Speaking of freak shows which I wish one could ignore, watching the escaped mental patients running the asylum District of Crazy government moan about health care is actually kind of amusing. While it’s hard to make heads or tails of the endless spin, it seems their main talking point now is that it’s just too expensive. And as far as I can tell, the popular solution which most of them deny favoring is to emulate the increasingly authoritarian country whom we fought a bloody revolution against a couple hundred years ago by having government “experts” ration/deny care and generally removing as much choice from the system as they feel they can get away with.
Or, in other words, they want to make it better by making it worse. You know, to save money they shouldn’t be spending to begin with.
But, yea, this got me thinking. Apparently, nationalized health insurance is important because, without it, you might go into debt (which they would rather you accumulate by borrowing non-existent money to buy a new TV to A: stimulate the economy, B: distract you via “reality” shows from the wholesale Treasury looting operation, and C: so they can blame your sitting in front of the TV for obesity or something) if you get sick and have to *gasp* pay the bill for some medical service which would have been considered close to Necromancy even ten years ago at an emergency room which cannot deny treatment. Or if your attention span failed during that run-on sentence, I’m saying you won’t die without national health care.
You’ll just be stuck owing ever more worthless bits of paper to pay for it if you get sick.
Without food, however, you will die without it. Period.
So if “health care reform” is important enough to follow the lead of the open air island prison where Great Britain used to be, then shouldn’t hunger care reform be important enough to copy another authoritarian regime?
Like, say, North Korea?
Seeing as political science is essentially the art of inventing numbers to make a really stupid, collectivist point, let’s just go ahead and assume the US spends eleventy times as much per capita on food than they do in N. Korea. Let’s also claim, breathlessly, that there are 47 gajillion, err, un-in-fooded people in the US. If we were to take inspiration from Kim Jong Il, nationalize the food industry, and ration everybody a ball of cold rice every week (and perhaps a rat or something on special occasions, if you’re lucky enough to find one), we could save tons of money while still guaranteeing everyone their “fair share!”
And once the malnutrition kicks in, we’re sure to wipe out the parenthetically aforementioned obesity problem too.
Or, seeing as a vast majority of medical spending is on the elderly, well, instead of just telling them to take a pain pill and shut up and die to save money, why not just combine the two plans..