Hello everyone, and welcome to this week’s podcast of the Human Underground Association. I’m your host Tim Norris, and this week I will be discussing the continuing efforts to thwart the alien overlords and free humanity through resistance, both subtle and overt.
Ever since the overlords came to our planet, they have been repeatedly using up our resources, and enslaving hundreds of thousands in their spice mines over one thousand light years from here. Some have wondered if we should just give up in the face of such an impressive armada that orbits the moon, striking every two weeks and costing so many lives. Well, according to new research by Stanford University’s professor Costello, if we let them continue on their raids, our resources will be used up by the end of next year. Also, the latest population census show our population is dwindling, and will reach endangered levels by the end of the decade.
With this information in mind, I say we should continue fighting. All forms of peace talks have failed, and last week the latest broadcast from the overlords themselves shows us that they just want our planet’s resources for their continued production of intergalactic junk mail, and they want to use us as a source of cheap labor.
Our efforts to fight back has slowed their advancements, but we need to continue to do so. I urge every citizen to provide what they can to the men and women fighting in this war. I also urge every person able, to take up arms against these invaders. Never before have we faced such dire circumstances, and not only our race, but our planet is in great need. Nothing ever worth doing was easy, and some sacrifices will need to be made. However, this is for the good of everyone if we want to be free from the alien menace at our door.
That’s all of our time this week. Thank you for listening everyone. Join us again next week as I talk about how to convert your bathtub into a water distillation facility. This is Tim Norris, and thanks again. Good day to you all, and remember, never give up!
Monday, March 23, 2009
Monday, March 16, 2009
A different Approach to Service (final draft)
Dear President Obama, Speaker Pelosi, Senator Reid, Senator McConnell, and Representative Boehner,
It has come to my attention that there is currently an idea by this current administration to institute a mandatory civil service plan for young people between the ages of 18 and 25. This plan would require said young people to work between 50 and 100 service hours a year to aide in the civilian defense and community outreach. While I understand and sympathize with certain opposition to this requirement, may I contribute another option for consideration? While requiring high school students to work in community clean up projects in addition to schoolwork to be able to graduate might instill some degree of personal and community responsibility, I believe more can be done to allow them a chance to really grow as individuals. Offering a choice of a two-year commitment out of high school might alleviate some of the woes this country is facing. I am postulating the idea that high school graduates have the option of choosing either a two-year civil service job before attending upper level universities, or a two-year contract in military service. This would have the benefit of creating a workforce of young people working for their communities, and add to the strength of our national defense without drafting.
There are other countries that have mandatory military service for its young people. Take Israel, which requires all of its citizens to serve in its defense force after high school. This however, is not what I am suggesting for our country. I know from first hand military experience that not everyone is fit for that type of service, and I would never suggest drafting unwilling people to possibly fight in a cause they do not believe in.
Giving the option of civilian or military service has several benefits. On the military side of this equation, the money allocated for recruiting could then be set aside for training, and would ease up some of the controversy this nation faces with some of the unscrupulous recruiting tactics that have made headlines over the years. The money then used for training purposes instead greatly enhances the capabilities of our recruits by giving them more resources, which in turn aides in teaching them better and preparing them for the road ahead.
As for the civilian side, a young workforce of volunteers helping in that sector gives back to the individual communities. As far as I can remember, nobody has ever complained about community involvement and beautification. This would allow the higher-level civil servants to better organize and manage their resources, since they would now have a larger pool of workers for much needed jobs.
Because of the widening divide between the rich and poor in this country, it has been those from a higher tax bracket that are able to afford sending their children off to college right out of high school. This new option would give some parents much needed relief. As of military service, there is tuition reimbursement for serving members and other educational benefits for veterans. For the civilian side, offering a similar plan for those that choose that option would give equal benefits for service to this country. This way, a child may not need to wait to receive a higher education, but can attend part time at many junior colleges while serving the two year contract in either civilian service or military. Once finished, they would gain access to other benefits to attend larger universities.
The other added benefit would be giving these young people life experience that is far greater than anything they could learn at even the most prestigious Ivy League school. Wisdom and maturity cannot be taught, but only learned through life itself. I have served in this nation’s military proudly, and it has taught me far more than I ever could have hoped to learn at the university level. I am now attending school at Arizona State, armed with maturity and wisdom far beyond what I had when I was 18 and graduating high school. I look around, see the waning maturity level of so many current students under the age of 20, and sigh. As some have said, “they don’t how good they have it”, and there are many that throw it all away with a lackadaisical approach to schoolwork and priorities.
By granting potential college students a better way to afford education while giving them work experience and helping to grow in maturity can only serve to help them in the long run. Instead of dropping out after a year and a half of bad grades in college, many would spend that time working for the betterment of this country, while earning a modest paycheck as a bonus. After their two-year commitment is up, they could continue on that path, or leave for a higher-level college, now able to afford it and with attention given to the more important priorities of school over beer pong.
