From the Tea Party Debate:
Wolf Blitzer >> You’re a physician, ron paul, you’re a doctor. You know something about this subject. Let me ask you this hypothetical question. A healthy 30-year-old young man has a good job, makes a good living, but decides I’m not going to spend 200 or $300 a month because I’m healthy, i don’t need it. But something terrible happens, all of a sudden he needs it. Who will pay if he goes into a coma, who pays for that?
Ron Paul >> In a society that you accept welfarism and socialism, he expects the government to take care of him.
Blitzer >> What do you want?
Paul >> What he should do is whatever he wants to do and assume responsibility for himself. My advice to him would have a major policy.
Blitzer >> He doesn’t have that and he needs intensive care for six months. Who pays?
Paul >> That’s what freedom is all about, taking your own risks. This whole idea that you have to prepare and take care of everybody —
Audience >> [applause]
Blitzer >> but congressman, are you saying that society should just let him die?
Audience >> [shouts of “yeah!”]
Weird exchange to be having in this day and age, but it does get right to the heart of the health care and spending question, doesn’t it! And then comes this clearly false message, lofted through the digital transom the same way that Nigerian Prince keeps asking me for money!
Hi, friend. Yeah, it’s me! I’m the guy Wolf Blitzer was talking about Monday night at that Tea Party debate. You know, the 30-year-old man who was feeling so good that he decided to skip buying health insurance, and then wound up in a coma? Pleased to meet you!
People are making a big deal out of the fact that Ron Paul would let me suffer the consequences of my inaction. And they’re making an even bigger deal out of the way that Tea Party crowd cheered for the idea that the Congressman would let me die. They’re being called heartless killers and a bloodthirsty band of modern Marie Antoinettes, except instead of “let them eat cake”, the motto is “let them stop eating totally, choke on their poor choices and decrease the surplus population,” which I’m pretty sure is something Dickens said, or one of his characters. I don’t actually remember. I had a pretty short life and didn’t have time to learn much. But enough about me – I’m just a rhetorical device.
There’s lots of hand-wringing over this episode, mostly from people who fear that we as a society have come to a very cold, brutal place where it is better to let people die than to think about an increase in government spending. But no one has asked me what I think! And I’m the one who’s going to be allowed to expire, right? And frankly, though this may surprise you, I think I deserve it. That’s right. It’s all my fault. I lived an uncharmed life. I made a bunch of mistakes. So let me die, already!
Before you start protesting, I have to tell you that my string of fatal errors began long before I decided to save a few bucks on health insurance. The first thing I did wrong was this – I allowed myself to be born without a name.
That’s right. I let God (in this case, Wolf Blitzer) create me as a fully-grown adult, destined to live only as long as it took for him to ask his question. I had no identity, no parents to speak of, no siblings, no spouse or domestic partner and no children. All I had was a good job, robust health, a cheapskate attitude, and eventually, a coma. That’s everything there ever was for me. No obligations. No connections. No one loved me and I made a bad, selfish decision. Who wouldn’t want to kill off a guy like that?
Regrets? I wish I’d insisted on a name. Even something as weird as “Hypothetical Q. Blitzerman” would have been good enough to bring a few of those Tea Party people over to my side. My folks might have named me “Hypothetical” because of the fruitless years they spent trying to conceive me. I’ll bet they couldn’t believe their luck when I finally arrived. I’m guessing I had siblings too. A spunky little sister, Antithetical (Ann) and an egghead baby brother, Theoretical (Theo).
I’d like to think I did OK in school, made lots of friends, played back up wide receiver on the football team, sang a song (badly) in the school musical, fell in the fountain at prom and ruined my rented tuxedo.
Before I got my good job I’ll bet I worked some truly lousy ones and probably served you a hamburger along the way. There was a time when a fishing pole and a sleeping bag were the only possessions I cared anything about. Until I met this girl who wasn’t impressed with my aimless life. So I finished school, got married, got that job and got her pregnant, all in a few, short, crazy, wonderful years. Of course I felt invincible, so when we made up the family budget we put hundreds into health care for her, and I used my health money to save for a house, instead. Calculated risk.
Did I mention I was never very good at gambling?
