To My Wife’s Patients: Things She Can’t Say To You – But I Can

My wife is a family physician. On average she sees 25 patients a day, works through her lunch and usually arrives home after dark. During her career I estimate she has seen around 35,000 patients. In order to become a doctor she had to do the following:

  • Graduate from a four year college.

  • Take advanced courses in calculus, chemistry and biology required by med schools.

  • Sit for and do well on the MCAT exam.

  • Get accepted into med school.

  • Spend 3 years taking full-time classes and 1 year doing rounds at hospitals and offices under the supervision of doctors.

  • Work 80+ hours a week for 3 years in internship and residency.

  • Pass several all-day written and hands-on exams to become board certified.

  • Spend several days each year in continuing education classes to keep up to date on the latest medical research and treatments and maintain her credentials.

Doctors used to be treated like gods. They were fawned over and never questioned by patients. Today we’ve swung to the opposite extreme where patients are treated as “clients” and management encourages staff to believe the “customer is always right” as they compete with other health care providers and health care systems for business.  To me much of the below is common sense, but it’s amazing how uncommon common sense has become.

Be polite to her. I know I shouldn’t have to say this, but manners have seemingly gone the way of men wearing fedoras and women wearing head scarves. When she enters a patient exam room,  she has had less than two minutes to review your chart (which often has hundreds of pages in menus and submenus in the electronic health record) and learn what you are there for from a medical assistant or visit notes that often say no more than “Fever.” When she opens the door, no matter how she feels herself you will have her full attention. She will make you the center of her universe for the few minutes that she is with you whether or not you deserve it to an outside observer like me.

Medicine Can’t Cure Everything. When you tell her, “I can’t be sick” with a cold or the flu because you are going on vacation or a wedding, tell that to her patient with pancreatic cancer, but you’ll have to go to his gravesite to do so. He didn’t want cancer but Fate had other plans. My wife is a doctor not Jesus. The truth is that your body will heal itself, and it’s my wife’s job to help it – and it will take its own sweet time doing so if it wants.

Antibiotics are powerful drugs and should only be used when needed. If she says you don’t need an antibiotic, you don’t need an antibiotic. What this means is you have a virus – likely a cold or a flu virus and antibiotics don’t affect viruses at all. If they did people wouldn’t be dying in Africa from Ebola because we could treat them with antibiotics, but we can’t because antibiotics don’t work on viruses.

If you say “But the last time I had this a doctor gave me a Z-Pak and I got better,” the Z-Pak had nothing to do with your recovery; your body beat the virus itself and the doctor only gave you an antibiotic because it was easier to give you one and shut you up than to be honest with you.

What you may not realize is that antibiotics have side effects, something the Wife knows first hand. Years ago she was treated for a bacterial kidney infection with a Z-Pak and the drug damaged the smell receptors in her brain. She couldn’t smell anything for a year, and it took two years more before she could smell the roses in her garden, five before she fully recovered. Antibiotics not only cause bacteria to become resistant, making the drugs less effective for everyone, they can also in rare cases kill you. Z-Pak has been found by the FDA to cause irregular heartbeats that have kill 47 people per million doses, and 245 per million for those with heart conditions. Even penicillin and its variants can damage your liver and kidneys. A common side effect is they screw up your body’s natural defenses, killing the so-called “good bacteria” that populate your gut and skin, causing yeast infections and diarrhea that can be worse than the cold that caused you to see the doctor  in the first place.

Immunizations save lives. If my wife notices you are not up to date on your immunizations she will offer to bring you up to date by vaccinating you in the office. If you then say to her “Vaccines are dangerous,” you’ll immediately reveal your idiot status although she won’t say so. Instead she will waste her time trying to educate you on how vaccination is the greatest medical discovery of all time. She’ll tell you that vaccines have saved more lives than any other drug or treatment ever imagined by Medicine bar none, and that idiots like you have only not gotten polio because the rest of us had parents who weren’t morons and got us vaccinated. The wife and I have been to places in the world where polio destroyed young lives, and have given money to paralyzed beggars in the streets. She’ll try to change your mind to help save your life; I’ll just laugh at you and say “Darwin Award!”

