Traditional Marriage Perverts the Tradition of Marriage

Here’s an interesting post containing a whole bunch of information about traditional marriage, meaning real traditional marriage, not what is being touted today. I had known, of course, that polygyny (polygamy is multiple spouses [spice?] without specifying which sex; polyandry is multiple husbands; polygyny is multiple wives) was common in biblical times. And, of course, I had known that for much of history, especially since agrarian times, that marriage was a business deal. However, there is much about the marriage ceremony and about today’s ceremony and its origins that did surprise me. Anyway, if your idea of traditional marriage as one man marrying one woman in a house of worship, this may surprise you.

Traditional Marriage Perverts the Tradition of Marriage

Perhaps this will give you something to consider the next time someone suggests that we need a constitutional amendment defining marriage. In my not so humble opinion, any couple or group of people who want to legally declare themselves life partners should be allowed to do so. The only issues are figuring out the tax code and ensuring that the law does not discriminate. If we choose to allow polygamy, the law must truly allow any number of partners of either sex. I, for one, wouldn’t want a law that specified polygyny or polyandry, but left out the other.

Advertisements

37 Responses to Traditional Marriage Perverts the Tradition of Marriage

  1. Patrick says:

    Thanks for the link Scott. I enjoyed it. Of course the argument that the white dress was a break from tradition given to us by Queen Victoria, doesn’t really support the idea that we should redefine marriage as something other than the union of a man and a woman to the exclusion of all others.

  2. The Grey Lady says:

    I care not what labels mere politico parasites and tax eaters decide is the definition de jour of marriage. It touches me not. Abolish the thieving tax code that supports those foul leeches and all problems associated are resolved.

  3. Patrick,

    Good idea. Pick out the least significant point in the article to criticize. But, as for marriage being one man and one woman, it certainly was not always so. King Salomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines.

    And, if you read the article, which clearly you picked only a single point from, you would find that religion and marriage in particular were not associated until recently.

    Further, it was only about a half century ago or possibly a bit more that there were legal restrictions on marriage between people of different races. Is that the marriage law you would protect?

    One man and one woman has been the norm in history, but not the only form of marriage by a long shot, and certainly not the one talked about most in biblical times.

    Besides, other cultures have other rules regarding marriage. Some have practiced polygyny, some polyandry, some all forms of polygamy.

    As far as I can tell, the only role the government should have in marriage is to allow any people who love each other and want to commit to each other to marry, and to work out the tax law for the union so that marriage is neither encouraged nor discouraged and so that wherever either polygyny or polyandry occurs, both are allowed, to keep things equal.

    If fourteen people of assorted sexes want to commit to becoming a family, well, it’s not right for me, but what do I care?

    The real point in all of this Patrick is, why do you care?

    Why do you feel qualified to judge the merits of the marriages of others?

    What gives you the right to take away the rights of others?

  4. Grey Lady,

    I have no idea what your post means or why you feel that anarchy will solve anything regarding marriage. You’ll have to be more clear and coherent if you wish to make a point.

  5. The Grey Lady says:

    Be more coherent?

    Ok I don’t give a rats behind what some parasite thinks is the definition of marrage. they can marry a monkey to a dog and his little goat friend, give “them” all the rights in their lawful world it will touch me, my marriage, my life not one wit.

    Your only concern with the changing definition is the tax code, abolish 90% of the theiving tax code and voila the tax code issue is no longer a problem.

    I am not an anarchist, I am a LIBERTARIAN. Vive la difference commrade. I belive that a certain level of government is a nessesary evil, I just like to keep evil to a minumum in my life.Apart from defending our country from invaders I cn not think that government is any else but a busy body nusuince that needs to be put back to it

  6. The Grey Lady says:

    Be more coherent?

    OK I don’t give a rats behind what some parasite thinks is the definition of marriage. they can marry a monkey to a dog and his little goat friend, give “them” all the rights in their lawful world it will touch me, my marriage, my life not one wit.

    Your only concern with the changing definition is the tax code, abolish 90% of the thieving tax code and voilà the tax code issue is no longer a problem.