The biggest selling point of this option that I can’t stress enough, is giving the individual the freedom to choose. That is the very principle this country is founded on. While requiring high school students to do community service to graduate is fine, anything more as a requirement has many people screaming “Hitler Youth”. This choice gives just that, a choice. It allows parents to rest easy knowing their son or daughter will have the capability of affording school. It will give this country the much needed boost to its security without implementing the notorious draft (that this former military member is wholeheartedly against). It allows young people to have the opportunity to give back to their communities and nation while earning a paycheck and gaining valuable experience. Forcing this upon the nation is not what this country is about, but giving them the choice makes all the difference and is in the best traditions of our history.
Thank you for your time, and I hope that your own life experience has given you the wisdom to make the right choices as our leaders. Think of this as an alternative to the current plan that is being drawn up. Good day to you all.
Sincerely,
Tim Norris
Web Sites Cited
GlobalSecurity.org. Israel Defense Forces. April 9, 2006. http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/israel/idf.htm
Martin, David. “Army Recruiter Used Scare Tactics”. CBS News. July 28, 2008. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/07/28/eveningnews/main4301305.shtml
MSNBC. Boost national Service Programs. December 5, 2007. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22117627/
Williams, Armstrong. “Mandatory Military Service Would Benefit the U.S.”. July 19, 2006. http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2006/6/18/162837.shtml
It has come to my attention that there is currently an idea by this current administration to institute a mandatory civil service plan for young people between the ages of 18 and 25. This plan would require said young people to work between 50 and 100 service hours a year to aide in the civilian defense and community outreach. While I understand and sympathize with certain opposition to this requirement, may I contribute another option for consideration? While requiring high school students to work in community clean up projects in addition to schoolwork to be able to graduate might instill some degree of personal and community responsibility, I believe more can be done to allow them a chance to really grow as individuals. Offering a choice of a two-year commitment out of high school might alleviate some of the woes this country is facing. I am postulating the idea that high school graduates have the option of choosing either a two-year civil service job before attending upper level universities, or a two-year contract in military service. This would have the benefit of creating a workforce of young people working for their communities, and add to the strength of our national defense without drafting.
There are other countries that have mandatory military service for its young people. Take Israel, which requires all of its citizens to serve in its defense force after high school. This however, is not what I am suggesting for our country. I know from first hand military experience that not everyone is fit for that type of service, and I would never suggest drafting unwilling people to possibly fight in a cause they do not believe in.
Giving the option of civilian or military service has several benefits. On the military side of this equation, the money allocated for recruiting could then be set aside for training, and would ease up some of the controversy this nation faces with some of the unscrupulous recruiting tactics that have made headlines over the years. The money then used for training purposes instead greatly enhances the capabilities of our recruits by giving them more resources, which in turn aides in teaching them better and preparing them for the road ahead.
As for the civilian side, a young workforce of volunteers helping in that sector gives back to the individual communities. As far as I can remember, nobody has ever complained about community involvement and beautification. This would allow the higher-level civil servants to better organize and manage their resources, since they would now have a larger pool of workers for much needed jobs.
Because of the widening divide between the rich and poor in this country, it has been those from a higher tax bracket that are able to afford sending their children off to college right out of high school. This new option would give some parents much needed relief. As of military service, there is tuition reimbursement for serving members and other educational benefits for veterans. For the civilian side, offering a similar plan for those that choose that option would give equal benefits for service to this country. This way, a child may not need to wait to receive a higher education, but can attend part time at many junior colleges while serving the two year contract in either civilian service or military. Once finished, they would gain access to other benefits to attend larger universities.
The other added benefit would be giving these young people life experience that is far greater than anything they could learn at even the most prestigious Ivy League school. Wisdom and maturity cannot be taught, but only learned through life itself. I have served in this nation’s military proudly, and it has taught me far more than I ever could have hoped to learn at the university level. I am now attending school at Arizona State, armed with maturity and wisdom far beyond what I had when I was 18 and graduating high school. I look around, see the waning maturity level of so many current students under the age of 20, and sigh. As some have said, “they don’t how good they have it”, and there are many that throw it all away with a lackadaisical approach to schoolwork and priorities.
By granting potential college students a better way to afford education while giving them work experience and helping to grow in maturity can only serve to help them in the long run. Instead of dropping out after a year and a half of bad grades in college, many would spend that time working for the betterment of this country, while earning a modest paycheck as a bonus. After their two-year commitment is up, they could continue on that path, or leave for a higher-level college, now able to afford it and with attention given to the more important priorities of school over beer pong.
