Milton Friedman – The Great Depression Myth

The crash that initiated the Great depression was not a failure of freedom or private enterprise. The great depression was initiated largely by the actions of the Federal Reserve (with some outside forces) who acted in such a way that was contrary to the ideas in which it was created.

Notice how Dr. Friedman says that government can deliberately cause inflation because it acts as a tax. Inflation brings more money to government and also makes the dollars that the government pays back to debt holders and bond holders worth less and less. This is why the Obama Administration and his lackey at the Federal Reserve, Ben Bernanke, have been deliberately driving up prices with inflation. This also makes every dollar in savings that the elderly have weaker and able to buy less, thus making them even more dependent on government, which falls in line with the current Democrat Leadership’s political strategy.

Final word on death panels and rationing?

[Editor’s Note – I posted this in March 2010. After repeatedly insisting that ObamaCare would never be able to ration care or ever have death panels and even after the self-proclaimed labeled this their “lie of the year”; fast forward to September 2011, now the truth is reported so casually that even Robert Reich and Paul Krugman have admitted that death panel like rationing will be necessary and the ObamaCare “Independent Payment Advisory Board” is common knowledge. Sarah Palin and Newt Gingrich were the first to call this what it was and deserve credit for doing so by stating the obvious: that the words “death panel” do not have to appear in the bill because Congress, by passing the ObamaCare law, has handed such overwhelming regulatory authority over to these faceless bureaucrats that they have the ability create law by regulation at the stroke of a pen.]

Bloomberg News reports about one of the ways health care will be rationed, notice it starts after the upcoming presidential election.

So will it become a death panel?

Bloomberg News:

The legislation also creates an Independent Payment Advisory Board to suggest cuts in spending by Medicare, the government health program for the elderly and disabled, that could threaten payments for drug and device-makers. Starting in 2014, the panel’s recommendations would take effect unless federal lawmakers substitute their own reductions.

The president’s own cousin, Dr. Milton Wolf,  said that this bill does harm and rations care in multiple ways – LINK:

As one example, consider the implications of Obamacare’s financial penalty aimed at your doctor if he seeks the expert care he has determined you need. If your doctor is in the top 10 percent of primary care physicians who refer patients to specialists most frequently – no matter how valid the reasons – he will face a 5 percent penalty on all their Medicare reimbursements for the entire year. This scheme is specifically designed to deny you the chance to see a specialist. Each year, the insidious nature of that arbitrary 10 percent rule will make things even worse as 100 percent of doctors try to stay off that list. Many doctors will try to avoid the sickest patients, and others will simply refuse to accept Medicare. Already, 42 percent of doctors have chosen that route, and it will get worse. Your mother’s shiny government-issued Medicare health card is meaningless without doctors who will accept it.

Obamacare will further diminish access to health care by lowering reimbursements for medical care without regard to the costs of that care. Price controls have failed spectacularly wherever they’ve been tried. They have turned neighborhoods into slums and have caused supply chains to dry up when producers can no longer profit from providing their goods. Remember the Carter-era gas lines? Medical care is not immune from this economic reality. We cannot hope that our best and brightest will pursue a career in medicine, setting aside years of their lives – for me, 13 years of school and training – to enter a field that might not even pay for the student loans it took to get there.

Of course, when the regulations written by bureaucrats get written how will they be interpreted and enforced? Several of Obama’s Czar’s and advisers have said in no uncertain terms that value judgements about who should get care need to be made, and we have reported those statements right here on this web site.

Allen West: Liberal Progressive Agenda is Antithesis of Who We Are as a Republic

Now some of you will watch this and think he is being over the top. But is he?

Allen West he defines tyranny as the Founders did. Think about the situation, what would the Founders think of the following:

All three branches of government are now legislating on their own and against the will of the people. We have a breakdown of separation of powers. Federalism is all but eliminated. Government is infringing on private property rights more and more, government owns most of the land west of the Mississippi to prevent us from using our own resources, Congress banned the Thomas Edison light bulb, government uses the tax code and other regulations to pick winners and losers and funnel money to their allies, judges and other office holders do not respect the limits of their office or the Constitution. The government is becoming so big that it is becoming ungovernable.

