Perspective

Why We Get Healthcare Totally Wrong

Part I of II

It’s baaack. . . In March, Trump’s proposed “American Healthcare Act” was so unpopular it wasn’t even put up for a vote. The episode was so embarrassing that most pundits (including me) thought Trump wouldn’t touch the issue again until 2019 at the earliest.

But the AHCA has returned, and this time, it’s somehow worse.

Trump himself doesn’t seem to understand what’s in the bill. We can only assume that he’s racing to pass something—anything!—so he can claim a small victory and sate Conservatism, Inc.’s seven-year obsession with “repelling Obamacare.”

To get the “Freedom Caucus” on board, the bill now has less coverage than it did last March. In order to appeal to the “moderates” in the GOP, the bill maintains the basic structure of Obamacare.

This is one of those “compromises” that is the worst of both worlds. As Ann Coulter recently tweeted:

The Republicans’ clueless messaging and total lack of imagination in policy-making has likely bolstered Obamacare’s popularity, which has retraced its highest levels of support. Voters grasp that Republicans want to change the system, but don’t understand what will be put in its place. In a climate of uncertainty, people tend to cling to what they’ve got. The stark reality is that Obamacare is more popular than Trump. One can only wonder why Republicans are so eager to die on the AHCA hill, especially when other, more winnable battles could be fought.

Ultimately, the problems with AHCA and Obamacare are not fixable, because they are fundamental and conceptual. The solution is not some cute new incentive or state subsidy; it is a new paradigm.

Let’s start with what is wrong.

Insurance Is The Problem, Not The Solution

Everyone seems to assume that we need more “affordable health insurance.” The debate is over how to get it: more government subsidies or a free market. But this is the wrong place to start. First off, what we call “health insurance” is not truly insurance at all, nor is producing more of it going to lead to better care. We need less health insurance, not more.

Essential to the concept of insurance is that no one expects to use it. For the holder, insurance is a hedge against unforeseen, rare, and catastrophic outcomes. For the lender, insurance is a gamble that the holder won’t call in the liability.[1]

Today, what we call “health insurance” is better understood as pre-payments or installment programs. Everyone expects to use their “insurance” regularly every year, for both unpredictable illnesses and totally predictable checkups. Both AHCA and Obamacare seek to lower these installment payments by creating mandates and incentives that pool the healthy and the sick, the young and old, as a way of averaging out costs.

So the real question is this: Why are we attempting to provide healthcare by socializing the insurance market? Why is this the paradigm? And why do we keep doing it, when the result is that the U.S. spends more on healthcare than any other nation, including the “socialist” ones.

The deeper answer to these questions probably lies in the American psyche. “Socialized medicine” is for those wimpy Europeans and Canadians and the working poor. America doesn’t have a proletariat, or rather it has one that thinks of itself as “middle class.” Thus, Americans like talking about “muh health insurance,” a product for rich people, as opposed to talking about the government simply providing care for people who can’t afford it. A similar situation occurs in the “food stamp” program. Americans are provided with EBT cards (electronic benefit transfer) that act like fancy credit cards. As opposed to simply providing basic foodstuffs for the poor (yes, literally government cheese) along with exercise regiments, the government lets Americans pretend they are wealthy consumers out shopping. The result is that poor aren’t starving . . . they’re obese. Similarly, America’s “free-market healthcare” involves more government spending than a socialist one.

Insurance Prices Are Not Driven By Supply And Demand

American healthcare is screwed up precisely because it operates through insurance markets.

The typical conservative solution to the overpriced insurance market is “more competition.” But insurance—and especially health insurance—is not like other goods in a free market and does not respond to competition.

With a typical demand curve for any product, as the price rises, demand falls. For example, while many men would be willing to spend $1,000 for a new suit, few would be willing to buy a suit priced at $20,000; and effectively none would purchase a suit for $1 million.

Healthcare is different because it is not simply about desire for a luxury, which could be satisfied or abandoned, depending on price. Demand for healthcare derives from the most basic instinct for life. Healthcare is existential. And we will mortgage our future to cling to life. Indeed, near the end, we will spend tremendous amounts just to keep our hearts beating, especially since we know debts will be liquidated in death.

Moreover, while a new suit’s price is on the tag, when we visit a hospital, we have no idea what the ultimate cost of our care will be. In such a scenario, the most basic pricing function is simply inoperative.

Again, insurance is not like others products or services. Insurance is a gamble on the part of the lender and borrower. It is thus determined algorithmically and actuarily. In a casino, it doesn’t matter how many people want to play Blackjack, or how many tables there are in the room; the odds are always the same.

With Obamacare and the AHCA, the “demand” for insurance is infinite, because every citizen is forced into the market, through the individual mandate or tax incentives. The “supply” is also infinite, since new insurance can be generated by the stroke of a pen; that is, there is effectively no marginal cost. The price of insurance is determined by actuarial calculation: how can the firm profit knowing how many people will die, how many will get sick, and how many will stay healthy in a given year. “More competition”—the brain-dead conservative answer to everything—is irrelevant, for again, the price is not determined by supply and demand.

If Trump and the Republican Congress pass the AHCA today, they can pat themselves on the back for, at last, “repealing Obamacare.” The catch is, Republicans will then take ownership of a profoundly screwed-up system, based on false premises and calculations, and one which will inevitably generate higher prices and greater unhappiness. The American Health Care Act is not “Making America Great Again,” and it does not represent a fresh start after the swamp has been drained. It is simply more of the same.

What is needed is not reform, but a totally new paradigm. And that is what I will outline in Part II of this essay.


Footnotes

  1. The classic insurance scenario, which dates back to the age of Hammurabi, is when merchants took out loans contingent on a vessel’s safe return from a voyage; if the ship sank at sea, the loan would not have to be repaid. ↩︎

Comment

146 comments

  1. [email protected] 11 May, 2017 at 04:24 Reply

    The last contributor is correct to point to the “conspiratorial nature” of our health
    care systems. Many in the medical profession recognize that there are many
    cases where we would be better off if we allowed the human body/human soul to
    try and heal itself. In the event that no such healing occurs, then we would accept
    with the help of grace that death is merely a continuation of the natural
    process of life. It is relatively easy to attack the morbid industrialization
    of our health care systems; much harder to articulate the consequences of
    challenging the principles and values by which those systems survive. Within
    the context of the United States Constitution, that means having the courage to
    challenge the principle that there is “a right to life”. The right to life is a
    contradiction of the will to live; but the will to live must also accept the burden
    that comes with leadership, a burden that includes the task of rationing health
    care amongst the citizens of a nation that aspires to greatness.