The biggest selling point of this option that I can’t stress enough, is giving the individual the freedom to choose. That is the very principle this country is founded on. While requiring high school students to do community service to graduate is fine, anything more as a requirement has many people screaming “Hitler Youth”. This choice gives just that, a choice. It allows parents to rest easy knowing their son or daughter will have the capability of affording school. It will give this country the much needed boost to its security without implementing the notorious draft (that this former military member is wholeheartedly against). It allows young people to have the opportunity to give back to their communities and nation while earning a paycheck and gaining valuable experience. Forcing this upon the nation is not what this country is about, but giving them the choice makes all the difference and is in the best traditions of our history.
Thank you for your time, and I hope that your own life experience has given you the wisdom to make the right choices as our leaders. Think of this as an alternative to the current plan that is being drawn up. Good day to you all.
Sincerely,
Tim Norris
Web Sites Cited
GlobalSecurity.org. Israel Defense Forces. April 9, 2006. http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/israel/idf.htm
Martin, David. “Army Recruiter Used Scare Tactics”. CBS News. July 28, 2008. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/07/28/eveningnews/main4301305.shtml
MSNBC. Boost national Service Programs. December 5, 2007. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22117627/
Williams, Armstrong. “Mandatory Military Service Would Benefit the U.S.”. July 19, 2006. http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2006/6/18/162837.shtml
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
A Different Approach to Service (first draft)
Dear President Obama, Speaker Pelosi, Senator Reid, Senator McConnell, and Representative Boehner:
It has come to my attention that there is a plan by this current administration to institute a mandatory civil service plan for young people between the ages of 18 and 25. This plan would require said young people to work between 50 and 100 service hours a year to aide in the civilian defense and community outreach. While I understand and sympathize with certain opposition to this requirement, may I contribute another option for consideration? While requiring high school students to work in community clean up projects in addition to schoolwork to be able to graduate might instill some level of maturity and experience, there is more that can be done. Offering a choice of a two year commitment out of high school in addition to this might alleviate some of the woes this country is facing. I am postulating the idea that high school graduates have the option of choosing either a two year civil service job before attending upper level universities, or a two year contract in military service. This would have the benefit of creating a workforce of young people working for their communities, and add to the strength of our national defense without drafting.
There are many other countries that have mandatory military service for its young people, but that is not what I am suggesting, knowing from first hand military experience that not everyone is cut out for that type of service. Giving this option of civilian or military service has several benefits. On the military side of this equation, the money for recruiting could then be set aside for training, and would ease up some of the controversy this nation faces with some of the unscrupulous recruiting tactics that have made headlines over the years. The money then used for training purposes instead greatly enhances the capabilities of our recruits by giving them more resources, better teaching them and preparing them for the road ahead.
As for the civilian side, a young workforce of volunteers helping in that sector gives back to the individual communities. As far as I can remember, nobody has ever complained about community involvement and beautification. This would allow the higher-level civil servants to better organize and manage their resources, since they would now have a larger pool of workers for much needed jobs.
Because of the widening divide between the rich and poor in this country, it has been those from a higher tax bracket that are able to afford sending their children off to college right out of high school. This new option would give some parents much needed relief. As of military service, there is tuition reimbursement for serving members and other educational benefits for veterans. For the civilian side, offering a similar plan for those that choose that option would give equal benefits for service to this country. This way, a child may not need to wait to go to college, but can attend part time at many junior colleges while serving the two year contract in either civilian service or military. Once finished, they would gain access to other benefits to attend larger universities.
The other added benefit would be giving these young people life experience that is far greater than anything they could learn at even the most prestigious Ivy League school. Wisdom and maturity cannot be taught, but only learned through life itself. I have served in this nation’s military proudly, and it has taught me far more than I ever could have hoped to learn at the university level. I am now attending school at Arizona State, armed with maturity and wisdom far beyond what I had when I was 18 and graduating high school. I look around, see the waning maturity level of current students under the age of 20, and sigh. As some have said, “they don’t how good they have it”, and they throw it all away with a lackadaisical approach to schoolwork and priorities. Giving young people a way to better afford education while giving them work experience and growing in maturity can only serve to help them. Instead of dropping out after a year and a half of bad grades in college, they would spend that time working for the betterment of this country, while earning a modest paycheck as a bonus. After their two-year commitment is up, they could continue on that path, or leave for college, now able to afford it and able to focus on the more important priorities of school over beer pong.
The biggest selling point of this option that I can’t stress enough, is giving the individual the freedom to choose. That is the very principle this country was founded on. While requiring high school students to do community service to graduate is fine, anything more as a requirement has many people screaming “Hitler Youth”. This choice gives just that, a choice. It allows parents to rest easy knowing their son or daughter will have the capability of affording school. It will give this country the much needed boost to its security without implementing the notorious draft (that this former military member is wholeheartedly against). It allows young people to have the opportunity to give back to their communities and nation while earning a paycheck and gaining much needed experience. Forcing this upon the nation is not what this country is about, but giving them the choice makes all the difference.
