The Anti-Gnostic writes a very good post about Obamacare, and the unsustainable folly of the welfare state in general.

There are many layers of confusion [about the medical insurance business], so let’s take a look at some facts.

1) Most people lose money on insurance, because most of the time insurance doesn’t pay out more than it takes in.

2) Thus, a “good” policy is a catastrophic-coverage-only, high-deductible policy, where most payments are out of pocket. This is a policy that protects you against the downside risk, but where you lose a lot less on average.

3) This is because the purpose of insurance is to protect yourself from *catastrophe*, not to make routine purchases.

4) For example, if you went to Best Buy and whipped out your home insurance card to get a new flat screen TV, everyone would look at you as a crazy man. “Don’t you know that home insurance is only for fires and floods, and not for routine purchases?”

5) And so it should be with health insurance, because you’ll actually — *provably* — pay less with a high deductible plan for all but catastrophic conditions.

6) Indeed, the most innovative and technologically advanced areas of medicine are ambulatory areas in which people feel that markets are “ok”. These are paradoxically the most trivial areas: lasik, plastic surgery, dermatology, dentistry, even veterinary medicine.

7) Why are these areas so advanced? Because people pay cash money, because they choose based on quality, and because they are *able* to choose — i.e. they aren’t being wheeled up to the hospital in a gurney in a no choice scenario.

8) Moreover, with every technology ever, from cars to cell phones to air travel to computers, things that start out expensive become cheaper when enough people demand them. With medicine it seems to bite more that money means differences in care. But at the end of the day doctors, patients, nurses, drugs, ambulances…all that stuff means real resources, and a refusal to do explicit computations just results in massive waste as costs are shunted to a place where no one looks at them.

9) How insane is it, for example, that in this age of internet shopping that you can’t do comparison shopping on a hip replacement or a physical on the internet? It has to do with the irrationality that surrounds the concept of paying for the most valuable service of all: for someone saving your life.

10) Now let’s consider the elderly. The big problem here is that there IS going to be a catastrophe that hits them with probability 1. It’s called dying from being old.

11) If you know anything about medicine, you know that futile care is a ridiculous proportion of healthcare expenditure.

12) Now, in the abstract everyone is all about taking care of the elderly. Witness [another commenter’s] bleeding heart:

“Were they to offer profitable policies to old people, the premiums would be unaffordable.”

The whole point is that *old people are going to die* with probability 1. So let’s take those evil capitalists out of the question, and assume for now that no innovative entrepreneur could figure out something win/win for his own grandpa. …
Now we are in the realm of social justice. Which sounds so nice in the comments section. Until [the commenter] answers the question: how much of his children’s money does he want to spend on futile care for 83 year old Emma in Ohio? For 74 year old Bill in Texas? For countless, endless, unnamed others?

Because you can spend ALL of your money on futile care. Literally every last penny.

So now he says, “well, of course there have to be limits”.

And here we come to the nub of the matter.

This is h-bd land. We are adults. We understand hard facts.

One of those hard facts is that until Aubrey de Grey really gets on the hop, people *are* going to die.

The question is whether they die when THEY and their family run out of money — localizing the catastrophe — or whether every single one of them is connected to a public purse that they can draw down without consequence.

Because draw it down they will.

You see, for most of us, if our own mother was on a deathbed, if we had the ability to tax and steal from Joe and John and James to keep her alive we wouldn’t think twice about it. Because even if it took a million dollars in stolen tax money a day to keep her alive, well, hell, then I guess they’ll just have to work harder.

The problem, of course, is when everyone thinks this way.

Because what quickly happens is that once you’ve given the government access to that giant pool of money, they make damned sure that no one ANYWHERE is spending that money other than them…and then too only for the express purpose of the vote-buying schemes that our esteemed host has bought hook, line, and sinker.

That money is not spent for saving any more mothers.

Not for actual care.

Not for innovative treatments.

Not for anything other than the necessary minimum to keep up the facade, to buy people’s votes.

But hell, what does it matter, right? At least now we’re all equal. Equally poor in health. We’ve defeated the Magic of the Market. We can now allocate scarce resources not through merit or money, but through queues and connections and politics.

Like this.

Biogen Idec is running an early-stage trial of the drug in multiple myeloma, but Baron doesn’t meet the criteria to participate.

Baron’s a prominent donor to the Democratic party, and many of his powerful friends, including Lance Armstrong and Bill Clinton, made appeals on his behalf. And the family agreed not to sue if anything goes wrong.

Ultimately, his doctors at the Mayo Clinic worked directly with the FDA to find a “legal basis” for giving Baron Tysabri. The deal was announced on Baron’s son’s blog late yesterday. The details remain unclear.

Fantastic work, all of you. We’ve now taken the profit out of health care. No more profit motive to encourage ambitious young geniuses to develop miracle drugs rather than program social networks.

Instead it’s just pure politics.

This is what we need to get back to: a basic understanding that health insurance is meant for catastrophes, not routine check-ups or money spigot end-of-life care on old people waiting for death’s imminent and unstoppable escort.

Harsh, but true.

And isn’t this just the problem with leftoids’ over-sensitivity to harm and fairness? It’s all egogasmic hurty alleviation… until the credit line that funds their moral posturing is maxed. And then it’s time to memetically move on to the next civilization and repeat the process of suicide by feels.

It is an awful dilemma. The State, having assured the taxpayers that their geriatric needs would be met, must now breach its covenant with its citizens. As several commenters noted, there is no way out.

… As a society we are suffering tremendously because we forgot that the best retirement program is to have 6 children and teach them how to be prosperous and then stay on the good side of at least a few of them.

And the Gods of the Copybook Headings with terror and slaughter return.

I have my own fantasy of a nice little country that extracts the minimum taxes necessary to fund its military and maintain the social safety net. I’m sure that has been the selling point trotted out by every welfare state politician since Bismarck. But inevitably it seems, net tax consumption increases, birth rates fall, the culture shifts to high time-preference, and the State inflates the currency and runs deficits–further distorting the productive economy–to keep the Ponzi scheme going.

GBFM lzollzollzol’ed.

Obamacare is a ruling class pet project. It’s labyrinthine opacity is a feature, not a bug, that enriches the corrupt managerialist Top and the blood-sucking parasitical Bottom at the expense of the beta niceguys in the Middle. This formula is bad enough in homogeneous societies, but in racially and ethnically diverse ones like America, where ability and temperament and charitable fellow-feeling are all unequally distributed at both the individual and population group levels, it’s a guaranteed failure.

Strip out the market-distorting and depraved actor-attracting opacity of medical insurance — this means ending employer provided coverage and nationalized healthcare — and return it to the economically and morally sustainable notion that insurance is supposed to protect one against devastating… and relatively rare… calamities.

If this is not possible, well… try separatism. It may be that a precondition of solvent and sustainable medical insurance programs is ethnic kinship.


  1. Can your lazy black ass not get a job?


    • Rhetorical statement is rhetorical.


      • > “If this is not possible, well… try separatism. It may be that a precondition of solvent and sustainable medical insurance programs is ethnic kinship.”

        Have you guys read what Thomas Sowell posted yesterday?

        That dude has gonads the size of grapefruit.

        Look at this excerpt:

        > “Perhaps the most clearly “backlash” books are those written by Paul Kersey, whose central theme is that whites have created thriving cities, which blacks subsequently took over and ruined. Examples include his books about Birmingham (The Tragic City) and Detroit (Escape from Detroit).

        > “Kersey even takes a swing at Rush Limbaugh (and at yours truly) for saying that liberal policies destroyed these cities. He says that San Francisco and other cities with liberal policies, but without black demographic and political takeovers, have not been ruined. His books are poorly written, but they raise tough questions.

        > “It would be easy to simply dismiss Kersey as a racist. But denouncing him or ignoring him is not refuting him. Refuting requires thought, which has largely been replaced by fashionable buzzwords and catchphrases when it comes to discussions of race.

        > “Thought is long overdue. So is honesty.”

        Do you guys have any idea the kinda courage it takes for a black man to write words like that, in our current anti-intellectual milieu of Bolshevik-multiculturalist absolutism?

        Dude risks getting his ass lynched by the local chapter of the SPLC.


      • Do you guys have any idea the kinda courage it takes for a black man to write words like that, in our current anti-intellectual milieu of Bolshevik-multiculturalist absolutism?

        The reason It takes no courage for the black man to speak the truth is because he has the least to lose and the most to gain from doing so.

        Black culture is prison culture; thats all it is.

        This is why by the time we are 13 we start sounding like “Red” in Shawshank during his 3rd parole hearing. We no longer give a fuck cause we can see the end game and its not good.

        White people think its “anti white’ but its really just nihilism; a word most ni66as never heard of.

        Black culture is prison culture.


      • It is yourself – blacks – who create the “prison” by refusing to speak and pronounce words like normal people, by wearing your “pants on the ground”, by promoting the gangsta culture, by giving each other awards for “poetry” in which killing cops and white people is routine,

        it is you blacks who keep yourself down by foolishly believing that until white man is punished harshly for sins some of his ancestors committed and for its mythical “white privilege” there is no way you can “flourish”

        and it is you who are keeping yourselves down by foolishly believing that there is no way you can leave that prison unless affirmative action is put on steroids

        and it is you who are keeping yourselves down by foolishly believing that if you follow the advice of people such as Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson and even people like Reverend Wright then you will become free of your dysfunction ( which you call a prison )

        Just as feminists have made women unaccountable and are blaming and punishing men for everything as if this would magically make the world a perfect place and refuse to see it does not work that way

        , you blacks foolishly believe you are unaccountable for any of your dysfunctions ( high crime rates. high illiteracy, high drug use etc etc ) and all you want is see white man punished

        and the more you punish us and we punish ourselves the more you demand

        and the more we help you the more you complain we do not do enough

        If every white person was forced by the government to give half his paycheck to a black person, you would still complain you are victims

        Being a victim , an eternal victim, has become a way of life for you; the more you gain from it , the more you cry ” we are victims!!!”

        instead of getting off your ass and doing something usefull to make your neighborhood better, to make your lives better, you cry ” racism!!” and expect us to do all the work for you

        All races on the planet – white, yellow, red, brown and even some black such as Thomas Sowell or Bill Cosby- are looking at you, at what you did to Detroit city, at your incessant demands for more from whitey, at your highest crime rates of all races, at your victim “huckster” games , at Obama and his defenders crying “racism” everytime we criticize another of his failures or another one of his broken promises ( such as closing down Guantanamo ) and they are not impressed at all

        apart from liberals of all creeds who are themselves suffering from some serious dysfunction if not mental disease the rest of the planet is fed up with your ridiculous attitude

        You know what? here in the province of quebec we have a similar problem but it has nothing to do with race; here about half of French speaking Canadians are exactly like black people, they have been complaining for a couple of centuries ( from 1959 to be precise ) that they are victims of English speaking Canadians, and no matter hwat Englsih canada concedes to quebec, the french ” victims” keep on crying ” injustice!!” and ” we are victims of anglos!!”

        and guess who has the highest rate of school drop outs? the highest rate of unemployment? the highest rate of welfare recipients?

        the French Speaking Canadians!!!

        Yes I am a French speaking Canadian but like Thomas Sowell I see clearly and I am honest

        French Canadians keep themselves down, no one is putting a gun to their head and English Canada is certainly not putting a gun to their head forcing them to quit school, become bums and go on welfare

        French Canadians do it to themselves but just like blacks they want to be unaccountable and put all the blame on Anglos Canadians

        They refuse to let go of the fact the English beat the French in 1959 in quebec, they still are sour about this defeat – just like black refuse to let go of what happened over 150 years ago

        it is ridiculous and very VERY unproductive attitude

        You think I am a racist who hates blacks? well how come I have the same opinion of very much white French quebecers???

        I can not stand people who sit on their ass and refuse to be accountable and how chose to remain victims and enjoy what this gets them

        Blacks, feminists, French quebecers they are all the same; they chose to be perpetual victims who the more we give to them the more they say life is unfair to them…they do nothing to make their situation better; they want their “supposed” oppressor to do all the work

        How can I have any respect for such dysfunctional people?

        PS: sorry for the long rant but I have bad migraine today


      • What I don’t understand is why you keep lumping Thwack with “you blacks”. I think it’s fair to say that black culture is dysfunctional and blacks generally are more prone to crime and violence. Now I don’t know Thwack personally and I don’t agree with everything he says but he generally seems like a sensible and thoughtful person, quite unlike blacks in general. And more blacks like Thwack is exactly what America needs. Thwack is the last person you should be railing at for the ills of black society in America.