Anyway, things went wrong and who do I have to blame but myself? Yeah, Wolf Blitzer brought me into the world but I made all the critical mistakes. I should have insisted that my “good” job have health care attached. How else can you call it “good”? And I should have demanded that he give me a name, some friends, and a few relations.
I’ll bet if Wolf had put my brother Theo in league with the Libertarians or made my sister Ann a leading light in the Tea Party movement, they would have at least paused for a moment before shouting out their enthusiastic support for my needless, premature death.
Like I say, it was totally my fault.
If Wolf Blitzer and Ron Paul were about to bite into Turkey Burgers tainted with Salmonella, could the government regulation-forced recall come quickly enough to save them? Should it?
Trail Baboon 
Sometimes we need to get out of the way and let natural selection do its work….
LikeLike
my feeling exactly beth ann
make an example of them
can you make ron paul burgers if the meat was tainted with tainted meat?
and by the way did hypothetical take out insurance on his tuxedo that he ruined when he fell in the fountain or did he have to pay for that. you would think he would have taken note then for crying out loud.
LikeLike
Rise and Shine Baboons!
It seems to me that in 2 short days Bubby Spamden grew up to age 30. This 30 year old is now dealing with grown up life with his teenage brain. All of his logic and illogic are fully present in this piece of writing. I always wondered what Bubby’s future would hold. Now that is clear.
I’ll bet Q votes Republican when he votes at all.
Natural selection seems to be a good idea in this case….
LikeLike
All I can think of whenever someone commences to fussing about government intrusion, is, “so…you don’t want roads to drive on, right? what about sewers and running water? that lack of TB and polio in your community – what about that? your free education you got growing up that taught you math and reading? and I suppose if someone breaks into your house or steals from your business, you’ll take care of the investigation, prosecution, and fair trial yourself – remembering that we have messy things like rights to that fair trial and protections from unreasonable search from that pesky government that also helps to keep you healthy, safe and educated…oh – and what about paying for the military, hmm? that’s a lot of government spending and intrusion right there…” So yeah, I’d let the government swoop in and save Mr Paul – and then give him a stern lecture on why I was saving his sorry butt. Because I believe in good government and a civil society. (Stepping off my soap box now.)
LikeLike
Well said, Anna! I would love to take those people and drop them in Somalia, which has had no functional government for 20 years, and see how much they enjoy living in a place with no government services, no central authority and “might makes right” as the only law. My roommate used to work with a lot of Somalis, and they told her they thought American anti-government attitudes were insane, because they’d struggled to survive without health care, free education, a working justice system, and so on, and never wanted to live that way again.
LikeLike
As they’d say in Denmark “Godt brølt løve!”
LikeLike
Perfect. I actually have this quote pinned up in my cube here:
If the life of a river depended only on the rainfall within the confines of its own banks, it would soon be dry. If the life of an individual depended solely on his own resources, he would soon fall. Be grateful for your tributaries. Dr. William Arthur
LikeLike
Good quote VS – I may have to pin that up in my cube, too.
LikeLike
Nicely said, Anna. I’ll quick hop up on the empty soap box. Today, ten days into my summer cold, I am meaner than a snake. Q isn’t going to get off as lightly with me as with some baboons. If someone isn’t willing to share in the costs of a civil society until he is in trouble is irresponsible and selfish, and his nasty attitudes corrode the natural tendency of people to work cooperatively. So Q didn’t want to pay for health insurance but now doesn’t want to die because he needs surgery after all? Fine. Operate. But now this guy owes society a LOT. Let’s send him to some modern equivalent of the Poor Farms they used to have. Let’s make sure he wallows in shame and humiliation. And let him pay off the cost of his surgery by riding big recycling trucks, hopping down to separate cans from bottles.
LikeLike
I don’t think it’s possible for you to be mean, Steve…
LikeLike
Ditto to Anna and Steve. I’d like to hear what Mr. Paul would say if it were some of his close friends and relatives who were in a coma. It all changes when it gets personal and close to home.
LikeLike
Unfortunately my experience with some of these people is that you can try to reason with them all you want, but it’s an exercise in futility because they just don’t listen.
Access to free public education? They want the government out of their lives to leave them free to educate their children themselves with absolutely no questions asked them by the government. Health insurance for all? Bad idea…because that’s socialism. They easily resort to name-calling. Anything they label “socialism” is bad because socialism is bad. Anything they label “liberal” is bad because liberalism is bad (in their eyes). They use the word “liberal” almost like a swear word.