Thank you for your time, and I hope that your own life experience has given you the wisdom to make the right choices as our leaders. Think of this as an alternative to the current plan that is being drawn up. Good day to you all.
Sincerely,
Tim Norris
It has come to my attention that there is a plan by this current administration to institute a mandatory civil service plan for young people between the ages of 18 and 25. This plan would require said young people to work between 50 and 100 service hours a year to aide in the civilian defense and community outreach. While I understand and sympathize with certain opposition to this requirement, may I contribute another option for consideration? While requiring high school students to work in community clean up projects in addition to schoolwork to be able to graduate might instill some level of maturity and experience, there is more that can be done. Offering a choice of a two year commitment out of high school in addition to this might alleviate some of the woes this country is facing. I am postulating the idea that high school graduates have the option of choosing either a two year civil service job before attending upper level universities, or a two year contract in military service. This would have the benefit of creating a workforce of young people working for their communities, and add to the strength of our national defense without drafting.
There are many other countries that have mandatory military service for its young people, but that is not what I am suggesting, knowing from first hand military experience that not everyone is cut out for that type of service. Giving this option of civilian or military service has several benefits. On the military side of this equation, the money for recruiting could then be set aside for training, and would ease up some of the controversy this nation faces with some of the unscrupulous recruiting tactics that have made headlines over the years. The money then used for training purposes instead greatly enhances the capabilities of our recruits by giving them more resources, better teaching them and preparing them for the road ahead.
As for the civilian side, a young workforce of volunteers helping in that sector gives back to the individual communities. As far as I can remember, nobody has ever complained about community involvement and beautification. This would allow the higher-level civil servants to better organize and manage their resources, since they would now have a larger pool of workers for much needed jobs.
Because of the widening divide between the rich and poor in this country, it has been those from a higher tax bracket that are able to afford sending their children off to college right out of high school. This new option would give some parents much needed relief. As of military service, there is tuition reimbursement for serving members and other educational benefits for veterans. For the civilian side, offering a similar plan for those that choose that option would give equal benefits for service to this country. This way, a child may not need to wait to go to college, but can attend part time at many junior colleges while serving the two year contract in either civilian service or military. Once finished, they would gain access to other benefits to attend larger universities.
The other added benefit would be giving these young people life experience that is far greater than anything they could learn at even the most prestigious Ivy League school. Wisdom and maturity cannot be taught, but only learned through life itself. I have served in this nation’s military proudly, and it has taught me far more than I ever could have hoped to learn at the university level. I am now attending school at Arizona State, armed with maturity and wisdom far beyond what I had when I was 18 and graduating high school. I look around, see the waning maturity level of current students under the age of 20, and sigh. As some have said, “they don’t how good they have it”, and they throw it all away with a lackadaisical approach to schoolwork and priorities. Giving young people a way to better afford education while giving them work experience and growing in maturity can only serve to help them. Instead of dropping out after a year and a half of bad grades in college, they would spend that time working for the betterment of this country, while earning a modest paycheck as a bonus. After their two-year commitment is up, they could continue on that path, or leave for college, now able to afford it and able to focus on the more important priorities of school over beer pong.
The biggest selling point of this option that I can’t stress enough, is giving the individual the freedom to choose. That is the very principle this country was founded on. While requiring high school students to do community service to graduate is fine, anything more as a requirement has many people screaming “Hitler Youth”. This choice gives just that, a choice. It allows parents to rest easy knowing their son or daughter will have the capability of affording school. It will give this country the much needed boost to its security without implementing the notorious draft (that this former military member is wholeheartedly against). It allows young people to have the opportunity to give back to their communities and nation while earning a paycheck and gaining much needed experience. Forcing this upon the nation is not what this country is about, but giving them the choice makes all the difference.
Thank you for your time, and I hope that your own life experience has given you the wisdom to make the right choices as our leaders. Think of this as an alternative to the current plan that is being drawn up. Good day to you all.
Sincerely,
Tim Norris
Monday, February 23, 2009
Free Lunch and Healthcare: You Get What You Pay For (final draft)
The concept of Universal Health Care is a highly debated topic that has divided political parties for many years. Like many of you, I wondered just what is it exactly, and what this means for the average taxpayer? After spending time trying to find out more on the subject, I can say now that free health care certainly isn’t free, and it is a concept this country should stay far away from.