My wife is not a drug dealer. If you come to see my Wife because of back pain, she will likely explain that back pain can take as long as two years after an injury to heal if surgery isn’t warranted. My wife knows about back pain first hand. She was nearly killed by a tree branch falling on her neck in Africa, and she has suffered occasional back spasms that last for weeks ever since. She doesn’t take pills for these spasms. Instead she stretches her back, does some yoga, and lays on a heating pad.

If you come looking for narcotics, you will leave empty handed. Thanks to computerized medical records and a federal government centralized reporting on prescription narcotics, it is very easy for her to see who you got your meds from, what narcotic was prescribed and how many pills you got. If you tell her (as some patients have) that you’ll just get the drugs on the Street, go right ahead. There’s nothing you can say to her that will erase her sorrow at the loss of one of her patients, a young boy killed in an accident caused by his parents who were drugged up on Oxycontin they had gotten from other doctors. Later she’ll worry about whether there’s anything more she could have done to help your addiction; I’ll remind her of that dead boy.

Speak up. My wife is not a mind reader, and is a people doctor not a vet, so she will ask you questions and doesn’t need to guess. Speak up. Be honest in your answers. Ask questions if you don’t understand. My wife seriously wants to help you. Ask a med student why they want to be a doctor and chances are they will say “to help people.” That’s what my wife said, and it’s true.

But shut up if you don’t like gays, Jews or African-Americans. My wife is not a racist and is open minded just to the point where her brains don’t fall out. She respects everyone, and even if you don’t just keep it to yourself.

Don’t assume she’s rich just because she’s a doctor. My wife has chosen the second lowest paid specialty because she felt called to it, not because of any financial windfall. Every month I cut a mortgage-sized check to pay her student loans and will continue doing so for another couple of decades. We do have 4 cars though: One is a subcompact she bought used. One is a Southern Lawn Ornament, broken down at 170,000 miles. The other two (mine and my son’s cars) have 200,000 and 150,000 miles respectively. On a per-hour basis my wife makes about as much as a plumber does – and he can’t kill anyone or be sued if he does. And he sure didn’t finish plumbing school with $225,000 in plumbing school debt. (That’s a hint to any kids considering medical school who stumble upon this post.)

My wife works in a medical office not Burger King. You can’t have it your way. You can demand an MRI as one of her patients did, but you won’t get one. My wife is specially trained in soft tissue and musculoskeletal disorders and doesn’t need a $3,000 test to tell her that you have tennis elbow, the treatment of which is like many conditions in medicine: Time. You can’t have it your way because a) you aren’t a trained doctor and b) you really don’t know what is best for you. If you did you wouldn’t weigh 400 lbs and complain of knee pain. Perhaps the cases of Mountain Dew and bags of potato chips I see in your cart at WalMart have something to do with your problem, and again, if you want a miracle ask your pastor, not my wife. Exercise and limiting your calorie intake will do more to fix you than any drug she can prescribe, and I’m sure even Jesus would tell you to lay off the pork rinds.

My wife isn’t perfect, but she is the most intelligent woman I’ve ever met which is one reason I had to marry her. She also cares about people, many of whom don’t deserve it in my opinion. While some of you treat her respectfully a lot of you don’t, and you make me angry because it’s up to me to remind her of the lives (yes, LIVES plural) she has single-handedly saved. In addition to those she has made countless lives better through the exercise of her clinical skills, training and experience combined with her natural intuition. There aren’t many plumbers who can say that.