If the idea comes from somebody they label as a liberal, then the idea is automatically bad because liberals are bad, therefore all their ideas are bad. And if the idea comes from our current president, then it is doubly bad because 1) he wasn’t born in the U.S. or 2) he is the antiChrist – or both. (Of course they don’t mention the fact that he’s black might have something to do with their hatred of him.)
There are some exceptions – some conservatives are willing to dialogue and discuss things in a reasonable manner. But, in my experience, they are few and far between. They’re more interested in getting people all worked up about the “enemies” of socialism and liberalism.
LikeLike
just to clarify – this is sort of a response to Anna and the following comments. I’ve tried to dialog with people who think no government is good government, but have pretty much failed – partly due to my lack of articulate-ness and partly due to their belief that their beliefs are infallible.
LikeLike
Would you like to borrow my “Liberal” t-shirt? I’m afraid to wear it in Waterville.
LikeLike
I might be afraid to wear it, too…some of the people i know might stone me or something if I wore that.
LikeLike
As a card-carrying Libertarian and a Ron Paul supporter since 1988 (the first time he ran for President), I feel the need to respond to HQB’s hypothetical question.
First, watch the debate again, or read the transcript. Dr. Paul did NOT agree with Blitzer when he asked:
“Blitzer >> but congressman, are you saying that society should just let him die?
Audience >> [shouts of “yeah!”]”
Dr. Paul said, “No,” immediately after the audience member made a fool of himself on national TV. Here’s the rest of that exchange, from the NY Times online transcription:
<> (end of transcription)
Libertarians don’t believe in NO government. We believe in Constitutionally limited government. There is a HUGE difference. The solutions to our problems aren’t a choice between government solutions or no solutions. The choice is between one government solution that tries to fit everyone (and is eventually forced upon everyone), or an open competition for solutions by any groups or individuals who care to try to solve a problem. If I choose not to buy health insurance because I have other priorities, I accept that the level of care I receive–from Medicaid; charitable hospitals; religious, business, or fraternal forms of group insurance; or family or friends–might be less than what I would get if I spared no expense to have the best health insurance money can buy.
I don’t wish to turn this into a political debate. I’ll only point out that Dr. Paul and Mr. Blitzer would hypothetically eat those tainted turkey burgers because the US Department of Agriculture antithetically approved that turkey for sale, despite the fact that the USDA has strict rules on sanitation and hygiene, theoretically inspected the plant where that turkey was processed, and should have prevented that turkey from reaching the market in the first place.
I choose to accept that risk when I buy any government inspected/approved food. But with the risk of food-borne illness seeming to increase in recent years, I’m more inclined to trust my local organic farmer, who knows that if he offers a dangerous product to his small group of consumers, he is directly affected big time by loss of sales, most likely going out of business for such a grave mistake as allowing his products to become contaminated and sickening his customers.
What consequences does the USDA suffer when they fail to prevent food-borne illness?
LikeLike
I am glad you entered the conversation. I think it is important for the Trail to be open to all Baboon opinions when they are presented in the civil manner in which you presented yours.
LikeLike
If you will permit me a Cliffie moment from my position in public health. Rates of food borne illness have actually decreased. What has increased is the technology that allows us to link cases so that a single case in Minnesota paired with 2 cases in Connecticut becomes an outbreak, one that we would never have suspected in the past.
Data normalized for population compares foodborne illness rates over recent time and finds: “In comparison with the 1996–1998 period, rates of infection in 2010 were lower for Shigella (57% decrease), Yersinia (52% decrease), STEC O157 (44% decrease), Listeria (38% decrease), and Campylobacter (27% decrease); slightly higher for Salmonella (though not significantly different); and significantly higher for Vibrio (115% increase).”
With improved technology and communication our exposure to information about outbreaks has increased. Granted there is still room for improvement. Some of the most serious outbreaks and deaths have been from small organic producers who over time may suffer loss of business, but it will only be after the serious illness not before.
Chris like Renee says welcome to the Trail and thanks for sharing!
LikeLike
Thanks, Beth-Ann. Glad you clarified that. Statistics can be very misleading.
