INCLUDE_DATA

Nullius in Verba

August 19, 2007

Today’s Numbers Game: Health Care and 28 million more bureaucrats

Filed under: health care, spin, unions — langmann @ 6:41 pm

Many socialists love to point to the evil United States health care system and smirk. Indeed there are entire organizations made up of socialists throwing boulders at the US that are somehow given credibility by the media. Harvard University has an entire department devoted to it.

Now there are several things wrong with the US health care system and as an employee of this Canadian one I can affirm that there are several things wrong with ours as well. So much so that I would rather have the US system.

The problem is that most socialists assume that public health care will be much cheaper in the US like they think it is elsewhere. The important point to remember is that public health care in the US isn’t very cheap at all for a variety of reasons. What people don’t realize is that the US has one of the largest social safety nets in the world, and with that comes rent seekers. Socialists will claim that the public system is better for example, because it is a monopsony but the problem with monopsony all you junior economists is that a monopsony is Pareto inefficient due to a decrease in optimal quantity purchased and that means waiting lists (notice how they love economic words when it suits them?).

Tower of Babel - Gustave Doré 

(Creating disasters - the government has been doing it for millenia)

The main reason socialists love public health care is because they know they can get rich off of it. The idea of of more unions and bureaucrats makes them incredibly happy.

Lets do some quick goat calculations in today’s game:

How many more bureaucrats could the US hire if the system was Public?

Ok get out your calculators.  

  • The US GDP : $13 ,244,550,000,000.00
  • Percent spent on health care 15.3%, total spent $2,026,416,150,000.00
  • Percent spent on public health care 44%, total $891,623,106,000.00
  • Percent spent on private health care 56%, total $1,134,793,044,000.00
  • Current population 302,280,000. People covered under both systems 253,915,200
  • Percent of those covered by public system 27%, population covered 68,557,104
  • Percent covered by private system 69%, 175,201,488 (There are a few percent covered by other systems)
  • Cost of public system per person in system: $13,005.55
  • Cost of private system per person in system: $6,477.07
  • Cost of US system if it was fully public: $13,005.55 X 243,758,592 = $3,170,215,488,000.00

The increase in cost of a full Public System is $1,143,799,388,000.00.

(A graph for Captain Capitalism. Click to Enlarge)

Cost of a bureaucrat: $40,000.00.  Projected increased number of bureaucrats: 28 million!!!

And that, folks, is a lot of bureaucrats!

Just think how extra fun it will be to try and navigate your 80 year old parents through a system with 28 million more bureaucrats.

Oh and just so you know, if you have a heart attack, you want to have it in the US. You’re more likely to survive. Indeed, when you actually look at mortality and morbidity outcomes between Canada and the US in terms of things doctors can change, all that money may result in better outcomes. 

* Raw Data from OECD.

July 11, 2007

Myopiology Becomes a Course Credit in the Department of Dumbology

Filed under: Liberal, political correctness, spin, unions — langmann @ 11:16 pm

I have been a union shop steward in more than one union. I have been involved in unions, hung around enough unionists, and moreover now that I am occasionally forced to practice medicine, I have handed out more than my share of “get out of work for spurious medical reason” forms than I ever should.


(In truth, it was the free flow of capital, investment, property rights, capitalism and mercantilism that has done more for the common peasant then Karl Marx, Unions, government or any other pretender.)

In my honest opinion about 1 out of 50 grievances are valid. Maybe less. Quite honestly some people deserve a frigging boot to their lazy hides.

I’ll put it this way. I have no problem with people forming a monopoly in order to bargain for higher wages or changes in their workplace. BUT employers should be able to fire them all if they want to and hire new people. If your skills are worth something, employers won’t be so eager to fire you off. And honestly for the most part I have found employers reasonable people.

In fact unions are such a waste of time these days that they actively seek obscure issues to mobilize around because in reality they have nothing better to do. The great majority of people in a union are apathetic and therefore the union leadership gets taken over by busy-bodies who love raising stink and trying to be more important than they really are.

So in the end union leaders tend to be either one of two types. A busy-body of self importance or a thief who is trying to steal as much as he can from other member’s paychecks. Or both. The lackies who attend union meetings are the kind of people who fit into the above categories but aren’t quite able to clamber to the top of the dung heap yet. 

At a union meeting I once said that one way we could increase our employee’s wages is by lowering our union dues. I’ll tell you the blank stares of disbelief I received were worth it. Or the other time when our teacher’s union was trying to “make a bold statement in defence of Palestine and in condemnation of Israel” I said that there were quite a few members who were Jewish in our union and that perhaps we should consider only relavent issues pertaining to employer and workplace in order not to uneccesarily ostracize other members. Whew.

I kind of liked to imagine myself at that time as a sort of Deep Throat or Voice of Conciousness within the union. In reality I was probably just more of a big prick. But there is no more firm a believer than one who was once an anthiest.

I was once a socialist but when I saw the light, it was bright and it showed socialism for the dirty thing it is.

Socialism is racism, it’s modern day Nazism. It discriminates, condemns groups of people, sets societal norms, dictates to the media, controls and corrupts politicians, employers, and people. And it tells lies about utopia to hide its true objectives: putting power into the hands of a select group of people. Racism you ask? Is hiring people based on color anything but racism? Is keeping groups of people on aparthied like slabs of soil not racism?

