Should your neighbor pay for your healthcare?

Healthcare must be a right, and not a privilege in a free scoiety!  How can it not be? Why should some have healthcare and others not have healthcare? What should somebody have a car and somebody else not have a car? Why should somebody be handsome and somebody else have to sneak up on a glass of water?

Current thinking suggests that it is far better for everybody to have 1/4 strength healhcare than for 1/4 of the population to be forced to get their care from clinics and ER programs. The latter in the US is called no healthcare. The latter in East Inkastinkastan is "thank God the Lord heard our prayers."

Are these issues not at the center of the debate about who gets the bounty produced by the working people of America?  In days gone by there would have been no dispute. The employees who earned the paycheck would get to spend their own paycheck. For lack of better terms, it was their own bounty. In days gone by, if you earned it, you kept it. 

Today, the government wants those who work to give their healthcare benefit to somebody else who is nondescript but needy. The person is most probably not not among the working class. Keeping your own family's healthcare has ecome a political issue. Why would you not want to give up your healthcare so somebody else, not as well-off as you can have what you have had all your life? Isn't about time you learned how important it is to share the pain?


Those who wish to keep their healthcare provided by their employers now are made to sound "piggish" by the mainstream media. The members of this media think the rights of those who choose to be downtrodden trump those who work and the rights of the needy now trump the average Joe's ability to keep what Joe earns. All of this is simply called "healthcare redistribution."

If you are worried that your healthcare is going to be taken away or severely limited, you are not alone. With Obamacare, there is plenty of reason to be concerned that the things you worked all of your life to assure may now assure that somebody else was right in choosing not to work. By government decree, they get yours. 

The Barack Obama Healthcare plan which is aptly shortened to Obamacare could never have passed muster with the greatest Americans of our time, the founding fathers. These guys and the mere 5 million in population that were around in the post 1750 era had a tough time asking the Crown for a Crown, if you get my drift. They expected nothing from government and they received exactly what they expected. They fought a revolution as I recall so that an oppressive government would not be able to tax them against their will. Now, you know why the TEA party was formed.  We are Taxed Enough Already! Consicating your health insurance and giving it to somebody else will be the greatest tax of all as you can bet it will shorten your life.

So, what is the right of every man to healthcare? If there is a right, what are its origins?. Did the right come from Adam and Eve? Did the Apple bite mean that we all became winners in the big fruit lottery? Which of the two were doctors, Adam, the observer, or Eve, the Apple biter?  Or perhaps it was God, who deemed it so?  If there were no doctors then how could there be healthcare at that time in our human history?  Maybe the hospitals would handle the traffic?  Whoops! no hospitals yet! It was just Adam and Eve. The Garden's hospital had yet to be built. Oh, and there was not government. Maybe that is why it worked for them.

Is heat a right?  Is light at night a right? Is food a right? Do the animals come to man asking to be eaten so that man can survive?  If so, why are there hunters?  When the farmer plants is he concerned about all the others besides his family who need to be fed by his crop -- pro bono?  Should he till a little more or throw more seed because others may want of his harvest.? Should he say to all that they are welcome to reap what he has sewn? 

Is air a right?  Do you think you got me on that one?  Air is not a right either. God provides air and water. If either is in short supply, it is up to individual men with God's help to solve that one. Is milk a right? Are chocolate cupcakes a right? Is air conditioning a right? Is protection from earthquakes and tsunamis a right?

Is sitting at home while your neighbor works a right? Is sharing in the harvest when you do not participate in the planting and you do not work the harvest a right? Is taking from a friend's home the things of his that you like a right?  Is it stingy if your neighbor chooses not to give you whatever you like? Should the government simply take the thngs you want from your neighbor so you can have them?

How hard do you think the founding fathers had to reach to come up with the few rights that they believe we all possess. Has two hundred and a quarter years separated us from the love of freedom those who died so we could live free gave to us: How about these rights as noted in the Declaration of Independence:


"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.These are the only enunciated rights: life liberty and the pursuit of happiness.  Happiness is not a right. Only the pursuit of happiness is a right. So, you may pursue and pursue and pursue your happiness, which is a right, but if you don;t achieve happiness, your neighbor is not at fault.

Please make note that Obamacare was not one of the delineated rights, nor was chocolatecare or fuzzycare or everything care. More on the rights from the founders sollows:

 — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, [US] — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness!