 

 

The Council Has Spoken: January 23, 2015

Council Winners


Non-Council Winners


Council Submissions: January 21, 2015

Council Submissions


Honorable Mentions


Non-Council Submissions


Concensual Incest Puts Progressives on Slippery Slope

I support gay marriage on the principle that the Government should not be in the marriage business. To me marriage combines two unrelated components: a legal contract for asset accumulation/division plus a religious component that creates a moral contract between two people witnessed by the religious community. Marriage is one of the last vestiges where Religion and State are intertwined. The government controls marriage licensing, determining who can and cannot marry, and requires a religious ceremony to finalize the contract. While two atheists can have a completely secular marriage in which the religious ceremony is replaced by a Justice of the Peace witnessing the exchange of vows, the State will not recognize a completely religious ceremony, where vows are exchanged in a religious context but the newlyweds refuse to obtain a marriage license.

While Western countries have removed barriers to the issuing of marriage licenses to homosexuals, movement by religions to recognize such marriages has been glacial by comparison. The Roman Catholic Church, most Protestant sects, mainstream Jewish sects and all of Islam refuse to recognize gay marriage. Part of the success of the Gay Rights movement has been due to the equation of gay marriage to the American Civil Rights movement of the 20th century, particularly the state laws that prevented interracial marriage and the attitudes supporting those laws that the Civil Rights movement overturned through non-violent protest.

One of the arguments employed by supporters of traditional marriage was that by legalizing same-sex unions, Society is placed on a slippery slope whereby other non-traditional practices such as polygamy and incest become the next in line for legitimacy. Samantha Allen confronts this challenge in her piece “Consensual Incest is Rape.” In the article Allen, who supports gay marriage, takes issue with the attempt by those calling for the decriminalizing of incest between consenting adults to hitch their issue to the gay marriage movement in the same way the gay marriage movement attached itself to the civil rights movement. Referring to a pro-incest blogger, Allen writes, “Pullman tries to boost his marriage equality credentials by also promoting the legalization of same-sex marriage but a more apt description of affairs would be that he wants to hitch incest to the same-sex marriage wagon. In his post “Gay Marriage and Incest in the US,” he tries to link same-sex marriage with incestuous marriage by saying that both take place “between consenting adults,” they “don’t hurt anybody,” they are both “subject to discrimination,” and that there is “no rational reason” for their prohibition. “Gays and lesbians do not choose their orientation and people do not choose the parents to whom they are born,” he adds, in a staggering leap of logic.”

Unfortunately Allen’s argumentative skills are lacking in the piece. She is unable to muster a defense against writer Keith Pullman, whom Allen refers to as  “adult incest advocate” except by using the words “staggering leap of logic.” I have not visited Pullman’s website nor do I have any interest in his arguments advocating the legalization of incest, but I find it interesting to see supporters of gay marriage who base their arguments on civil rights squirm when the same arguments they used are turned against them to justify practices which they find as heinous as the religious find gay sex. Allen concludes her piece stating flatly, “Supporters of incest are not part of the marriage equality movement,” but does little to explain why that’s the case.

In her article Allen’s sole weapon that separates gay marriage from incest is power. She quotes incest survivor McKenzie Phillips, ““[T]here really is no such thing as consensual incest due to the inherent power a parent has over a child,” she said. “So I wouldn’t necessarily call it a consensual relationship at this time,” although a year earlier she described sex with her father John Phillips as just that on Oprah. Allen quotes psychotherapist Robi Ludwig on Phillips’ incest, “But you can’t say it’s consensual, because there’s always a power imbalance when it comes to a parent and child,” even when both parent and child are both adults.

It’s no surprise that Samantha Allen resorts to the issue of power, since Leftist thought is based on the assumption that the unequal distribution of power underlies all conflict. In fact the imbalance of power between the sexes is one reason why traditional Feminism has been opposed to marriage. Since men always had more power in our society it was impossible for women to be treated fairly in marriage. It’s only recently that feminism has evolved to accept marriage, and usually only within the context of gay marriage.

