Mar 05, 2007 01:08
I always have to wonder about anyone advocating more government control over their lives. Phrases such of "good enough for government work" exist for a reason. People look at the financial disaster we call Medicare and think Universal Health Care would be a good thing. Speaking as someone with whose wife is from Canada, it isn't all it's cracked up to be. People there talk about "free" health care. It isn't free at all, of course, someone always has to pay. It is just that for some reason someone else has to pay your way. People with money come from Canada to take advantage of our private health system. It is like when you learn the people on the local public school board all have their kids in private schools.
The answer to expensive higher education in this country isn't more government and lottery money. These schools know that can soak these government programs for money. It is like when you go to a collision center after a car accident, and they ask if insurance is going to be paying. These body shops often will charge an individual less while charging insurance companies as much as they will pay for.
I am adamantly opposed to smoking bans and government attempts to tell us what to eat. If I want to consume solely hamburgers and fries three meals a day for the rest of my life and die from an heart attack at forty, who cares? At least the government wouldn't have to pay me my social security pittance. The same thing goes for smoking. So what if a smoker lives a few years less and gets cancer? Can you make a case that someone who lives a completely healthy life will cost less to our health care system? The longer you live, the more vulnerable you are to a really costly disease like alzheimers. So what? Here in Tennessee there has been a tobacco tax increase proposed for no good reason besides we have a low tobacco tax. How is having low taxes for anything ever bad? I think they ought to call it "The Fuck Smokers Act." At least be honest before you screw one particular group. If you cite that it encourage smokers to quit as a reason, I ask since when is the government is the business of using taxes as behavioral modification? If I wanted mind control I'd be a Communist.
I am usually a pretty easy-going guy. Governmental control over my life is one of my issues, as is psychics and other bullshit artists. Actually they are all bullshit artists as far as I am concerned. Penn and Teller's show is aptly named. They are a lot like me, skeptical atheist libertarians. The problem is that these guys are good at getting people to believe what they want you to believe. They tell you your condition is not your fault. They tell you that someone else owes you something. That for some reason the government owes poor people something. Why? Who knows. Don't get me wrong, I am not heartless. I like charity. I think people ought to be encourage to give to the poor. I support private attempts to help people. But charity is voluntary, not forced. It is the difference between consensual sex and rape. Sex is great, rape is horrible. You don't "owe" anyone sex. But if you choose to give them sex, GREAT. Have a blast. The government can take your money, and if you refuse, put you in jail.
We of course have to have some rules to live by, otherwise civilization is impossible. The government has the role of protecting us from thieves and people who would do us physical harm. We also do have to have a framework of rules to have an economy, based on the protection of private property.
I'm watching "The Lost Tomb of Jesus". It is a documentary by James Cameron about a tomb bearing names directly related to the story of Jesus that was found. It actually has made a more compelling case that I expected, mainly due to the statistical improbability of the occurrence of certain names in a group. The whole thing I think is just sort of funny, because to a guy like me it is irrelevant. If you believe that the supernatural aspects of the story are by definition impossible, whether or not an historical Jesus even existed in the first place is a moot point. I can understand why a lot of people are upset, though. It alleges that Jesus most likely had Mary Magdalene as a wife and left physical remains, both of which directly contradict Catholic dogma. It could all still be a giant coincidence, of course. These guys have some nerve. Using modern archaeological science to fact check a religious tradition. Oh, damn you Science.
More importantly, I finally called my old friend who is in the Army. He is supposed to be done with his second enlistment in August, but is probably going to be shipping out with his unit before then. This will be his first trip to Iraq. I hope we will be able to get together before then.
Later!