      • Zimmerman: “And more blacks like Thwack is exactly what America needs.”

        LOL! Who cares anymore about what “America needs”? America had its chance, and blew it. America “needs” to break apart, and the sooner the better.

        Just a couple of generations of American clowns have managed to squander the work of centuries, turning a once great nation into a cesspool. And do you know one of the big reasons that it failed? People like YOU. Clowns like you. People who run scurrying with fright at accurate and reasonable generalizations.

        For example, America would not make the obviously reasonable generalization that maybe it’s not such a great idea to import tens of millions of Third Worlders. American clowns couldn’t even generalize to the extent of being able to distinguish an Irishman from a Bantu. No, to the American clown the two are the same thing, though they obviously aren’t.

        That’s not just stupid, it’s pure lunacy. Not being able to make reasonable generalizations is pretty much the same thing as being blind to patterns and tendencies. Intelligent people can’t function that way, nor can nations long survive.

        There would always be some clown like you that would say, “Well, not ALL non-whites are a net burden, and not ALL whites are beneficial.” Well, thanks Captain Obvious, but that doesn’t alter the generalization. Hint: a generalization is not the same as an absolute claim, but thanks for refuting a straw man.

        Zimmerman: “And more blacks like Thwack is exactly what America needs.”

        Yes, about as much as a whore needs more syphilis. When Thwack starts advocating separation, then I’ll change my tune. Until then, the halfway decent non-whites only serve one purpose: to convince morons like yourself to accept the status quo. “I mean, Thwack’s kind of o.k., right? So I guess forced multiculturalism isn’t all bad.”

        The reality is that whites are rapidly being reduced to minority status, whether Thwack has some redeeming qualities or not. If the anti-whites have their way, we’ll disappear altogether…whether Thwack has any redeeming qualities or not. Are you following me, clown? Thwack’s redeeming qualities, or lack of the same, are utterly irrelevant.

        Any reasonably intelligent non-white understands what is happening to whites, and understands that separation is clearly in our best interests. If he doesn’t advocate separation for us, he is NOT A FRIEND. He is an enemy, attempting to provide cover for his scummy cousins. You’re being played, assuming you’re not an anti-white yourself, which is assuming a lot.

        Simply put, either Thwack does the right thing and supports separation for whites (those that want it), or he’s just providing cover for a sick and genocidal status quo – while pretending to oppose it.


      • Trainspotter
        Simply put, either Thwack does the right thing and supports separation for whites (those that want it), or he’s just providing cover for a sick and genocidal status quo – while pretending to oppose it.


        So the guards at the prison are calling on the inmates to support “separation”; but the warden, mayor and city council ain’t listening.

        So trainspotters suggestion is to beat up the inmates, or even kill them?

        (((shakin my head)))

        Sorry TS, but the prison is the only business in town that produces a return great enough to feed the beast.

        The beast will not be denied; keep feeding it, or you will be eaten.


      • thwack: “So trainspotters suggestion is to beat up the inmates, or even kill them?”

        LOL! Yeah, that’s my suggestion.

        It’s this sort of misrepresentation that makes my point: you are not a friend, but merely an anti-white. I’ve made it clear that I consider the current system illegitimate. I’m definitely a critic of debt based currency, not to mention other tools of the plutocracy. I don’t even have a problem with the prison metaphor. We *agree* on that much, more or less.

        But what does the current system teach in terms of values and ideology? What does it demand that we believe? That race doesn’t matter, and that whites who want to separate are bad people. They are scary malcontents who want to beat up innocents.

        Which, interestingly enough, is pretty much your position. Funny, that. I advocate sovereignty and independence for my people, but to you I just want to beat up innocent inmates, or blame the victim.

        This desire for sovereignty and independence is perfectly normal and healthy, and manifests itself all across the globe. Numerous peoples have achieved sovereignty just in our lifetimes, though I’ll allow that true and complete sovereignty requires going further and breaking the tools of the plutocracy. Yet you characterize this perfectly normal and healthy aspiration as wanting to “beat up the inmates, or even kill them.” Of course this absurd charge is never applied to non-whites. It’s a position that poses as anti-racist, but is in fact anti-white.

        Not only is this a ridiculous misrepresentation of reality, but more to the point, it’s a quintessentially “system” message, the very system you claim is the problem. That’s why I say that you carry water for the system, while falsely claiming to oppose it.

        There is a solution, however. Support separation for those whites who want it. This in no way precludes you from being a genuine critic of the system, and advocating for the interests of other inmates as well. Your choice: genuine critic or anti-white waterboy.


      • Trainspotter
        This in no way precludes you from being a genuine critic of the system, and advocating for the interests of other inmates as well.

        Oh I get it, you want me to help run the prison; and in exchange I get all the fried white girls and water chickens I can handle?

        Let me sleep on it and I’ll get back to you


      • thwack: “Oh I get it, you want me to help run the prison; and in exchange I get all the fried white girls and water chickens I can handle?”

        I advocate complete separation from your kind, and somehow you conclude that I want to partner up with you, showering you with white women and chicken? LOL!

        Who says diversity impedes communication? Now, I’ll say the sky is blue…


      • I’ve always suspected that the 2008 crisis was caused in part by risky loans to minorities. In the years before the crash, NGO’s like the Greenlight foundation and the NAACP were pressuring banks to give out more loans to blacks. If this is true though, you won’t hear about it in the mainstream media


  2. on October 24, 2013 at 10:05 am Lucky White Male

    “Obamacare is a ruling class pet project”

    All you need to know on this subject: There is a clause where Congress members and their families are EXEMPT from having to opt in to Obamacare


    What’s good for the gander is never good for the goose.


  3. You arrogant ass. You’ve killed U.S.


    • Can you point about where that plan works in real life heartiste? No because it isn’t even plausible. Nationalized systems have proven to be the best. We would have been better to go the Singapore route.


      • Would that involve importing hot willing Singoporean babes? If so count me in


      • No other multi-cultural nation the size of the US has nationalized healthcare.

        Well, the Soviets did, at one time, until it collapsed.

        People point to small, homogenous countries as the models. But as those nations are importing 3rd world genetic shitpools, those countries are starting to feel the strain.

        If the us has a population of 95% Swedes or Germans, we would living on the fucking moon and Mars by now.

        The US doesn’t need to do much to solve the healthcare issue:

        Let the states oversee the hospitals and doctors in their states without federal interference.

        Every citizen gets a health savings account at birth where the “child credit” is deposited to every year until 18.

        Cap pain and suffering on malpractice lawsuits to 500K. Lots wages should still apply as well.

        Allow people to sell organs / blood / bone marrow.


  4. I have a friend who paid his tuition selling home heating bill “insurance” door-to-door in poor neighbourhoods.

    Best Buy makes huge margins on fools paying for “insurance” on their big screen TVs, laptops, etc.

    Comprehensive health insurance makes about as much sense as grocery insurance, rent insurance, etc. Which is to say, none.

    It’s amazing to take a minute and imagine what the US healthcare system could be like, if it hadn’t been insulated from the past 50 years of innovation.


    • I have a friend who paid his tuition selling home heating bill “insurance” door-to-door in poor neighbourhoods.

      Poor people are poor for a reason.


    • re: Best Buy, Generally they do make massive profit but I selectively insure some stuff from them and it has paid dividends for me personally. Example- The Xbox360 was a notoriously faulty piece of shit with a 1 year warranty. Through the magic of Best Buy, I was able to get this POS returned when it stopped working TWICE during that warranty period for less than a 100 bucks. Buying a new one would have ganked my wallet for US $400. But generally speaking if the product is reputable you are taking the sucker’s bet.


  5. on October 24, 2013 at 10:23 am Life at Calhoun's Lake

    Brilliant read.

    Probably the most deveststatingly accurate assessment of this whole disaster that I’ve read to date.


    • guess who it won’t convince for a minute? most females. if you tried to run this past them they will shut down, they (in general) think of how they want things, not how those things get got.


  6. “If this is not possible, well… try separatism. It may be that a precondition of solvent and sustainable medical insurance programs is ethnic kinship.”

    True, and not just because of the charitable fellow-feeling. There are (costly) medical issues correlated to certain races and ethnicities, and demographics. People in the generally healthy groups don’t really want to subsidize the others.


    • Amy

      There are (costly) medical issues correlated to certain races and ethnicities, and demographics. People in the generally healthy groups don’t really want to subsidize the others

      Bitch pahleeez!

      Have you EVER set foot inside a “retirement home?”

      Turn around you ignorant cunt;

      Have you?

      Those places cost $3000 to $5000 a month; AND ALL THE GOD DAMN WORKERS ARE NONWHITE except for a few supervisors.

      A bunch of old ass white people who refuse to die being cared for by a buncha nonwhite people.

      You don’t think thats a God damn subsidy?

      (((shakin my head)))

      You need to stop and think before you parrot some of the nonsense you read here.


      • Demographic= section of the population. Not necessarily sorted by race.

        I have been in several retirement and nursing homes. I visit one weekly. The workforce is primarily white, although I’m sure it varies by location. These people all earn a paycheck. No one forces them to work there.

        I don’t think you understand how end of life residential care is funded. Retirement and nursing home care is private pay until they spend down their assets to a very low amount. Then Medicaid picks it up. Medicaid is a joint federal-state program for the elderly, poor and disabled. It’s taxpayer funded, and in my state, it’s funded by property taxes. So if anyone is being subsidized, it’s the homeowners subsidizing the nonhomeowners, who get the full benefits of Medicaid-funded nursing home care without paying any of the taxes.

        I don’t know the specific racial breakdown statewide, but where I live homeowners are predominately white, renters are predominately nonwhite. So to say that white people in nursing homes are being subsidized by black people is really not true.


      • *Medicaid is a joint federal-state program for the poor and disabled, not the elderly generally. My bad


      • Amy,

        so now you wanna back pedal after you get your card pulled?

        Lets look at CH’s racism you cosigned: “If this is not possible, well… try separatism. It may be that a precondition of solvent and sustainable medical insurance programs is ethnic kinship.”

        You don’t hafta explain the financing of “old folks homes’ all you gotta do is look at the color of the workers. Its called COST SHIFTING. Cheaper workers mean more money for the company to spend on better food, better medicine, better percs for the clients; but most importantly A BETTER RETURN FOR THE INVESTORS.

        It starts and ends with them!

        For example, why did houses get MORE expensive when the workers became illegal and the drywall became Chinese?

        Where the fuck is all the money going?

        This type of cost shifting is a key component in any white supremacy system; its literally the oil that keeps the financing from seizing up; this is why they need more and more nonwhite people.

        Whole foods is another example. They want you to pay 8 dollars for an orange and there ain’t a white worker in sight? Since I know they ain’t payin the ni66as, where the fuck is all that money going?

        Amy, Im not making a value judgment on “the system”; Im focused on the hypocrisy (which you cosigned) of white people mouthing off about “separatism” while benefiting from the labor AND, AND, the consumption of NONWHITE PEOPLE.

        You can’t have it both ways? ( although you’ve probably had 3 the hard way)

        When you get your utility bill, you can’t complain about your maid and your janitor.

        BTW– I apologize for calling you out your name. My verbal chimpout was uncalled for. I’ll kick the dog next time.


      • where the fuck do you live, bro? where i live, about 25% of the population is black. those dudes and dudettes do NOT work at our whole foods, nursing homes, or any of that shit. lots of them do work at the universities as groundskeepers and shit like that, but a shocking percentage DO NOT WORK AT ALL. what benefit is it to whitey to keep a bunch of layabouts who “use up the communities resources and rape white women” as so many of these supposed white supremacists think? there is a huge disconnect in your logical leaps here, bro


      • oh, and fyi, many blacks in my community are also doctors, lawyers, and are on the city council, etc.


      • “but a shocking percentage DO NOT WORK AT ALL.”

        In a fiat currency monetary system EVERYBODY WORKS, its no different than a cemetary; yes, my friend, this includes those black “layabouts” you mention. They are the visible effects of the “sterile intercourse” the ancients warned against. Its not a bug its a feature.

        Your shock has been noted.


      • thwack, you have never stated your location which is ok, but Ima back you on this. I’ve spent most of my days in big cities and what you are saying has generally been my experience particularly in nursing homes. Minority staff by and large, though in any major metropolis the old folk have usually been a mix of black and white. Interestingly, most of the TRUE healthcare providers aren’t AA’s (AKA American Kneegrows) many are true Africans. African nurses for whatever reason have totally infested elder care on the NE Seaboard of the US.