  2. 787878781 9 May, 2017 at 20:34 Reply

    Health care will fail because pharma/insurance/FDA/CDC/WHO designs it so. They want us to be sick and ensure we get at sick as possible with vaccines, processed GMOs, anti depressants, chem-trails, fluoridated water, and an endless media collusion of propaganda feeding us false and fake health information. In particular scaring us of non-existent diseases such as Zika. Add the fake climate change discussion…. has anyone ever bothered to ask how come CO2 was been vilified, when without CO2 we die… ? CO2 is LIFE, it fuels the entire ecosystem. Without CO2 no plant, tree or food will grow. Every plant, animal and human are made of carbon… It is the chem-trails that are destroying our climate, creating gray fuzzy sky’s/chem-cloud’s and droughts… destroying our soils food-farming sustainability etc…

  3. [email protected] 8 May, 2017 at 06:12 Reply

    Using liberal democratic principles will never solve Health Care. Mr. Spencer is right when he calls for a new paradigm. He is also right when he questions the craziness of using the concept of insurance
    to provide better health care. The “Left” are onto something with their Single
    Payer concept; although the criterion that they would use for doling out health
    care services would be very different from the “Right”. For the liberal Left,
    providing Health Care is communism by stealth, with no distinction being made
    between those who deserve health care and those who don’t. That requires some
    tough decision making. It also requires the courage to forcefully challenge one
    of the principles of liberal democracy, namely the sanctity of life. Even the
    Soviets knew that was crock of Christian shit! And so we pat ourselves on the
    back at how technology can preserve life at birth and prolong it before death. Nature
    laughs at us, all too amused by the spectacle of the politicians and the people
    lying to one another, another example of American Democracy gnawing on its own still
    bleeding entrails.

  4. grumpiertrucker 6 May, 2017 at 19:39 Reply

    Looks like my original post was deleted. Disappointing that the Alt-Right would censor, especially in light of the ongoing Twitter Holocaust.
    Hopefully it’s a technical glitch.
    (Edit: Disregard. My bad. It’s still there.)

  5. Sam Cru 6 May, 2017 at 08:01 Reply

    I pay $600 per year for $900,000 inpatient health insurance with no deductible. I don’t live in America. Neither the gov nor my employer subsidizes my health insurance.

  6. grumpiertrucker 5 May, 2017 at 21:50 Reply

    More genius.
    Quick! Name me the last Government program that helped white people. Anyone? Bueller? “GI Bill.” You don’t say? World War II. And implemented when we were a 90% white country. By white people.
    How do you suppose Single Payer will be implemented today? The same way every other Government program is implemented: If you’re white and male, you don’t get. Everyone else: you get. And who works for the Government, that would be implementing this splendid Single Payer? It’s not white men, if my License Branch, City Hall, County Offices, Polling Stations and Airport are any indicator.
    And this dopey trope that really should be well out of it’s misery by now: “Health Insurance is the ONLY thing completely resistant to the Free Market!!!” Richard, you sound like a Daily Kos writer.
    All your examples are from the BUYER side. You completely neglect the SELLER. And the laws of supply and demand more often than not are Seller driven only. Don’t believe that? Look at Wal Mart putting all the Mom and Pop stores out of business. According to you, Wal-mart should have never happened because when your roof is leaking and you need supplies, you can’t quibble or even know about the prices… It’s too late!!!
    No, a free market in Healthcare would FORCE providers to have to COMPETE for my dollars. That’s why McDonald’s drive thru is always full and always moving quickly… while Burger King has 3 cars and still takes 20 minutes. One seller is providing better, quicker, more affordable service. Same with health care. And it’s why every single one of you (especially if you have kids) knows that if you’re in a hurry, you can’t do Burger King and you hunt for the next McDonald’s.
    And this, “Once we’re at the hospital, it’s too late! You can’t go over prices when your leg has been severed!”
    No, dunce-cap. Do college kids show up on the first day of classes not knowing what they are taking and thus, expected to decide then? Of course not. Are gym members told to decide if they want a shower and a locker or a class each time they go? No.
    They pick a standard plan at an agreed upon price. Same can be done with Healthcare.
    “But it’s so expensive you can’t possibly know what you’ll need!!!” You say?
    Watch the prices fall once the monopoly party is over and Hospital Administrators can’t just stick it to the Insurance companies for a $5000 rate for half an hour of Operating Room outpatient surgery.
    And get the Lawyers under control. I live in Vegas. Every third commercial is for an ambulance chasing injury lawyer. Want bold action? Go to Loser pays legal system. Like the ‘rest of the industrial nations’ I always hear about. They don’t sue each other constantly because they have loser pay. They CAN sue of course, but if they lose, they pay. No frivolous lawsuits designed solely as settlement shakedowns.
    Watch prices fall even more. It CAN work. It DOES work.
    You youngin’s won’t believe this.. but I was young at the tail end of the time when Doctor’s actually made HOUSE CALLS. Can you believe that? You could call a Doctor, and if he wanted to make some money, he would drive to your house and stitch your kid up after the kid fell off his bike. That actually happened! IN MY LIFE!!
    Don’t tell me that Healthcare is the single, solitary Kryptonite that destroys the Free Market. It isn’t. It wasn’t…. for all of our history except that past 40 years.
    What happened? Government happened. The same Government that Spencer is now insanely advocating take it all over. Again, we all know how much those Government employees love us, don’t we? Don’t you want Chanice and Latoya and Njyabe and Goonie-Goo-Goo now in charge of whether you live or die? They’ve done so well with the Airports, haven’t they?
    Here’s an insane idea: How about before we declare the Free Market can’t work in healthcare, we actually try the Free Market in healthcare?
    PS.. somebody should hire me to write for this site. I leave hotter takes between my couch cushions than I see here.
    Geez Louise. All Y’all gotta raise your game and bring it harder than this stuff or your movement is toast. If Cernolisp is your Cronkite and Spencer is your Alinsky, you kids aren’t ever getting rid of your training wheels.

    • craicher 6 May, 2017 at 04:20 Reply

      Too long to read but from the first phrase, many whites get food stamps, obamacare, and so on. When I was a kid, we went to get our vaccinations at the free clinic and were the only Whites there. My brother and I played a game, push each other into fat Black women.

      Not that i support these welfare programs in an ideal world. But yea, we don’t live in a an ideal world.

      • grumpiertrucker 6 May, 2017 at 04:26 Reply

        I said, “helps.” I didn’t say, “uses.” Your premise is flawed. You are asserting that food stamps and Obamacare help people. They do not. They trap them. You seem to be admitting this in your next sentence when you say, “Not that I support these…” Why don’t you support them? You just said they help people.
        But step back from even that… Is society as a whole… blacks and whites…better off now with these massive welfare programs? No. By every metric.

        • craicher 6 May, 2017 at 04:46 Reply

          You have some points but still every civilized nation has a decent system of comprehensive healthcare coverage and the “free market” nonsense will only line the pockets of the well heeled and do nothing of good for our people.

          I mentioned Obamacare and food stamps to point out that it is not only dindus who get them.

          If I were Emperor I would do away with all welfare and have workfare for a short while in a transition phase back to self sufficiency. But like I said we are not in an ideal world and have to play the hand we are dealt.