    I am not an anarchist, I am a LIBERTARIAN. Vive la difference comrade. I believe that a certain level of government is a necessary evil, I just like to keep evil to a minimum in my life.Apart from defending our country from invaders I can not think that government is any thing else but a power hungry, overstepping, people oppressing, busy body nuisance that needs to be put back to it’s original place of serving the people instead of us serving their ends.

  7. The Grey Lady says:

    My apologies for the double post, some how it got sent with out my requesting it. Need more coffee….

  8. Grey Lady,

    I’m leaving the double post because I couldn’t choose between the two slight variations, the latter with a more vehement ending. So I let them both stand.

    Defending our country from invaders is the only purpose you see for government?

    Hmm… Interesting. Here are some other functions government does perform, however corruptly they do so. I would, of course, like to weed out the corruption.

    However, I’m not yet ready to throw out perfectly good bath water just ’cause there’s a dirty baby in it, or vice versa.

    Here are some other function of government, please tell me which ones you would remove in the interests of saving a few bucks on your taxes.

    • Police
    • Firefighters
    • Highway building and maintenance
    • Public transportation
    • Regulation of commerce *
    • Parks (Would you really want everything to be a strip mall, strip mine, or oil rig?)
    • Providing currency (Yes, without government, we go back to the barter system.)
    • Trash removal
    • Sewage treatment
    • Fresh Water
    • Regulation of pollution
    • Public health regulations

    Oliver Wendell Holmes once said: ‘I like to pay taxes. With them I buy civilization.’

    I too would like a more efficient government. I too would like it if it could be done with lower taxes. I just think that today’s libertarians, as opposed to the more reasonable Heinlein-esque variety, really are looking to throw out most or all of government and go back to a near anarchistic state. And, yes Grey Lady, that does sound like your wish as well. Call yourself whatever you want. The current radical nutjob tea party movement really is a bunch of anarchists who are not even self-aware enough to realize just what the effects will be if they actually win. Bankrupting government is not the answer.

    You need to wake up.

    * The reason Monopoly is a fun game is because there are rules. Take away the rules and one greedy bastard grabs all of the money from the bank. Game over. The subprime crisis was an example of this on a global scale.

  9. The Grey Lady says:

    Are you aware of Z.A.P.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-aggression_principle

    I always despised Monopoly, even when I won. :O)

    I only played because my friends and family thought it was fun. It wasn’t it was boring and dumb. Even if the person who took the most risks and spent the most on buying properties and spent every dollar on upgrading their properties to make profits.

    I have no need to wake up I quit taking the blue pill a long time ago.

  10. Well Grey Lady, regardless of your opinion of monopoly, I still say that you are an anarchist. The non-aggression principle you cite virtually states that. If you oppose all forms of taxation, you must oppose all forms of government. For, there is no way a government can run without funds. So, I state that you can call yourself a libertarian if you want. But, you’re lying to yourself.

    What about all the services I listed in my prior post?

    Would you really want to live in a country where none of those services are provided?

    Or, do you have a way that you propose they be provided at no cost to anyone? If so, I say again, wake up!!

  11. The Grey Lady says:

    MS,

    Congratulations on being able to read into an article and take from it only what you want. It must be a lovely skill to have. Feel free to keep labeling myself and others in a derogatory manner for Your psychological ease, it does simplify things doesn’t it? But it still makes you wrong in your assumptions about moi and others. :O)

  12. OK Grey Lady. I claim that your world view is highly naive. Tell me exactly where the government is going to get the revenue necessary to exist at even the most basic level. You claim you are not an anarchist. Where does the government get its revenue? Or, how does it run for free?

    Be specific. This is not a theoretical question.

    People are genuinely voting to abolish government by bankrupting it; you’re probably among them. I want to know your plan for maintaining a modern society without any taxes.

    Go through my list above and tell me how you plan to provide for each of the items on the list.

  13. The Grey Lady says:

    Be specific?

    First you need to be specific about what exactly this sentence means.

    “People are genuinely voting to abolish government by bankrupting it; you’re probably among them.”