      • Jay in DC

        thwack, you have never stated your location which is ok, but Ima back you on this.

        There is a larger point I meant to make that got side tracked because I went to color thinking it was a short cut.

        Nobody can really be anything anymore; not even a “good” racist because everyone is some sort of slave to interest and usury; thats what annoyed me about CH’s comment about ‘separation”.

        Think about it?

        The drug cartels, the terrorists, the pedophile rings… they all use the same banks to finance their activities; and these same banks cannot be allowed to fail because THATS WHERE YOUR PENSION IS.

        This is why I respect, and would not be angry if a white guy said: ” I don’t want you to marry my daughter and its because you are black”. I worry about being stuck in a world where EVERYTHING is for sale as long as the price is high enough.

        Because guess who has all of the money?

        If Im not mistaken, this is kinda what GBFM is talking about with his gibberish.

        But thats not all; it gets worse.

        Ive only recently come to understand the core principle behind the long held prohibition against usury that even the ancients warned against; and its connection to sodomy. It starts off harmless, but interest is a beast which must constantly be fed more and more in order to keep it from consuming YOU. This phenomenon results in people engaging more and more in destructive behaviors for the sole purpose of getting money to feed this beast.

        Making money in order to make more money is what they refered to as “sterile intercourse’ and this is the connection they made between faggotry and banking.

        Sterile intercourse is unsafe, NOT because it produces a beast, but because the participants BECOME the beast.

        So when I hear all this racist talk, I want to laugh because this beast has even monetised your racism; and sold it to a bank, who sold it to a bank, who sold it to a bank, who has it on their books as YOUR PENSION; you know the one you ain’t gonna get?

        We’ve all been made into faggots and we don’t know it.

        hows that for some nihilism?


      • thwack: “hows that for some nihilism?”

        Well, despite veering into lunacy, I guess it wasn’t too bad. I actually agree with you – sorta – concerning the plutocracy and megabanks, but this isn’t an argument against separatism, rather an argument for it.

        It is the corporate elite who oppose racial separatism, preferring a deracinated herd of consumerist morons with no real identity beyond work and bling. They don’t want borders and identity interfering with their ability to do as they please, including shifting entire populations around the globe. The world is their plantation.

        Don’t believe me? Follow the money. Who gets funded, and who doesn’t? Plenty of money flows toward spreading the liberal, anti-white agenda. It’s taught in every school and every media outlet. Countless programs and organizations are well funded, all spreading the anti-white message. The anti-white message is constant and never-ending.

        On the other hand, pro-white programs don’t get a red cent of corporate money. The pro-white view is only available on a relative handful of blog sites, operated entirely by volunteers. Volunteers who risk ruin daily if they are exposed.

        Someone like you thinks he’s being cutting edge, but really you’re just doing free marketing for the plutocracy. Check yoself!


      • thwack, I’m not one of the racist dudes around here, so try to take this next comment with some degree of measured objectivity: you do way too many psychedelic drugs, bro. It isn’t that you’re dumb; you’re clearly very bright. But your belief in fantastical conspiracy babble rivals those sand people who worship that child molestor who liked to get high in caves and talk to God. You know the ones. Dude, I agree the system is fucked, but power knows no preference for skin color.


      • Yeah, it might sound crazy, but this is only because you don’t want to look inside.

        What he’s saying is that racism/non racism among many other thought systems is based on interest, usually material. So most people can’t really think freely because their way of thinking is tied to whether or not thinking this way and acting on it will cost them [money].

        As things are, to prop up the current system, lots of poor people are needed to supply cheap labor. Being a couple thousand years late to the devil culture (again, not saying “white” people are devils, just that their culture and current genetic tendencies facilitate the rise of great devils at the expense of the bedeviled), most of those poor are non “white”. So when the average separatist is complaining about our existence and insisting on their superiority, and saying that things would be better for them if we were not there, he doesn’t really understand what he’s asking for. He believes that the same profits or more will keep rolling in, even though there would be no more cheap labor for those who supply his paycheck to support…but at the same time, he does not wish to be that cheap labor.


      • yeahokcool

        Dude, I agree the system is fucked, but power knows no preference for skin color.
        You got that right; as anyone who studies European history would know. Racism in the form of white supremacy is no more a conspiracy than walking into a bar and accusing all the guys there of conspiring to try to fuck all the hot girls.

        Anything can begin to look like a conspiracy if you dump enough money into it.


      • I can buy that it is a sort of scratch on the brain, but I do believe that there was some conspiracy involved in it becoming the norm for Europeans.

        Those who were more peacefully converted to Christianity already had “heavens” in which a person would maintain not just an individual soul, but their identity after death, and that identity would live in some sort of paradise and get to be a layabout with no worries and all pleasures for eternity. Those less peacefully converted, or exterminated, almost invariably had either no afterlife, lost their identity in the afterlife, or jobs in the afterlife.



      • Trainspotter
        It is the corporate elite who oppose racial separatism, preferring a deracinated herd of consumerist morons with no real identity beyond work and bling.

        And you doubt interest is the driving force behind it?

        *David duke ain’t payin for shit,

        so for my bread and butter

        I leave whites in the gutter”

        When bernie madoff was offering and PAYING 20% returns year after year do you think his investors were concerned with HOW he was doing it?


        Matter of fact, a large majority of them wanted nothing to do with ANY knowledge of how he conducted his “magic”.

        (Cue sgt schultz)

        Madoff may have started it with the best of intentions, but the nature of the “beast” is it eventually cannot be controled and the master becomes a slave to the sterile intercourse that is usury. Madoff is a joo and his beastly creation ate a lot of joos.

        You think white people can deploy the beast in the service of white supremacy and it won’t eventually eat you?

        Listen white man, if you want to know who you are up against, don’t look at ni66ers; look in the mirror.


      • Nicole
        What he’s saying is that racism/non racism among many other thought systems is based on interest,



      • I am familiar with a wealthy nursing home here in Chicago. And yep the workers certainly are MINORITEASE! Haitians and Mexicans/Latins. Surely the owners get cheap labor,(this particular owner is a jew)but how is this Cracker Soupremacy?? The owners get cheap labor,and the living exp. of these workers are augmented by tax dollars (Foo Stamps,EBT etc). from…wait for it…white shmucks!


      • And thus you illustrate Amy’s point.

        And no, employment is not a subsidy.


      • If you work in one of the nicer places, those are good jobs.


      • Lara=fail

        If they were good jobs, white people would be doing them.


      • you need to get out into the heartland more often, man. white people ARE doing those jobs. that doesn’t make them good jobs, though.


      • Come on man! I’ve gotten your back more than once and stood up the the knuckleheads who thinks the legitimate science of genetics proves it’s okay to oppress people. But this butthurt shit, such as the subsidy and white people don’t do bad jobs, does more to hurt your case than anything the racists are saying.


      • As I have said before, sometimes Thwack’s anti-white comments are so bad they make white people look good


      • JB – yeah.


      • *shoulder roll*


      • Thwack is “too clever by half.” I see your dazzling, Thwack, and it saddens me. Intelligence focused in the wrong direction, coupled with a few yokes you don’t either know are there, or are not willing to throw off. Here’s hoping.

        Thwack sees the problem but ascribes that problem to the “popular” hitching posts. He misses.

        “Give me control of a nation’s money and I care not who makes it’s laws” — Mayer Rothschild

        There are those that will say that the “problem” is whitey. There are those who will say it’s “YKW”. Perhaps they are both right, but only in a correlated way, not in a causative way. The real problem is the Feudal Lords. The Statists. Those that have a vested interest in what we currently have perpetuating. “Whitey” and “YKW” have successfully joined these ranks, but their skin tone/DNA was not how they gained ingress.

        We have the system we paid and voted for (after we were mercilessly browbeaten by the “Free Press” to accept that bridle). Those that throw the levers of power may be “white”, they may be “YKW”, they may be “____”. Ultimately that part doesn’t mean a whole lot. In the end it’s about dominion and tribe (and “tribe” can be defined in several relevant ways, and not all of those ways involve DNA).

        Wake up “black” and “white” man.

        Realize that your prism is not the accurate one.


        Excise that which is not useful from your prism.

        Your petunias may be pretty if you’re smart enough to earn an “Upper Middle Class” job, but those petunias still adorn the same cell block that everyone else lives in. And for those that don’t have petunias, don’t spend a lot of time being envious of the petunias. We all need to break free of the prison.

        “Nothing can stop the man with the right mental attitude from achieving his goal; nothing on earth can help the man with the wrong mental attitude.” – Thomas Jefferson


      • You don’t think thats a God damn subsidy?

        (((shakin my head)))

        It’s not, because the workers are paid to be there.


      • In the black mind, doing honest labor for market price is a “subsidy” to people like you or me, assuming you’re white. I realize that this makes no sense to a rational mind, but consider who we are dealing with.

        These are a people that put virtually no cookies into the community cookie jar, yet take huge amounts out. At an average IQ of 85, it should be obvious that this is the case. But in their mind? They put ALL of the cookies in the jar, and the white man is merely stealing them. Ever gone out socially with someone who only chips in a pittance when the bill comes, yet really seems to believe that he paid for most of the bill?

        Sounds utterly absurd, and nobody could possibly believe such a thing? Sorry, but they do. I really don’t think it’s an act.

        I used to think that blacks must feel some degree of shame for the enormous costs they impose on white communities: the rapes and murders, the destroyed schools and neighborhoods, the countless places that used to be nice, but are not anymore.

        I now realize that they don’t feel any such shame. As best I can tell, it doesn’t even register with them at all. In fact, as they destroy your neighborhood, they actually see themselves as the victim. They really feel put upon, as they transform a wonderful area into a DMZ.

        Separation: the ONLY solution.


      • In the past I tried to find another explanation, I could not believe black people were like that, but you are right

        they create a mess and then blame whites


      • Thwack, though of course you don’t have the brains to grasp it, you prove the separatist point beautifully. In your up is down, right is left, and night is day universe, apparently it is blacks that are subsidizing whites? LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

        I mean Jesus Christ, you people are something.

        But hey, we can square this. How about we, well, separate? I know, I know, it will be tough on us white folks. We’ll struggle without the blacks, just like white populations do all over the world who aren’t fortunate enough to be inundated with blacks. And your people will prosper, just like blacks do all over the world where they are fortunate enough to be free of whites. I mean, who could deny the evidence?

        Probably many of us will starve to death, and we’ll have to get Sally to tour our camps, pointing with teary eye at our blonde children with swollen bellies. Maybe you’ll send us assistance? Maybe sing us some “We are the World,” just for old times? After all, without us, you blacks will be living in the land of milk and honey.

        LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Where is the guy who does those great lolzlzzlozzz when you need him?

        Separation: the ONLY solution.


  7. >This formula is bad enough in homogeneous societies
    It is bad enough, but to make it worse the elite try to heterogenize them. Sweden was socialist just after the war, to improve on that, they made 20% of its citizens foreign-born by now.


    • doesn’t work at all, regardless of homogeneity. japan’s homogeneous. you build a pyramid, you have to build a base of a pyramid over and over. that cannot happen anywhere. people have to be responsible for themselves, period, or the math doesn’t work. ever. it’s not complicated.


  8. OT: laura beck, one of the fat cows who writes for jezebel, recently suggested that it is a common occurrence/experience for girls to have faggot bfs/ex-bfs. sorry, babe, i think this only occurs when you’re fat, ugly, feminist. however, that specific type of person is probably 75% of jezebel’s readership.

    the article in question:

    a great article about what laura beck EXPECTS out of the “man” she would consider dating:

    some highlights:
    “I’m vegan and kind-of a dick about it.”
    “I swear in a quantity and way that is not cute to even guys who think women swearing is cute (i.e. Sarah Silverman)”
    “I have a pit bull and she will always be more important to me than you are.”
    “I am fat and this ain’t the heartland, you dig? The only thing worse you can be in the dating scene in SF is um, nothing.”


    • OT: laura beck, one of the fat cows who writes for jezebel, recently suggested that it is a common occurrence/experience for girls to have faggot bfs/ex-bfs. sorry, babe, i think this only occurs when you’re fat, ugly, feminist. however, that specific type of person is probably 75% of jezebel’s readership.

      Incidentally, this statement further pokes a hole (heh) in the idea that homosexuals are strictly so and therefore should make it part of their identity, rather than suffering from a sick paraphilia. I still say that most male fags are omegas who decided or were convinced to get it from other men in desperation and turned it into a habit. It would not surprise me one bit to hear that fat feminists and omegas-turned-fags hook up a lot.