          • grumpiertrucker 6 May, 2017 at 05:02

            So you’re repeating Daily Kos talking points, too. Every other civilized nation doesn’t have decent comprehensive coverage. That’s a total myth perpetuated by the same Jews who want single payer. If you look at our cancer survival rates as well as other diseases we absolutely crush any country on Earth. You’re falling for the lie that lifespan somehow is affected by quality of healthcare. Japan ranks higher in lifespan than we do because they are a homogeneous culture that doesn’t drive, doesn’t have guns, doesn’t drink and smoke or do narcs nearly as much as we do. We have a huge population of minorities who, for whatever reason, don’t live as long and are susceptible to all kinds of diseases whites are not, we smoke and drink and narc out, we crash our cars and die, we shoot each other, we eat like crap. THAT’s why Japan has a longer lifespan. Has nothing to do with the healthcare system.
            Also, all these Scandinavian countries used as the model we should emulate.. WE pay for all their Defense and have for 70 years. Plus, they all use our stuff… our medical technology, procedures and meds.
            It’s really easy to look down your nose at boorish Americans who ‘turn their backs on the sick.” when the Americans are paying to defend you so you can spend tons of money on your people. And you are able to use all the technological advances we’ve invented, all the surgical procedures we’ve discovered, and the meds we spent billions researching and developing…
            But who is going to be our America once we turn into Sweden?
            And I never said whites didn’t get welfare. By proportion, who uses more welfare? I’ll tell you: Blacks, Hispanics, Women. Overwhelmingly. Just because there are many more whites here (presently) so some use them as well, doesn’t change my point that these programs are most certainly NOT built around the idea of advancing the white race in any way, shape or form.
            Neither will Single Payer healthcare.

          • craicher 6 May, 2017 at 05:10

            Wut? The japs smoke like chimneys and drive cars and drink. And you make all kinds of other false claims. In any case Spencer is right (Right) and our people need the security and comfort of knowing that if they get sick or need help it is there.

            Up with the Whites!

    • craicher 6 May, 2017 at 04:23 Reply

      All nations have government. Get over it. We just need it to work for us and not against us. recapturing our governments should be our primary concern not destroying them for some jewed up ideal.

      • grumpiertrucker 6 May, 2017 at 04:50 Reply

        So you struggle with reading comprehension. Typical. Nowhere did I state or even imply that nations shouldn’t have Governments.
        But I’ll play your game, Name the last Government program that was designed and implemented to help whites?
        And the free market is not some “Jewed up ideal.” Our most prosperous years were immediately following World War 2, when Jews had just arrived here after fleeing Europe. They didn’t have a foothold here at that point like they do now. The biggest companies were run by Gentiles… Rockefellers, Kennedy’s, Fords, Hughes. Not Jewish names.
        Actually, it’s the Jewed up ideal that’s pushing for bigger Government and Single Payer healthcare.
        Every Jewish pundit is either aggressively advocating for Single payer or like Krauthammer, would not be opposed to it. Every Jewish politician supports Single Payer. 70% of Jews vote in bloc for Democrats. Democrats are the party of Single Payer. This means that Single Payer is a vessel of the Jews.
        If you all really think that in today’s America, Government employees (and the Jews who control the Government) are going to create a program that will benefit Richard Spencer… then knock yourselves out and go for it and see how that works out for you.
        Last time I looked, Jews are single handedly behind flooding Europe with populations that will displace whites. Jews are behind the immigration policies here which have diluted the country beyond recognition. And behind all the anti-white propaganda that pushes for white genocide are Jews. It’s so Jewed up that one can’t even point out the obvious truth that this country was founded by whites for whites without the Jewish mafia destroying your life for being such a bigot.
        So your story is: Turning over our healthcare to these people and the minorities they hire is somehow going to help us? Have I got that right? Is that your story? Good luck with all that.
        This is what I mean when I say y’all better get your heads out of your butts and get in the game.

        • craicher 6 May, 2017 at 05:17 Reply

          I am not reading your entire….yawn. I hope you are very young because you make many false claims at the beginning of your spiel. One that Jews arrived here after WWII. Two, immediately after WWII the West was mostly unionized workers who were treated well. It was by no means a time of “free market” insanity. on the contrary the USA and other Western nations enjoyed a time of greater equality between the classes than ever. Working in a slaughter house was a good job that fathers passed to their sons. Just for an example. Now in the free market and the market of moving people, it is a job “Americans” just wont do. Fucking sick!

          Wake up my son and don’t go to the dark side.

          • grumpiertrucker 6 May, 2017 at 16:33

            Ha! So you brag repeatedly about not even reading what you’re responding to… classic.
            I never meant to imply that there were no Jews here until after World War 2. I thought about that when I wrote it because I know you people aren’t very smart.. but I took a chance and hoped you’d understand the point. But you didn’t. Yeah, Jews have always been here. But they didn’t control everything like they do now until they started migrating here in great numbers during and after the War. Look up any old pictures of civic leaders. Look up the studio executives in Hollywood. Look up the major networks and media outlets and see who ran them during and before World War 2. They are all Gentile names. Andrew Carnegie, Charles Merrill and Edmund Lynch, Nelson Rockefeller, Joseph Kennedy, Henry Ford, Howard Hughes, Walt Disney, JP Morgan was baptized a Christian when born….and on and on and on. The captains of industry who built the country and controlled it until after World War 2 were gentiles. Now every one of those industries is controlled by only Jews.
            And the “Unions built this country” myth. At their height of power, only 22% of America’s workforce were in Unions. And Post world war 2 was most certainly more free market than it is today. Hell, we can’t even build a dam or a road today because the Government has choked the Free Market so much.
            And you people are in the wrong club… you should go over to Daily Kos… that’s more your speed. With your “Equality between the classes” nonsense. There never has been equality among the classes. And it wasn’t better back in the day. That’s another lie you’ve swallowed whole.
            The top 1% is a myth. It’s different people moving in and out of it. What you are basically saying when you say garbage about the 1% and growing inequality is this:
            “The school system is inherently unfair because the Valedictorians have seen their grades rise exponentially compared with the rest of the student body.”
            Well, yeah.. that’s why they are Valedictorians. If their grades fall, they are replaced by others whose grades are rising. Get it? Probably not. But the 1% are the Valedictorians of our culture. But they are different people. Mark Cuban was not in the 1% 30 years ago. He is now. So of course the top 1% is always going to have income growth far outpacing everyone else’s. If their income slips… or even if it doesn’t… they get replaced and knocked out of the top 1% by someone whose incomes are growing dramatically.
            Get it?
            I bet not.
            You fuckers gotta raise your game.

          • craicher 6 May, 2017 at 18:33

            We people are not smart? I smell a yid.

            You are a hostile racial alien. That is clear. You spew out lies. Hollywood was mudblood from its inception.

  7. Fred 5 May, 2017 at 12:37 Reply

    Do not have an opinion on this cuck item in Trump’s agenda, but seems like the whole Right wing, Coulter, Cerno and now Alt-Right seem to hate this passage of the AHCA through the House. We just need to realize that at some point, with ongoing demographic trends, nothing is going to work in America.

    On a positive note, maybe a confidence booster for Trump to go after real items such as the Border Wall.

  8. craicher 5 May, 2017 at 08:07 Reply

    The insurance business is a sham created and run by the same people who brought us the joys of usury. Another way to fleece the goyim. That being said, collectively owned not for profit insurance schemes like they used to have in Sweden with insurers like Folksam work very well. You pool your money for future use but the shyster at the top doing everything he can to steal the pooled money is removed.