But power is a poor choice against incest. It fails to address the issue of incestuous siblings, for example, who lacked the “power imbalance when it comes to a parent and child,” yet I doubt that Allen would support incestuous marriage between adult brothers or a brother/sister pair with equal power. By using power imbalance to ban marriage between parent and child, the usage of the term implies that marriages require a balance of power. Since power can take many forms this opens up a whole new arena for restricting marriage.

Leaving aside the issue of the subjectivity of power (Who defines it? The State? The marrying parties themselves?) this usage of the power c0uld ban marriages between adults of differing financial backgrounds, since the wealthier party in a marriage would have more power than the poorer one. It would ban marriage between adults of different ages, since an older, more experienced partner would conceivably have more power than a younger less experienced one. Alternately the younger person in such a relationship could have more power since youth is valued more highly in our society than age, putting the older spouse at a disadvantage. Finally the imbalance of power would ban all marriages between whites and minorities since white privilege by definition gives the white person more power than the minority.

The result of this would be laws banning marriage between whites and non-whites, between social classes, and between those of different ages. Congratulations Ms. Allen, you’ve recreated the restrictions of Victorian England or the the American South prior to the 1970s.

The only way for a progressive to avoid the slippery slope that ends up undermining her argument supporting gay marriage is to give up on the concept of traditional marriage entirely and take the libertarian view. There any number of adults of varying sexes can have contracts, and the age of consent becomes the line at which a child is recognized as being old enough to be a partner in a binding legal contract. Religions are then free to continue to marry as they see fit. If a Mormon sect wants to marry one man to multiple women, so be it. Similarly if the Catholic Church refuses to marry two women it is free to do so because of religi0us freedom. The role of the State then becomes the enforcer of contracts, a role that it has had throughout history and one that does not come into conflict with religious and personal freedom.

The problem for progressives like Ms. Allen is that they seek to expand the role of the State in people’s lives, the opposite of libertarians. While a libertarian believes the government should be limited and as small as possible, the progressive views government as a tool to create a society based on progressive ideals. There is little difference between progressives on the Left and conservatives on the Right in this regard, since both see the State as a means to their different ends. This is why government ballooned under Reagan in the 1980s and Bush in the 2000s, just as it has grown under Obama over the past 6 years. It also explains why progressives have encouraged censorship and curtailed basic freedoms such as freedom of speech and freedom of religion under Obama just as the conservatives did under Reagan in the 1980s.

But keeping the government in the marriage business will present logical dilemmas such as incestuous marriage or polygamy, making sure the ground beneath the feet of progressives is icy and sloped. Advocates for such unpopular views simply need to follow in the footsteps of the progressives and wait for legal cases and popular opinion to swing their way. In the meantime those on the Right including libertarians such as myself will enjoy watching progressives like Allen rocket down the icy slope.

The Council Has Spoken: January 16, 2015

Council Winners


Non-Council Winners


Council Submissions: January 14, 2015

Council Submissions


Honorable Mentions


Non-Council Submissions


The Council Has Spoken: January 9, 2015

Council Winners


Non-Council Winners


Council Submissions: January 7, 2015

Council Submissions


Honorable Mentions


Non-Council Submissions


What I Learned in 2014

1. I’m not immortal, nor am I an accurate assessor of risk. In November I came the closest I’ve knowingly ever come to death or serious injury. There was no foreshadowing of the accident, no supernatural “spider-sense tingling” warning me of the possibility of danger, nothing. Instead the accident happened, my luck held, and I didn’t die nor was I paralyzed. Decades of experience had lead me to believe that I could accurately assess danger, and an instant on my own property proved me wrong.

This incident also taught me that bad medical insurance is worse than no medical insurance at all. If you are currently uninsured and can only take one thing away from your time reading this article, GET INSURED NOW. I estimate that my time in hospital cost $30 a minute. The American health care system is a clusterf**k, but until we fix it everyone should be insuring themselves with catastrophic plans to avoid financial ruin. These are cheap, don’t cover pre-existing conditions or provide Obamacare mandated coverage. But they are there for catastrophes that can wipe out your life savings in a blink of an eye (worth $.05 in a hospital – I’m still gobsmacked at the cost of my care).