      • sorry corvinus, but that’s a ridiculous statement. most of the gay men i know could get any girl in their social circle (and way more at any random club they decided to go to), if they just wanted. one of my good gay friends was even told by a HB9 (she was in a justin bieber music video – not as a dancer, just to look pretty) that she would sleep with him, when he was feeling down about a guy who wasn’t feeling him.

        girls love gay guys for plenty of reasons discussed here in the past, but ultimately because they have tight game.


      • It doesn’t really conflict with what I’ve said. I’ve known several gays who were total omegas, and then were recruited. Once they get into gay sex, naturally their behavior around women will seem more alpha because they’re getting sexual release from each other and the desperation goes away.

        In other words, going gay is a Faustian way out of undesirability to women for a certain subset of omega rejects.


      • I suspect the more common cause is abuse, grooming really, by homosexuals in a position of trust.


      • Grooming has to be one of the causes,

        compare this drug use, humans are not born to become drug addicts, yet if introduced at a young age a person can become addicted; even though before they ever tried drugs their body ( or mind ) had no need for it, now they badly need it as if they could not live without it.

        it is entirely possible if someone’s first experience with sex is trough homosexuality, their first experience with the pleasure of an orgasm was trough homosexual sex, they might become addicted to something they never ever needed before, never mind did not even know existed

        I believe a small percentage of gays are born that way, but I doubt most who call themselves gay were born that way, and since a large portion of them are bisexual, it seems “my” theory ( I’m probably not the first to come up with this ) is right; they are naturally attracted to female but became addicted to the “drug” of gay sex and now behave as if they could never live without it as if they were born that way

        and as I have said before I am sure a lot of bisexual men are actually men who have such an enormous appetite for sex that they would anything and anyone, they are so horny that were they stuck on a desert island they would do a goat so badly they need to stick their dick into something

        There are probably many reasons why some men are gay or bi-sexual, but “born that way” must be a small minority in my humble/arrogant opinion…


      • There are probably many reasons why some men are gay or bi-sexual, but “born that way” must be a small minority in my humble/arrogant opinion…

        You wanna fuck with a jiberals head real bad?

        next time you hear one say; “you gotta accept homosexuality because they were born that way, God made them that way, bla bla bla…”

        Just say: “well Im racist, and you hafta accept me because i was born this way, and this is how God made me, bla bla bla…”

        Watch them ears turn beet red.


  9. I more or less agree with all of this, but remember when Obama talked about the cost-saving measures in the affordable care act designed to limit wasteful expenditures on unnecessary or useless treatments, the republicans were the ones who shrieked “DEATH PANELS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11111111” at the top of their little lungs.


  10. I am far from an expert on Obamacare, but I’m pretty sure it’s not socalized medicine like the NHS in the UK, or the equivalent in Canada, in which the government runs the hospitals and health-care system. Rather, the exchanges are basically marketplaces- points where the private insurers can offer competing, diffrerently-tailored plans for people or companies who have to sign up under the mandates. If this is the case, then the point above about the aged having access to a limitless pool of public money (as it is in the UK, Europe or Canada) is wrong: it will be private insurers who offer the policies and have the liability, and they have shown themselves very good over the years at pricing risk and absorbing payment for catastrophic incidents and old-age care.

    Don’t forget that the basic model of the ACA was originally a Republican, conservative idea, put forth in a series of papers from the Heritage Foundation in the 80s and subsequently, to build a unlversal health care system built around private firms and market forces.

    I suppose it’s the individual mandate that makes the current crazy crop of the GOP equate ACA to Stalinist terror, but of course they’re wrong. Think of it as the equivalent of the state requiring auto insurance in order to drive a car– which most people feel is a reasonable requirement.

    [CH: it’s not the same. people who don’t drive don’t have to pay auto insurance. they aren’t fined for refusing to have a car.]

    I expect to get flamed for this, but really, the groupthink here gets to be a little much. You can have your own opinions but not really make up your own facts. The wider manosphere could use a dollop of reasonableness, a narrower gap between the angry and sometimes deranged rhetoric and the politically incorrect but just and fair claims of social, political, and juridical bias against men and their interests. Frankly the manosphere wouldn’t need to maintain itself underground if it made its claims in a more rational and inteligent way.

    [your concern trolling is duly noted and scoffed at.]


    • on October 24, 2013 at 11:14 am alexandrahamilton87

      Just a point on car insurance:

      Car insurance covers catastrophic events, i.e. accidents. There are “insurance” plans that pay your regular maintenance, but they are consequently massively expensive and don’t make sense for almost anyone to purchase.

      It makes no sense to purchase “insurance” for costs you know you’re going incur. You will pay the costs anyway, plus administration and profit for the company. Otherwise no one would be in the business of insurance.


      • I don’t disagree, and some of the plans on offer will be just that- high-deductible, catastrophic-event only, and these will make more sense for young healthy people. But people without this catastrophic insurance can not only ruin themselves and their families financially if that catastrophe hits; they dump these costs on the public as well, but showing up in emergency rooms or not paying their private doctor or hospital bills. This is one of the points of the mandate. You can choose not to have a small chance of causing large damage to life and property by car accident by chosing not to drive. But most people will, in fact, have some small risk of a catastrophic health condition (accident or serious disease such as cancer or heart attack), the risk of which should be borne by private insureres and not the public.

        Some fo the other plans have coverage as built-in incentives for regular, annual checkups, which can nip some of the catastrophic conditions in the bud by detecting them early. This also makes sense from an economic point of view.


      • on October 24, 2013 at 11:28 am alexandrahamilton87

        High-deductible catastrophic plans are made illegal by this bill. The “minimum requirements” mandates from HHS make them so expensive as to be pointless.

        If nothing else good comes out of this, there may be so many uninsured people that there starts to be a real private market (sans any insurance) for certain health services.


      • I’ve read that the penalty for being uninsured, while light this upcoming year, will soar and become crushing. The Dumbdumbs are gonna be toast among anybody with an IQ above 90.


      • Although… according to Rush, they can only garnish the penalty out of your tax refund. If you foresee having to go without insurance or an “unapproved” catastrophic plan due to lack of employment or whatever, have payroll at your place of employment not withhold any federal tax.


      • on October 24, 2013 at 12:15 pm alexandrahamilton87

        The problem isn’t the mandate fee. The problem is that the companies offering high-deductible insurance plans will have to add a whole bunch of unnecessary services to the plans, starting with birth control coverage, but including a million and one things Sebeillus thought “should” be covered. The whole point of a high-deductible plan is that those kinds of costs are NOT covered, and therefore the company can make money from your very low premium on the large chance that you will NOT need healthcare services over, say, $5k or $10k.

        Such plans are not technically illegal, but forcing them to cover a bunch of “preventative care” and “reproductive care”, etc. makes it so that the cost is no different from an average healthcare plan.


      • It doesn’t sound like Maurice considers himself still on the SMP. Or maybe the “men don’t need money to get hot women” theme of the manosphere has been helping him and others to maintain a left wing POV.

        You see, the more money you earn that you can keep, the better your sex life is going to be (game can only go so far with tens, most tens want rich male partners).

        It’s when you’ve convinced yourself on PUA sites that disposable income doesn’t matter to get laid more often with a better variety of women, that’s when you can still be a Democrat and claim that there’s no problem being forced to pay $400 per month for insurance you don’t want while hot young women pay $100 for the same coverage and ignore you because that $400 you’re forced to pay for insurance you don’t need is taking away a DHV or two from you (better clothes, better apartment, better car, better restaurant for the first date, whatever).

        For $400 per month to be inconsequential in your dating life, you’d have to be earning six figures.


      • It doesn’t sound like Maurice considers himself still on the SMP. Or maybe the “men don’t need money to get hot women” theme of the manosphere has been helping him and others to maintain a left wing POV.

        I haven’t seen him post regularly, so I suspect he’s a typical leftoid troll.

        Rush Limbaugh found that the penalty is only taken out of your rebate. The more young men figure this out and instruct their employers to not withhold any federal tax, noncompliance will soar through the roof and cause a much-needed death spiral. The Dumbdumbs can’t discredit themselves quickly enough.

        Rasmussen Reports shows that the American sheeple are less disapproving of 0bama than usual right now, but that’s because 0bamacare hasn’t really begun to bite yet, and the ridiculous leftoid rage over the government shutdown is only now tailing off.


      • dude, I’ve been posting on this site for 5 years. leftoid troll-? nope, guess again.


      • The penalty collection will START as being limited merely to garnishment of tax returns, but as sure as the sun rises in the east, the IRS will eventually be given the authority to prosecute aggressively. That is how all government encroachments work – you get the violations of liberty in piece by piece so as not to alarm the sheep. Bear in mind that our income tax (which required a Constitutional amendment to enact) started out as a promise of only a small percentage (<%10) of tax on the top tier earners (aka the "rich"). Imagine the reaction by the people if they had known the eventual form of the tax code AND the government agency (IRS) that would be created to enforce it.


      • a guy:

        Agreed. For the moment, this loophole is enshrined explicitly in the ACA itself, but let’s just hope to God it stays. Income tax has been a nuisance for the past century, but it hasn’t really harmed people’s ability to earn a living too much. The burdens of high health insurance premiums, OTOH, will quickly become much too onerous for young Americans trying to pay off student loans and support a family.


      • Under Obamacare, you can’t have just catastrophic insurance. You’re forced to have the full spectrum. If you’re male, you even have to purchase a plan that provides lady-parts coverage (abortion, contraception, maternity care). So no, your argument doesn’t fly.


      • on October 24, 2013 at 12:49 pm alexandrahamilton87



      • Seems fair, everyone has a mangina right?


      • Yeah, valid point… perhaps beta males should be paying for lady-parts coverage.


      • But the key Alex, as CH pointed out is; Nobody is forced to DRIVE.

        Driving is an OPTION.

        The insurance equivalent for “Obamacare” would be “walkers insurance”, or “sleeping insurance” incase you fall out of bed or something…


      • on October 24, 2013 at 1:16 pm alexandrahamilton87

        Yes, but even if you grant the premise that they’re similar, the very analogy used shows the utter stupidity of “insurance” for known costs.


    • The GOP plan was to shift costs from businesses, they didn’t care how the hell it happened, which isn’t particularly conservative, though they certainly weren’t going to establish a “right” to insurance or “fair” premiums like Obamacare. An no, Obamacare is not like auto liability insurance; for one, you’ll be denied car insurance if you are too high of a risk.


    • our super high IQ for a black guy president didn’t even know what auto liability insurance was.


    • on October 24, 2013 at 11:57 am Bitter clinger

      Maurice fails to mention that Obamacare places strict limits on how high insurers can set premiums for the sick and old. Insurers have to raise the premiums for the young and healthy to compensate. Old people will demand all the care in the world, insurers will have to cover it and then raise the rates for the young and healthy the next year. Or we can embrace death panels.


      • Not saying it’s perfect, or even that it will work long-term. That remains to be seen. The purpose of my comment was to refute the assertion in the post that the government bears liability for long-term care for the old under ACA, which appears to be wrong.


      • i like how you roll through, make stuff up out of whole cloth as you go “some of the plans on offer will be just that- high-deductible, catastrophic-event only” (they CANNOT do that now) and simultaneously trot out how we can have our opinions but not our own facts and lecture us on groupthink. what a treat.


    • “Don’t forget that the basic model of the ACA was originally a Republican, conservative idea, put forth in a series of papers from the Heritage Foundation in the 80s and subsequently, to build a unlversal health care system built around private firms and market forces.”

      the lesson isn’t that it’s any good, it’s that anyone can have a shitty idea.


      • Obamacare is far from the conservatives envisioned, though. “Market forces” means risk rating! Like auto insurance, if you’re a safe driver, you get really good rates, and if you’re a bad driver, you get really expensive rates.

        But Obamacare (and any other liberal universal-care offering) requires pure community rating. The healthy and sick are all thrown in one pool; the insurer cannot underwrite the risk. The healthy end up paying more premium, and the sick pay less. And this can work if the insurers can pare down coverage, offer different coverages, and set their own premiums, which is how employer plans work. But under Obamacare they can’t do any of that. Obamacare regulates the market forces that keep insurance companies profitable, or even just solvent. That’s not what the conservatives had in mind at all.


    • Your lack of knowledge on this subject matter is rather predictable since you are pontificating from the high moral ground like most lefty cunts.