    Co-op health insurance is certainly something we should look into. And cooperatives in many other things too.

  9. WR_the_realist 5 May, 2017 at 05:18 Reply

    It is true that in modern health care you have no idea what the bill will be when you enter a hospital. So maybe the first step in health care reform is to require that hospitals and doctors start providing you with that information up front. The biggest threat to American health is not the cost of health insurance but the wretched poor diet of most Americans. If we promise free health care to people and tell them they can go ahead and get 100 lbs overweight, you have a formula for bankrupting the country.

    • craicher 5 May, 2017 at 07:54 Reply

      In many scenarios they cannot give that information up front. One things leads to another and a persons health and responses to treatment are not predictable. So that is off the table.

      How can every nation besides the mentally retarded ones provide health care systems that work at least on the basic level but the USA cannot? Unfathomable.

      Not that it is perfect anywhere. In Europe it is said that France has the best health care system. The USA should be looking at how they do it there. Germany seems to do well too.

    • Rick 5 May, 2017 at 14:29 Reply

      One problem is there is no way that the hospital can predict the costs – one person will walk in with heart attack symptoms and just need antacids, another will need a triple bypass. This why healthcare can’t be treated like other industries, say a construction company or IT company that provide you a quote upfront. Its often not practical for patients to shop around, eg imagine someone with stroke symptoms shopping around for a hospital. I agree 100% about the diet issue.

  10. J_Bonaccorsi_Philadelphia 4 May, 2017 at 23:48 Reply

    Every item of exchange is like every other item of exchange. There is nothing unique about medical insurance.

  11. Afterthought 4 May, 2017 at 22:16 Reply

    Not the first time Spencer is totally out of his depth, nor the last.

    What is achievable in all white societies is death in multiracial America.

    Next Richard will be touting public school as the answer to our education woes!

    • Yehudah Finkelstein 4 May, 2017 at 23:07 Reply

      There’s nothing wrong with the idea of public schools or public health care. Its all a matter of who controls government institutions.

      • J_Bonaccorsi_Philadelphia 5 May, 2017 at 00:09 Reply

        There is certainly something wrong with the idea of government-run schools and government-run medical care. They indirectly make someone responsible for the education or medical care of another person or another person’s children. No person should be made responsible for any such thing.

        • craicher 5 May, 2017 at 07:59 Reply

          Bullshit. Public schools can be the best. And many are. If Blacks have their public schools and all they learn about is Shaka Khan well that is their problem. What we need is our own space and our own school and they will be the world’s best. The same in health care. Let the Blacks and muds take care of their own. We will do well with our own public institutions.

          The USA had some of the most educated students in the world when near everyone went to a public school. How about Russia, France, Germany? Where do you think all their very well educated people go to school?

          • J_Bonaccorsi_Philadelphia 5 May, 2017 at 12:50

            In the first place, this is the last time I will be responding to you, since I don’t engage with persons who say “Bullshit” in an online exchange like this, you low-grade nothing. As to your comment’s substance, I didn’t say anything either way about the public schools’ quality, which has nothing to do with my point.

          • craicher 5 May, 2017 at 21:25

            I get your point. you are a libertard. Our movement is for our people not some abstract individualism.

        • Yehudah Finkelstein 5 May, 2017 at 08:59 Reply

          Go to a white public school in North Dakota or Western Pennsylvania. The problem in those schools is leftist indoctrination, but otherwise the kids get a good education.

          • J_Bonaccorsi_Philadelphia 5 May, 2017 at 12:47

            I didn’t say anything either way about the education’s quality, which has nothing to do with my point.

          • Yehudah Finkelstein 5 May, 2017 at 13:18

            Your point was some Libertarian “muh personal responsibility” nonsense. White public schools work.

        • Rick 5 May, 2017 at 14:36 Reply

          This point of view becomes appealing in countries where you have little or nothing in common with the people around you, and are basically parts of different groups in hostile competition for the same resources (in other words, America). But IMO, it makes less sense in places where one does have positive ties to those around them, because caring for the children would help the society as a whole. The later is often not the case in America, but people tend to talk about it in abstract, ideological and moral terms rather than discussing the realities of ethnic and racial competition that drives these viewpoints in the first place.

          • J_Bonaccorsi_Philadelphia 5 May, 2017 at 15:00

            You’ve stated things exactly backwards. In a place where one has regard for those around him, one does not bring a child into the world and expect others to take up the burden of rearing him or her.

          • craicher 5 May, 2017 at 21:23

            Your radical individualism does not belong on the Right. You can try Libertardism with your poison.

  12. Teutonic Butts 4 May, 2017 at 21:25 Reply

    Well it passed the House. Only hope now is that the Senate kills it.
    I guess its back to accelerationism. Best to forget about the uni-party and just hope they crash this thing with a few survivors.

  13. Mike M 4 May, 2017 at 18:51 Reply

    The issue is the rising cost of medical care and drugs. Insurance is not the same thing as medical care.

    Think of car parts…If a car windshield keeps increasing in costs, you don’t solve it by attacking the insurance industry…for increasing their deductible for windshield replacement..you address why windows cost so much.

    • J_Bonaccorsi_Philadelphia 5 May, 2017 at 00:14 Reply

      Yes–and in this case, of medical care, the costs are going up because there really is no private exchange. The doctors, hospitals, and insurance companies are mere proxies, intended to preserve an appearance of private enterprise in what is a government system. It’s socialism American-style.

  14. Jaggers 4 May, 2017 at 18:28 Reply

    Healthcare is not exactly “supply and demand”, but I would say the principle still does definitely apply. It’s very simple: if an individual has a choice between different companies offering different plans for different prices, by definition you have a marketplace and free market principles. Of course it’s not easy to shop around for insurance because it’s so complicated. Obamacare forces young healthy men to subsidize women, older, sicker people, and of course poor people, especially brown people. AHCA mitigates this situation.

    • Yehudah Finkelstein 4 May, 2017 at 18:37 Reply

      That’s the point, there’d be no issue subsidizing the old and the poor if most people who needed Obamacare were white.

    • Krafty Wurker 4 May, 2017 at 18:42 Reply

      This debate has little or nothing to do with healthcare, and everything to do with insurance corporation profits. Remember, at least 1/7 the of the US economy is tied up in ObamaCare/TrumpCare. How would you like to have trillions of dollars running through your bank account every year.

    • Rocco Manzardo 4 May, 2017 at 19:45 Reply

      There’s no such thing as a free market. There hasn’t been a free market since human beings were hunter-gatherers. It’s a unicorn.

      Secondly, what do health insurers actually do? All the do is maximize profits for shareholders, impose negative externalities on society, line there pockets, and drive up costs. They don’t provide care. This is an industry that exits solely through lobbying efforts.

        • Rocco Manzardo 4 May, 2017 at 21:49 Reply

          It’s the textbook definition of rent seeking. I doubt the average cuckservative has the desire or inclination to study public choice theory. It’s all about document worship (muh Constitution) and muh free markets.

          These people are actually worse than the Left when you think about it.