2. There is hope for America. This election every candidate I supported won, in contrast to past 4 elections when the opposite occurred. I had been in the wilderness for so long that I had lost all hope for a viable opposition against the juggernaut of the Left’s assault on our rights and freedom.  November 4th and its aftermath renewed my faith that especially in politics Life is like a wheel; wait long enough and it will all come around.

3. I don’t need cable/satellite television. Last year I experimented with online streaming of TV using the PS3. This year I purchased a Roku and subscribed to Netflix and AcornTV. For a fraction of the cost of cable/satellite I now enjoy a broader selection of programming than ever. Cable/Satellite claim to have 200+ channels, as if that number means anything. I’m down to a handful now (AMC, BBC America, History, Discovery, NatGeo) but enjoy content that I choose. If you Doc Martin is your favorite GP, or relish a good Time Team dig, then AcornTV is for you. Need something heavier? There’s Breaking Bad or Sons of Anarchy on Netflix, playing exactly when you need them. It’s like having my own TV channel. Next stop: Cutting the cord.

4. Speaking of own TV channel, Pandora is soooo 2012, but thanks to my Smartphone and data package, I can stream it in the car and in 2014 it was like having my own radio channel. Instead of being stuck with whatever ClearChannel wants me to hear, I listen to what I want with enough variance thrown in to keep me interested. In a bad mood? There’s always the Skinny Puppy channel to put things right. Need something moving to get the hear moving, there’s DJ Tiesto. 2014 changed the way I consume media, and for someone who used to have to buy records without hearing them, it’s truly sublime.

5. The Ancients Still Have Much to Teach Us. In 2014 I developed an obsession with Ancient Rome (after devouring the HBO series Rome on Netflix). I’ve read all of Julius Caesar and Tacitus. I am now working on The History of Rome by Livy. For most of my life I was told how good the Classics were but I thought “meh, that’s ancient history.” This year I saw them in a completely new way. What truly amazes me is how little the Romans had to start with, but yet how they accomplished so much. Sure they ripped off the Greeks, but the Greeks weren’t the best teachers. Instead the Romans had to make things up as they went along. There was little “history” that they could search for clues on how to handle a new situation. 2000 years ago there was no Free Market economics, no Democracy (at least in the modern sense of the term), no separation of powers. Nevertheless the Romans built first a Republic then an Empire that resonates through Time. In today’s technology obsessed era it’s worth remembering what the Ancients did with just wax tablets, quills, and animal muscle.

6. Rolling Stone magazine should have OD’d on heroin in 1978. Rolling Stone was founded at the height of hippiedom and only stayed relevant during the 1970s thanks to gonzo journalist Hunter S. Thompson. It was a counter-culture magazine but when the counter-culture became the culture, it lost its allure. Today’s millennials do not group identify through music the way Hippies, Stoners and Punks did through the 1960s, 70s and 80s. A magazine that started life geared towards the musical taste of their grandparents really has limited interest to them. Lenny Bruce once said “there is nothing sadder than an aging hipster,” and the liberal geriatrics don’t seem to understand that. Rolling Stone’s founder Jann Wenner (who turns 69 on Jan. 7) doesn’t get it either. If he did and had folded the magazine before it became a parody of itself, it wouldn’t have earned Columbia Journalism Reviews’ worst journalism prize for 2014.