      Medicare and Medicaid already exist today for the old and decrepit and indigent poor, respectively. If they have “insurance” under these programs why bother with Obamacare at all? Your primary point of ignorance was “can offer competing plans” vis-a-vis health insurance companies “MUST under rule of law offer competing plans”. FTFY

      Obamacare allows them a much wider range of services at, theoretically, a low price point. So instead of telling Shaniqua she has only one medication available for hypertension and that she is a fat she-boon who needs to curb her predilection for death by food and learn impulse control, now we can offer her several tiers of HTN drugs. AND drugs for high cholesterol, and diabetes, et. al.

      This also goes for Grandpappy Slappy on the Medicare side. Insurance companies are being forced to bear the brunt of this cost at virtual gunpoint now. So given this massive influx of pretty sick people who in the former case at least, had every ability to not become sick in the first place do you think that insurance companies are simply going to absorb this massive extra cost and liability? I’m sure they will, because they are so altruistic by nature. I can’t imagine they would attempt to soften the blow by bloodletting on their subscriber base.

      Anymore pithy commentary?


      • Bite me.


      • And… like a train that never runs late, the lefty ad hominem and abject defeat against a mountain of logic, fact, and evidence that is beyond repudiation. Thanks for that.


      • Mountain of logic, fact, and evidence? huh? fwiw, I’m not a lefty- very critical of them in most cases. Am center-right, a moderate Republican by temperament, hence my exasperation with the tea party morons who are driving the party into a ditch.

        ACA might be a disaster in design and implementation- but it might not be. That remains to be seen. Certainly there are many flaws that ought to be fixed if it keeps rolling out. But as noted, it came from ideas originally proposed by conservatives. What I don’t do is tar it with a broad brush or nurture illusions that it portends the end of civilization because it came from a liberal Democratic administration and Congress.

        You have to admit my above comment was pithy, which is what you asked for. And if you didn’t want an ad-hominem response, you shouldn’t have used the phrase “lefty cunt”, which (as noted above) is ridiculous. I like lefty cunts – I’ve enjoyed a few over the years- but am not one myself.


      • Here’s my prediction, Maurice; you can look me up and gloat if I’m wrong.

        PPACA will either: 1) be amended beyond recognition to repair a statute so flawed no Congressman can defend it or 2) utterly bankrupt the country.

        Right now, I’m leaning toward option 1, with this reservation: if the Congress can’t realize that Obama’s current pick for the new Federal Reserve Board Chairman is not competent to oversee a central bank, then there’s hope the government will last another decade, otherwise, it’ll be over in less than ten years, and the PPACA will crash down with the rest of the federal government. Alternatively, she will die in office due to a medical condition, which would be ironic, if her cause-of-death were health-related, which it secretly wouldn’t.

        My biggest worry is the general incompetence of the younger medical professionals I’ve met. No non-specialist under 50 seems to comprehend rudimentary medicine, like sewing large lacerations. When the preppers are faced with frightening medical emergencies (think tractor roll-over), I don’t expect that “insurance” will be the issue: It’ll be the distance to a competent doctor that will make the difference between life and death.


      • I agree- your #1 is most likely, but beopre #2, there is another option- insurance companies simply decline to take part, undermining and hollowing out the whole scheme, because of the regulatory constraints on proper pricing of risk. Amy has mentioned this a few times in the thread. And if that happens, future Congresses will have to lift some of those constraints which were the pet issues of Pelosi et al. In other words, it will be tweaked and tamed before it ever bankrupts the republic. Maybe Ryan and the GOP budget wonks will do the same for Medicare/SS in this round of futile negotiations. I don’t hold out much hope, though.


      • tteclod – the country is bankrupt.
        It’s just that no one has noticed yet.


    • Most people don’t know it, but you don’t actually have to buy insurance to drive a car. You have to demonstrate financial responsibility. If you have the money in the bank and jump through a few hoops, you don’t have to buy insurance. A lot of businesses with large fleets do this to save money.


    • My company doesn’t give me the option of choosing emergency only type coverage. As it stands, I get unlimited mental health benefits, and my psychiatrist charges someone $800 a week for me to be seen a few times a week. And that someone is not me.

      It feels so good to be on the taker end of this for once. I pay taxes for school. I got no kids. I pay taxes for govt worker salaries when many of the jobs they do don’t benefit me directly. But my health insurance loses money on me. I am the taker, the eater, the resource sucker. How I relish this.

      I don’t really know anything about health insurance. If you have expensive comprehensive health insurance that your employer mainly pays for as I do, how does Obama’s plan affect you?


      • Well, according to Obama, it doesn’t affect you! You’ll keep the wonderful coverage you have! Yay!

        The reality is that all private insurers will be jacking up their rates under the ACA, so your employer will either (a) eat the extra cost himself, (b) pass the extra cost to you, or (c) stop offering the benefit and pay the penalty (if applicable). How many employers are really going to choose option (a)?


    • the exchanges are basically marketplaces

      It’s so market place that it took the force of law for people to engage in them. Free markets are about voluntary exchanges, free from coercion. It these exchanges were so great and would add so much value, they would all ready exist. That the government had to force people to use them should make you hesitant to claim they are “basically marketplaces”.

      it will be private insurers who offer the policies

      Policies with provisions dictated by the government, rather than freely negotiated between the seller and buyer.

      Don’t forget that the basic model of the ACA was originally a Republican, conservative idea

      First and foremost, “republican” does not equal “conservative”.
      Secondly, what difference does it make who came up with a bad idea. This a classic logical fallacy example of appealing to authority.

      Lastly, republicans may have thought of it, but never seriously tried to implement it, much less make it a center piece legislation.

      Think of it as the equivalent of the state requiring auto insurance in order to drive a car

      You aren’t required to buy insurance to own and drive a car. You only required to buy insurance if you intend to use public roads. Fancy that, the government created a nice little monopoly for itself, then got in bed with insurance companies in order to feather their bed.

      which most people feel is a reasonable requirement.

      Again, appealing to authority isn’t the greatest way to go if you’re trying to make a logical argument.

      You can have your own opinions but not really make up your own facts.

      Can you point to any facts that were “made up” in the post? Why do lefties always resort to lying when attempting to make their point?


  11. on October 24, 2013 at 11:02 am RappaccinisDaughter

    If you want to know what healthcare could be like if insurance truly was reserved for catastrophic emergencies, and if we had some sort of tort reform, look no further than your veterinarian’s office.

    I have two cats (GO AHEAD, YUCK IT UP). A few years ago, I noticed one of them was losing weight, despite the fact that she was eating and behaving normally. Concerned, I took her to the vet. Within 48 hours, I had a diagnosis and a treatment plan. It cost $300 out of my pocket.

    A couple of years later, I noticed that *I* was losing weight, despite the fact that I was eating normally. Concerned, I went to the doctor. Then another doctor. Then another. Three months later, I had a diagnosis and a treatment plan. It cost $75 out of my pocket…BUT IT TOOK THREE MONTHS…and the total, actual, costs were closer to $5K.

    p.s., I’m fine, I have idiopathic hypoglycemia. The “treatment” is basically to go low-carb/Paleo and eat lots of small meals/snacks.


    • on October 24, 2013 at 11:12 am alexandrahamilton87

      Somewhat unrelated but came to mind:

      In Canada, the government rations care, so they set a quote for MRIs per day. Thus, when your local hospital reaches quota at around 11 am, they make an extra buck by renting the MRI machine to vets. So your cat can get an MRI the next day, but you have to wait months for one.

      Socialism, it’s grand.


      • My story is “anecdotal” but many Canadians have similar stories

        A few years ago I had prostate problems, I needed an echography of that whole area ( bladder etc )

        I was told our ( free) health care system was overwhelmed and it would take 16 months before I could get my echography done

        lucky for me here in the province of Quebec we are allowed to pay for private health services ( illegal in some other provinces )

        My echography was done a week later in a private clinic at a cost of $120.00

        our health care system is “free” ( we all pay for it in taxes ) and relatively good but it has a lot of downsides as well, lack of staff as they are trying to cut expenses since the system is overwhelmed and long waiting times are the main problems as far as I know


    • YUCK, YUCK. Are they also poisonous because they absorbed toxic essence from the plants in their eccentric father’s greenhouse? Because that would be cool. You could send them out to kill rats and other animals much bigger than them.

      I suppose you told the doctor about your plant-induced condition-?



      • on October 24, 2013 at 11:53 am RappaccinisDaughter

        Actually, Hawthorne strongly implies that Beatrice Rappaccini’s condition is inborn, not acquired—that her mad-scientist father interbred her with the atropa belladonna plant that she affectionately refers to as her “sister.” Many critics consider the story to be the first true science-fiction story ever written.


      • So I guess that means the cats don’t have the toxic essence. Too bad.


    • I have a $6K deductible, 0 co-pay, costs $200/month, it will be yanked soon because of the government. Never understood what the problem was, other than half the population doesn’t want to pay its own bills. So I’ll pay 3-4x (I’m 56) and have a stupid low deductible forcing me to wait in line with coughing teenagers with the flu.


    • RappaccinisDaughter
      I have two cats (GO AHEAD, YUCK IT UP). A few years ago, I noticed one of them was losing weight,


      What color are they?


      • on October 25, 2013 at 7:25 am RappaccinisDaughter

        …I don’t know why you’d want to know, thwack, but I don’t see the harm in telling you:

        One of them is silver leopard (spots, not stripes) with yellow eyes, and the other is a tortoiseshell with blue eyes.


      • I believe that was a semi-miss of a joke since thwack like most of his peeps sees every single issue no matter HOW mundane through the lens of color lines, but I could be wrong.


      • Had you said “white cats” this would have somehow confirmed whites are privileged or something about white supremacy

        had you said “black cats” somehow this would have confirmed blacks are oppressed by white people or something about white supremacy

        …and are hung from trees or something about white supremacy


      • black cats are known to shake down other cats for they lunch money.


      • on October 25, 2013 at 11:22 am RappaccinisDaughter

        You’re sort of a secret genius, aren’t you, thwack?

        [CH: a black shaftgali.]


    • on October 25, 2013 at 6:52 am The Burninator

      Dang it, I didn’t read down to your comment before making mine further down in the thread. Great minds and all that.


  12. on October 24, 2013 at 11:09 am alexandrahamilton87

    I HAD a high-deductible catastrophic-only health care plan. Had being the operative word. In that stack of regulations from HHS are a gazillion qualifiers for the “minimum” health insurance. Everyone focused on the birth control because zomg sex, so everyone was interested. Just from that one mandate, my premium increased $26 (around 25%). For the record, my privately-purchased birth control was $20, so that plus administration and profit means I’m actually paying MORE for “free” birth control. But that mandate is just one of many, each raising the cost of my premium because my plan covered nothing below $3000; in other words, none of that routine care that our executive agency overlords have decided is mandatory.

    In January, when my rate resets, it is 99% certain that I will not be able to afford the new premium, and will drop out.

    And being young (not for this website’s standards, lol) and healthy at 25, I’m exactly the sort of person Obamacare needs to defray the costs by signing up for the exchange, except the plans are so much more expensive and include so many unnecessary services, that it’s worth it just to pay the 1% fine and get on insurance while at the ambulance door (thanks no pre-existing condition turnaways mandate).

    Call telling my individual story female solipsism if you like, but I think it’s important to realize there are millions out there like me. This thing is designed to fail and move us to single-payer.


    • Exactly, it is a lot of healthy 20 somethings like yourself, that are going to make Obamacare look good.


      • Mee-owww!


      • I expect the birth rate to crash as young people are no longer able to afford even marrying and starting families due to having to pay for old people’s health insurance.


      • It will for the taxpaying young people. The “takers” will keep having more and more kids. They won’t marry, though… it’s more economical for them to have a child as single parents. Mom gets the benefit of Dad’s income without the penalty of losing all those single-mom benefits. Our society has created so many perverse disincentives to marriage and family, I’m not sure how we can ever get back to where we should be.


    • “This thing is designed to fail and move us to single-payer.”

      That’s exactly what it’s designed to do. They had to get their foot in the door, and now they’ll gradually edge it wide open, to Medicare for All.

      And we don’t have to guess what will happen, we can just look at Massachusetts. They enacted universal care in 2006. The number of uninsured has gone down, but healthcare spending has exploded. Private insurers are pulling out. That’s what happens if you force community rating and require comprehensive coverage, but restrict premiums!