        • craicher 5 May, 2017 at 08:18 Reply

          How can a product exist that you buy and that the seller does everything they legally can not to deliver? That is health insurance on the free market. It should be nationalized or made into not for profit cooperatives. Poor Lev Rubenstein may have to sell his mansion in Miami and move back to his place in Manhattan. Poor boy.

          Nice to see someone bring rent seeking into the picture. That is a term most Americans will not be familiar with.

          • J_Bonaccorsi_Philadelphia 5 May, 2017 at 12:46

            No–health insurance on the free market is not a product “that you buy and that the seller does everything they legally can not to deliver.” That is the pseudo-health-insurance that now exists in America and that is a government system, in which the doctors, hospitals, and insurers are mere proxies, intended to preserve an appearance of private exchange.

          • Yehudah Finkelstein 5 May, 2017 at 13:22

            I think your “free market” remedies will find a better reception on the Ron Paul forums. Anyways a free market solution in health care is impossible because the insurance companies always engage in rent seeking to capture government regulatory agencies and enrich themselves.

          • craicher 5 May, 2017 at 21:28

            Right, once it is a ”true” free market and the insurer can jew you at will it will work perfectly.

      • J_Bonaccorsi_Philadelphia 5 May, 2017 at 00:19 Reply

        Medical insurance isn’t intended to provide care. It’s insurance. It no longer exists in the United States. What is called medical insurance or is widely-imagined to be medical insurance is government medical care, in which doctors, hospitals, and insurers are mere proxies, intended to preserve an appearance of private exchange, whether for medical care itself or medical insurance. Medical insurance is a legitimate item of exchange, as legitimate as any other type of insurance or any other good or service whatsoever. In fact, it was an excellent item of exchange, which has been destroyed.

  15. Catiline_Conspirator 4 May, 2017 at 18:16 Reply

    “The deeper answer to these questions probably lies in the American
    psyche. “Socialized medicine” is for those wimpy Europeans and Canadians
    and the working poor.”

    Very insightful. Unfortunately this mentality runs deep within the Alt-Right as well.

    • Ike35 4 May, 2017 at 23:33 Reply

      What also runs deep in our psyche is not wanting to pay for Sha Nee Nee’s diabetes medication and going to the ER when she loses a dildo up her gash.

  16. Marathon-Youth 4 May, 2017 at 18:15 Reply

    What I do not like about Obamacare:
    some of the long list of pre existing conditions covered by Obama care
    -Anxiety
    -Heartburn
    -Eating disorder
    -Mental health disorder
    the list is long and Anxiety to how one eats is part of life. I mean Heartburn as a preexisting condition? is that what my taxes go?

    Another asinine Obamacare policy:
    -Freddie Mac and Fanny Mae profits are diverted to pay Obamacare. that is downright ugly. Why should the profits of massive home financing companies help pay Obamacare?

    -anther horror? the Affordable Health Care is extremely Unaffordable!!

    Yes few can afford Obamacare Premiums. That is what I find grossly shameful!

    plus
    -Congress exempted themselves from buying Obamacare. Even Obama was Exempt. He bought Obamacare but kept his 24 hour personal physician
    Replacement bill changed this. Congress are now required to be part of the New health insurance.
    One of the main reasons DC pushed Obamacare was because DC never suffered from it.

      • Marathon-Youth 5 May, 2017 at 12:09 Reply

        When I get acid reflux I immediately treat the symptom,
        If I have a nagging case of acid reflux regardless of over the counter meds I seek a doctor. the entire process should be covered by any insurance.

  17. unpaidpundit 4 May, 2017 at 16:22 Reply

    Single payer might be the right answer, but it is such a heavy lift, both politically and culturally, that I don’t see how it can happen at this time. Healthcare in America will have to get much worse before the general public is willing to buy into a revolutionary (for Americans) change. And things might get significantly worse for many people, even if you have employer-sponsored health insurance. The health plan that passed the House allows employers to have a life-time limit on care. I work for a megacorporation, and we had one of those limits before Obamacare. Healthcare is so expensive that a significant number of employed people may bump up against those life-time limits.

    • Yehudah Finkelstein 4 May, 2017 at 16:38 Reply

      Get rid of for profit insurance companies. Keep the insurance companies, but make them non-profits. That’s what they do in Germany.

      • Catiline_Conspirator 4 May, 2017 at 18:06 Reply

        Any minute now Hipster Racist is going to show up and call you a “Nazi Larper.” I hear his footsteps already…

      • Rocco Manzardo 4 May, 2017 at 19:46 Reply

        That works. Or just enroll everyone on Medicare. It’s rugged, tested and works, even with the neoliberal privatization and crapification efforts.

          • Telemachus_1 6 May, 2017 at 09:12

            The United States of America never “runs in the red”. It is the most powerful nation in the history of mankind and can never run out of United States Dollars, the legal tender only it has the sovereign right to create and regulate.

            There is nothing more destructive to the Alternative Right than libertarianism. Truly, there isn’t enough money? Where on earth do you think money comes from?

          • Rocco Manzardo 6 May, 2017 at 19:45

            I find this Austrian School, libertarian nonsense borderline nauseating. I totally agree. The only Austrian economist that matters was the founder of the school: Carl Menger. He developed marginal utility. Rothbard and von Mises were intellectual jokes and terrible political economists. I don’t even think Rothbard understood basic macroeconomics.

            Lastly, you make a good point: capital costs for the federal government are ZERO. The only constraint is inflation. However, unless the economy is a full capacity (full employment), I don’t see a problem. Even at full employment taxation can be used to regulate aggregate demand. The only constraints, in the end, are REAL resource constraints, not how many reserve accounts and securities accounts at the FED get debited and credited.

          • Telemachus_1 8 May, 2017 at 10:25

            It is important to note that the constraint of real resources is WHY the fiction of hyperinflation is propagandized so much. Once you delude the masses into believing political economy doesn’t exist, then the relationship between sovereign currency value and the political power of the issuing sovereignty is obviated. Every libertardian mentions Weimar and Zimbabwe, but how many realize that both were and are effectively not sovereign? Weimar, obviously, was the product of a military occupation. Zimbabwe, for a variety of reasons – some of which do originate with Anglo American imperialism – does not effectively exercise sovereignty over most of the country. Of course, when a government falls, its currency is worthless.

            At the very first United Nations conference, it was believed that the cause of World War II was competition for scarce natural resources. Both Germany and Japan were highly industrialized but resource poor, and engaged in competitive currency devaluation to export goods and purchase raw materials. This is the kind of inflation that most worries the globalist regime.

            The world is transitioning to a UN reserve currency as was proposed at that conference, and the goal is to insure that ALL countries cede their sovereignty to insure that natural resources can never be acquired via imperialism, whether military or financial. Of course, as always, the people in power will benefit and others will not.

            There is no greater threat at the moment, yet no one on the left or right is able to articulate how this system works or how to counter it.

          • Rocco Manzardo 9 May, 2017 at 12:15

            Also:

            #1 Weimar had its debts denominated in Sterling

            #2 Weimar’s industrial capacity was destroyed by the war, which means any and all industrial capacity was rendered useless

            #3 As a result of 1 and 2, it’s OUTPUT was basically controlled by other countries

            #4 The more they “printed”, it wasn’t being offset by real goods and services, which is what resulted in hyperinflation.