7. The Democratic Party is the new Geezer Party. Speaking of aging hipsters, it’s difficult to respect a party whose standard bearer and young upstart – Hillary Clinton and Elizabeth Warren – are both eligible for full social security benefits at the respective ages of 67 and 65. It’s not that I have issues with the elderly. I see the elderly as a valuable but underutilized resource in the US. What I have trouble with is a geriatric who thinks he understands youth culture. Now old people understand children, at least the smart ones do. Having been kids then raised a generation or two of them (in some cases) many old people can relate better than most to the struggles of the younger generations, but that has nothing to do with culture. I’m approaching senescence at full speed myself and I couldn’t tell you who is hip these days, nor would I care to. But when my teenage son has that look in his eye, I know what psycho mind games his girlfriend is playing on him because I remember having that look myself at his age (which is why I ended up marrying an older woman – the girls my age seemed to be all bi-polar schizos).  But that level of maturity, to be old and sympathetic but aware of one’s limitations, is not in evidence in the Democratic Party. Instead we are watching the political equivalent of a 50 year old woman dressing in public like her 20 year old daughter. It’s embarrassing.

8. Crazy Ivan is back. Russia’s bad behavior in Europe and the Middle East proved that 1989 wasn’t the end of Russian authoritarianism after all. The Russian propaganda machine is working overtime extolling the virtues of Vladimir Putin and denigrating everyone else as conspirators all working zealously to undermine Russia. As someone who studied foreign policy during the Cold War, let me just state how happy this makes me. All those papers and books I read about Russian nationalism, culture and paranoia are finally proving their worth. As I have written before, Russia should be America’s natural ally but not when it’s got its pants around its ankles and is pissing on a lamppost while screaming how much it wants to kick America’s ass. We understand Russia the way we understand our crazy ex’s. We know their weaknesses better than they do. The only reason Putin has gotten away with what he has so far is who sits in the Oval Office. Barack Obama makes Jimmy Carter look like Genghis Khan by comparison. Hopefully in two years we will have a balanced leader who will replace him, who sets meaningful red lines and punishes our enemies while rewarding our allies – the opposite of our current commander in chief.

 

The Council Has Spoken: January 2, 2015

Council Winners


Non-Council Winners


Writing in a Neo-Victorian Age

Elizabeth Nolan Brown writes for Reason on the return of Victorian-age sensibilities in modern life, “(I)t’s taken the form of fighting to shield delicate sensibilities from “offensive” ideas, limit the parameters of free expression, and return women to the realm of dainty dolls needing special protection.” The assault on freedom is particularly acute to those of us who came of age in the 1970’s and 1980’s when the attacks came primarily from the conservatives and right-wing, although one shouldn’t forget that Tipper Gore, wife to then senator Al Gore and co-f0under of the PMRC, lead the charge against rock music lyrics making censorship a bi-partisan effort. Today’s attacks however come primarily from the Left and appear under the guise of “rational for banning/criminalizing hate speech is that it’s so emotionally traumatizing it serves, even in the absence of any incitement or physical consequence, as a form of violence, and this trumps free speech concerns.”

As a professional writer (not here) self-censorship comes with the job. Self-censorship for a writer is not necessarily a bad thing. It’s an editing tool that can help a writer get his or her point across. But I find myself censoring myself more these days outside of the professional realm to avoid trouble. In fact I just did it in the previous sentences, replacing a short and visceral reaction to living in a neo-Victorian prison with more palatable fare. Worse, I did it without thinking and a careful review of my writing here confirms that even though I argue against such censorship, I capitulate to it more than I should have to as a free-born human being living in a free society under legal protection.

Fuck that. It’s one thing to have to self-censor on the job, it’s another thing completely to do so on an online journal. Nevertheless fighting against self-censorship has consequences, and a writer must decide whether the exercising of  expression is worth it. Unfortunately today those penalties become increasingly harsh as Culture continues its crawl towards authoritarianism making the choices more difficult and painful.

Here’s a reminder of simpler times from Burke Breathed’s classic comic Bloom County.