One thing socialism does well, which parallels Nazism in an extraordinary manner (Read Hitler’s Scientists) is to infect Universities and chase out voices of reason by hiring those who fit their political standard. John Cornwell does a great job of showing that while not only did Hitler appoint politico hacks as Department heads, there were many Nazis and those of like mind within the universities already. The 1930’s were a different time in some ways. If you don’t think so, read Tommy Douglas’ Master’s thesis sometime. The one where he argues that poor people should be sterilized. Remember also that Nazism involved state control of production in ways similar to socialism, not capitalism like some socialists seem to want one to think.

When I first saw that the Britain’s University and College Union (UCU) enact a motion to boycot any Israeli university seminar, meeting, journal, and scientist/academic I though to myself wow boy that sure is myopic and typical of bored unions with nothing better to do but sit on their ivory tower jobs. But I forgot about it like most people tend to do.

So why is a university professor’s union doing this? Well to solve the problem with the Palestinians not having a country, naturally. Why is this myopic? Because the reason the Palestinians don’t have a country (they do have one) has a lot to do with it being their own fault lately, especially since the Palestinians receive more aid per capita than any other nation yet manage to elect stupid leaders like Arafat who steal most of this money and fund gangs of terrorist that kill their own people. Palestinians kill many more Palestinians than Israelis do. Under pressure from the United States Israel has made many accomodations and appears ready to make more. The Palestinians from the start have been the bouncing-ball plaything of the national goals of Iraq, Iran, Syria, Jordan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia since Israel first clawed itself into a nation. An objective look quickly demonstrates who has hurt these people more. (Before the second intifada for which Arafat held a high degree of blame, a peace existed where 20 percent of Palestinians went to work in Israel daily and the Palestinian GNP grew at 5% a year).

My favorite part of Stephanie Gutmann’s book, “The Other War: Israelis Palestinians and the Struggle for Media Supremacy” in her chapter, Travels With Faraj were these lines which sum up pretty much the entire problem. She’s speaking with a common Palestinian shop owner, a nice guy who she describes as wanting a variety of things just like the rest of us.

The proprietor soon had a new, seemingly “saved up” question for the Westerner who had landed in his restaurant: “Why do the Americans hate the Palestinians?” he demanded.

“Our government doesn’t hate the Palestinians,” I said. “They support an independent state next to Israel. They send money to the Palestinians, millions a year. Why do you think they hate the Palestinians?”

“Because they do no kill Arafat,” he stated matter-of-factly. “They don’t like Saddam; they go get Saddam. So why not Arafat?”

Given the news accounts had recently been full of heads of state and such calling Arafat “the personification of the ideals of the Palestinian people,” I groped for the words for a few seconds, and then stated carefully: “I think… the Americans believe… that Arafat is your guy; that you elected him; that he speaks for you… ”

“He is a crook and a thief,” the proprietor interjected.

Anyhow, does the UCU expect that every Israeli is going to commit self immolation in order to resolve this issue because a bunch of university professors expect them to based upon their myopic view of things? Israel contributes much to scientific literature, and it’s a democratic country where each person gets one vote including the non Jews who become members of their parliament. It’s a Middle Eastern country most intellectual liberals should be proud of.

Well there’s nothing like insanity to fuel the flame of irrelevance. With a smug backhanded blow from the ammunition of the press release, my Queens University stated that they deplore the actions of the UCU.

is antithetical to the core value of academic freedom, which is cherished by Queen’s and other universities around the world.

Freedom of inquiry and expression carries with it responsibilities – to encourage open debate and dialogue, and to listen to and learn from the views of others. We must defend these freedoms of speech and inquiry even as we engage with those whose views may differ greatly from our own. Contemporary society calls for leadership that respects but can also bridge social, cultural, economic and geopolitical divides. I therefore denounce the actions of the UCU and absolutely reject its approach.

Those of us who devote ourselves to the learning and discovery that characterizes the academy must defend the freedom of individuals to study, teach and carry out research without fear of harassment, intimidation or discrimination.

Accordingly, I join with many of my colleagues in stating that, if the British UCU pursues its ill-advised course, we will have no choice but to add Queen’s University ­and many other universities around the world ­ to its boycott list. We are proud to align ourselves with those  who deplore the UCU’s unacceptable attack on the values and principles that define us.

Of course they say one thing. But do another. Queens wants to select more minority admissions so we can all pat ourselves on the back about how progressive we are. Like minorities cannot decide for themselves where they’d like to go in Canada so we have to tell them.

These socialists. If there is one thing that the Middle East has given to universities that the academics want to recognize, instead of the actual historic scientific contribution from the East, is the keffiyeh. These socialists all around the university wear the traditional male arabic headress around their necks in the form of a protest against anything western and in support of Palestine because, I suppose, Arafat wore one. What they don’t want to recognize is that western  culture stands for democracy, human rights, liberties, property rights, peace, tolerance, secularism etc. The only thing I think these gangs in Palestine stand for is terrorism, thievery, chauvanism, religious fanatacism, and indiscriminate death. They keep proving it. These Imams are so revered that if they issued a fatwah on how killing people is satanic, the Middle East would probably be as peaceful as downtown Mariposa. So why don’t they?

The worst thing is that the very gangs like Hamas that these UCU folks support, would in a minute turn on their supporters and cull them for being apostates.


(The woman in the top photo wears a keffiyeh “in support” of Palestine at a rally, meanwhile the guy holding the sign up at the bottom is saying what every socialist there is thinking. In reality the gangs they are supporting, like Hamas, are simply criminals who couldn’t give a damn about human rights. hat tip zombietime)

Powered by WordPress