            Lastly, there’s more involved in the causes of hyperinflation than the quantity theory of money.. There’s a political component. They were at fifty percent deficits from spending on a fixed exhange rate to pay war reparations.

            Zimbabwe also had its debts denominated in foreign currency and its industrial production destroyed by civil war.

          • Rocco Manzardo 6 May, 2017 at 19:36

            The “creation of fiat currency” is how a floating, non-fixed exchange rate currency operates. In other words, the federal government spends (creates dollars) first, then taxes back a portion of what it spends. Fiscal policy = $$$$ credits to non-government; Taxes = $$$$ debits to the government sector. Taxes for revenue at the federal level are obsolete for “revenue”. Spending and taxation are independent of each other. The monetary system isn’t a recycling plant. The US government is the monopoly issuer of the dollar, which means it can’t go broke. It sets the price and quantity like a traditional monopolist.

            Secondly, the US government can pay for whatever it wants so long as its denominated in dollars. It’s a political decision in the end about how many resources we want to move from the private sector to the public sector.

          • Telemachus_1 6 May, 2017 at 20:03

            Very good stuff Rocco. You have no idea how happy it makes me to read this.

      • craicher 5 May, 2017 at 08:22 Reply

        Are you sure those German insurance giants are non-profit? They used to be in Sweden but no more. They were founded by worker cooperatives but eventually those who could stole everything that wasn’t nailed to the floor. Makes my stomach turn.

          • craicher 5 May, 2017 at 09:18

            They were in Sweden too. i think that has all changed. I know it has in Sweden where neo-liberal economic looting has hollowed out a once proud nation. School vouchers, privatized railroad and postal service, public spaces (like city parking spaces), toll bridges (oresund to Copenhagen), defacto privatized police service by reducing them and forcing private security and on and on and on.

            But hey they likes there trans, nigs, gooks and spooks. Powa to da peoples.

  18. Charles The Hammer 4 May, 2017 at 16:00 Reply

    So if we can’t have a single payer system because we’re too diverse or too broke then how are we able to continue policing and babysitting the rest of the world? Why are we still giving billions to Israel every year? The globalist elites of the GOP have no problem wasting blood and treasure to benefit themselves and our so called “allies”. They disgust me just as much as the Democrats.

    • WR_the_realist 5 May, 2017 at 14:07 Reply

      If we stopped all foreign wars we still wouldn’t be able to afford free health care for people. We might be able to actually balance the budget though. That would be nice. Unfortunately the one thing Trump really wants to spend money on is playing Globocop.

      • Charles The Hammer 5 May, 2017 at 17:40 Reply

        How do you know? We spend trillions on babysitting and policing the world. What proof do you have that if we gave that up we still couldn’t have a single payer system like Canada?

  19. Krafty Wurker 4 May, 2017 at 15:59 Reply

    All TrumpCare does is shore up the failing ObamaCare for the insurance corporations who profit from it.

    We know that the interests of the insurance corporations, are not our White American interests. If anything the insurance corporations work against White Americans. Just look at insurance corporation advertising, or their social spending agendas.

    Trump and the Republicans want the insurance corporation political money and support. That’s why they are so hot to do TrumpCare. Just think of those tens of thousands of insurance agents out their pounding the TrumpCare message.

      • Krafty Wurker 4 May, 2017 at 18:31 Reply

        Gee wizz, could it be the same people who dominate the hedge funds, and investment banking?

        • Catiline_Conspirator 4 May, 2017 at 19:46 Reply

          Do (((they))) control insurance all by themselves, or is another tribe involved?

          • Krafty Wurker 4 May, 2017 at 20:20

            That’s a tough question, that would require some research. To dominate is one thing, to control is another. To identify the controlling interests?

            In general from what I’ve seen insurance company advertising promotes the anti-White agenda, and their social spending does too. When was the last time you heard of an insurance company doing anything for White Americans besides taking their money?

  20. Diversity Heretic 4 May, 2017 at 15:54 Reply

    One other factor is the adaptation that takes place to an existing system, even, or perhaps especially, to a bad system. People have made their best bargain with the present system and any change threatens those bargains. So, while it might be easy to design a reasonable health care deivery system from the ground up, trying to implement one on an installed base is more difficult. In Europe, less and less medical care is covered by the government, except for the indigent, and more and more people buy private insurance to supplement their government coverage. There are two other factors that are driving up health care costs in Europe: an aging population has more health problems, and many of the “immigrants” bring significant health problems (e.g., tropical diseases and genetic problems from repeated cousin marriages).

  21. From Ohio 4 May, 2017 at 15:17 Reply

    Trump should have tied this immigrations, but certain Republican (((interests))) would never allow it.

  22. Daniel 4 May, 2017 at 15:11 Reply

    There is also this stupid belief among the alt-right that universal healthcare will work perfectly in a homogenous society but the entire system relies on importing third world cretins to control costs. Not very many people would want to go school and make the kinds of sacrifices a doctor makes to get paid in order to live in an apartment and drive a small effete car like they do in Europe.

    Also, trying to apply this model in America wouldnt work unless you address the particulars that apply in America. Unlike Europeans American doctors have to deal with alot more liability and malpractice issues, have to pay 300-400k in student loans, have to spend 2 years longer in school, do not get a pension, and work more hours.

    It could be better than what we have now but probably wouldn’t last long and would be implemented poorly.

    • Yehudah Finkelstein 4 May, 2017 at 15:33 Reply

      Europeans don’t live in apartments and drive Skodas because of public health care. Europeans have smaller houses and cars because Europe is more densely populated than America. You can also witness this in NYC or San Francisco.

      • Daniel 4 May, 2017 at 15:36 Reply

        A doctor in Europe is much more likely to live that way which is my point. Quality of care will decline because the best and brightest will opt to do something else. Why be a surgeon when you could just be a parasite in management or some other bullshit with substantially less effort?

        • Yehudah Finkelstein 4 May, 2017 at 15:40 Reply

          Doctors live in apartments in Manhattan too. I don’t see where you’re going with this analogy.Plenty of countries have government backed health care and their medical system is fine. For those who wanted Cadillac level health care, they could be given the option of paying for it themselves.

          • Daniel 4 May, 2017 at 15:44

            They have long wait times, near zero innovation, and rely on foreign labor. Also, you’re not going to get European or Canadian level of functionality. You will get VA/military level of care which is atrocious.

            If you want to die from a Nigerian nurse while waiting on your Hindu doctor be my guest. It’s not going to end up like you or Spencer imagine it.

          • Yehudah Finkelstein 4 May, 2017 at 15:46

            We have third world nurses and Hindu doctors in America too. See my post below, I don’t think Euro level health care is feasible at all in America.

          • Rocco Manzardo 4 May, 2017 at 20:08

            My cousin is physician in Naples. I didn’t see any Hindu doctors or nurses. I tore my ACL there, had it reconstructed, and all I saw were white people. Italy is a little different in that they haven’t drank the multicultural/multiracial Kool-Aid. It’s one of the most hostile countries to migrants from MENA – and even parts of Eastern Europe.