Some may ask if it is so bad, why is every other country doing some form of it? As your parents may have said when you were younger ”If all the other kids were jumping off a bridge, would you want to do that as well?” Now before I get into this, I want to take a look at the ideas behind Universal health Care, and why it sounds so appealing at first. It is true that in a country with over 300 million people, a little more than ten percent are uninsured. Health Care itself has become increasingly unaffordable in recent years to many individuals without coverage. And yes, many medical professionals seem more concerned with malpractice liability and insurance procedures than they are with actually providing quality care. Universal Health Care (UHC) would tackle these issues, as well as centralize medical records in a single database, making it easier for medical professionals to access. It would allow every person the chance to receive care, no matter what. However, here is the one flaw already apparent. Every person already has access by law. It is against the law to deny anyone emergency care. Now I know that some might say that is just for emergencies, what about day-to-day use? Well, there are non-profit hospitals around the nation that still provide care to the uninsured. They are willing and able to work with patients who do not have coverage. The money they get comes partly from the government yes (through grants), but it also comes from private insurers who pay per-diem or on the basis of fee-for-service schedules which can cover the costs of any losses taken to provide medical services. They also get a nifty little bonus of being exempt from certain taxes other organizations must pay.
Another idea is that with UHC, it will encourage people to take a preventative approach to their own health. Correct me if I’m wrong, but that’s already happening. However, you must consider the nature of the beast. People know that smoking causes cancer, and yet many people still smoke. People know they should eat three to four fruits and vegetable every day…and yet some people have a diet consisting of Red Bull, Powerbars, and Cap’n Crunch. People know that drugs are dangerous, but we still have an epidemic in this country that has no end in sight. Just because a person is encouraged to do what is right, doesn’t mean they will actually do it. Human nature aside, there are still ad campaigns striving to teach people how to live healthier lives as well as community outreach programs trying to teach school kids the value of living healthy. Just because government controls access to heath care, doesn’t mean people are going to start living healthier. In fact, it probably won’t curb prescription drug usage or doctor visits at all. The scary realization is, once heath care is more affordable and “free”, more people will be flocking to the hospital for every little sniffle and scrape. On a side note, you would think that not having coverage would encourage people to take better care of themselves, not the other way around.
Some argue that UHC is successful overseas. However, according to Britain’s Department of Health, the current wait time for outpatient referrals to see a doctor is on average, 18 weeks. Let that sink in for a minute. Let’s say on the first day of the semester you are referred to a doctor for general care (nothing major, just a casual medical visit). You make an appointment, and then two weeks after the semester is over you can finally meet with the doctor. Oh yeah, that sounds mighty efficient. Sure, emergency care will be provided in a somewhat timely manner but…oh wait! It already is over here without UHC.
Now the other dirty secret of UHC, is that some call it free health care. I’m sure most of you have heard that old saying, “There is no such thing as a free lunch.” That is so unfortunately true, it isn’t funny. Remember, if the government is paying for it, they get that money from you, the tax payer. We all dislike paying taxes, and we all look down on tax hikes. Now imagine if there was UHC finally instituted in this country. The money has to come from somewhere. Now even more money is pulled from your paycheck. That means less money you take home for those keeping score. Here is the other thing, what if you are completely healthy and never need to see a doctor? Well guess what, you’re paying for it anyway. I don’t know about you, but I don’t like paying for something I’m not using. Tack on to that the fact that technically, you are paying for someone else too. I’m sure we all have friends that on occasion, we don’t mind picking up their tab, because we know they will do the same in return some day. However, we all have known at least one person who never seems to have the money. They always “forget” their wallet at home or something like that. You always end up paying for them, and they never return the favor. That gets annoying, real fast. Now think about those right now who are collecting welfare and are milking the system for all it’s worth (not those legitimately unemployed, but those leaching off society). They don’t have a job, so they don’t pay taxes. With UHC they can go to the doctor on your bill. You pay for them. The person who willing injures themselves or willing does something to get sick, you pay for them too. I can say honestly that I really don’t like paying for something I don’t use, and it annoys me more when I have to pay for other people (especially those who are trying to take advantage of me), and I really get upset even more when I have to pay for somebody else’s mistake. I want you to remember that commercial about stealing cable. It’s the one where the guy at the grocery store leaves with a cart full of goods and doesn’t pay. The next person in line is given the bill. That is UHC in its most basic form. You pay so others can benefit, whether they deserve it (or need it) or not.
Another argument for UHC is that the government will make health care better because it will make it efficient. Now, the last time I checked, the great bureaucracy that is our government is well known for not being very efficient at all. Currently the government has a form of medical coverage called Medicare. However, the officials involved wastes about a third of the money it spends. Now imagine that on a bigger scale. Look at the current stimulus bill. Sure, that money is supposed to go to us, the people. However about $300 million of that package is going to congress to buy electric golf carts so they can get around Washington…despite already having a private tram system already in place. Just because the government controls it, doesn’t mean it is efficient. Usually (and unfortunately), the opposite is true.
Do you really want our government to control heath care completely? Do you really want tax increases so you can pay for something you might rarely use, but others who take advantage of everything will abuse? Do you really want health care to mimic the inefficient wait times and quality that other countries have? I certainly don’t. If I wanted what other countries have, I would move there. I spent time overseas, and I was ready to come back home after my tour was over. I still love this country despite its flaws and inefficiencies. However, letting it slide into a socialist state where the government controls everything is not my idea of a free country. Let the non-profit hospitals continue doing their jobs. Let government leave health care alone so that the private citizen can decide whether or not they want to spend money on heath coverage. After all, being free means deciding for yourself. If we take that away, then what do we have left?