Congress spent almost $4 trillion last year with $2.08 trillion of that being new deficit spending which is 10 times higher than the yearly deficit the last year the Republicans had budgetary control.

Does anyone doubt for a minute that George Washington, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, Ben Franklin, James Madison, Jon Jay, Ben Rush, George Mason, Gouverneur Morris, Sam Adams, or Alexander Hamilton would say otherwise? Would Abe Lincoln, Frederick Douglass or Joseph Story?

Flashback: Obama vs Obama on ObamaCare

Obama on the transition process to nationalized health care. He says that he opposes national health care , but when in front of a safe audience he says that is what he supports and where he is headed.

Obama saying how he would do health care different form the Clinton’s; notice the transparency and process he is describing was never seriously attempted and the process the Democrats used was so secretive that ‘Easter Eggs” in the bill are still being discovered such as the three multi-billion dollar political slush funds hidden in the bill

So six months ago we were “nuts” and now some on the left admit that we are right. Of course if one were still in denial over this and believes the video’s and information links above are totally innocent coincidences, at the very least you must admit that Obama gives very different messages when he is in front of different groups, showing that he is just a typical politician willing to tell you anything you want to hear at the time.

This one is just a bonus, definitely worth five minutes of your time. This video is from a union supporting Obama voter who came to the realization that his president just doesn’t tell the truth. The shame is that this guy who is just waking up, doesn’t realize that this ObamaCare bill regulates the insurance industry in such a way that it is designed to blow them up and make health care costs skyrocket. Using the Alinsky model they will blame capitalism and freedom for the problems they created and offer a government take over as the solution. –

Flashback 2009: W.H.O. ‘America is 37th’ Report Refuted. USA vs. Canada vs Britain Health Care Statistics.

 NEWBritish Govt Hospital Causes “Unimaginable Suffering”: Up to 1,200 needless deaths, patients abused, staff bullied to meet targets… yet a secret inquiry into failing hospital says no one’s to blame.

NEW – British National Health Service late cancer diagnosis kills 10,000 a year – LINK.

Real Clear Politics:

By Deroy Murdock

Imagine that your two best friends are British and Canadian tobacco addicts. The Brit battles lung cancer. The Canadian endures emphysema and wheezes as he walks around with clanging oxygen canisters. You probably would not think: “Maybe I should pick up smoking.”

The fact that America is even considering government medicine is equally wacky. The state guides health care for our two closest allies: Great Britain and Canada. Like us, these are prosperous, industrial, Anglophone democracies. Nevertheless, compared to America, they suffer higher death rates for diseases, their patients experience severe pain, and they ration medical services.

Look what you’re missing in the U.K.:

* Breast cancer kills 25 percent of its American victims. In Great Britain, the Vatican of single-payer medicine, breast cancer extinguishes 46 percent of its targets.

* Prostate cancer is fatal to 19 percent of its American patients. The National Center for Policy Analysis reports that it kills 57 percent of Britons it strikes.

* Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development data show that the U.K.’s 2005 heart-attack fatality rate was 19.5 percent higher than America’s. This may correspond to angioplasties, which were only 21.3 percent as common there as here.

* The U.K.’s National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) just announced plans to cut its 60,000 annual steroid injections for severe back-pain sufferers to just 3,000. This should save the government 33 million pounds (about $55 million). “The consequences of the NICE decision will be devastating for thousands of patients,” Dr. Jonathan Richardson of Bradford Hospitals Trust told London’s Daily Telegraph. “It will mean more people on opiates, which are addictive, and kill 2,000 a year. It will mean more people having spinal surgery, which is incredibly risky, and has a 50 per cent failure rate.”

* “Seriously ill patients are being kept in ambulances outside hospitals for hours so NHS trusts do not miss Government targets,” Daniel Martin wrote last year in London’s Daily Mail. “Thousands of people a year are having to wait outside accident and emergency departments because trusts will not let them in until they can treat them within four hours, in line with a Labour [party] pledge. The hold-ups mean ambulances are not available to answer fresh 911 calls. Doctors warned last night that the practice of ‘patient-stacking’ was putting patients’ health at risk.”

Things don’t look much better up north, under Canadian socialized medicine.