    • Heh. The massive growth of the entitlement state has slowly “cheated” one group after the other. I’m 41, so I just remember when they jacked up social security/medicare taxes in the ’80s. At that point, it became obvious working black men, given their life expectancies, would be paying a lot more into the system in “contributions” than they’d ever receive back. One comedian joked about visiting some old guy in Florida to ask for a refund.

      Cut to the ’90s, and especially after Medicare Part D, and All Men are going to be giving more to the system in “contributions” than they receive back, unless they wise up and go on disability at age 35 or something.

      Thankfully, ladies, equality is upon us. Somewhere around age 35, you too are going to be subsidizing grandma and getting screwed as the system declines for “social justice.” But at least ya have free your birth control.

      (When I first priced an HDHCP plan in ’07, it was around $20 a month for everything I, a mid-30s smoker, would need. Now it’s priced at about $240 for a plan with higher deductibles, but of course they won’t sell it to me. Thankfully, I’m moving to Puerto Rico ’round January and getting a fairly comprehensive Blue Cross plan w/ dental for $140, so a lot of this is no longer my problem.).

      /Above is an overly simplistic estimate. When you factor in the “unintended consequences”–part-time jobs, wage reductions because the employer has to “match” your “contributions,” you’re getting tons more inequality, But I doubt you’ll hear much about that in the media. Yahoo! Finance just launched a new blog, “The Exchange,” whose reason for existence is to parrot the administration’s B.S. about the economy next to popular stock quotes.


    • on October 25, 2013 at 6:04 am The Burninator

      Actually alexandra your example is not solipsism, it’s good foot on the ground evidence of what it happening. And you’re right, this was the foot in the door and designed to fail, for exactly the pattern you outline.

      The shitter is, everybody knew this even before it was voted on.


  13. One thing left out of the points above: The price club nature of insurance. Getting treatment now is super expensive if you don’t have insurance. There is this game where, they charge 5K, then the insurance co pays 1k, and you pay $50 and they call it even. But if you don’t have an insurances co’s protection you get charged the full 5k, and good luck trying to figure out what its going to cost before hand.

    The other point is on the issue of futile care for old folks. 1. purely socialist systems do a good job of letting them die. The since the whole system is public people are more aware of the ridiculous costs, and are more likely to put grandpa on iceberg and let nature do its thing. Our system is worse than either a pure market or pure socialist system we literally have the worst of all options. If repubs were smart they would love Obama care, as for a few changes. 1. minimum plan has a 10k deductible. 2. Medicare and Medicaid are slowly brought into one system.


    • I have found the opposite. If you wave benjamins that you will give the doctor today, he considers that more valuable than a partial payment from insurance months down the road with high labor cost involved in collecting it. Generally around 70% off for cash. If you’re paying full sticker, you’re a rube.


      • True. If you tell the doctor/hospital you’re uninsured, the cost is much less than if you tell them you’re insured. It only seems more because the insurance company pays most of it.


    • The lack of transparency in health-care pricing is ridiculous, which ACA does nothing to solve. Maybe some rich Silicon Valley plutocrat will find a way to disrupt that industry, putting costs online and making them easily searchable. (If they can do Google Maps, why not that?) Again private companies and market forces are best to solve that, not regulation, which would just add more layers of bureaucracy and red tape.


  14. maurice, saying that X group of politicians supported Y policy does not establish anything about the results of that policy. It establishes something, which may be important.

    It looks like what you’re trying to do is claim that we are the intellectual descendents of the neoconservatives who came up with the ACA scheme. I think we’re more likely to have directly come from progressivism or libertarianism than to have gone through a neoconservative phase first. I personally view neoconservatives as unprincipled failures, and conservatism as retarded. As Reverend Dabney, the horrid Confederate, said,

    This is a party which never conserves anything. Its history has been that it demurs to each aggression of the progressive party, and aims to save its credit by a respectable amount of growling, but always acquiesces at last in the innovation. What was the resisted novelty of yesterday is today one of the accepted principles of conservatism; it is now conservative only in affecting to resist the next innovation, which will tomorrow be forced upon its timidity and will be succeeded by some third revolution, to be denounced and then adopted in its turn. American conservatism is merely the shadow that follows Radicalism as it moves forward towards perdition. … It is worthless because it is the conservatism of expediency only, and not of sturdy principle. It intends to risk nothing serious for the sake of the truth, and has no idea of being guilty of the folly of martyrdom. … The only practical purpose which it now subserves in American politics is to give enough exercise to Radicalism to keep it ‘in wind,’ and to prevent its becoming pursy and lazy, from having nothing to whip.

    I believe that this is what the people here think about Heritage’s ACA.


    • Fair enough, and since Obama and Pelosi designed ACA (along with the lobbyists of the insurance and health-care industries), of course it has a lefty bias. It would have come out better if it were designed by the old-style GOP establishment, but as we know those guys have been run out of town by the Tea Party types. The Left always had the passion for universal healthcare, even though the Right would have done it better had it been so inclined.

      That quote perfectly illustrates a fatal flaw of a sort of romantic conservatism, that idealizes the past without understanding how and why the problems of earlier eras have been solved and incorporated by society in a broadly popular way. The growth of government, pushed by libs/”progressives”, may be a ratchet, which only goes in one direction (however: see the deregulation and tax cuts of the 70s and 80s, which were broadly popular at the time), but it’s not exactly “perdition”, which is a term from religious fundamentalism and doesn’t really have a place in a rational discussion of politics or government.

      Rhetoric like that is really a form of entertainment, or infotainment, like Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh and those clowns who make a lot of money whipping up political passions which have no hope of being fulfilled, and who bear no responsibility for their actions.

      Ultimately it’s a result of a poorly educated and poorly informed citizenry. the founders of the republic knew that democracy in an ignorant population would result in mob rule and demogoguery. well, here we are. It may be that Hamilton was the wisest of them in that regard, who wanted the Senate to look like a House of Lords, with elder statesment hanging onto their seats for life rather than being appointed every 6 years. He was lampooned as a monarchist for that, but just imagine if there were such a body today, which would be totally resistant to the floods of cash and media bullshit pushing special interests and demanding shallow responses to whatever the news-flash of the moment might be. There’s such a thing as politicians being too close to the people, and needing some distance in order to take a longer-term perspective.


      • “It would have come out better if it were designed by the old-style GOP establishment”

        what makes you think this is true, they love cronyism as much as any politician. there is no ‘better’ socialism, it’s faster or slower maybe but it will fail. the ‘tea party types’ want freedom from it. i’ll gladly stand on that side no matter how many moderates try to disparage the idea.


      • on October 25, 2013 at 5:38 am The Burninator

        Exactly burke. Looks like we’re on the same team here brother.

        The GOP will give us nothing better than the Progressives, they’ll just mask it in free market rhetoric. It will NOT be free market based, as that would actually solve this entire self-created mess, and without disasters to lord over, what power would government have? None. Can’t have that.


      • on October 25, 2013 at 5:54 am The Burninator

        Old style GOP types? The ones who cannot agree fast enough with the Progressives? The John McCains of the world? Are you effin’ serious man? And as to “being run out”, there are very few tea party GOP elected to Congress right now, the old cadre still rule the roost. Boehner and his clique are not some withering flower.

        Your paening for Hamilton’s world is also telling.

        And the Senate WAS separated from the people, as they were at one time elected by state legislatures and not up for general vote. You can thank the “moderate” types you like for going along with this fiasco.


  15. Started doing the newbie missions YaReally recommended last week. Started with eye contact and basically spent all of the last weekend and this week doing it. Needless to say I had no idea I had terrible eye contact before I started doing this exercise lol. Apparently I didn’t spend much time looking at anything besides girls’ bodies..

    Still not the best at it, but I’ve gotten enough experiences where now I’m just actively practicing automatically on most every girl I see. So yeah, eye contact “mission” days no longer necessary. Next up is kino (Thursday, Friday) and leading (Saturday). Gonna leave makeouts for Halloween next weekend lol.

    Had good experiences but nothing worth talking about since I sucked at leading. Befriended whole group of girls/women (bachelorette party) got them all on my side to basically bang the 23 year old blonde bartender of the group (she was drunk tho) but messed shit up because of the aforementioned reason. Same thing happened Friday. Was staring into this girls eyes, she says my eyes are gorgeous, but tells me we’re just friends. I start to believe her but I’m inches away from her face… so I’ve concluded she was bullshitting lol.

    Yup, could’ve kissed her. Didn’t. Which is why I want to get kino, leading, and eventually makeouts out of the way. Again logistics with practicing are annoying because it’s getting cold now and I take public transportation from my tiny neighborhood. Couple that with having to work downtown means not a lot of chances to practice.

    Anyway, just a small update.


    • “Yup, could’ve kissed her. Didn’t.”

      Mental masturbation. Always take the shot if you want to know the score.


      • Well my point is I realized I could’ve kissed her and should’ve, but I was too pussy to do it. I’m more annoyed that I saw the opening and did nothing than I am mentally satisfied that I saw it.

        The escalation newbie mission should take care of this.


      • Disagree. I took it as an after the fact analysis of his mistake. If he flailed around and kept making the same mistake and talking about it, sure…


  16. This does not apply just to Obamacare. It applies to medical insurance, period. Including Europe where universally mandated insurance is subject to the same dynamic, regardless of whether it is public (usually cheaper) or private.

    Imagine if you had hardware insurance. If you need a hammer you to go the store and pay with you insurance. You want the best hammer money can buy. The store likes to sell the big ticket high margin stuff. And the insurance company likes revenue and turn-over. No where is there a cost/benefit judgment. And that is exactly how medical stuff works.

    How often are people actually confronted with decisions about real costs (not scheduled made up cost-shifted prices) and real benefits where you can decide on option A ($10, low risk, 90% chance of success) or option B ($10000, many low and medium risks, 97% chance of success).


    • and everyone’s offended by medicine having profit for some reason, but not the far more fundamental needs of food and housing. why do libs allow for better or worse houses or food? not to say they wouldn’t even it all out so long as they got to keep their nice places, but why is medicine where this seems to stick so well


    • Obamacare’s weakness is the pandering to insurance companies. With single payer though, you get the inexpensive hammer.


    • on October 25, 2013 at 5:35 am The Burninator

      The inexpensive hammer? The kind where the head flies off the handle after two wacks at a nail? No thanks.

      I’d prefer the hammer I buy with my own money through my own choice. Your pimping for socialist medicine is getting tiresome.


  17. I don’t much care in the end whether we have a socialist or capitalist health system, as long as it learns to do more with less. We spend about 18 percent of GDP, and some of the socialistic countries with “free” routine care are spending more like 10 percent and get much the same results. If a public-sector solution is how we can get those costs down, I’ll make my peace with that.

    And the runaway costs are really a problem of the few. Over 20 percent of the total spending is done on the “top” one percent of sick people, about half on the sickest five percent, and less than three percent of the money is done on the healthiest 50 percent. I.e., people who post on a site like the Chateau aren’t going to make much of a difference either way, the system is mostly just taking money from you one way or another to give to the sickest people.

    The real problem is how do we spend less money caring for chronically ill people. If the government can do it better, let them, because the Chinese and Mexicans are more than happy to use the advantage to take more jobs.


  18. A government that has the ability to give you everything you need has the power to take everything you have away.


  19. Healthcare has a lot of issues that makes competition hard to do:

    -can’t comparison shop for emergency services
    -can’t easily judge the quality so people use high cost as a signal for quality
    -link between benefit and cost tenuous
    -doctors are the decision makers

    Competition also leads every hospital to try to do every profitable procedure which leads to mediocre doctors who don’t have enough experience killing people.

    Single payer has a lot of advantages because it provides cheaper, slightly less quality service. It puts pressure on doctor salaries and avoids the problem of expensive low benefit interventions. It also avoids paper work and hassles.


    • on October 25, 2013 at 5:32 am The Burninator

      Cheaper? LOL!

      No thanks. You can keep your single payer. I’d prefer to return to pre-1962 funding of health care and health decisions. Out of pocket, no insurance needed, quality care, everything is fine. “Single payer” in these united States with our Puritanical mindset government would mean every one of my remaining liberties destroyed because of “health care risks/concerns”.


  20. on October 24, 2013 at 1:03 pm Reservoir Tip

    We’ll find out what’s in it when we pass it, ya’ll.