What goof would have written a piece of crap like that?  Well, recent historians have tried to disguise this patriot as a slave owner who cared little about mankind but they are wrong as this was written  by one of our nations's greatest patriots. On this document, you will find the name Thomas Jefferson, a man who loathed all attempts to subvert freedom and who loathed the realities of government by "mortal men" even more. 

All one has to do is keep reading and just like Harry Reid can gain accord with the President about nascent remarks in our time, how about a real patriot? The Patriot of whom I speak, stubborn as he was, was as good as it got even in disagreement, and he helped us all be what we are and more importantly, he helped us know what we can be. 

Accursed as it is in less understanding circles, his name of course is Thomas Jefferson, and we would do well to have him amongst us today. No, he was not the sole author of the Declaration against England. Many other brave men stood the task and did what needed to be done. The Declaration of Independence of course is a formal explanation of why Congress had voted on July 2, 1776,  to declare independence from Great Britain. 

So, as we evaluate our rights versus our privileges for living in the United States, it is better for all of us to think of all of our wonderments as privileges, reserved by our founding fathers of course only for citizens of the United States of America.  Let others ask and they may receive but if they demand there shall be no receipt.  There are no rights in which one man may appear and demand the rights of another.

And, to be more specific, which founding father would you suspect suggested that the work of the many shall provide for the lack of will to work of the few? The answer is none. The Founders beleived that by giving men the freedom needed to flourish they would choose to work hard to fourish, rahter than expect others to work on their behalf because they simply choose not to work.

Americans believe that we should all help the helpless but. However Americans do not beleive that we whould do anything to help anybody to choose to act helpless who is not helpless.  

Healthcare is something that one should expect if you have paid into the system. If Doctors were slaves of the state, indentured to serve without complaint, then many things could be asked of them. 

But, they are human beings and so we shall not as them to give from themselves so that those who choose to be parasites of the system can have "so-called rights." 

Thinking I had created a notion about individual accountability for healthcare as well as a new idea for funding as much care of those with no insurance as we can, I wrote a year or so ago called Healthcare Accountability.


This book is sold at

Do you reallize that for all the help that we tapxpayers give to so many -- Medicid, EMTALA, CHIPS, etc, there is no mechanism to account for it all. In other words if upon being treated, the patient gaining help from Medicaid or EMTALA were to become a millionaire, there would be no way to collect because we immediately forgive the bill.  EMTALA hospitals do try to collect but when they cannot, they give up.  No matter when the patient becomes a millionaire, because their is no accounting by the government that uses taxpayer dollars from the treasury, there is no accountability. Tough to beelive isn't it! 

Please permit me to finish this essay with the words of Sigrid Egan, who was compelled to make the folllowing post on a blog on His thesis in this response is basically that eventually, when nobody is paying for anything, it ceases to exist.  


"I would like to add the following:

I am a native of Germany, born in 1940. I came to the US in late 1977, having experienced the so-called "great" national healthcare. Everything was free which, incidentally, it is NOT anymore. The German government is just as broke as the US (before National Healthcare) and has to put some of the burden onto the people.

Aside from inconveniences, waiting in line from 8 - 4 or more at a doctor's office, referrals to specialists were always delayed.
My best example for the "great German National Healthcare" is this: In 1993, my 85-year old mother, who had a long history of heart disease, diagnosed as Angina Pectoris, by her internist, who never found it necessary to refer her to a cardiologist, spent the last 4 weeks of her life in a hospital. After a series of tests, it was discovered that her arteries were clear and that she had never had the above mentioned condition, in fact, she needed 2 new heart valves, otherwise she would die.

One of the attending physicians said to me very blandly "your mother has long surpassed her life expectancy". The cardiologist in the hospital told her that there was no hospital that would operate on her, she was too old and this type of operation would only be allowed up until the age of 75, inspite of the fact that she was otherwise in very good health and spirits.

After a number of phone calls and interventions by the doctor, myself and an insurance agent, my mother was told that they found a hospital outside of her hometown who would take her and perform the heart surgery.

To make a long story short: She was transfered, every day that she was scheduled for the catheter test, they had a different problem with the machines broken, too many back-ups etc. I personally believe, that these were excuses; the first hospital wanted to get rid of her, it was too embarrassing and the second hospital had no intention of operating on her. 4 weeks later she died.

I know of a few other incidents similar to the above among German friends.

So, if any fool in this country wants to tell me how great national health coverage would be, I have to bring up my story.  Government is incapable of running businesses because it does not consist of people in business.

They are best at talk not work!   "