
Social Security was transformed from an actuarially sound annuity into a Ponzi scheme. The money that is collected is immediately spent on all government programs. The result is the account entry called surplus continues to shrink in size and will eventually become a negative number.
Ponzi schemes need more and more income to prevent total collapse. Congresses have increased the tax rates, raised the limit on income to be taxed, provided a means test for benefits, and even raised the age that benefits could be claimed. This has only postponed the day when the collapse will occur. Medicare has the same funding problems as Social Security. The only difference is the shortfall is even more urgent with Medicare.
What would happen if the Federal Government was the sole provider of health care? Trillions of dollars are spent on health care every year. How could a good Ponzi schemer resist the temptation to control that flow of funds?
When the government is the sole provider, they can improve the margin by simply paying health care providers less money. They can arbitrarily control how many expensive treatments are allowed per year. They can direct research dollars to political patrons. They can set the amount of money charged in taxes to pay for healthcare.
As sole provider of health care, the government will be able to enforce a policy of complete lives system. This is a policy whereby the largest number of health care resources are spent on persons from age 15 to 45 simply because they have the potential to return the greatest value to society.
As a bonus; reduced healthcare expenditures for unproductive citizens will cause them to simply stop draining scarce resources from our economy. This will help prevent the impending collapse of Social Security and Medicare.
It is a Ponzi schemer’s dream come true. There is no downside for the government and those who administer the government.
There is no upside for voters, taxpayers, young people, old people, ordinary people, and medical practitioners.
Bumper sticker of the week: "You will love Obamacare, unless you want to be born, or don't want to die."
The funds were originally kept in a separate account. This account was used to pay benefits and the surplus was invested in government securities. The growing surplus of funds made it increasingly attractive for politicians to offer more goodies. Additions included death benefits, income for children under 18 who suffer the loss of a parent, and disability income payments.
President Johnson convinced the congress to fund the Great Society by combining the Social Security Trust Fund with the General Fund. The Social Security Trust fund is nothing more than an account entry. The change is subtle but the effect was substantial. The old Social Security surplus was supported by treasury securities that could be sold on the open market at any time. Now the surplus is spent and the government gives an IOU which has no value. Social Security has access to this money only if congress appropriates the funds.
Social Security was transformed from an actuarially sound annuity into a Ponzi scheme. The money that is collected is immediately spent on all government programs. The result is the account entry called surplus continues to shrink in size and will eventually become a negative number.
Ponzi schemes need more and more income to prevent total collapse. Congresses have increased the tax rates, raised the limit on income to be taxed, provided a means test for benefits, and even raised the age that benefits could be claimed. This has only postponed the day when the collapse will occur. Medicare has the same funding problems as Social Security. The only difference is the shortfall is even more urgent with Medicare.
What would happen if the Federal Government was the sole provider of health care? Trillions of dollars are spent on health care every year. How could a good Ponzi schemer resist the temptation to control that flow of funds?
When the government is the sole provider, they can improve the margin by simply paying health care providers less money. They can arbitrarily control how many expensive treatments are allowed per year. They can direct research dollars to political patrons. They can set the amount of money charged in taxes to pay for healthcare.
As sole provider of health care, the government will be able to enforce a policy of complete lives system. This is a policy whereby the largest number of health care resources are spent on persons from age 15 to 45 simply because they have the potential to return the greatest value to society.
As a bonus; reduced healthcare expenditures for unproductive citizens will cause them to simply stop draining scarce resources from our economy. This will help prevent the impending collapse of Social Security and Medicare.
It is a Ponzi schemer’s dream come true. There is no downside for the government and those who administer the government.
There is no upside for voters, taxpayers, young people, old people, ordinary people, and medical practitioners.
Bumper sticker of the week: "You will love Obamacare, unless you want to be born, or don't want to die."
Saturday, August 15, 2009
Our Worldview in 2009
There is a loud public debate going on over the role of government, the cost of government, and government involvement in our economy. We feel compelled to record our point of view in the hope that some may benefit.
Are we racist? Well, it depends upon how you define racist. Candidate Obama said, "People who don’t agree with my policies probably wouldn’t vote for me because of my race." Our definition of racist is "a person who believes that one person is superior or inferior based solely on their racial heritage."
We are not racist based upon our definition of racist. We find President Obama to be almost exactly antithetical to our values; therefore it is expected that the President would consider us to be racist.
