While that is fair of you to say, links to articles are not facts.  They aren't even sources.  I want to know what assertions are being claimed as facts here, and what conclusions he draws from said facts.  I'm predisposed to disbelief whenever someone attempts to use the Internet as support for an argument, and it doesn't even matter if I agreed or not.  The biases, reputation and trustworthiness of sources really do matter; particularly since almost no one who reads such articles can replicate the research methodology in order to check their work.  Most of us have to be able to trust that we're not just being lied to by educated bullshitters. 

Could you post some of these facts you refer to?  Please show your sources.

I didn't tell that story looking for pity.  I told that story to highlight the point that everyone has their own issues, whether they are presently aware of them or not.  I am aware, and in some ways that's a huge advantage that my grandmother (and more) did not have.  I can either hope that medicine solves the mystery, or I can arrange my life to better fit my most likely future.  Like all things, I hope for the best but plan for the worst.  My assets are almost all set up to benefit my wife and children should I suddenly drop, which can happen.  I'm presently three years older than my grandmother was when she passed away, but 20 years younger than my father.


A market based health care system would be great for controlling value of service, not necessarily overall costs.  In fact, I'd doubt it would work that way at all.  The medical industry is far from the only one that the US is, by a wide margin, the most expensive in the world.


The obvious answer there is to reform the medical patent schedule.  I don't believe that a government created monopoly shourd exist at all, but that is the world we live in.

Because there is a difference between health care and health insurance.  The health insurance system in the US is broken.  However, if you do have insurance, or can otherwise pay the costs yourself, the US has the highest rate of health care access and the highest health care quality for the middle class of any nation in the world.  The proof is in the pudding, as the wealthy still come to the US to get care when things get serious; although that's probably going to change.  Can I get cheaper care for common problems in other nations?  Yes, that's provablely true.  But for cutting edge care, historically speaking, that's the US.  I, personally, have a degenerative disease.  Entirely incurable.  Unless I die bungie jumping, snow skiing, or crossing the street; it will kill me.  It's killed my grandmother, my uncle and my father.  My life expectancy is, however, a good 10 years longer in the US than anywhere in the world.  It's also not covered at all by any national health care system in the world.  (which has much to do with the discrepancy in life expectancy)  Honestly, it's not covered by any form of health insurance that I've found here either; and I'm entirely ineligble for life insurance.  However, I don't have that kind of insurance.  I have a health savings account, so I'm basicly self-insured pre-tax.  I, and I alone, decide whether that money will be used to extend my lifespan for a little longer, or become an inherited asset for my children.


It wouldn't surprise me either, but again, you're talking about health insurance not health care.  I would agree that every American should have access to health care.  No one should be denied critical care, but no American should be taxed to pay for the poor life choices that leads them to lung cancer (smoking) or diabeties (over eating), nor should anyone be compelled to help pay for my, rather expensive, hospice care when my turn comes.  I lost the genetic lottery, and rather than have more blood children, my wife & I have chosen to adopt.  My eldest son might be just as screwed as me, but my younger sons are not my blood children.  My brother has chosen to eat himself to death before the family curse catches up with him.

Again, I can solve this grand dilemma in 5 minutes.  Simply make any form of health care that was available to the very richest 30, 40 or 50 years ago tax deductible, as well as paying for same for others a corporate tax deduction.  Hell, make anything that was available just 15 years ago, as a recognized form or health care, tax deductible.  Sure, we'd have thousands of people in cali deducting yoga classes and weekend trips to the spa, but we'd have corporations willing to support free clinics and religious institutions sponsoring non-profit hospitals again.  If profit was the problem, then return to the age when health care insurance wasn't a benefit that employers used to attract middle class professionals.  Return to the age that Jewish hospitals paid to train the skilled and devout, rather than just the skilled and well funded.

That just means that care costs more for Americans, on average.  Of course it does.  That doesn't equate to UK residents having better healthcare, better access or better outcomes.  The reverse is generally true.

UK residents don't have better health outcomes than those in the US.  That's a myth. 

Yeah, that's usually not good for anyone but the arms dealers & funeral homes.  But then, the history of fiat currencies says they have an average life expectancy of about 100 years and that there is a 100% mortality rate by 200 years.  The US federal reserve note is approaching 100 years old, so it's going to happen somehow.

Giant spikes compared to what?  It's been fairly stable for the past several months.  Based soley on bitcoin's short history, a several months long smooth trading trend portends a sudden and dramatic price movement is due.  So far, the price movements up have generally stuck, while the price movements down have generally been temporary.  That is, after all, the only way a price goes from half a penny in 2010 to $140 in 2013.

Any answer that anyone could provide would be speculation, and that is part of the problem.  Almost no one can get to the details of the plans supposedly being offered, so it's impossible to verify the claims being made by such ads.  If this were a radio car dealer's ad, I'd be smelling a bait & switch.

