I’ve shared several videos that make the case against Obamacare.
Here’s one narrated by a Dutch woman warning that America shouldn’t repeat the mistakes of European government-run healthcare.
Here’s one from Reason TV about how free markets produce lower healthcare costs.
Here’s one explaining the need to deal with the government-caused third-party-payer crisis.
And I had to reluctantly admit that even one of Karl Rove’s group produced an effective video on Obamacare harming young people.
I think all of those videos are well done and contain critical information, but I suspect the humor in this clever video may change even more minds. Or at least it will be more widely watched.
Fortunately, the creepy Uncle Sam is only symbolic at this stage. While Obama probably would prefer a single-payer system like the one in the United Kingdom, where doctors and other medical personnel actually are government bureaucrats, the immediate danger is that Obamacare will turn health care professionals into agents of the government.
And the politicians will then direct doctors and others to collect information that the government shouldn’t possess.
If you think I’m exaggerating, read some of the chilling details from Betsy McCaughey’s recent New York Post op-ed.
‘Are you sexually active? If so, with one partner, multiple partners or same-sex partners?” Be ready to answer those questions and more the next time you go to the doctor, whether it’s the dermatologist or the cardiologist and no matter if the questions are unrelated to why you’re seeking medical help. And you can thank the Obama health law. …The president’s “reforms” aim to turn doctors into government agents, pressuring them financially to ask questions they consider inappropriate and unnecessary, and to violate their Hippocratic Oath to keep patients’ records confidential. …Dr. Richard Amerling, a nephrologist and associate professor at Albert Einstein Medical College, explains that your medical record should be “a story created by you and your doctor solely for your treatment and benefit.” But the new requirements are turning it “into an interrogation, and the data will not be confidential.”
I don’t like the idea of government bureaucrats having my private information, but what’s probably most worrisome about this Obama Administration scheme is that the data won’t be confidential.
As McCaughey writes, it’s just a matter of time before hackers or incompetent bureaucrats make that information public.
Patients need to defend their own privacy by refusing to answer the intrusive social-history questions. …Are such precautions paranoid? Hardly. WikiLeaker Bradley Manning showed how incompetent the government is at keeping its own secrets; incidents where various agencies accidentally disclose personal data like Social Security numbers are legion.
Do you want details about your sex life put at risk of disclosure? That’s what this issue is all about, not to mention the fact that what we do behind closed doors is none of the government’s business.
And I’m sure you’ll be delighted to know it’s not just data about your sex life that will be available for bureaucrats and identity thieves.
Here’s what Senator Orrin Hatch of Utah recently wrote.
Individuals signing up are required to provide personal information such as Social Security numbers, tax returns and household income information that will be entered into the Federal Data Services Hub (Data Hub) — a new information sharing network that allows other state and federal agencies, including the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and the Department of Homeland Security, to verify a person’s information. The problem? …Last month the department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General (HHS-OIG) issued a report saying the federal government had failed to meet multiple deadlines for testing operations and reporting data security vulnerabilities involved with the Data Hub. …The repercussions of opening the exchanges with an unproven security system could be devastating, putting the personal and financial records of millions of Americans at the fingertips of data thieves. Other government certified systems have already proven to be less than reliable in protecting personal information. Look no further than the accidental release by the IRS this past July of thousands of taxpayer Social Security numbers on its website. …we can’t stand on the sidelines and let the Administration potentially expose the personal data of millions of Americans to more fraud.
By the way, everything written by McCaughey and Hatch also helps to explain why we should resist privacy-destroying schemes such as the Internet sales tax cartel being pushed by greedy politicians. I know I wouldn’t want all my online purchases in a database where state and local bureaucrats would be able to snoop for details.
And we also should oppose international tax harmonization schemes that are predicated on governments all over the world collecting and sharing private information about our finances. That kind of data would be a gold mine for hackers and identity thieves, not to mention there are huge risks of making that information available to corrupt, incompetent, and venal governments.
The common theme is that we shouldn’t let government have more information about us, particularly when the politicians want that data to pursue bad tax policy or bad health policy.