LikeLike
Chris, you present a third choice between government solution and no solution – and it seems to me that you are arguing to preserve the patchwork system that is our status quo, which has proven to be a massively inefficient system. It leaves a mountain of unpaid bills, forcing hospitals to shift the cost to their paying customers, resulting in higher insurance costs, which drive more people out of the insurance market, which then results in more uncompensated care. When health care costs are high, the uninsured and underinsured postpone appropriate medical care, making them more expensive to treat.
Like Anna and others, I believe in good government, and this is an area where the private market does not meet the need, and charity is not even coming close to filling the gap. This is something government can do, and can do well – other governments in the industrialized world demonstrate this every day.
LikeLike
I couldn’t agree more, Linda. A stitch in time, saves nine. These problems are very complex, and simple solutions will not fix them.
LikeLike
Thanks for the clarification on Ron Paul’s answer, Chris. I’ve had the Libertarian vs. Liberal discussion many times, mostly with my late brother who was active in the California Libertarian Party and actually ran for Congress a couple of times on the party platform with lots of passion but very little success. I eventually came to see his approach as more idealistic than mine – he really did believe that the free market and enlightened self-interest would solve all our problems. Part of that “solution”, though, is having to watch people suffer and even die as the inevitable result of their poor choices. In his view it would be a regrettable but effective way for everyone to learn important lessons. To my way of thinking, it would simply be unacceptable to allow these tragedies to unfold while we have the means to stop them.
The point I was trying to make by creating Hypothetical Q. Blitzerman for this post was that Wolf’s question entirely missed the mark because he asked us to consider the fate of a person that nobody cares about. It was easy for the some in the debate audience to bump H.Q.B. off – a man with no family, no connections, nothing except a “good” job, a bad choice, and a coma. Our real choices are much more difficult because they have to do with the genuine suffering actual people who matter to us. I felt my brother’s Libertarian ideal was workable as a theory, but broke down when applied to real people and their complicated feelings about each other.
LikeLike
Morning everyone,
*Could* the government intervene soon enough? Probably not. Committee work you know.
*Should* it? Yes. Not everyone is an idiot even though they try hard to prove to you how good of one they are.
Let’s tie this into the Missouri Synod; Women aren’t allowed to hold offices in the church, however none of the guys would climb the ladder strung across the entry way to clean the new windows at the top so my Mother In Law had to do it.
OT: The funeral yesterday was at a small, rural, Missouri Synod church in the town of Wilbert in South Central MN. Population of Wilbert is 2 I think. Three if you count the cat. Church cemetery out back full of German names and German script on some of the older headstones. In regard to my confusing ‘Secular’ and ‘Sacred’ on Monday I can only offer my humble apologies and this comment from Inigo Montoya of ‘The Princess Bride’: “You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.”
A different organist was found; one who was able to play ‘On Eagles Wings’ along with ‘Amazing Grace’. (They still had the old red hymnal. I didn’t check the year but ‘Eagles Wings’ would definitely have NOT been in there!)
‘Egg Coffee’ was served, buttered buns of ham and turkey, the 7 layer salad and potato’s (I’m not sure what flavor they were. That isn’t a criticism of the potatoes but a lack of education on my part). And many varieties of cake.
I got to play the ‘Fun Uncle’ to four boys and taught them it’s not ‘Are we almost there’ but ‘Are we there yet’ and to be done in rounds of the four of them. And to follow it immediately with ’99 bottles of beer on the wall’.
But I also taught them how the mechanism works that lowers the casket and vault. And the funeral home guys and cemetery guys were happy to show them how it works. (BTW, graves aren’t always six feet deep. Five feet in some places will hit the water table.) A beautiful day and nice service.
LikeLike
thanks for the recap ben, glad the music got figured out. love the princess bride quote.
good fun uncle stories. catch you later
LikeLike
Chris, I too appreciate your willingness to stick your neck out and state your opinion in a civil manner, but I don’t agree with you. Here’s why.
It seems to me that wanting “open competition for solutions by any groups or individuals who care to try to solve a problem,” rather than accept carefully considered government solutions is a road we’ve traveled before. Most, if not all, government regulations are an attempt to minimize the harmful effects of business practices that focused more on their own bottom line than the public good. When profit becomes the only objective, there’s no end to the havoc industry can wreck on the environment and the jeopardy we can all be put in. We have seen it, repeatedly, yet we don’t seem to learn the lesson.
