http://www.ibdeditorials.com/…

Back in the 1960s, Castonguay chaired a Canadian government committee studying health reform and recommended that his home province of Quebec — then the largest and most affluent in the country — adopt government-administered health care, covering all citizens through tax levies.

The government followed his advice, leading to his modern-day moniker: “the father of Quebec medicare.” Even this title seems modest; Castonguay’s work triggered a domino effect across the country, until eventually his ideas were implemented from coast to coast.

Four decades later, as the chairman of a government committee reviewing Quebec health care this year, Castonguay concluded that the system is in “crisis.”

“We thought we could resolve the system’s problems by rationing services or injecting massive amounts of new money into it,” says Castonguay. But now he prescribes a radical overhaul: “We are proposing to give a greater role to the private sector so that people can exercise freedom of choice.”

Castonguay advocates contracting out services to the private sector, going so far as suggesting that public hospitals rent space during off-hours to entrepreneurial doctors. He supports co-pays for patients who want to see physicians. Castonguay, the man who championed public health insurance in Canada, now urges for the legalization of private health insurance.

In America, these ideas may not sound shocking. But in Canada, where the private sector has been shunned for decades, these are extraordinary views, especially coming from Castonguay. It’s as if John Maynard Keynes, resting on his British death bed in 1946, had declared that his faith in government interventionism was misplaced.

What would drive a man like Castonguay to reconsider his long-held beliefs? Try a health care system so overburdened that hundreds of thousands in need of medical attention wait for care, any care; a system where people in towns like Norwalk, Ontario, participate in lotteries to win appointments with the local family doctor.

Interesting. I like MikeS’s of MooreWatch.com line: “Somehow, I rather doubt this will be a part of Sicko II: The Search For More Money.” I agree.

Check out the original article for a few Canadian healthcare horror stories.

http://www.michaelmoore.com/…

I know some of you will say, ‘Mike, what have the Democrats done to deserve our vote?’ That’s a damn good question. In November of ‘06, the country loudly sent a message that we wanted the war to end. Yet the Democrats have done nothing. So why should we be so eager to line up happily behind them?

I’ll tell you why. Because I can’t stand one more friggin’ minute of this administration and the permanent, irreversible damage it has done to our people and to this world. I’m almost at the point where I don’t care if the Democrats don’t have a backbone or a kneebone or a thought in their dizzy little heads. Just as long as their name ain’t “Bush” and the word “Republican” is not beside theirs on the ballot, then that’s good enough for me.

I, like the majority of Americans, have been pummeled senseless for 8 long years. That’s why I will join millions of citizens and stagger into the voting booth come November, like a boxer in the 12th round, all bloodied and bruised with one eye swollen shut, looking for the only thing that matters — that big “D” on the ballot.Don’t get me wrong. I lost my rose-colored glasses a long time ago.

It’s foolish to see the Democrats as anything but a nicer version of a party that exists to do the bidding of the corporate elite in this country. Any endorsement of a Democrat must be done with this acknowledgement and a hope that one day we will have a party that’ll represent the people first, and laws that allow that party an equal voice.

He calls out Hillary for making race an issue and he goes and uses party bigotry instead. As if the D’s are better. As if the parties contain members of uniform belief. Because Ron Paul and John McCain have the same platform. Or Mike Gravel or Denis Kucinich and Obama or Clinton. If this guy wants a 3rd party to succeed why not find a candidate in the Green, Libertarian, Socialist, or other party to back? He is a collectivist so I understand it’s difficult for him to look at individuals instead of arbitrary groups but it’s still sad that these people who claim to be disgusted with business as usual continues to play the game as usual.

Pennsylvania, the state that gave birth to this great country, has a chance to set things right. It has not had a moment to shine like this since 1787 when our Constitution was written there.

As if Moore gives a shit about the Constitution. His policy surely doesn’t indicate it. He has little concern for individual liberty or hardly any of the intentions of the Constitutions.

I like what MooreWatch.com points out:

Michael Moore has endorsed Obama.  This should be the death knell for the Obama campaign, since not a single candidate for political office endorsed by Michael Moore has ever won.  The endorsement is aboout what you’d expect, the usual nonsensical ramblings of a multimillionaire socialist.  Read it yourself if you like, I just want to make a couple of observations.

I don’t get to vote for President this primary season. I live in Michigan.