  21. True story: I have precisely the kind of high-deductible catastrophic policy mentioned above. For my family of 4, we pay $1200 per month. I don’t usually mind because I know in the event of a catastrophe there is no limit and no co-insurance (in other words we would not have to pay a percentage of the total bill. I don’t have to tell you that 30% of $1,000,000 would bankrupt most folks). I understand that’s the deal–so I don’t really grumble when I have to pay full price for every doctor visit and prescription medication.

    Still, it was hard medicine to swallow one day when I mentioned to a Mexican woman I know that my son’s asthma medicine cost $175 for one 30-day inhaler. She sympathized and suggested I should just sign up with the county, like she does. Then all my medicines would only cost $3.


    • on October 24, 2013 at 5:46 pm Carlos Danger

      The policy would be much cheaper if there were interstate competition and you could bundle insurance through any organization like a church or bowling league, union, professional associations, etc. We also need to lighten up on what we prescribe.


    • on October 25, 2013 at 5:26 am The Burninator

      That medicines wouldn’t “only” cost $3.00. They’d still cost the same $175.00 you’re paying, only somebody else is being forced to subsidize the remaining $172.00. Likely an actual producer of wealth who is being strong armed by the government. So it would cost little Mexican broad $3.00 while me and my productive neighbors are forced to pick up the slack for the remaining $172.00. What does she care though, she’s clearly quite happy to live as a burden on others AND recommend that depraved view of life to others.


  22. I’d argue that Obamacare is an example of the betas and women using the state to go after the alphas. Think about who ends up paying more: self-employed (men), who currently have catastrophic coverage only. These are the pioneer alphas of the economy. They own bars, restaurants, are personal trainers, self-employed doctors, lawyers, accountants….

    Who doesn’t have to pay? Corporate employees (betas) and government workers (betas and women). They get a pass.


  23. If this is not possible, well… try separatism. It may be that a precondition of solvent and sustainable medical insurance programs is ethnic kinship.

    LOL! CH you are cute when you’re being fantastical. Right of Association? Not in this Utopia buddy…

    Also, I sometimes marvel at how cogent and almost precognitive people like Kipling and Orwell were for their time.


  24. Field report.

    Hung out last night. My buddies weren’t out, but a couple of girls I know were out, so I chilled with them. One is a very flighty 7 with a lot of beta orbiters; the other is a lesbian half-Asian 8. They know each other, and I also got officially introduced to the lesbian’s girlfriend.

    The 7 is certainly bangable, and is certainly into me, but her flightiness and her beta orbiters make me rather reluctant to close, as it’s difficult to do so without seeming try-hard. Also, she does give off some slut tells and has twice referred to “her son’s place” — I have never seen her “son” and am not even sure it’s not one of her particularly pathetic beta orbiters, as a little boy wouldn’t be expected to have his own place. Nevertheless, she is fully open to kino. There was also a point where we were hanging out and she was having a smoke, and a guy who recognized me from my bad old beta days came up and tried to horn in, and she sent him packing by talking about me for ten seconds — I only heard the beginning of what she said, but I literally saw his shoulders slump and walk away with a rather confused, defeated look on his face. But again, she eventually left with one of her orbiters. Once in a while, I’ll try to text or call her to meet up, but haven’t succeeded yet. The fact I don’t give a shit if I succeed or fail is probably a major reason she likes me, but again… a horde of beta orbiters, terrible flightiness, and slut tells.

    The lesbian is a strange case. I just met her a couple months ago, and she is very open and friendly — I assumed like a married/taken chick, but I’ve flirted with her as if she were a straight woman, and she laughs at things I say that she thinks are funny; indications are she is turned on to me. Last evening, there were a couple of points where she did things like submissively accept my grip (palm up, with me kinoing her wrist) and a thigh slap from me. This is the first time I’ve done kino on her — I only see her once every couple of weeks, and we haven’t hung out in a while. Unfortunately, I couldn’t stay until the end of the night, but I’ll continue to treat her like a straight woman. Her girlfriend likes me too, although I can’t tell yet if sexually; she’s also cute, about a 7.


    • You sure she’s not bi? A lot of bi women call themselves lesbians around lesbians to avoid drama. (also, a lot of lesbians are lesbian by solipsistic fiat, not hardwired biology – the older ones spend a lot of time convincing themselves they never once enjoyed sex with their husband of 10/15/20 years. It’s not the same kind of binary thing it is for gay men. Lesbians are lesbians because they’ve decided they want to be lesbian.)


      • Yeah, I’m pretty sure she is bi. She’s young, though — only 22. I’d imagine she’s more like a LUG, calling herself lesbian and messing around with girls to keep away beta male attention. She’s certainly hot enough that she’d want to do that if she likes girls (she has worked as a model in Japan).


      • on October 24, 2013 at 5:49 pm Carlos Danger

        That’s what I’ve always thought too. I also agree with Corvinus on Omega men becoming gay and sticking with the program. There is supposed to be a lot of pressure to stay gay from the gay associates you have made once you’re in the scene.


      • There does seem to be that thing with guys… you either like dick or you don’t, end of story. “Lesbian” is more of a social distinction amongst women, and doesn’t really mean anything at the end of the day.


      • I think it may have to do with women being the passive sex and men the active. If a man goes gay through getting hooked on gay sex or however, he won’t try to escalate things with straight women. If a woman is lesbian, but is young and hot, and runs into a straight reasonably alpha man who just sees a hot woman and acts accordingly, she may find she likes him. Most lesbians are unattractive to men — old, fat, bitchy, masculine, etc. — and IMO that’s the result of the selection effect due to the younger more attractive ones running into straight guys and later deciding they were LUGs.


      • There’s also that contingent in the female population that doesn’t want to play the pretty card; they learn that they can wear their sweatpants and be a hundred pounds overweight, and it’s not a deal breaker to get another woman to “fall in love with you”. They’re unattractive to men because it’s easier for them to wallow in their innate lack of attractiveness than do anything to better themselves.

        Lesbians/bi women are suspicious of any woman in their social circle who’s not ugly, and things can get pretty uncomfortable for a woman who’s not a 5 or below. It’s like everyone is still aware of their SMV, and having a pretty girl show up reminds them that they’re still failing at the game, even if rug-munching gives them a way to cheat it.


  25. From what it looks like when I test sign up this is a high deductible plan that provides nothing of value to me. This is not socialized medicine. My premiums quadruple and my deductible doubles. This is for the cheapest plan! This actually might force people to pay cash for things as desired by Anti-Gnostic? I know I for one will never reach the deductible. I will also continue not to buy any healthcare services unless something catastrophic happens.

    I think what Obamacare really is, is a way to get people to actually pay for healthcare. The really sick people don’t pay for their healthcare at the moment, they just go bankrupt and get on medicare/medicaid. With Obamacare everyone who buys insurance will be paying for them and will get little in return. It will effectively redistribute the money through the insurance companies to reduce medicare/medicaid costs rather than directly through government.

    Something interesting to note having a bunch of children lowers premium costs significantly because of subsidies. Childless people are going to be paying more money for people with children to pay less. Also low income, low cost of living areas will be paying more and high income, high cost of living areas will pay less.


  26. […] Obamacare is a ruling class pet project. It’s labyrinthine opacity is a feature, not a bug, that enriches the corrupt managerialist Top and the blood-sucking parasitical Bottom at the expense of the beta niceguys in the Middle. This formula is bad enough in homogeneous societies, but in racially and ethnically diverse ones like America, where ability and temperament and charitable fellow-feeling are all unequally distributed at both the individual and population group levels, it’s a guaranteed failure. […]


  27. He misunderstands human nature, and will never win the argument on grandpa. Here’s why: It’s not that we wouldn’t yield if we had to decide between keeping grandma alive and going bankrupt – it’s that the voters will never allow it to come to that. They’ll never allow it to arrive at that decision point. This is why we have socialized medicine in virtually every civilized democratic country on earth- in spite of the relevancy whether it’s solvent or not.


    • And he’s wrong that you can’t shop for a hip replacement on the internet. It’s called India, Belgium, S. Korea, Thailand or about a billion other locations.


  28. First, I hope the attribution is clear. The numbered pragraphs were written by an anonymous iSteve commenter.

    Second, in reply to Four Aces, I really was only trying to make the broader point that the welfare state is not sustainable due in particular to the economic impossibility of socializing geriatric medicine, and due to the fact that “health care” is not insurable. The Ponzi scheme goes on because the world’s central banks have agreed to print money and buy everybody’s debt with it. We’re also using immigration get more serfs on the tax farm. When they figure out its keeping old strangers alive or pre- and post-natal services for all the new, vibrant Americans, then the oxygen is going to get shut off.

    Culturally, the welfare state penalizes K-selection, and rewards r-selection.
    The eaters inevitably end up outnumbering the producers, and I think history will prove it doesn’t matter how much oil you had or how tight and white your country was.


    • Blasphemy! Fuck off you RealTalk™ Speaker. Yes, you are the originator of this particular thread but just like anything in the New World Order, your original comments are NOT valid. What is always and only valid is how your commentary is redistributed to the population.

      I feel very certain that you realize that insurance companies don’t work like casinos at all. I also know that you know and that you don’t honestly think that with 30 million new serfs on said farm + their current pregnacy in their belly, any so called K-selected individual will react. They aren’t reacting now, what is the catalyst you predict?

      They have bread, circuses, have grown complacent on the fat of the land, and have largess even Roman Senators could only dream of. They would no sooner rise up then any other peoples in history that didn’t have the proverbial Sword of Damocles as their halo.

      Europeans and so called “K-selected” peoples will maybe and it is a strong maybe, rise up when they are against the wall while Liberal Hope & Change Chekists discuss their crimes against humanity.


  29. on October 24, 2013 at 5:39 pm Carlos Danger

    What we need is a system of interstate health insurance plans that are high deductible and catastrophic in nature coupled with Health savings accounts to cover the high deductible. health Insurance needs to become a personal deduction and should be completely decoupled from work at all. This is basically what Switzerland has. If you don’t get insurance when you’re young, you run the risk of any problems developing not being covered when you start later on. We also need to rein in trial lawyers too. This would be the cheapest and easiest solution to our problem.


  30. When it comes to who pays for the old people, remember who are the old people in this country? White women. The black men die around 66 or so, the white women about 20 years later. Black men are ripped off by Social Security. That this is never mentioned just shows that the black leaders have sold out black people, who, BTW, don’t seem to notice.


  31. Likely his first assumption is wrong. Warren Buffet talks at length about insuranance and its one of those industries that loses money like 4/5 years.


  32. The problem with such private medical procedures is that they’re non-essential. However in big world it is deemed that people receive life-saving treatment as well as legal defence regardless of their ability to pay. Presumably some here fancy themselves as Randian heroes who won’t ever get seriously or live to an advanced age in which they need more money than they actually have.


    • Who pays? Who benefits (beyond the schmuck who is the excuse for extortion)?

      Thank you very much


      • As said you and your Randian hero friends can’t ever imagine living in Libertopia and being in a situation where you need serious medical intervention yet don’t have the ability to pay? You’ll happily die from cancer under a bridge with not even pain relief? Or, for that matter, are sent to a prison slave labour camp for a crime you didn’t commit because you couldn’t afford any legal defence?


      • There are plenty of charities that pay for these things, if one is unable to pay through no fault of their own.

        Of course, people who are irresponsible and spend all of their money on trinkets and toys should fucking die.

        Freedom. Pass it on.


  33. You’re posts on inevitably of the failure of Obama’s agenda, and this one on Obamacare are first rate.

    The game stuff has been played out and boring for a long time.

    Maybe it’s time for you to move on.


  34. The problem has always been pre-existing conditions. If you have one you can’t get insurance no matter your age. Since anyone could at any point end up with a pre-existing condition going forward it makes even healthy people part of the constituency.

    For a large number of reasons major medical health insurance can’t be sold for periods longer then a fairly short amount of time (most is sold year to year, I’m not sure anyone would ever sell a policy more then a few years). Attempts to sell much simply long term healthcare products like LTC were disasters. It’s just too hard to predict healthcare costs that far out and you get selected against.

    So you buy a policy that lasts a year and if you get sick sure it will cover you for that year, but what about after? Health insurance covers based on care delivered in the timeframe, not sickness events within the timeframe. The only reason people can even keep their coverage after that is because of laws against dropping them. There are also laws against not hiring or firing people based on medical records to keep your health costs down. They tried to fire my father over that a couple of times, but luckily the union backed him up.

    If “insurance for life” existed or if “pre-existing condition” insurance existed (and you could buy it in the womb) then perhaps some free market example might work, but they never will so it won’t.