I don’t like it one bit that some people milk the system. I like it even less, when we as a society fail to care about those who through no fault of their own can’t provide for themselves. I would trust a democratically elected government over most corporate boards any day.
LikeLike
can wreak on the environment……
LikeLike
Thanks for speaking up, Chris. It’s good to be able to have this kind of respectful conservation, acknowledging all points of view. I have to agree with Anna, Crow Girl, Edith and Steve on this one. Well said, all of you.
My first response is, Yes, let them eat that tainted turkey and then tell them that their insurance won’t cover their hospital stay because they chose to eat turkey that was tainted, and they didn’t have it inspected by their own private food contaminant lab. But after I think about it, I realize that I am no better than they are if I respond that way. I have my own karma to think about…
Good discussion today!
LikeLike
i feel like ron asked for the doctoring questions on the medicare issues i didn’t catch the whole debate but i gather he waffled a bit on the debate on what to do with the guy who couldnt afford insurance and now wants to live? that is a toughie. i was at a luncheon today with governor dayton and he impresed the heck out of me by standing tall on his tax the richedst 2% as the way to pay back the schools, fund the light rail, fix the roads etc… the republicans in the chamber of commerce luncheon were civil but dayton really got his hackles up when he was asked about the tax credit for the home mortgage payments being eliminated. he said he vetoed it twice and then had to sign it in its current form to get the state back up and running and now the republicans are trying to blame me for their bil even though i was and am totally against it. the republicans should stand upa nd take credit and blame not point the finger and pretent it wasnt them.
i do like that guy.
LikeLike
Can’t blame Dayton for not wanting to be associated with the elimination of the home mortgage interest deduction, but it actually is a back-door way of taxing the rich, since they’re the biggest beneficiaries of the deduction. A lot of low and moderate income people assume they’re getting a big break from that deduction, but in fact what they’re able to deduct is only a tiny bit higher than the amount they’d be able to take as a standard deduction anyway. For many homeowners of modest means there’s no benefit at all after the first ten years or so on the mortgage. Many taxpayers don’t actually know whether they itemize deductions or not – they feed a mortgage interest figure into the tax software, but don’t look to see if they got any benefit from it. So they get angry if someone suggests taking it away.
MinnPost estimates that only 29 percent of Minnesota tax returns claim the deduction – mostly high income ones – and the cost to the state was an estimated $1.1 billion annually.
LikeLike
Studies have shown that most people have no idea what they’re paying in taxes. They’re just opposed to them no matter what.
LikeLike
‘nother Cliffy!
LikeLike
Nice, thoughtful comments today… a salve to my squashed spirit after a long day of meetings and client tours.
LikeLike
vs if your spirit was squashed I hope it was at lease butternut 🙂
LikeLike
snort!
LikeLike
When I feel squashed I kinda feel crookneck squashed.
LikeLike
If I am squashed, it matters not what variety…I feel I’m moving on to pureed (squash).
LikeLike
Thanks to all who didn’t ‘pile on’ the weird guy who doesn’t necessarily share your views. 🙂 Being a Libertarian is lonely, but I accept that most people want to believe what a large group believes, so they have a sense of belonging, consensus, etc. I’ve never had a big urge to belong to any group of any sort, especially a political group. Which is why the Libertarian Party is such a paradox. We’re a group of people who believe that groups of people shouldn’t be telling other groups of people what to do.;-)
Dale, point taken on your HQB perspective. I understand what you were getting at. It is extremely easy to bloviate about hypothetical situations, but then choke when it comes to deciding about real people. I just felt the need to (once again) point out that Ron Paul (and most politicians) are often misquoted or misunderstood,sometimes intentionally, by others seeking to further their own agendas. No knock against you, just that I feel we the citizenry, are much more manipulated by the media than we care to acknowledge, as illustrated by this example.
Apropos of what Plainjane said, and also tied in to what Dale said about HQB, LIbertarians believe that most current laws are made by those who wish to get around the laws or gain an advantage in business in one way or another. If I were ‘king’, we’d scrap every law in the book, start over from square one, and enact laws that create a level playing field for everyone, respect property rights, and guarantee individual freedoms, no exceptions. No Libertarian I’m familiar with advocates maintaining any sort of status quo as far as the US legal system is concerned. It is in need of complete and drastic overhaul and simplification.