    Off hand it looks like you are accusing me of voting in government in order to bankrupt it? that is a super sillious charge, you can not bankrupt a government that the (what they think is the bottomless) pockets of it populace at it’s disposal, when it prints it very own monopoly money. You think I vote to bankrupt it and myself at the same time. How very illogical. But I am willing to allow that I do not interpret your type correctly, it is clear we do not think the same way so please be specific and clear as to what wisdom you are attempting to bestow upon me.

  14. Grey Lady,

    Are you trying to be annoying??!!?

    I left a specific list of tasks performed by government. I asked you how you were going to accomplish getting them done without any funds. Do you have an answer?

    I thought not.

    As for what my sentence means, it is that a government that has no source of income is necessarily bankrupt, by definition. So, as you vote against any and all taxes, you are literally voting to bankrupt the government and hence, you are an anarchist.

    That is my claim.

    Care to dispute it? Then answer how you intend to provide the following services without any taxation at all.

    • Police
    • Firefighters
    • Highway building and maintenance
    • Public transportation
    • Regulation of commerce *
    • Parks (Would you really want everything to be a strip mall, strip mine, or oil rig?)
    • Providing currency (Yes, without government, we go back to the barter system.)
    • Trash removal
    • Sewage treatment
    • Fresh Water
    • Regulation of pollution
    • Public health regulations

    Answer, or everyone reading this site (OK, admittedly not that large an audience) but, if you refuse to answer how you intend to pay for the services, you will be admitting that you are a naive fool who has no idea how society will run without taxation.

    Good luck. Your teabagger friends are counting on you.

  15. I am sure you do find someone that doesn’t agree with your thought process annoying. So I can not take credit for any special talent. Teabagger, those folks still believe in the fable of democracy, they still think that they can vote in a kinder gentler master to service under, teabagger….naaaa but I do love a good cup of Grey lady tea, so calming don`t cha know.

    What makes you think that only government is fit to provide everything on your list?

    What trash can’t be picked up and disposed of unless it is done by overpaid parasites? Private Business can not? Oh wait….

    Firefighters? Oh my since settlements began there has been this little thing called the volunteer fighter or why can’t a private company provide the service and folks have a choice as to who they want to provide their service?

    Parks? Why does the government have to own them? If people want parks they will be provided by private means because people will buy and build in areas that have natural beauty. If I want to go camping I could easily go to a private camp site why does the government have to provide that?

    Regulation of commerce? Seriously you think regulation is the answer? What about greed? If a company is greedy enough they will be very good citizens because they know that folks vote with their wallets and their livelihood depends on being good cooperate citizens. Why do you assume that government is the reason that companies are good or provide good product.

    Regulation of currency. You mean the monopoly money they print, that only has worth because they say it does, but really is nothing unless folks believe it does.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiat_money

    What about going back to the gold or silver standard.

    Public transportation? What only government can run a bus company? Private business can’t possibly do it more efficiently, better or at a decent cost?

    What are you thinking? Government is not the answer to the worlds woes, it is the primary cause. Ever thing they achieve they do with violence or the treat of violence. I seem to recall saying that the government should be severely limited and 90 some percent should be abolished, not exactly all, but close.

    If I wanted to be annoying I would cheekily inform you that I have almost as many children as most folks have toes. :O) (Yup thats a truth. :OP )

  16. Grey Lady,

    Yes. And Frodo and Sam and Merry and Pippin took back the Shire from the evil Saruman with bright swords and grim faces. But, in the real world, there are practical problems with what you say.

    In your privatize life scheme, where exactly does the money come from? How is it so different than a tax?

    Police – You skipped this. You really don’t want this privatized, do you? The warring factions of police companies each trying to prove they protect you better by committing crimes in the neighborhoods of the others. Each trying to reduce costs by hiring high school drop outs and giving them guns. You don’t want privatized police, right??!!?

    Firefighters – Volunteers are great! I have nothing against volunteer firefighters. 73% of U.S. firefighters are volunteers. Who trains them? Why do you feel their jobs have no value?

    Highway building and maintenance – You skipped this one too. Who funds the building and maintenance of highways in your scheme. Each little village along the way takes responsibility for their mile long stretch of I-80? Some build 3 lanes, some 5, some 1? The road goes back and forth from wide to narrow every few miles? Some areas are paved well enough to go 70MPH right up to a stretch with enormous potholes where one must slow to 20MPH? I don’t think so.