          • Yehudah Finkelstein 4 May, 2017 at 20:10

            And Naples is one of the poorer parts of Italy as well. We have lots of Filipino nurses and Hindu doctors in America.

          • Rocco Manzardo 4 May, 2017 at 20:13

            Yeah, they have a lower GDP per capita in the south. Ironically, the south, before unification, used to be wealthier than the north of Italy. Things have also gotten progressively worse for all of Italy when they adopted the Euro and joined the EMU.

          • craicher 5 May, 2017 at 08:32

            Every Western nation is suffering from the same malaise. Sweden, Ireland, the UK, the USA are all flooded with turd world (fake) doctors and nurses while the poorer White (and Asian) nations seem to do just fine producing their own. You know the story, these are jobs Americans (and Western Europeans) just won’t do.

          • Rocco Manzardo 4 May, 2017 at 16:36

            I lived in Italy for five years. They have a better health care system than the United States by every metric. If the Italians can create a more efficient and equitable health care system, it can be done in the US so long as there is the political will to do so. The US also has more real resources than Italy.

            Innovation has nothing to do with rent extracting parasites (health insurers). They don’t provide care, nor do they innovate. Most innovation in pharma and the medical fields are a result of government R&D and grants.

            As long as health care is for profit in the US, and health insurers continue to impose massive negative externalities on all of society, costs will never come down.

          • craicher 5 May, 2017 at 08:29

            Very funny. In nations where a doctor makes survival wages like China or Eastern European nations they have plenty of doctors. In nations where doctors are paid like pashas they have to import those Hindus and Niggerians you speak of.

          • Rocco Manzardo 4 May, 2017 at 16:44

            A single payer system can be designed to ensure there’s enough personnel and resources, like free tuition for anyone who wants to go to medical school and subsidies to firms for medical equipment manufacture, etc. We subsidize billionaires buying condos, we can surely subsidize useful production.

        • JosephtheGreat 4 May, 2017 at 15:45 Reply

          WHY WOULD ANYONE WANT TO DO SOMETHING IF THEY AREN’T GETTING PAID LOTS OF MONEY? IT MAKES NO SENSE! MONEY IS THE ONLY IMPORTANT THING IN LIFE!

        • craicher 5 May, 2017 at 08:26 Reply

          Wrong. People will be doctors for the status and because they care and are inclined that way and those are the people we need to be doctors not selfish people who do it just for the money. They have plenty of doctors in Russia, Ukraine and such places where the pay is very low.

          Believe it or not money is not the motive for everyone.

    • JosephtheGreat 4 May, 2017 at 15:43 Reply

      It is completely dumb to assume most people become doctors in order to live in mansions and drive big cars. I highly doubt their motives to do all that work is so shallow. Instead I assume most people become doctors because they want to help people and they like the work.

      • Daniel 4 May, 2017 at 15:44 Reply

        You’re pretty slow if you don’t think aspiring physicians don’t respond to incentives like normal people. Have fun being treated by a Nurse practioner and Artificial intelligence program.

        • JosephtheGreat 4 May, 2017 at 15:46 Reply

          Of course they respond to incentives but maybe their incentive is more than money. Does Richard Spencer do all of his advocacy because the paycheck or is there more to life then that?

        • Hipster Racist 4 May, 2017 at 21:34 Reply

          Of course doctors respond to incentives. But you are pretending that doctors can only be paid well in a faux-“capitalist” system, which of course isn’t true. Under “socialism” doctors can be the top paid profession, have the biggest houses and the fanciest cars. It depends on what the society values.

      • Yehudah Finkelstein 4 May, 2017 at 15:47 Reply

        Yeah, someone with the aptitude needed to be a Doctor can make way more money in fields like Engineering.

      • Charles The Hammer 4 May, 2017 at 16:14 Reply

        I certainly don’t want a doctor whose in it solely for the money. Typically people who are in a profession solely for the money cut corners and do a shitty job because they have no passion for it.

      • DaveMD ✓ᴺᵃᵗᶦᵒᶰᵃˡᶦˢᵗᴰʳ 5 May, 2017 at 20:09 Reply

        Most don’t (and those are unreasonable expectations in medicine anyway, at this point, unless one practices in a semi-rural area). However, I think the majority of those training in medicine expect to make enough to not have to worry about penny-pinching at the grocery store, be able to afford schools for their children, and have enough investment capital to make up for the opportunity cost of medical school and residency training.

    • Ozymandias 4 May, 2017 at 18:07 Reply

      That’s because it’s a socialist idea trying to function within a capitalist state.

      Universal healthcare can only work effectively inside a socialist, or at least socialist-style, state.

    • A hymn to Hermes 4 May, 2017 at 21:05 Reply

      We basically already have universal healthcare. No one can be turned away. We just don’t have single-payer so the pay structure is absurd. You are already subsidizing those who can’t and won’t pay.

      If you want a capitalist healthcare system then those who don’t have financial resources to pay for service must be turned away for even basic care and medical practitioners who give out finite resources (including their own time) for those who can’t pay must be punished. Good luck with that.

  23. Yehudah Finkelstein 4 May, 2017 at 15:01 Reply

    Health care in America is failing because America itself is failing. Heterogeneous, blood and soil nations like Japan or Finland have high levels of social trust. Consequently, health care for the poor and social welfare are seen as being necessary to help poor people who think, look and act like wealthier taxpayers.

    America is a garbage heap with low levels of social trust and cohesion. Wealthy women sign up for parenting classes with other yuppie moms because they don’t feel safe just taking toddlers to the park.

    Health care will never be fixed in America because America lacks the racial unity to enact government backed health care.

    • grumpiertrucker 6 May, 2017 at 05:43 Reply

      Nonsense. Somalia has tremendous racial unity. Try to find decent healthcare there. And blacks here overwhelmingly back Single Payer. It’s whites who know Single Payer will leave them powerless to get quality care they could afford but won’t be around after the Government takes it over….. while illegals and minorities get the care they can’t or won’t afford… that have prevented a Government seizure of health care.
      And I find your Avatar especially amusing as there is one group or tribe of people that controls ALL the media in this country. And it’s that media that is constantly trying to stoke white vs black grievances. It’s almost like the same tribe that controls the media is the same one who controls the banks and the Government WANTS whites and blacks constantly at each other’s throats. Huh? I can’t figure out why they want it that way. Oh, yeah… so they can pick both our pockets while we fight
      But it’s good to see that even with your bold avatar choice, you still manage to repeat their propaganda.

      • Yehudah Finkelstein 6 May, 2017 at 12:57 Reply

        Somalia fails because Somalis are stupid people, on average. Japan and Finland succeed because Japanese and Finns are smart people, on average.

        If you took the time to read my post, you’d understand that I said single payer will never work because America is a multi-racial empire.

        And sorry, I don’t think it takes Jewish scheming to get Whites and Blacks at each other’s throats. Ethnic conflict is as old as the hills.