    Universal healthcare systems aren’t so bad. There are tons of gains from them and they work well in most of the world. I’ve gotten care abroad myself and it was great.

    Obamacare is of course trash, but more because its a shitty law then the idea of universal healthcare is bad.


    • There are ways to take care of the truly desperate who are in that position through no fault of their own.

      a 20k page monstrosity is not that way.


      • Yes, there are ways. Like single payer that works in every other advanced country and works very well.

        Which isn’t what is being called for in the OP. Your charity option is a non starter. Are we really to believe that charity alone will fill the need? Private charity wasn’t there for me and my father when we were sick, only (government mandated) health insurance was.


  35. on October 25, 2013 at 5:14 am The Burninator

    Compare and contrast the differences between human “health care” and the “health care” we give to animals. The Veterinarian doesn’t cost you your house in order to save Fido or Snowflake the cat. Office visits are out of pocket cash that doesn’t stop you from buying a six pack on the way home. Surgeries are not uber cheap but they don’t bust you down several tax brackets to afford. Medicine is delivered directly from the office without a middleman pharmacist and is also pocket cash cheap even for the same kinds of drugs, down to the name brand, given to humans. Death and cremation is far cheaper than human beings. But in all, the biology is for all intents and purposes the same when it comes to treatment/diagnosis (in fact, human diagnosis can be easier since we can communicate verbally).

    The difference? Two things. First, you are directly in contact with the costs, you know the cost going in, you pay for the cost after the visit, and no insurance is involved. There is no middleman whatsoever, nothing to remove you from the end cost and end product. Second, litigation is nearly non-present. What legalities exist are for true malpractice, as in, the Vet left a watch, his wallet and three double beef burrito wrappers in your dog before he sewed up the poor animal and sent it home.

    This is EXACTLY the same kind of system we had in place prior to 1962, when you could afford to visit the hospital and walk out paying by cheque without worrying about how to sell off the kids to medical science to afford it. Doctor’s office visits were out of pocket, cheap. Care was good, life was good.

    Government stomping into that marketplace and belligerently demanding “compassion” at the cost of our future is what made this nightmare we’re currently living. Their solution? More government! And of course insurance industries followed suit, why wouldn’t they? The expectation once Uncle Sugar Tits started footing half the costs of health care was that private industry must as well. They didn’t mind, it is a huge profit maker. An unholy alliance thus of insurance expanding to “pay everything!” to compete with Uncle Sugar Tits and his “Pay everything, or else!” philosophy.

    Return it to the Vet/pre-1962 model and all of this self caused disaster would vanish overnight.


    • Preach it, brother. People can form mutual aid societies, buying clubs, etc. And yes, the obese, smokers, advanced sepsis cases, children born with deformed lungs, etc., are going to die sooner. That’s what the Church is for.


    • Then again you can’t euthanize people in lieu of treatment “Sorry Tiny Tim we’re going to put you down because you’re a sickly child who’ll never get much better and we’d much rather spend that money on your older brother Rick who’s smart, healthy and has a bright future.”


  36. I personally think the best insurance is to live sanely, and if you get a disease or condition that would render you useless to your family, die.

    Comfort with mortality is the best insurance. I would never wish to live like a vegetable or place the burden of high medical bills on my family when I know that the end is going to be the same anyway.

    We are all going to die. Why nitpick about the details?


    • on October 25, 2013 at 7:55 am The Burninator

      Details? Like deciding who gets to die and who doesn’t? Those kinds of “details”? The “details” like who deserves care and who deserves a pain pill?

      Pray that you never fall under “details”, Nicole.


      • I have died once already, Burn, and it was on the last place I’d have wanted to: an examining table.

        Do you not see what you are doing to yourselves?

        We will all die. Nobody gets to decide who will live and who will die because we all die.

        I’m not saying that medicine is useless, just that there are limits to its powers and usefulness. Basic care is something I believe everyone should have (note, I did not say feel entitled to) in a civil society, if you want it to be and remain civil. The fact is though, that this is something that can be given and can be taken away, where knowledge to care for one’s self without dependency on the government cannot be taken away from literate or at least communicative people once they have it.

        If you teach me how to endure a non fatal or non injurious pain, I do not need to get pain medication from a doctor.

        If you teach me how to endure depression and seek help and support from others in my community, and there is a supportive community, I don’t need to take happy pills.

        If you teach me to accept my mortality, I don’t need to spend years in treatment for a disease or condition that would have killed me with a whole lot less pain sooner.

        If you teach me to love my body, and make me understand that it is the tool with which I bring my dreams to reality, I don’t abuse it overmuch.

        See where I’m getting at?

        You are in a situation where the elite have a plan that they will carry out, to make people more dependent on things that can be given and taken away at their whim.

        Don’t need them. Then there is nothing they can take from you.

        I understand that this is easier said than done, but when someone puts you in an inescapable box, no matter where you stand, you will have the same amount of space…but in the middle, you will have the most room to maneuver.


  37. Nicole
    We are all going to die. Why nitpick about the details?

    Because the distribution of healthcare is not a detail. Your physical health is the foundation upon which all your other behaviors are dependent. I suspect this is the root of sports worship.

    I have white friends who lost their fathers at an early age and despite their family money, they exhibit many of the pathologies I see in ghetto people who never met their father.

    The white man is not God, but his scientific health care techniques can compensate for many health problems.

    As brilliant as that ni66a is, it took a lot of health care just to get and keep Stephen Hawkings in a positon to use his mind to its fullest potential


  38. If you don’t fork 1000 uSD per month for healthcare, for 30 years, at a real rate of return of 1%, that’ll make 400 grand. That can purchase a lot of medical services. Account for non-inflated medical prices, and that pay for a HUGE amount. I literally cannot fathom a procedure that would NOT be covered.


  39. I grew up with socialized healthcare, and there are certainly some aspects of it no one in the US ever mentions, simply because they don’t know about those yet, you have to actually *live* under such circumstances for a while before noticing them.
    First would be MASSIVE mountain ranges of paperwork/bureaucracy, which will absolutely dwarf anything ever seen on these shores. Also, everyone and their freakin’ cousin is going to run to the doctor for literally every little shit. Because it’s ‘free’ or ‘included’. Kind of like 50 cent hot dog night at the stadium.
    Waiting rooms will be packed to the rafters, nurses even crankier, doctors more stressed and detached, if you think you’re just a number now, you got ‘nuddah thing comin,.
    The online registration site still having problems, I used one of those online calculators, to be told that this shit might cost me $ 2,700 in 2014. I don’t spend that much on health care in 6 years, never mind 1.
    I have never applied for any government assistance of any kind, but if I don’t qualify for Medicaid (which I kinda doubt), and one of those ‘catastrophic’ plans isn’t workable either, they’re just gonna have to fine me.
    “Yo, Homes, this is your old buddy Barack. Semme nineyfahv dallah, muh’fuggah!”
    Then, I will have to hope that the ‘Healthcare Exchange’ will expand to include companies offering cut-rate insurance for active, healthy people who live intelligently and responsibly.
    No one I know who isn’t already insured or on welfare knows how in the fuck they’re going to pay for this.
    ‘Affordable’ my fucking ass.
    Reagan 2016!


    • on October 25, 2013 at 9:13 am Carlos Danger

      Good post. These are all things I find problematic with the German system that I’m familiar with. I have also personally seen orderlies and nurses hit old people who weren’t taking their med, or were unresponsive to instructions, etc. The blows were fairly light, but still enough to get one’s attention. That would get you fired and maybe professionally barred here. You can’t really sue for malpractice in Europe either. It’s possible, but the payouts are low and winning is rare.


      • Carlos Danger

        I have also personally seen orderlies and nurses hit old people who weren’t taking their med, or were unresponsive to instructions,

        What color were they?


      • on October 25, 2013 at 5:32 pm Carlos Danger

        White. Just like the patients.


      • So how did you decide which ones to hang?


  40. The original poster (Anti-Gnostic or whoever) doesn’t have a clue what he’s talking about.
    “1) Most people lose money on insurance, because most of the time insurance doesn’t pay out more than it takes in.”
    That’s why insurance companies are the ones declaring bankruptsy because of medical bills… no , wait, but that is what most bankruptcies in the US are due to.

    “2) Thus, a “good” policy is a catastrophic-coverage-only,…where most payments are out of pocket. This is a policy that protects you against the downside risk, but where you lose a lot less on average.”
    No, a “good” policy would have you checked regularly to prevent a lot of catastrophic needs. That means you have to incentive (ie make it cheap) so people take the preventative steps instead of fearing a visit to the doc until they’re falling over in pain.

    “4) For example, if you went to Best Buy and whipped out your home insurance card to get a new flat screen TV,”
    Stupid comparison.

    “9) How insane is it, for example, that in this age of internet shopping that you can’t do comparison shopping on a hip replacement or a physical on the internet?”
    No, what is insane is being the only 1st world country without universal healthcare. Insinuating a profit motive into keeping people alive is the definition of evil. Or we could take that extra 30% the useless insurance companies tack on and upgrade hospitals, pay nurses more, something with a tangible benefit to society.

    “Fantastic work, all of you. We’ve now taken the profit out of health care. No more profit motive to encourage ambitious young geniuses to develop miracle drugs rather than program social networks.”
    Taking money away from the useless middle-men that are insurance corporations is not the same thing as paying prescription drug makers, or doctors for that matter.
    Apples and oranges comparison from someone either too stupid to know the difference or with an agenda to manipulate a populace that can’t afford to pay for a heart operation into voting against their self interests.


    • Oh man this is awful. Are you one of the 99%?

      The point is, Karl, insurance is an awful way to pay for anything much less the fact that everybody gets old and sick. If you want to insure medical casualties without the eternal upward death spiral of premiums and costs, you have to allow insurers to price risk, like they do for auto and property. And since they aren’t allowed to do that, you get distortions.

      You seem to have a bee in your bonnet about ‘profit.’ Do you march around your local Kroger raging about them charging a profit for the food we all require to stay alive? You know what happens to food distribution when the government takes all the profit out of it? Ask the North Koreans or Cambodians.

      BTW, there’s really no such thing as preventive medicine. ‘Preventive medicine’ means don’t smoke, don’t use recreational drugs, drink in moderation, exercise, and eat well. Preventive medicine is NOT taking diuretics, statins and insulin because you ate crap, smoked and sat on your ass all your life.


    • “Insinuating a profit motive into keeping people alive is the definition of evil.”

      What color is the sky in your world, comrade?


  41. Just presenting an alternative perspective: where does maternity care fall in all of this? Having a child is ridiculously expensive these days. Should women be backing off on some of the ‘unnecessary’ extras? Perhaps go back to the days of midwives? Or, if we were to take on the catastrophic approach, would the cost of giving birth naturally fall?


    • Costs are always higher whenever there’s a third-party payor. The only way to keep the cost curve down is to allow the third-party payor to price risk.

      I’d add that childbirth is not normally regarded as an insurable casualty.


  42. on October 27, 2013 at 12:31 am BioCulturalBeamDelta

    I always love the “concerned” commentators from the UK or Canada or Australia (I’m Canadian myself) who lecture Americans about universal healthcare. I used to fall for the universal healthcare propaganda myself, but the more these people screech about how great their healthcare is, even while the elderly are being starved in the UK NHS system, these people sound more and more like drug addicts. They sound creepy and unhinged, like they want are addicted to this unsustainable drug and want to force it on other people. I thought Canadian and UK liberals were against colonialism…


    • They’ve actually never stopped believing in imperialism, except instead of conquering the wogs and extracting resources from overseas, they just import the wogs to keep the welfare state/Ponzi scheme going here. “They’ll pay my pension!,” I have actually been told this. Boy are they in for a surprise.


      • on October 28, 2013 at 11:04 am BioCulturalBeamDelta

        But! But! The Tea Party! They’re neo-confederates! They’re all Klan members! Leftists are truly despicable trolls.


  43. Andrea – Maternity costs would naturally decline if the Government stopped interfering with the marketplace. Right now, maternity costs are artificially inflated just like most other healthcare costs. An additional issue is that Obstetricians also must carry substantial liability insurance to defend against lawsuits if the baby is born with any “defects”. This is directly related to declining birth rates. If you are only having one child, you are going to be inconsolably disappointed if that child is “imperfect”.

    Also, as mentioned above, pregnancy is not a catastrophic event or even an illness. It is the natural outcome if the advice generally given at CH is successful….


  44. […] great post on healthcare. Related: Obama knowingly lied about people not losing their insurance. I’m surprised. Related: […]