Hey Stranger!

Yes, it's been a while.

What's up with that? For one, work has been really busy. Two, I've gotten into MotoVlogging, and you can see my handiwork here:

Spacep0d MotoVlog

MotoVlogging, as the name implies, is Video-Blogging on a Motorcycle. It's a great thing, and is a different way to voice one's opinions in a totally different format, and with some interesting video. Of course, writing doesn't need video, but it's a different way to consume thoughts. It's not that I am replacing blogging with vlogging, just that it's been new for me and working out the bugs and kinks has taken some of my free time I'd normally spend blogging.

In other news, the election has hotted-up and on the Republican side, has dumbed-down. A lot. The stupid things that Republicans say about rape and their god(s) is mind-blowing. Mourdock just recently said, 

'"And I think even when life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that it is something that God intended to happen."- Richard Mourdock , U.S. Senate candidate from IndianaHoly shit. First, this means that god, the all-powerful, all-knowing creator of worlds, approves, endorses and PLANS rape. This is the only conclusion, because a god which controls ALL THINGS simply cannot escape blame for anything, including rape.

Second, why the Hell would someone WORSHIP a god who goes around making women through rape? If god could stop it and doesn't, he's not good. If he can't stop it, he's not much of a god, is he?

Richard Mourdock is a fucking idiot. Not only that, he's too stupid to realize that saying this stuff in public is even more idiotic. At least Romney has the sense to pretend to be moderate, which makes him even more vile in a sense.

I've watched the debates (all of them) and the pundits, and voting for Romney would be unconscionable. Not only is he a flip-flopper, he's wrong on just about every social-issue that matters, especially with respect to marriage-equality and reproductive rights. Marriage-equality isn't even just a mere social-issue but a matter of basic human rights. If government is going to continue to recognize sexual relationships between consenting adults, they need to recognize ALL consenting adults and their marriages equally. Otherwise, they need to get out of the marriage business ASAP (an option I am also happy with).

As you know, I reject marriage for myself. I think it's a bad idea for me (and anyone), but I support the rights of others to live their conscience and get married if government recognizes any marriages.

My girlfriend and I are still fighting the good fight with respect to trying to get me (a freelancer) covered under her company health-insurance group-plan, with little success as yet—and we've been trying since 2004 (with years where I did have my own coverage). Unfortunately, her company (CBS) doesn't see fit to cover opposite-sex domestic partners because I suppose they are trying to save a tiny amount of money. It's not like there are hordes of unmarried iconoclasts in opposite-sex partnerships waiting to jump on the +1 bandwagon, but there are at least 4-5 couples we know about *personally* at that company would would benefit if CBS could stop discriminating.

See, gay couples have a mandate which covers them. Companies have to provide their partners with +1 coverage. Married people of course get favoritism because marriage is still a preferred legal status, discriminatory as that is. Unmarried opposite-sex couples are basically punished for not being married and they don't have the protections that unmarried gay-couples have. If the system were logical, both unmarried couples and married couples would be able to add any +1 to their employer-based healthplan, whether that was a sister, mother, uncle, friend, etc. Why does it matter that we're involved in a sexual relationship? Talk about big government.

An even more logical system is one where we can get our OWN insurance, without relying on employers and their peculiar ideologies, spouses in government-recognized marriages or the awful, stockholder-controlled, profit-driven private-insurance sector.

What I want is access to fair, reasonably-priced, individual healthcare coverage, and that is why I am voting to uphold the ACA and to allow our president to continue his landmark progress with healthcare reform. That is why I am voting Obama on November 6th.

It's good to be back. Check out my vlog if you like and please, VOTE!!

--

Obamacare Upheld!

This is a historic moment, and people have been trying to do what Obama has done for nearly a century. It's access for all, but if we don't pay in, we can't all expect coverage. This is actually something Romney touted as a 'conservative' idea when he enacted Romneycare in Massachusetts, and yet Romney wants to flip and say that the entire country can't benefit from this philosophy?

Insurance companies are being reformed, which has been sorely needed. Just ask anyone who got sick and was denied or had coverage-rescinded due to a 'pre-existing condition'. Just ask people who went broke or are broke due to medical bills from a catastrophic event, or because they could not get coverage. Reform is a GOOD thing, and insurance companies in America may end up like those in Germany, where the government guarantees individuals coverage and they can go to whatever insurance company that offers the best value. Germany, by the way, spends about 11% of its GDP on healthcare (while covering everyone) where America spent 17% of its GDP on healthcare while doing it badly and letting insurance companies line their pockets by covering only the healthy and wealthy. Reform is all about correcting this type of corruption, and SCOTUS has allowed it to happen as-intended.

Those of you who don't get it yet or think this is 'socialism', you will understand in time. Medicare was called 'socialism' by Ronald Reagan back in 1961, before it was signed into law by Democrat president Lyndon Baines Johnson, where former Democratic president and Medicare campaigner Harry Truman was the first recipient.