Do you smell bait?

We've made some people who make a living of the status quo nervous is all.  As you have said, once it's inevitable that bitcoin is the new gold, the 1% will be buying it up from us like madmen, inviting us to join their ranks as they kick out the guy who was late to the party.  It's not the investors or venture capitalists that bitcoin puts a 'dent' into.  It's the central banks and those who profit from them that will be upset.  Unfortunately, we aren't talking about a class of people that take their sudden obsolescence in stride.  Their not just going to put down their buggy whip tools and look for a new job without pitching a fit.  And when these people have a hissy fit, armies march and nations burn.

How do you define "work" in this context?

Not really free.  We're all paying for them.  And I'm pretty sure that both you and the fetus must be registered Democrat before payment.

Dude, that's the whole point.  Obamacare was designed to fail, but softly and in a manner that the libs can cry, "see! markets don't work! we need a single payer system!"

But it's failing before it even gets that far.  And, at this point, I think that it's a fair point to note that patents are a government monopoly that shouldn't really exist.  Furthermore, a single payer system would just be one government enforced monopoly negotiating with another government managed monopoly regarding your health care options.  That's not going to end well even if you believe that at least one negotiating party has your best interests at heart.

Doubtful.  The author has a history of writing smut.  Atlas didn't strike me as the kind of person that could convincingly or descriptively write about intercourse.  At least not human intercourse.

You're in the wrong state to learn how Americans think.  Cali is just South British Columbia, warmer but just as many liberals.  I hated it there.  Come to my state and spend some time, and you will come to know how different the culture really is.


Attempts have been made to do exactly that, but the liberals keep insisting that health care is a right and not a market.  The market says otherwise, and charges more to compensate for the overhead of government "regulations".  We haven't had a free market in healthcare, or anything else, since WWII, and probably earlier.

I've read the free sample from Amazon.  I'm curious, did you bother to ask Atlas if you could mock his personna in a book?  Or are you going to pretend that the character "Atlas" has no relation to forum members, real or imaginary?

And where did you get the title photo?

Again, still waiting for the great stories about wonderfully low priced health insurance.

Coinseeker?  RodeoX?  Anybody?

I was finally able to watch most of it.  I agree that his solution, while it may be the best balance of many bad choices, is flawed in the sense that it's not going to be implimented by him; or even by economists in general.  It's going to be implimented by polititians.  If it can go wrong, and I'm sure that even he can admit that it could go very wrong, then it is a wise bet to assume it will go wrong.  Obamacare might have worked (as a social program) under the correct implimentation as well, but it doesn't because we are talking about government actions.

I'm of the opinion that his "choose death now" path is the better one in the long run, because it will effectively purge the economy of institutions that function as parasites upon our economy and our society at large.  (Think about this; every bank teller, every tax consultant, every lawyer, every polititian earns a living performing necessary work that the private sector would call a "cost center".  They don't produce anything.  If Bitcoin comes out the winner, it will be because the public recognizes that using it will cut out the cost centers, and our society will not need a tenth of these people anymore)  The drawn out "Japanese model" won't do this, although it may avoid a civil war.  Even if one path could be said, with any certainty, to lead to civil unrest and the other to decades of economic maliase; I'm not sure that a full blown civil war would actually be more costly in human lives and suffering as compared to decades of rationing of resources (because health care may be first, but it won't be last) leading to reduced access to many important resources for the childhoods of the next generation.  I have five children; but only one life of my own.  If the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, then I choose the quick death now.

For the life of me, I couldn't watch that video. But I'm not unfamiliar with Rich Duncan's work.  The problem is that his perspectives are no more certain than anyone else's.  Japan has largely been in this same boat for two decades or more, and yet they seem to zombie on.  The primary reason for this is that, as a culture, the Japanese seem to have an endless trust that their government knows best; and American's generally do not.  Still, I'm not stupid, and have taken more drastic steps for my own family than just a few weeks canned goods and a few gallons of water.  I'm not going to bet against an economic breakdown, in part, because I'm of the Austrian school of thought at well.  However, I'm not going to 'talk my book' either; because such social breakdown is a social breakdown.  A debt deflation may or may not be a trigger for a social breakdown.

Funny you should mention this, because I recently encountered a one year old that could sign some of these things while working in the Sunday morning nursery at church.  I asked if she was hearing impared, because she kept signing "more" (tips of fingers on each hand together, and tapping tips of fingers to each other repeatedly) after running out of wheat wafers.  She wasn't, and I asked why she is learning signing, and the answer is that they can communicate quicker with signing than speech, even though they can understand their parents fine.  It was kind of surreal watching a baby who can't walk or talk doing sign language, even if it was only single word communication.