Are we Republican? We resist all labels because they are so limiting. Labels usually polarize discussion and prevent the sharing of ideas. We embrace most of the values and ideas associated with conservatives and classical liberals. We are annoyed by persons who are politically liberal as commonly used and are truly frightened by the ideas of progressives. We have found the book, "Liberal Fascism" by Jonah Goldberg, to be a well-researched and annotated text on the evolution of the progressive movement in America. It has answered many questions that are unanswered in the common telling of history.
The only politician that we respect is the Honorable Ron Paul. We don’t always agree with him; but we admire his integrity. We believe the current occupant and his retinue are a bunch of weasels and unindicted felons. We have a similar view of most Congresspersons.
We believe intelligence is overrated. Woodrow Wilson is considered to be the most intelligent president we had. Woodrow Wilson embraced eugenics (the sterilization of ‘undesirables’) and created the War Production board (a cabal of government and industry). Robert McNamara is one of the whiz kids recruited by John Kennedy. His resume includes the Edsel, arguably the greatest failure in automotive history; the body count, a discredited metric invented to reassure the American people that the Vietnam War was being won; and as President of the World Bank financed such fine world leaders as Idi Amin, Muammar al-Gaddafi, and Robert Mugabe.
We believe that human nature has not changed in 6,000 years and the Holy Bible is useful to learn about the interplay among people in the last 3500 years.
We believe in a loving creator God whose nature is expressed in the person of Jesus of Nazareth. We have no use for the conceit of "doing God’s work". We reject those who ask, "What would Jesus Do?" other than rhetorically. Specifically, we believe anyone who says "Jesus would be a Democrat/Republican/environmentalist" or "Jesus would favor healthcare reform, drive a Prius, want you to do what I say" is guilty of violating the third commandment. (Exodus 20:7)
We are living proof of the unlimited Grace of a loving God. We believe what is freely given should be freely shared. We have spent a lifetime trying to put that into practice and feel we are still imperfect at it.
We believe that social justice and fairness are indefinable and cannot be achieved by any institution; including but not limited to the United Nations, the United States government, the United Methodist Church or any other church. For those who don’t agree we recommend Job chapters 38 – 42.
Future posts will address our view on healthcare reform, fiscal responsibility, and other current events.
Are we racist? Well, it depends upon how you define racist. Candidate Obama said, "People who don’t agree with my policies probably wouldn’t vote for me because of my race." Our definition of racist is "a person who believes that one person is superior or inferior based solely on their racial heritage."
We are not racist based upon our definition of racist. We find President Obama to be almost exactly antithetical to our values; therefore it is expected that the President would consider us to be racist.
Are we Republican? We resist all labels because they are so limiting. Labels usually polarize discussion and prevent the sharing of ideas. We embrace most of the values and ideas associated with conservatives and classical liberals. We are annoyed by persons who are politically liberal as commonly used and are truly frightened by the ideas of progressives. We have found the book, "Liberal Fascism" by Jonah Goldberg, to be a well-researched and annotated text on the evolution of the progressive movement in America. It has answered many questions that are unanswered in the common telling of history.
The only politician that we respect is the Honorable Ron Paul. We don’t always agree with him; but we admire his integrity. We believe the current occupant and his retinue are a bunch of weasels and unindicted felons. We have a similar view of most Congresspersons.
We believe intelligence is overrated. Woodrow Wilson is considered to be the most intelligent president we had. Woodrow Wilson embraced eugenics (the sterilization of ‘undesirables’) and created the War Production board (a cabal of government and industry). Robert McNamara is one of the whiz kids recruited by John Kennedy. His resume includes the Edsel, arguably the greatest failure in automotive history; the body count, a discredited metric invented to reassure the American people that the Vietnam War was being won; and as President of the World Bank financed such fine world leaders as Idi Amin, Muammar al-Gaddafi, and Robert Mugabe.
We believe that human nature has not changed in 6,000 years and the Holy Bible is useful to learn about the interplay among people in the last 3500 years.
We believe in a loving creator God whose nature is expressed in the person of Jesus of Nazareth. We have no use for the conceit of "doing God’s work". We reject those who ask, "What would Jesus Do?" other than rhetorically. Specifically, we believe anyone who says "Jesus would be a Democrat/Republican/environmentalist" or "Jesus would favor healthcare reform, drive a Prius, want you to do what I say" is guilty of violating the third commandment. (Exodus 20:7)
We are living proof of the unlimited Grace of a loving God. We believe what is freely given should be freely shared. We have spent a lifetime trying to put that into practice and feel we are still imperfect at it.