Medicare was put in-place because insurance companies didn't want to cover higher-risk seniors, and it's a form of socialized medicine that works well, has wide-support from seniors who are happy with it. However, it was the brainchild of Canadian socialist, Tommy Douglas and a lot of people don't know that. Yet, Medicare operates with a 3% admin overhead (very efficient), has been a great success and for many, is the safety net they need if they can make it to age 65.

In 2014, individuals will be able to get their own government healthcare plans, and insurance companies will be unable to refuse someone for a pre-existing condition. This is exactly what we need, because what is the point of a health-insurance company who only sells insurance to healthy people? It's the sick people who need it, but if we don't have a mandate, insurance-buyers will be mostly sick people (adverse selection). We just have to get used to having healthcare (whether we pay-in or provide our own), so everyone can get access. As it is now, we all pay for employer-based coverage, people who use the E.R. as primary care, etc. so we already have lots of 'socialized' pools of money built into a bad system, and the ACA is reforming that system after insurance companies have had a long, profitable run playing the for-profit insurance game with our lives.

We need to re-elect Obama in November so he can complete what he started, or Mitt Romney will flush a century of work toward healthcare for all down the drain.

--

America Needs Health Care

Now.

I just finished reading 'The Healing of America: A Global Quest for Better, Cheaper, and Fairer Health Care' by T.R. Reid.

Phenomenal book.

I know now what I knew before: America needs a proper healthcare plan which is government subsidized through some clever use of existing taxes, or some kind of mandate (like auto-insurance) so everyone can be covered and so nobody is refused due to a pre-existing condition or dropped because they made a claim.

Right now, the healthcare payment system is designed to reduce coverage, to reject treatment and ultimately fail the patient, because it's for profit and run by insurance companies who, like wolves guarding the henhouse, have opposing interests to actually healing the sick. Do you have a pre-existing condition such as cancer? Good luck finding healthcare, and you just may go broke trying to stay alive. Did you make a claim recently? You might just be the victim of healthcare recission as I was, where your company dumps you soon after. Do you need a particular test that a for-profit insurance company deems too expensive? You may just not get it. Is your insurance company owned by idealogues who oppose birth control? Maybe this is why the pill or abortion often isn't covered, yet childbirth (a much more expensive option) is covered.

Many of us get health-insurance through employers, but I find this to be a flawed system. Health insurance should be a valid option for the individual and not related to your source of income. What about those who are unemployed as much of the U.S. finds themselves to be in this economic downturn? Should the unemployed also be out in the cold with regard to health insurance? Talk about a double-whammy. What about those who can't work but would otherwise be willing to?

What America needs is some kind of standardized healthcare for everyone with nobody being rejected for a 'pre-existing' condition or being dumped because they made a claim. If you can't make a claim for insurance, why bother having it at all? We should not be penalizing those who truly need to make a claim.

One shocking fact is this...although America leaves nearly 50-million Americans uninsured, the National Coalition on Health Care (NCHC) reports that America spends 17.6% of our Gross Domestic Product (GDP) on healthcare, whereas every other developed nation with Universal Health Care spends less, MUCH less on health care..usually less than half.

The Japanese actually visit the doctor most, according to Reid's book, and their system is still cheaper than ours and one of the most efficient in the world. Japan only spends about 8% of its Gross Domestic Product (GDP) on health insurance, while America spends 17.6% of its GDP on healthcare yet leaves nearly 50 million Americans uninsured...this is repeated just to drive home the fact that every other nation with Universal healthcare does it way cheaper than the broken American system.

The Japanese system has very strict limits on what hospitals/doctors can charge. Their doctors make a healthy living, but nothing compared to what U.S. doctors make, who are still often hamstrung in their decision-making by insurance companies such as HMO's who are way-too involved with the bottom-line or private inusrance companies who have to promise a return to investors.

France is rated by the World Health Organization as having the best health care in the world, the world's richest nation (the U.S.) rates 37th! France also spends much less than America on their system (about 10% of its GDP), partially due to the efficiency of their system. For example, they don't have the huge administrative costs we have the U.S. One thing they've done is eliminate paper medical records, filing, storing, etc. They store your entire medical history on a digital card you carry on your person, called the 'Carte Vitale'. Every required detail of your medical history is on the card and can easily be accessed by French doctors. Recently, American HMO, Kaiser Permanente switched to the card system. This is a step in the right direction as our entire healthcare system undergoes reform.

The British system, commonly known as 'National Health Insurance' or 'NHS', was designed and written by William Beveridge. Beveridge was an aristocrat, social-reformer at the turn of the 20th century. This likely-atheist who eschewed the clergy profession is quoted as saying, 'I believe neither in Heaven, which would be insipid, nor in Hell, which would be ridiculous'. During Britain's post-war rebuilding efforts in the 1940's, Beveridge was given an opportunity by Winston Churchhill to lead the way to a new healthcare system, which he pretty-much single-handedly drafted in what was known as 'Social Insurance and Allied Services', and was wildly popular with the British people. His popularization of his plan via numerous speeches spread the idea thoroughly.

