When bureaucrats take over

That’s just it. What makes a bureaucrat ‘a bureaucrat’? When they have confidence that they wield government force, and you don’t; that you are beholden to them, and not they to you.

What confuses people is when that kind of dynamic creeps into enterprises that are supposedly private, for-profit, ‘there’ to serve and delight customers. Private companies become bureaucratic when the government regulates their industry, making it difficult and expensive to create new companies. People don’t realize it, but that is what government regulations do – and why lazy rich people so often support government regulations: they serve to block new competition. They make it harder and harder for new competitors to appear; therefore, harder and harder for old competitors to fail. When a company must virtually go lunatic before it can fail, it has the backing of government force… and its bureaucrats become as lazy and dysfunctional as government’s. And that is the situation we are in today, in the U.S. The Obamacrats have discovered the secret to nationalizing the whole economy: they don’t have to nationalize directly, rather, they simply guarantee that companies which are their “friends” have the full backing of the government and cannot possibly go out of business, no matter how corrupt or dysfunctional those companies may be.

I am thinking here especially of General Motors and Goldman-Sachs.

Government “help” and bailouts aren’t capitalism; they destroy capitalism.

I bring this up because this forms a part of out of hand medical costs, and in your country it is more the propensity to litigate on the slightest thing that has seen medical costs start to skyrocket with decisions being made that might not always be the best option (Please bear with me as I try to make the point).

I have had first hand experience with the changes of legislation in Australia relating to both motor accident third party insurance and workers’ compensation. In New Zealand the patient gets covered for life and in my daughter in law’s case that is good because it means that she can get her new prosthetic leg for free but she has to go back to New Zealand to get her prothesis. In Australia you used to be able to sue the other party and then they brought in no fault compensation which was abused by the cheats, then they limited the payout and then they started spying on everyone as though all are cheating the system.

We are supposed to be assured of having a safe working environment and it used to be that you could still sue the employer for pain due to the injury etc. etc. However, they changed the legislation so that genuinely injured people had to fight to get compensation in the form of medical treatment.

When bureaucrats take over they will do everything to either not accept a claim of injury in the first place or attempt to cut short on payments for medical etc. such that they leave the patient in the lurch and yes that was my experience with the system.

Your Obamacare has the potential of being a bureaucratic nightmare in a similar vein with the bureaucrats making medical and other decisions based upon reports where they will pounce upon words so that they do not have to continue to cover a person’s treatment.

There are good reasons to consider what is being proposed as something that should not be implemented.

Cite specific examples; otherwise I call BS.

As I usually do with your posts.

Regards,
Peter H.

[you conservatives] reaping what you have sown.

No, ADD; but in a few more years, you left-liberals will be. You already are, in fact. (Seen Obama’s plummeting poll numbers lately? The town hall protests are just the beginning.)

Oh door, you’ve come close to breaking my heart, I cannot stop my tears for the poor conservative always being picked on. It’s called reaping what you have sown. Conservatives have been pouring bile on their “enemies” for decades now and when they get a little back it’s the end of the world. You asked for it, deal with it.

That leaves me with a decision. As included in my previous pledge to GPW, I definitely will omit to give gillie his DUMBASS title in GPW’s future threads, no matter how justified it is. But when the thread is governed by Bruce, the door may be open (in terms of GP community standards) to letting gillie have his DUMBASS title. Just thinking out loud. Hmm.

That’s the kind of change O. intended to bring all along, from; vilifying conservatives is your patriotic duty, to … shut the hell up, do what you’re told, or you’re a racist Nazi-sympathizer (and we’re keepin’ a list of youse).

Only, it’s NOT change, it’s STILL: Vilify Conservatives. Same old song and dance.

But hey, encouraging doctors to help people plan to die is just fine with them…

Why wouldn’t they, gillie?

After all, you leftists claim you can run Medicare with a 2% total overhead cost. Senior citizens must be the cheapest people around to ensure — unless, of course, you’re lying about Medicare’s costs and just hiding the money elsewhere in the Federal budget.

Meanwhile, let’s once again show what the Obama Party’s plan for the elderly and those with serious diseases is:

One patient in Oregon got a letter that made this all too clear, when in the same letter rejecting her request for life-extending chemotherapy, Oregon offered her “physician-aid-in-dying”.

Oh, and what saved her life? Private industry, which got her her medication at reduced cost. Not the Obama Party. Obama wanted her off the books and he wanted her dead.

The reason why is pretty obvious as well; gillie and the rest of the leftists who post here often talk about how they hope old people die off because older people tend to vote more conservatively. Leftists like gillie and Tano are banking on that happening, so it should be no surprise that they favor assisted suicide for the elderly and those with serious diseases; they think it will shift the electorate in their favor.

Is a “reverse concern troll” this?
http://trollcats.com/2009/06/reverse-troll-trollcat-attacking-troll-trollcat/

The problem with Bush was, he was a Republican so there was no effective “conservative alternative”. (He had conservative opposition on many things, but the American public viewed it as party infighting, rather than as a fundamental alternative available at the polling booth.)

In that regard, the Dear Teleprompter has brought me hope. He has adopted and intensified all of Bush’s worst domestic policies. And, he has a “D” after his name. So, hopefully and God willing, come 2012 there will be a liberty-loving, conservative, “fundamental alternative” to Obama at the polling booth, that a saddened and wiser nation will go for.

Reading that, it just occurred to me, I’m a reverse concern troll.

I was a self-described Bush-Hater. I opposed 75% of his policies… Amnesty, spending, Harriet Miers. And I wanted to punch him in the face for the imprisonment of Ramos and Compean.

But after six months of Obama, Shrub is looking pretty good. Those $200 Billion deficits look like chicken feed. And I didn’t have to put up with these bullshit “Beer Summit” PR gimmicks, either.

[...]

First of all, I do think you went too far and shouldn’t call him names. Second, he does ask for it, so I sympathize with you. Had I had as much coffee today as I did yesterday, I might have not been restrained as I have.

Try to refrain from such language in the future and realize that he makes himself look foolish by his childish antics…

I will take that to heart going-forward. That is, I will omit DUMBASS, however appropriate it may be morally or semantically, from my future remarks to gillie.

I for one would appreciate enforcement of community standards

Except of course, Iggy, on occasions when it has been you violating them.