Web Sites Cited
Department of Health. Treatment Statistics. 2008. http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Statistics/Performancedataandstatistics/18WeeksReferraltoTreatmentstatistics/index.htm
Earle, Geoff. "Congress $hopping Carts."
US Census Bureau. Universal Health Care Coverage. Almanac of Policy Issues. 2002. http://www.policyalmanac.org/health/universal_health.shtml
Reinhardt, Uwe. "How Do Hospitals Get Paid." January 2009. http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/01/23/how-do-hospitals-get-paid-a-primer/
Live Healthy America. 2009. http://www.livehealthyamerica.org/
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
The Free Lunch: You Get What You Pay For
The concept of Universal Health Care is a highly debated topic that has divided political parties for many years. Like many of you, I wondered just what is it exactly, and just how good or bad can it be? Is there a list of pros and cons we can peruse? After spending time researching and seeing it first hand in other countries, I can say now that free health care isn’t free, and it is a concept this country should stay far away from.
Some may ask, if it’s so bad, why is every other country doing it? If every other country was shooting every third citizen to prevent overcrowding, would you want to do that as well? Now before I get into this, I want to take a look at the ideas behind Universal health Care, and why it sounds so appealing at first. It is true that in a country with over 300 million people, a little more than ten percent are uninsured. Health Care itself has become increasingly unaffordable in recent years to many individuals without coverage. And yes, many medical professionals seem more concerned with malpractice liability and insurance procedures than they are with actually providing quality care. Universal Health Care (UHC) would tackle these issues, as well as centralize medical records in a single database, making it easier for medical professionals to access. It would allow every person the chance to receive care, no matter what. However, here is the one flaw already apparent. Every person already has access by law. It is against the law to deny anyone emergency care. Now I know that some might say that is just for emergencies, what about day-to-day use? Well, there are thousands of non-profit hospitals around the nation that still provide care to the uninsured. That’s what they are there for.
Another idea is that with UHC, it will encourage people to take a preventative approach to their own health. Correct me if I’m wrong, but that’s already happening. However, you must consider the nature of the beast. People know that smoking causes cancer, and yet many people still smoke. People know they should eat three to four fruits and vegetable every day…and yet some people have a diet consisting of Red Bull, Powerbars, and Cap’n Crunch. People know that drugs are dangerous, but we still have an epidemic in this country that has no end in sight. Just because a person is encouraged to do what is right, doesn’t mean they will actually do it. Human nature aside, there are still aggressive ad campaigns striving to teach people how to live healthier lives. Just because government controls access to heath care, doesn’t mean people are going to start living healthier. In fact, it probably won’t curb prescription drug usage or doctor visits at all. In fact, now that heath care is more affordable, more people will be flocking to the hospital for every little thing. On a side note, you would think that not having coverage would encourage people to take better care of themselves, not the other way around.
Some argue that UHC is successful overseas. However, according to 
Now the other dirty secret of UHC, is that some call it free health care. I’m sure most of you have heard that old saying, “There is no such thing as a free lunch.” That is so unfortunately true, it isn’t funny. Remember, if the government is paying for it, they get that money from you, the tax payer. We all hate paying taxes, and we all hate tax hikes. Now imagine if there was UHC finally instituted in this country. The money has to come from somewhere. Now even more money is pulled from your paycheck. That means less money you take home for those keeping score. Here is the other thing, what if you are completely healthy and never need to see a doctor? Well guess what, you’re paying for it anyway. I don’t know about you, but I don’t like paying for something I’m not using. Tack on to that the fact that technically, you are paying for someone else too. I’m sure we all have friends that on occasion, we don’t mind picking up their tab, because we know they will do the same in return some day. However, we all have known at least one person who never pays. They always “forget” their wallet at home or something like that. You always end up paying for them, and they never return the favor. That gets annoying, real fast. Now think about those right now who are collecting welfare and are milking the system for all it’s worth (not those legitimately unemployed, but those leaching off society). They don’t have a job, so they don’t pay taxes. With UHC they can go to the doctor on your bill. You pay for them. The person who willing injures themselves or willing does something to get sick, you pay for them too. I hate paying for something I don’t use, and I hate it more when I have to pay for other people (especially those who are trying to take advantage of me), and I hate it even more when I have to pay for someone else’s mistake. I want you to remember that commercial about stealing cable. It’s the one where the guy at the grocery store leaves with a cart full of goods and doesn’t pay. The next person in line is given the bill. That is UHC in its most basic form. You pay so others can benefit, whether they deserve it (or need it) or not.