[…] Next we have a humorous portrayal of Internet usage in a bureaucrat-governed world. Sort of reminds me of this Obamacare OB/GYN video. […]
[…] Sort of reminds me of this Obamacare OB/GYN video. […]
[…] creepy version of Uncle Sam wants to know about your sex […]
[…] creepy version of Uncle Sam wants to know about your sex […]
[…] creepy version of Uncle Sam wants to know about your sex […]
[…] if you like snarky videos about Obamacare, here are some based on sex and mockery, and there’s even a Hitler […]
[…] think Obamacare videos are particularly effective, whether they’re based on sex or mockery, and one of my favorites, from last October, featured the former Fuehrer of […]
[…] if you like Obamacare humor videos, here’s a very unsettling one about the government having a database about our sex […]
[…] P.P.P.S. And I’m sure we’re all delighted that the government wants a database about our sex lives. […]
Important detail to remember: the 85% rule dominates practically everything about healthcare.
In general, women (college educated, white, many of them single and likely to remain that way) make or heavily influence 85% of consumer purchases.
Whenever an advertiser buys time on a TV show or during the news hours, they need a captive audience. Whether they are selling Chevy or Ford, Coke or
Pepsi, Colgate or Crest, Audi or BMW, JC Penny or Nordstrom’s, the TV show, whether it is entertainment, network news or information channels (CNBC is probably the exception) must be very welcoming to women.
And how is this accomplished? By presenting a (non)reality that ‘everyone knows’ and contrasting it with the reality that we know and live every day.
The non-reality that ‘everyone knows’ is that ‘European single-payer health care is better,’ which ties into female wish-fulfillment fantasies of being taken care of at all times.
The actual reality is that single-payer arrangements have their own set of problems (price controls, rationing, as well as delayed adoption of new technologies that improve outcomes, just to name a few) that a (relatively) free market can resolve if given the time. A free market in practically anything involves the allocation of scarce resources that forces sometimes harsh choices. And women in general hate having to make harsh choices.
Or any choices, for that matter. Where have we heard “Have it all…” before?
So when TV shows present issues pertaining to health care, European single-payer arrangements are not just better, but pretty damn near PERFECT in order to appeal to female viewers.
For a woman to champion single-payer arrangements allows that woman to raise her status among other women; particularly Republican women, conservative women, Pro-Life women, and others who stray from the liberal-feminist plantation. If you ever wonder why the phrase ‘Republican War on Women’ has gained so much usage, even though it’s utter hogwash, the answer is obvious.
There you have it – people will ALWAYS prefer the earnings and assets of other people (particularly those horrid rich folk) and politicians live and die by this. Single-payer health care financing is the means to that end. Do not say you weren’t warned.
Example: In 2002, I was working with one of the healthcare providers. They had a lowly-paid claims adjuster who was going through an ugly divorce. Well, having access to her ex-husbands insurance claims gave her a chance to “even the score”. I could tell more stories like this. Your imagination cannot estimate the things the scheming mind might be capable of. Since the inception of HIPPA laws, I have had to share my most intimate information with more minimum-wage workers than EVER knew such things about me prior to this “protective law”. And it was quite innocuous compared to what is coming.
Regarding government control of doctors- does anybody find it a coincidence that the Obamacare law also took control of ALL student health loans? My nephew just graduated from medical school. The government now holds over $100k of student loans over his head. (his wife has a similar medical school debt load) And four years of residency leaves him little opportunity to begin paying it back. Do you suppose that sometime soon he will be offered the option of a repaid loan in exchange for government employment?
this belongs in the “you don’t want to know how far it’s gone” category… must reading for every American…
http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175750/tomgram%3A_calabrese_and_harwood%2C_privacy_down_the_drain/#more
this is insane………….. what’s next? the government collection of bio-meteric data from babies at birth? micro chips implanted in our children “to keep them safe”…………………………………………. yeah right……………………………………. safe from what?
We need someone like Edward Snowden who would blow up all the false hopes in Obamacare. We can not afford to run a centralized and hypercontrolled healthcare system right now. There is plenty of options how to make it more available to the masses. Centralization was something communist regimes did, and they faced serious problems with supplying and maintaning at least basic health care.
Reblogged this on Public Secrets and commented:
And you can rest assured the NSA would never illegally tap into this. Really. Oh, stop laughing.