Council Submissions: December 31, 2014

Council Submissions


Honorable Mentions


Non-Council Submissions


The Dagger In The Heart of Socialized Medicine in the US

Megan McArdle has an excellent post-mortem on the death of Single-Payer Healthcare in Vermont. In it she points out some of the difficulties the single-payer advocates face in implementing the solution in the United States. The main issue isn’t the explosive growth of health care costs in the United States today; it’s the growth of costs in the past. “The problem, as I wrote previously, is that America doesn’t have a health-care cost-growth problem; we had a health-care cost-growth problem. Right now, our health-care cost growth is right in the middle of the OECD pack. Our spending is indeed high compared with the rest of the world, but that’s because it started high.”

To put this another way, imagine you rack up $35,000 in credit card debt over a period of time. You finally wake up and realize that you can’t keep spending that way so you start using the card more carefully. You cut back to the point where you only purchase about $650/month – roughly the monthly average credit card spending of Americans. But doing so there is no way to reach the average American credit card debt of $7,500 because in the past you didn’t spend like an average American; you spent like a 16 year rich girl handed her daddy’s plastic. So while you may spend like an average person today, there is no easy way to achieve that $7,500 average by spending cutbacks. You’d have to cut spending to zero and hope for a bailout from the parents or the government.

As McArdle notes, in order to reach the level of health care spending that would allow us to consider a single-payer system like the Europeans have today we would need to cut entire swaths of health care system employment, and doing so would be politically impossible. “Health-care jobs are steady and well-remunerated compared to whatever else those workers could be doing. And that’s not just true of the much-derided “specialists” who do too many procedures and charge too much; it’s true of everyone in your hospital and doctor’s office, from your beloved family physician to the woman who draws your blood. All those people have spent long years working to get where they are. If you suddenly change the rules and take that all away, their rage will burn with the righteous fire of a thousand suns,” McArdle writes.

In 2014 the US spent 17.9% of its GDP on healthcare according to the World Bank. The UK spent 9.4%, France 11.7% and Canada 10.9%. If the US wanted to institute a Canadian-style single payer system, it would have to cut it’s health care spending by roughly 40%.

Think about that. Every doctor, nurse, and medical assistant would receive a 40% pay cut. Every paramedic, home health worker and dietician would do the same. Ditto every insurance claim processor, HMO CEO and malpractice attorney. Every worker who received at least part of their salary due to health care would see that part cut by 40%. And this wouldn’t be a one off event, no. It would be a permanent pay cut.

Nurses wouldn’t be able to pay their mortgages. Insurance claims reps wouldn’t be able to pay for their kids’ tuition. Physicians wouldn’t be able to repay their student loans. The ramifications would reverberate through our economy like an economic earthquake as banks failed, service industries collapsed and other businesses that relied upon that income from the healthcare system evaporated. I have no idea how much GDP would be lost through kn0ck-off effects of such a change. Of course our economy would suddenly have 7% of its GDP freed up, a massive amount of wealth that could eventually lead to some amazing things in our economy. Just hope you don’t get sick during the first several years of adjustment.

Anyone who claims that they know how to fix our system is either an idiot or insane. As someone who both consumes health care, and is married to a health care provider who works long hours under the constant threat of lawsuits dispensing health care to the entitled then laboriously documenting the encounter in electronic medical record systems designed by lawyers and health insurance bureaucrats, I have no idea what the solution is.

We need one, but single-payer isn’t it.

 

 

The Council Has Spoken: December 26, 2014

Council Winners


Non-Council Winners


Why I Say “Merry Christmas” Even Though I’m not a Christian

For the same reason I wish my Jewish friends a “Happy Hanukkah” during Hanukkah even though I’m not Jewish.
For the same reason I wish my Muslim friends “Eid Mubarak” during Eid al-Fitr and Eid ul-Adha even though I’m not Muslim.
For the same reason I wish my Hindu friends a “Happy Diwali” during Diwali even though I’m not Hindu.

Because I like them and I respect them, and even though I don’t share their beliefs I want to show them that I care about them and value their friendship.

That’s true tolerance, and I don’t need a bullsh*t bumper sticker on my car to proclaim it.