Another argument for UHC is that the government will make health care better because it will make it efficient. Now, the last time I checked, the great bureaucracy that is our government is well known for not being very efficient at all. Currently the government has a form of medical coverage called Medicare. However, the officials involved wastes about a third of the money it spends. Now imagine that on a bigger scale. Look at the current stimulus bill. Sure, that money is supposed to go to us, the people. However about $300 million of that package is going to congress to buy electric golf carts so they can get around 
Do you really want our government to control heath care completely? Do you really want tax increases so you can pay for something you might rarely use, but others who take advantage of everything will abuse? Do you really want health care to mimic the inefficient wait times and quality that other countries have? I certainly don’t. If I wanted what other countries have, I would move there. I spent time overseas, and I was ready to come back home after my tour was over. I still love this country despite its flaws and inefficiencies. However, letting it slide into a socialist state where the government controls everything is not my idea of a free country. Let the non-profit hospitals continue doing their jobs. Let government leave health care alone so that the private citizen can decide whether or not they want to spend money on heath coverage. After all, being free means deciding for yourself. If we take that away, then what do we have left.
And that is all from this corner of the globe. Have a good day, America!
Web Sites Cited
Earle, Geoff. "Congress $hopping Carts." New York Post. February 2009. http://www.nypost.com/seven/02112009/news/politics/congress_hopping_carts_154496.htm
Department of Health. Treatment Statistics. 2008. http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Statistics/Performancedataandstatistics/18WeeksReferraltoTreatmentstatistics/index.htm
US Census Bureau. Universal Health Care Coverage. Almanac of Policy Issues. 2002. http://www.policyalmanac.org/health/universal_health.shtml
Live Healthy America. 2009. http://www.livehealthyamerica.org/
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Analyzing the blogosphere
We had to read and analyze a few blogs for class, and this is the assignment...
Bloggers: an army of irregulars, by Paul Reynolds
Explain in your own words how Reynolds thinks that blogs are most useful. What do they do well, and what do they do poorly? Is Reynolds fair in his criticism?
Well ladies and gentlemen, blogs can be a good source of information, and be a good supplement or alternative to the main stream media (msm). However, they can be (and many times are) biased and unfair. While they can hold government and the msm accountable, they can also be too critical and devoid of useful information.
Bloggers: an army of irregulars, by Paul Reynolds
Explain in your own words how Reynolds thinks that blogs are most useful. What do they do well, and what do they do poorly? Is Reynolds fair in his criticism?
Well ladies and gentlemen, blogs can be a good source of information, and be a good supplement or alternative to the main stream media (msm). However, they can be (and many times are) biased and unfair. While they can hold government and the msm accountable, they can also be too critical and devoid of useful information.
Why bosses blog - and why it's cheesy, by Stephen Evans
Why does Evans think that many corporate blogs are, in his words, "regulation corporate speak"? What's wrong with that?
Corporate speak is full of bias aimed at the stockholders to make them happy. It is also usually nothing but a load of fluff that one would usually see coming from the Public Relations Dept. Some of these blogs seem to be overshadowing the PR people since it is coming "straight from the horses mouth" high up on the corporate food chain. In this, it loses credibility. Also, there is the legality issue when the higher ups start spouting ideas tht haven't been approved by the board of directors. It is a slippery slope for these execs that do this type of blogging, who must watch out when they walk that line between useless blog fluff and insider information.Michael Crow's blog
Look through President Crow's blog and see if you can find instances of Evans' "regulation corporate speak" or times when Crow is being more personal. Quote him in your reply. Which do you find more effective? Why?
Nearly all of his blog posts are corporate speak in its finest form. President Crow certainly has a talent for saying nothing while speaking at length. His entire post entitled "More Important Budget Facts" has nothing in it that would serve the average student well. It mostly is an apologists rantings of why we the students will be paying even more tuition, but does nothing to say why he still gets a pay raise. Even in his more personal posts have little in the way of substance. This means even his most heartfelt (and I use that term loosely) posts is not effective. I have seen nothing from this president that puts my mind at ease. You see, the proof is in the pudding. As a student I have seen how this university has deteriorated in its academic capability. Sure, students are getting good grades, but are they really learning anything useful? As a former business student, I have gained most of what I know in the business world from actually being out there working. None of it (aside from accounting, so kudos there) have I learned from my business classes...which is why I changed to communications. I actually learn useful things there...sometimes.
GM's Official Blog, "FastLane"
Again keeping Evans' article in mind, how would you describe the usefulness of this blog? Who might find it interesting? In other words, who is the blog's intended audience?
Well, this blog could be useful to car afficianados, or people curious about the company (like potential investors). To the general public it seems to be a rather useless blog. It contains nothing I can't learn from their PR releases in the lates "Car and Driver" rag.SYNNEX CEO's blog
Again keeping Evans' article in mind, how would you describe the usefulness of this blog? Who might find it interesting? In other words, who is the blog's intended audience?