* Canada has one-third fewer doctors per capita than the OECD average. “The doctor shortage is a direct result of government rationing, since provinces intervened to restrict class sizes in major Canadian medical schools in the 1990s,” Dr. David Gratzer, a Canadian physician and Manhattan Institute scholar, told the U.S. House Ways & Means Committee on June 24. Some towns address the doctor dearth with lotteries in which citizens compete for rare medical appointments.

* “In 2008, the average Canadian waited 17.3 weeks from the time his general practitioner referred him to a specialist until he actually received treatment,” Pacific Research Institute president Sally Pipes, a Canadian native, wrote in the July 2 Investor’s Business Daily. “That’s 86 percent longer than the wait in 1993, when the [Fraser] Institute first started quantifying the problem.”

* Such sloth includes a median 9.7-week wait for an MRI exam, 31.7 weeks to see a neurosurgeon, and 36.7 weeks – nearly nine months – to visit an orthopedic surgeon.

* Thus, Canadian supreme court justice Marie Deschamps wrote in her 2005 majority opinion in Chaoulli v. Quebec, “This case shows that delays in the public health care system are widespread, and that, in some cases, patients die as a result of waiting lists for public health care.”

Obamacare proponents might argue that their health reforms are neither British nor Canadian, but just modest adjustments to America’s system. This is false. The public option – for which Democrats lust – would fuel an elephantine $1.5 trillion overhaul of this life-and-death industry. Having Uncle Sam in the room while negotiating drug prices and hospital reimbursement rates will be like sitting beside Warren Buffett at an art auction. Guess who goes home with the goodies?

A public option is just the opening bid for eventual nationalization of American medicine. As House Banking Committee chairman Barney Frank (D., Mass.) told SinglepayerAction.Org on July 27: “The best way we’re going to get single payer, the only way, is to have a public option to demonstrate its strength and its power.”

Barack Obama seconds that emotion.

“I don’t think we’re going to be able to eliminate employer coverage immediately,” Obama told a March 24, 2007 Service Employees International Union health-care forum. “There’s going to be potentially some transition process. I can envision [single payer] a decade out or 15 years out or 20 years out.” As he told the AFL-CIO in 2003: “I happen to be a proponent of single-payer, universal health-care coverage. . . . That’s what I’d like to see.”

And why a public option just for medicine? Wouldn’t government clothing stores be best suited to furnish the garments Americans need to survive each winter? And why not a public option for restaurants? Shouldn’t Americans have universal access to fine dining?

All kidding aside, government medicine has proved an excruciating disaster in the U.K. and Canada. Our allies’ experiences with this dreadful idea should horrify rather than inspire everyday Americans, not to mention seemingly blind Democratic politicians.

Deroy Murdock is a columnist with the Scripps Howard News Service and a media fellow with the Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace at Stanford University.

UPDATE: Refuting WHO report nonsense.

This post has gone viral on the internet and is posted on thousands of message board around the world and the most common response I have seen are some profoundly ignorant postings from leftists screaming that the WHO Report ranks the United States number 37th in care world wide, therefore we must stink. If said leftists had taken the time to actually read the report they would see that the WHO ranks the United States number one in patient responsiveness and care, but putting the United States as number one offends the WHO’s socialist sensibilities, so they had to find a way to lower America’s ranking. They were at least nice enough in the report to admit what they were doing and how they did it.

The WHO figures into the ranking weather or not the country in question has socialized health care, that means that if health care dollars come from the private sector, charities or the consumer the WHO lowers the ranking. WHO also skews the mortality rates by including people who die from crime and more importantly WAR.

When you look at the breakdown the United States according to WHO  is number ONE in patient responsiveness and care –

The WHO divides the report into sections – Here is the section on patient responsiveness and level of care – the United States is ranked number one  –

The WHO ranks the United States overall as 37 because we don’t have socialized health care; meaning that doesn’t meet socialists standard of “fairness”. – look here and do a search for the words “fairness in contributions” to see for yourself.

This means that the ranking of 37 has little to do with the quality of care people receive and it has everything to do with ideology and politics.

UPDATE II – 12- 15- 09 An article coming to the same conclusion that we did above about the WHO report LINK.