No you don’t, Michael, you live in a penthouse in Manhattan.  Jim and I know your home address.  You own property in a swanky part of Michigan.  (You know, where you held your film festival, rather than in Flint, the town you claim to come from but don’t.  Why help out the disadvantaged in Flint when you can suck up to the rest of the millionaire liberals who own gigantic private estates?) So, either you’re registered to vote in two places (New York and Michigan) or you’re lying your ass off to perpetuate the farcical image of yourself as an average Joe.  Both of these sound equally plausible.

I, like the majority of Americans, have been pummeled senseless for 8 long years.

And here we see the classic liberal self-image as a pathetic waif being beaten by an all-powerful machine.  This is one of the things I find more vulgar and disgusting about liberalism than anything else, their incessant need to view themselves as victims.  I guess this is why they believe that the government is the solution to ever conceivable problem.  If people weren’t pathetic victims they might be able to find solutions to some of their own problems, and if that were to happen (God forbid!) it would deny liberals the ability to derive self-satisfaction from pointing to a government program and saying, “See what a wonderful person I am?  I supported that proposal!”

It’s foolish to see the Democrats as anything but a nicer version of a party that exists to do the bidding of the corporate elite in this country.

Thus says a guy who has made himself filthy, stinking rich by working with massive corporations.  But let’s not let a little rank hypocrisy get in the way of your own perceived sense of victimhood, huh Mike?  Just keep dressing like a slob and wearing your baseball caps, the world is full of idiots who will actually buy your little persona.

http://www.nytimes.com/…

WITH the health care system at the center of the political debate, a lot of scary claims are being thrown around. The dangerous ones are not those that are false; watchdogs in the news media are quick to debunk them. Rather, the dangerous ones are those that are true but don’t mean what people think they mean.

Here are three of the true but misleading statements about health care that politicians and pundits love to use to frighten the public:

STATEMENT 1 The United States has lower life expectancy and higher infant mortality than Canada, which has national health insurance.

STATEMENT 2 Some 47 million Americans do not have health insurance.

STATEMENT 3 Health costs are eating up an ever increasing share of American incomes.

Nice to see an organization/person other than a libertarian one or MooreWatch is acknowledging and explaining the deceptive numbers Michael Moore and others use when railing against the US healthcare system. Our system obviously has issues but there is no need to distort the facts to make it sound worse just to further your agenda.

http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/…

During an interview with NBC television, Mr Buffett brandished an informal survey of 15 of his 18 office staff at his Berkshire Hathaway empire. The billionaire said he was paying 17.7% payroll and income tax, compared with an average in the office of 32.9%.”There wasn’t anyone in the office, from the receptionist up, who paid as low a tax rate and I have no tax planning; I don’t have an accountant or use tax shelters. I just follow what the US Congress tells me to do,” he said.

If he really wanted to ‘pay his fair share’ he could not only voluntarily give the government more but he could give gifts to those he felt were paying too much. Perhaps he would like the 70%+ top tax bracket back from WWII? Does he ignore the fact he’s paying taxes on capital gains and dividends vs. the receptionist’s wages? It’s taxed before he gets it at 35%. Then he pays 15% on that. It just floors me… he wants the government to force him to pay more taxes when he can freely give them more and ask others to do the same. It’s like when Bill Maher complained to Bill O’Reilly about the Bush tax cuts. He said effectively the same thing as Buffett is. “The rich aren’t paying their share… I’d gladly pay more.” When O’Reilly showed him the form where you can give more than required Maher just stopped dead in his tracks, looking like a deer in headlights. They aren’t dumb guys and I doubt they are ignorant to the fact they can pay more… so what is it?  What’s their justification for wanting the threat of force to be used to take (more of) the property of their fellow citizens? They have the means and connections to supply many of the services the government does… why don’t they? Why can’t Michael Moore setup his own insurance company if the thinks they are so horrible? Why must all these plans of their be implemented by a proxy at the barrel of a gun?

1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kf3MtjMBWx4
2. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7W37NkjplWQ
3. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7XsRzfckneg
4. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGj4Ei9l0iI
5. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PlNtWy8TX_Y
6. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q6QyTZs__Pw

See SiCKO? Nor did I. I have though read a decent amount about what Moore said and that’s great for me but the general public is inundated with famous people and politicians promoting socialist healthcare. This piece by Stossel is a good step. I hope that this conversation continues and the free market side gets equal time to educate the public.