    Public transportation – Greyhound? That’s your answer to public transportation? Yes. We need public transportation from the government. The New York City subway is a great example of a cheap, efficient, mass transit system. New York would not be the city it is without it. 80% of commuters in NYC commute by rail or bus, both publicly provided by the MTA. You think private companies would do better?

    Regulation of commerce – Well, 30 years of rampant deregulation got us the Savings and Loan scandal followed years later by the subprime mortgage crisis that brought down the entire global economy. Yes. Regulation is actually the answer. People are greedy. They need strict rules for business to follow.

    It was regulation that increased fuel economy of cars … until Reagan stopped the increase in CAFE standards. It was regulation that cleaned up our air pollution significantly. It was regulation that stopped the ozone hole from getting huge.

    Parks – In candyland, people decide they want a park and they designate one. In the real world, Ole King Coal ignores the sign and comes in and knocks down the entire mountain the park was built around to get the coal out. Then, after there’s nothing but a desolate Mars-scape, you can make your park. Have you not heard that companies have been trying year after year after year doggedly and single-mindedly to drill in ANWR? People want a park. They make one. Who enforces the park rules? Who keeps it a park?

    Providing currency – I’m not sure how I feel about the gold standard. Certainly, mining for ever more gold is another way to ruin your parks. Gold mining is particularly bad environmentally. Either way though, do you really want world commerce on a gold based barter system? What about electronic banking? You do realize that gold doesn’t flow through the internet, right?

    Trash removal – What makes you think the private parasites are better than the public ones? What will you do as they continually raise their rates? What will you do when they cut service to one day a week, then one day a month? Who will regulate it so that the trash doesn’t sit around long enough to attract vermin?

    Sewage treatment – Missed that one too.

    Fresh Water – This is huge. Right now, government either buys land around reservoirs and makes parks out of it or filters the water, or both. When there is no government to prevent farming right up to the edge of the reservoir, including subsistence farming by poor people just trying to eke out a meager living, the water will have both farm runnoff and sewage in it.

    As for privatization of water, that is being tried and is a complete and utter catastrophe. Here’s how Bolivia collapsed due to privatization of water. Literally. They had a revolution to get their water back.

    Of course, it would be different in the U.S., right? Not exactly. Here’s what happened in Atlanta when private business took over the water supply. It wasn’t pretty.

    Regulation of pollution – Skipped this one too.

    Public health regulations – And this.

    Government is not always the best answer. But, for basic life-sustaining needs like air, water, sanitation, sewage, etc., it certainly is. And, for parks and transportation, it is the only answer. Even with a gold standard, it would still be the only answer for currency, if you want electronic and international commerce, you still need an abstract representation of the gold that can be accounted for electronically.

    What you fail to realize is that the bulk of the woes in the U.S. today are because of the rampant deregulation started by Ronald Reagan and continued by both democraps and repugnicans alike for 30 years.

    Of course, there is a bigger cause of the real problems of humanity, overpopulation.

    But, for a modern horribly overcrowded society, government is a necessary evil, is a lesser evil, and does indeed require money to run.

  17. MS,

    You think what you like, but government is violence, the very essence of it’s being is violence. I feel sorry that you lack both the imagination and courage to let free sovereign human beings do and think for themselves.

    Back to the topic at hand, I do NOT care what some parasite says marriage is, they have no effect on me, my marriage, my life in this regard. On this we seem to agree, what others decide a marriage is has absolutely no consequence to our lives. I do NOT require a government’s stamp of approval to sleep well, I do not let their definition to effect my calm either. They are nothing but gnats with their words on paper that are meaningless to my life.

    What others do, that is harmless, in their homes is none of my business and nor should be anybody else’s.

    90 some percent of taxes are spent on non-essential services, spent on the parasites, their kingdoms, bases of power, their pawns and their toys.

    If I hire a garbage company to take care of my refuse they way I deem fit and they start to screw around with me and their service I have a right to hire someone else, start my own garbage refuse company that will do as I see fit. If a company does not fulfill the needs of the populace that pays them they will suffer the consequences of such actions and die as a corporate entity as they should.