        • grumpiertrucker 6 May, 2017 at 16:14 Reply

          No, you didn’t say single payer will never work because America is a multi-racial empire. Here’s the quote: “Health care will never be fixed in America because America lacks the racial unity to enact government backed health care.” No mention of single payer. And no mention of a multi-racial empire. Instead, a useless bromide, “we lack racial unity.”
          And I did read every word of your post several times. And ethnic conflict is not the same thing as racial conflict. Two totally different things. Somalia is a mess because of ethnic conflict, but they have racial unity.
          And according to you, the Free Market is an obviously “Jewed up ideal.” But the constant pushing of racial division from the Jew controlled media… that’s a figment of my imagination.
          So you people can’t read and you can’t write and you can’t understand basic concepts well enough to articulate them and communicate clearly what you mean…. Good luck with all that in your revolution.

          • grumpiertrucker 6 May, 2017 at 19:25

            I’m a Right Wing white boy seeing the displacement/extermination of my race in every country on Earth. Frustrated that allegedly dangerous “Alt-Right” guys are spouting the Jew talking points that the Free Market doesn’t work and that the only solution in Healthcare is for Jews who control the Government to take control of it so it will work for white people.
            You believe the Free Market is unfair only because of Jew lies.
            You believe that Single Payer works best only because of Jew lies.
            But now you scary guys are convincing yourselves and others that with regards to Healthcare, the Jew Government will somehow magically benefit white people.
            For Fucks sake, you’re even repeating the central… “King of the Jew Lies” about inequality and class disparity.
            How can you be so fucking naive?
            Jews trash the free market because it disturbs their incestuous monopoly power. Jews claim the Government will help people not because they believe it, but because they want YOU to believe it and give up more of your sovereignty to them. Jews constantly spew lies about “income inequality” and the “top 1%” and class unfairness because that leads you to agree to higher taxes and more Government power and less freedom for you. And taxes that they know they will never pay as they ARE the 1%… it just consolidates more power and money to them when everyone else has less.

          • Rocco Manzardo 6 May, 2017 at 20:50

            Do you mean “Jew lies” by the likes of Murray Rothbard and Ludwig von Mises?

          • craicher 6 May, 2017 at 22:15

            A boy or a man? Jews are a powerful faction in the USA. They do not control the government. They influence (corrupt) it.

            Jews do, as a group, as a collective, as a group evolutionary strategy, what is best for the Jews. The radical individualism of free market idolatry is not in our interests. End of story.

            All civilizations need government. We just need one that

          • Cynic 7 May, 2017 at 03:45

            In a free-market individualistic whites who compete with each other will be dominated and exploited by collectivist out-groups who co-operate with each other.

          • Yehudah Finkelstein 6 May, 2017 at 19:18

            Government backed health care= Single payer. Stop autistically parsing each word. Somalia sucks because its full of East Africans. I obviously did not mean that every racially unified society can have a government health care scheme. To accomplish functional government health care requires a high IQ population, something that is lacking outside Europe and East Asia.

          • grumpiertrucker 6 May, 2017 at 19:37

            No, Government backed healthcare does NOT mean Single Payer. I’m not parsing anything. See, you’re making my point. You don’t know the basic terms you use and then get frustrated when others point this out to you. We currently have Government backed Health Care. It’s law that Employers provide coverage. It’s law that insurance companies get to monopolize. It’s law to have mandatory minimum coverages. HMO’s, Hospital Administrators and Insurance companies all must function not according to any market, but purely by Government edict. That’s my point. All our healthcare problems are a RESULT of Government Backed healthcare. But now you dingbats have believed the Jew lies that the problem the Government created were actually created by the Free Market. And the only sensible thing to do now is have Government take it all over. For fucks sake, Read Ayn Rand on this topic. She saw this shit 100 years ago in Russia. Statists move into an industry and start picking at it and fucking it up. Little by little over years and years… decades… of them fucking up the industry… At some point the industry implodes and then they all declare, “The Free Market has failed, the people must take it over.” After they’ve fucked it up entirely. This is what I mean when I say, “You fuckers need to get in the game and raise your game.” (See: Housing collapse of 2008.)
            And now you’re moving the goalposts and saying you didn’t really mean racially unified, you meant high IQ.
            But there’s no evidence to support your assertion… I thought Cuba had better health care than we did. Micheal Moore made an entire fucking movie driving that point home. Cuba doesn’t have high IQ.
            Try again.

          • Rocco Manzardo 6 May, 2017 at 19:50

            There’s no such thing as a free market, we have competitive markets.

            Ayn Rand was shitty novelist and even worse pseudo-intellectual.

          • grumpiertrucker 6 May, 2017 at 20:11

            Two Left Wing talking points you’ve been taught to repeat.
            This is what the Alt-Right is producing? Leftist talking points?
            For the sake of this discussion, we are using “Free Market” as a counter-point to “Government Control/Instrusion/Interference.”
            But thank you Mr. Literal Guy.
            And Ayn Rand’s novels have been best sellers for decades and have had hundreds of pressings. I challenge you to read any of them without a dictionary handy.
            You haven’t read them, have you?
            I figured.
            GET THIS ALL THROUGH YOUR THICK SKULLS: THE ALT-RIGHT WILL NEVER SUCCEED WHILE IT INTERNALIZES AND ACCEPTS THE LEFT’S PREMISES AND REPEATS THEIR JEWISH LIES.
            But that’s all I’m hearing from Spencer and reading on this message board.

          • Rocco Manzardo 6 May, 2017 at 20:44

            There hasn’t been a “free market” since humans were hunter gatherers. Once city-states formed, we entered the realm of political economy. The Alt-Right really needs to get red pilled when it comes to macroeconomics, money and banking, labor theory, the history of political economy, public choice theory, etc. The Austrians and assorted libertarian economic theories are nonsensical at best.

            The idea of an economy operating independently of government and political institutions is a clear-cut utopia. It’s not possible, and any efforts to do so are doomed to fail and create dystopian consequences. Look at the last three decades of neoliberal, free market nonsense.

            Lastly, government action isn’t some type of “interference” in the sphere of of economic activity. There simply isn’t an economy without goevrnment institutions and rules.

          • craicher 7 May, 2017 at 05:55

            You mean the Jewess Ayn Rand? The one who created Bolshivism for Americans? Well now we know where you get your destructive ideas from.

          • Yehudah Finkelstein 7 May, 2017 at 13:53

            You go on and on about Jew lies and cite Ayn Rand…HAHAHAHAHAHA!

            Yup, I had you pegged….LOLbertarian for sure.

          • Rocco Manzardo 6 May, 2017 at 19:48

            Single payer = socialized insurance + for-profit providers.

            Obamacare/Romneycare/Heritage Foundation market-based LOLZ = for-profit insurance + for-profit providers.

            Zero payer = socialized insurance + socialized providers.

          • grumpiertrucker 6 May, 2017 at 20:14

            Beautiful. You should work on Wall Street. Socialize the risk but privatize the profits! Are you Jewish?

          • Rocco Manzardo 6 May, 2017 at 20:34

            I’m Italian.

            It’s just that people get confused over the various types of universal health care systems. Single payer isn’t “socialism”, it’s a financing mechanism more than anything else.