Laws today are written by lawyers, for lawyers, to benefit large corporations and rich powerful individuals. Equality and fairness are paid lip service, but are largely ignored by those who wish to control the masses.
One thing I’ve learned over the years I’ve spent as a Libertarian thinking about personal responsibilty is that there is no way one person or group can possibly understand what goes on in the mind of every single person in this country. Who am I to say that someone who exhibits what I call foolish, illogical, and/or self-destructive behavior is not behaving in what is in that person’s best interest, since I can’t possibly know or understand that the only way that person thrives in life is to risk his own by making foolish, illogical decisions?
An example: There may be at least one person in the world for whom smoking crack cocaine is the most blissful, fulfilling, pleasurable experience in the world. Better than sex, better than altruism, better than achieving the greatest feats in sports, the arts, civic leadership, anything. To him, it is the only reason to live. How can I try to enforce a rule that says what he loves to do more than anything in the world is illegal, just because I happen to think it is a lethal, dangerous, harmful activity that adds nothing to the general social welfare? As long as he does no harm to the environment or anyone else in the world, who am I to say that what he chooses to do to himself is wrong?
So to get back to HQB, or any real person who chooses not to buy health insurance. By what moral authority can I force that person to buy health insurance? Maybe buying a house is much more important to him than covering the costs associated with 6 months in a coma. Maybe his one and only adult goal in life is to be able to call a house his own little kingdom and he’ll save every cent he can to buy that house, even if he can only live in it for a short time. I can’t know that. If he has made that decision knowing what all his options are, that should be his right, to make what some, or many, of us would call a bad choice. And then, maybe only in hindsight. Vive la difference`.
LikeLike
Hat’s off to you, Chris, for sticking to your guns. We could no doubt have some very interesting and stimulating discussions because we agree on so many points and differ on so many others. Glad you joined us today. Hope you’ll keep coming back.
LikeLike
Life would be dull if we all agreed – and there are definitely parts of the Libertarian ideal that I agree with. My little soapbox was meant less for the true Libertarians than for the Tea Party types who I would mostly not describe as Libertarian but as more of a selective cousin to that strain of political thought (the sorts of folks who want less government and fewer taxes, unless it suits their agenda – like more laws to restrict abortion or mandating the teaching of creationism along side evolution). And I totally agree that there are a lot of extraneous laws and regulations we could scrap if only people would show some common sense.
LikeLike
Beth-Ann,
Thanks for pointing out the phenomenon of better, more thorough, and more accurate reporting and dissemination of information, especially statistics. In my opinion, political leaders will often cite statistics like this to scare people into voting for more ‘regulation’, when the problem is actually less of a problem than it was years ago, but is a good way to reward some special interest group or political donor in the guise of ‘doing something for my constituents.’
We have a huge bureacracy in the USDA, yet food-born illnesses haven’t been eradicated completely.
We have miles and miles of financial rules and regulations, yet Bernie Madoff ‘made off’ with $50 billion.
We have thousands of pages of tax laws and tens of thousands of IRS employees, yet most large corporations still manage to pay little or no income tax on tens of billions of dollars of profits.
We have a cabinet level agency, the Environmental Protection Agency, whose sole purpose is to protect the environment. Despite their multi-billion-dollar budget, we still have large and small corporations, as well as individuals, who continue to pollute our air, land, and water, and have avoided prosecution.
The easist way for a problem to be ‘solved in the eyes of the public’ is for Congress to pass a law, so we all assume the problem will no longer exist, and we forget about it and go on with our blissfully ignorant lives. And the rich, powerful and politically connected go right on with business as usual. And the budget gets inflated, and we’re asked to sacrifice, and inflation taxes us worse than any income tax or sales tax ever will, and government will insist that the only thing that can solve these problems is more government.
That’s what annoys me the most: our willingness to believe that government is doing all of ‘this’ for us, the average citizen. To me, nothing can be further from the truth. They do it for THEMSELVES. That’s why I’m a Libertarian.
Respectfully, (and I’m done rambling for the day!)
Chris in Owatonna
LikeLike
Anna,
My thoughts exactly on the Tea Party. I never trusted their agenda from the get-go.
LikeLike