We believe that social justice and fairness are indefinable and cannot be achieved by any institution; including but not limited to the United Nations, the United States government, the United Methodist Church or any other church. For those who don’t agree we recommend Job chapters 38 – 42.
Future posts will address our view on healthcare reform, fiscal responsibility, and other current events.
Sunday, August 9, 2009
Government Prefers Their Control to Your Freedom
"Any government that is big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take everything you’ve got." – Barry Goldwater
"And they will." – Famous Ferris Corollary
These true statements are relevant in the current debate over healthcare. They also are germane to the current administration’s statist objectives for our society. It is essential that we, the people, look for guidance from history and answer the question: are we willing to exchange the freedom we take for granted for slavery?
Three and a half millennia ago, a young man named Joseph was sold into slavery by his jealous brothers. The saga has been recorded in the Torah and the Holy Bible. You will find it in Genesis, chapters 37 – 50. The story has also been produced as musical theater by Andrew Lloyd Webber, starring Donnie Osmond, under the title ‘Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat’.
Ultimately, Joseph becomes the administrator of Pharaoh’s granaries. In Genesis 50:21 Joseph tells his brothers, "So then don’t be afraid. I will provide for you and your children." WOW. Joseph, the representative of the government, has assured his extended family that the government will provide for them. And they lived happily ever after, right?
Turn the page.
Exodus 1:11. "So they (the government) put slave masters over them to oppress them with forced labor, and they built Pithom and Ramses as store cities for Pharaoh."
Our life experience has shown that nothing has changed in 3500 years. We, and thousands of other farmers, took out a long-term loan with the Farmer’s Home Administration of the Department of Agriculture in 1978. By 1984 the FmHA had taken our business, our home, our tools of production, our livelihood, our retirement plan, and they wanted an additional $120,000 plus interest at 9% compounded daily.
Our experience is not unique. The program was so thoroughly discredited that FmHA was eliminated and the program placed in the Farm Service Agency. A group of North Carolina farmers of African heritage brought a class action suit against the government for racial discrimination. Known as the Pigford Case, the government offered a settlement of relative pennies (http://tinyurl.com/cenyba).
And so it goes.
Do you really want to exchange your freedom for the downpayment on a new car or government authorized health care?
What evidence do you have that your experience will be different from Joseph’s? Or ours?
"And they will." – Famous Ferris Corollary
These true statements are relevant in the current debate over healthcare. They also are germane to the current administration’s statist objectives for our society. It is essential that we, the people, look for guidance from history and answer the question: are we willing to exchange the freedom we take for granted for slavery?
Three and a half millennia ago, a young man named Joseph was sold into slavery by his jealous brothers. The saga has been recorded in the Torah and the Holy Bible. You will find it in Genesis, chapters 37 – 50. The story has also been produced as musical theater by Andrew Lloyd Webber, starring Donnie Osmond, under the title ‘Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat’.
Ultimately, Joseph becomes the administrator of Pharaoh’s granaries. In Genesis 50:21 Joseph tells his brothers, "So then don’t be afraid. I will provide for you and your children." WOW. Joseph, the representative of the government, has assured his extended family that the government will provide for them. And they lived happily ever after, right?
Turn the page.
Exodus 1:11. "So they (the government) put slave masters over them to oppress them with forced labor, and they built Pithom and Ramses as store cities for Pharaoh."
Our life experience has shown that nothing has changed in 3500 years. We, and thousands of other farmers, took out a long-term loan with the Farmer’s Home Administration of the Department of Agriculture in 1978. By 1984 the FmHA had taken our business, our home, our tools of production, our livelihood, our retirement plan, and they wanted an additional $120,000 plus interest at 9% compounded daily.
Our experience is not unique. The program was so thoroughly discredited that FmHA was eliminated and the program placed in the Farm Service Agency. A group of North Carolina farmers of African heritage brought a class action suit against the government for racial discrimination. Known as the Pigford Case, the government offered a settlement of relative pennies (http://tinyurl.com/cenyba).
And so it goes.
Do you really want to exchange your freedom for the downpayment on a new car or government authorized health care?
What evidence do you have that your experience will be different from Joseph’s? Or ours?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)