Now here is a blog that I found to be interesting. It gives information for CEO's, administrators, and managers who can use his bits of sage advice to be a better leader. He describes the kinds of posts that should be used to inform without being trite. As someone that looks to be a better leader, I found this to be a nice little treasure trove. It's just too bad more corporate execs haven't read this blog.
And that ends this assignment for today everyone. So in the words of Bill and Ted..."Be excellent to each other."
...oh, and "party on, dude."
Universal Tim Norris
Sunday, January 25, 2009
There can be only one...first assignment.
As my first post in this blog for my class, allow me to introduce myself! I am Tim Norris, currently a senior at ASU...for the second year (yeeha!). After getting out of the military, I decided to finish up college and came down here to ASU to become a business major. After taking many classes that didn't do anything for me, I changed my major to Communications. After spending some time in the corporate world (in between the military and ASU), I quickly realized that it doesn't matter what degree you have, as long as you have one (unless you're trying to be an accountant, a lawyer, or a doctor). It's the Master's degree that really counts. I will do happy cartwheels of joy once I get away from this mess President Crow made this university into. However, that's a whole other topic...
One of the things I'm supposed to talk about is my level of computing experience. Well, I've worked on computers off and on for many years now. I had a Mac back when they first came out in the 80's. Yep, I'm that old (I went into the military first, remember?). However, I never took the initiative to really learn all I could, so my experience is average at best. Back in high school I hacked a couple of games, but I didn't do anything spectacular. Adding in new sprites and renaming characters (and the occasional cheat) was the best I could manage. I can do a lot of things if I have enough time, but in the constraints of this class, I don't think I'll be programming any 3d rpg adventure. I do look forward to creating the webpage. That will help me out in the long run, because I am creating a comic strip that I want to get online. As for podcasting, it isn't too different than when I was younger and had a tape recorder, so that is a cake walk. I've written many blogs over the years (I forgot I already had one on this site until the start of class...go figure!), so that particular thing doesn't have me worried in the slightest.
My reasons for taking this class was two-fold. One, I wanted to gain experience in persuasive writing. I thought that might help me out in the business world (I want to get into non-profit healthcare administration). And two, uh...I hate to admit this, but I needed a filler. However, I never looked at it as an easy grade. I always take my classes seriously, filler or not. Now, as for online hybrid classes, I've taken a few. In my opinion, they are not too bad. I honestly have no real opinion either way. I like classes I can sit in, and I like the ones I can go online as well. Mixing the two isn't a problem either. I see myself as rather flexible and adaptable to any situation. One of the things the military tends to do to people. Adapt and overcome (and peace through better firepower isn't a bad thing either)!
Now, I believe I met all the requirements for this first assignment, so I won't bore you readers with any added introductions at this moment.
So, to conclude this first blog, I wish everyone a goodnight, a happy tomorrow, and may you squeeze the Charmin when Mr. Whipple isn't looking.
"Universal" Tim Norris
Being the life of the party, since 1978
One of the things I'm supposed to talk about is my level of computing experience. Well, I've worked on computers off and on for many years now. I had a Mac back when they first came out in the 80's. Yep, I'm that old (I went into the military first, remember?). However, I never took the initiative to really learn all I could, so my experience is average at best. Back in high school I hacked a couple of games, but I didn't do anything spectacular. Adding in new sprites and renaming characters (and the occasional cheat) was the best I could manage. I can do a lot of things if I have enough time, but in the constraints of this class, I don't think I'll be programming any 3d rpg adventure. I do look forward to creating the webpage. That will help me out in the long run, because I am creating a comic strip that I want to get online. As for podcasting, it isn't too different than when I was younger and had a tape recorder, so that is a cake walk. I've written many blogs over the years (I forgot I already had one on this site until the start of class...go figure!), so that particular thing doesn't have me worried in the slightest.
My reasons for taking this class was two-fold. One, I wanted to gain experience in persuasive writing. I thought that might help me out in the business world (I want to get into non-profit healthcare administration). And two, uh...I hate to admit this, but I needed a filler. However, I never looked at it as an easy grade. I always take my classes seriously, filler or not. Now, as for online hybrid classes, I've taken a few. In my opinion, they are not too bad. I honestly have no real opinion either way. I like classes I can sit in, and I like the ones I can go online as well. Mixing the two isn't a problem either. I see myself as rather flexible and adaptable to any situation. One of the things the military tends to do to people. Adapt and overcome (and peace through better firepower isn't a bad thing either)!
Now, I believe I met all the requirements for this first assignment, so I won't bore you readers with any added introductions at this moment.
So, to conclude this first blog, I wish everyone a goodnight, a happy tomorrow, and may you squeeze the Charmin when Mr. Whipple isn't looking.
"Universal" Tim Norris
Being the life of the party, since 1978
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