This Beveridge plan was later put into law by Welshman Aneurin 'Nye' Bevan who witnessed the death of four of his siblings growing up. With his hardscrabble coal-miner roots and more aggressive personality, he went on to become a Union agitator and politician, elected to the House of Commons as the Labour Party candidate. As a result of the efforts of Beveridge, Bevan and others, the National Health Service opened on July 5th, 1948 for everyone in the U.K.

This Beveridge-Bevan system (NHS) is a no-pay at the point of service healthcare, except for small co-pays for prescriptions which is waived for children, anyone over sixty, pregnant women and the chronically ill. The taxes in Britain are higher, about 15 to 17.5%, but the difference is, you won't go broke from some catastrophic injury or illness if you're caught without insurance, no fighting insurance companies to retain coverage if you're sick, no being dropped for pre-existing conditions and you won't lose your home for lack of medical insurance or worse, your life for fear of medical bills and delayed care. The NHS does use a Gatekeeper system to see a specialist, just like in the U.S., and this helps control costs, the difference is, the NHS covers everyone in the UK.

With all of the spending on healthcare, the U.S. still ranks 37th in the world in healthcare, 22nd when it comes to infant mortality. For the richest nation on Earth, these results are more evidence how much the healthcare system needs to be improved.

People seem to fear 'socialized medicine' as they call it because it would 'limit choice'. Not so. In Germany under the Bismarck model, they have a system similar to what Americans have with employer-based insurance, and can choose between 200 different private insurance companies which they keep their entire lives. They're covered under private insurance longer than Americans! However, those German insurance companies have to offer the basic insurance package guaranteed by the government at fixed rates, and cannot decline people based on pre-existing conditions or dump someone, as long as people pay their premiums. German insurance companies do compete for those government dollars in the form of added-value and quick payments, and some for-profit insurance companies in Germany will offer additional services not covered under the basic plan.

Americans over 65 switch to Medicare, which in fact was invented by a Canadian socialist by the name of Tommy Clement Douglas, who is lauded as a hero in Canada even over the likes of Wayne Gretsky or Alexander Graham Bell. When it comes to veterans, nobody complains about 'socialized' medicine even though it's nearly that. Veterans are covered by the government, and this is the closest system to 'socialized medicine' that America has, but it works.

The ones who are left in the cold are the backbone of America's economy, and that's the working class who often can't afford health insurance or can't get it through their employer, or through discriminatory domestic-partner laws (straight couples under the age of 62 are not eligible).

There is a mandate to have car-insurance. Fail to get it, and the DMV is notified and your registration is suspended. Your privilege to drive is contingent on having auto-insurance (and a valid registration). If you make a claim, you may get dumped by your current company, but *someone* will cover you. Cancer that nobody could have hoped to foresee or cure alone should no more be a case for denial than a not-at-fault car-accident claim should be a reason to deny someone car insurance.

Having a mandate for health-insurance is required simply because if insurance is to cover *everyone*, then *everyone* should be paying into it. This could be done through taxes like the U.K. system or a mandated yearly fee like other systems. Either way, this is pennies compared to trying to pay for a week-long hospital stay out-of-pocket should the need arise or worse, paying out-of-pocket for treatment of a chronic illness like cancer. People often go broke for nothing but the results of unforseen medical expenses, and it's a crying shame. This can't be good for Americans or the economy.

We need a simple, effective, tax-funded healthcare system for everyone, regardless of claims or pre-existing conditions. Whether we use the co-pay system of France (which is refunded) to remind people that healthcare costs money, or a system of private insurance companies who compete for perks but are not 'for profit', something, almost *anything* would be an improvement on being 37th in the world for healthcare when we're the richest nation on Earth.

With nearly 50-million people who aren't insured and successful systems all over the world to learn from, it's high time we did *something* to revolutionize our healthcare and make it available for everyone. Even if it's not you going bankrupt or dying to the current system, the failure of the current system affects us all.

T.R. Reid gives real hope that if America can humble itself and learn from others, we too can enjoy amazingly good healthcare for everyone and for much less than we spend now. As Michael Moore's documentary, 'Sicko' points out, Americans have no issues adopting better technology when we see it....from Japanese cars to Swiss watches...why on Earth aren't we cherry-picking the best Universal Health Care systems from around the world and putting them into practice in America?

And now for the atheist angle...why on Earth is the world's most religious developed nation leaving so many people out in the cold when it comes to health insurance? Those who are so worried about abortion and gay people being allowed to marry should really pay attention to the real travesty...millions of people who die from otherwise treatable diseases. No wonder gay people want to be able to marry...some of them probably just want health insurance. Who can blame them.

We really have nothing to lose, and everything to gain....especially for the nearly 50 million Americans without healthcare.

-dB-