    I can not educate you on the whole theory of Libertarianism in a few posts, I can not nor am I interested in trying to explain (what appears to be for you) a complicated idea in a few posts.

    P.S. about that subprime thing you might want to re-educate yourself a wee bit on that one, do some research. You do know that it came about because the the US government fiddled with regulation of the banking system…right?

    I particularly have enjoyed my time here. I can see that you are always interested in Educating yourself on ideas instead of demonizing and dismissing them outright,it is heartening how open your mind is, your quest to expand your knowledge,to think carefully, no flip for wrote answers, deep thought instead of reliance on mere feeling about things, no reliance on that whole dogma “if they disagree with thee they must be wrong”. Congratulations on that.

    Good day to you sir MS.

  18. Yes Grey Lady, we agree on marriage, and probably most civil rights and liberties issues as well, but little else.

    I would like to see where your 90+% comes from. Do you have a link for that? It’d be interesting to see what you call non-essential services.

    Regarding sovereign individuals, I think you give the bulk of our species way too much credit. Even if you took a few hundred thousand hand-picked decent individuals and put them together in a society, I strongly suspect that, without oversight, they would quickly begin to act not in their own best interests as a society.

    One term you may wish to read about, of which I presume you are unaware, is “tragedy of the commons“. This is an inherent problem in any society that is sufficiently large that people do not all know each other and that lives in an area where one cannot see the entire landscape to know the real effect of the masses. We have this today with our air, our oceans, our declining top soil, our declining fresh water supply, desertification, and many other places. The only cure for this is the necessary and lesser evil of government regulation.

    As for Libertarianism, I have a pretty good working knowledge of it from having read a ton of Heinlein who was a classic libertarian probably from a time predating the term. Though his works are all fiction, they are (dare I say it) liberally sprinkled with his political views. True libertarianism is a viewpoint with which I can respectfully disagree.

    Your brand, on the other hand, scares the willies out of me. You claim you are not an anarchist. I would ask you to please list for me the services you do believe government should provide and the means by which these services will be paid.

    Thus far, I do not believe any of your posts have left any room at all for government or have hinted at all about how the government would be funded.

  19. Your willies are weak. Perhaps it was a mistake to snip them at my expense then.

  20. That was my vasa deferentia I snipped, not my willies. And, it wasn’t for you.

    I take it then that you actually have no answer to what you feel government should do. And, also no answer about how to fund the nothing you want them to do. Correct?

    So, exactly how are you not an anarchist?

  21. YES I am very sure you didn’t do it for me, but is clear that if not for me and every other tax slave in this country who was forced to pay to have your snippage. Why do you think that is? Do you think it fair and just that my children, old folks living on a fixed income were forced to sacrifice or go with out something so you and every other self entitled twit could have this and other elective medically un-necessary procedures done? Be a man take responsibility for your own progeny or desire for the lack there of. Pay for these things for yourself.

    Novel concept for you: Government could try to raise funds by providing a real service that everyone who actually wanted it could voluntarily access it, pay for it at their pleasure as opposed to being forced against their will. :O)

  22. I have just had a friend read this thread to see if I was missing something and they think you are an American Blog. That would explain the ridiculous teabagger references and super sillious assumptions about me and your insistance that if I am not a I must be b.

    It would also explain the self loathing, apparent guilty remorse and removal from mankind, lack of faith it’s many attributes, the fear of all others who think differently, so much fear in fact that you think only the implied gun point of the state can save you and satisfy your need to control all others actions who are not exactly in sync with you.

  23. Grey Lady,

    Now you’re just being intentionally (and internationally) obnoxious. So, I’ll respond in kind.

    A) You have no idea whether I paid for my snippage myself or whether it was covered by insurance, which is not covered nationally in the U.S. but is a benefit of my job, so is not covered by taxes either way. So, it really doesn’t even matter for this discussion.

    B) Regardless, it was far less than the amount I pay every year in school tax for the children of those who have not been snipped but instead have contributed to the overpopulation of the planet and the tragedies of the commons mentioned above.

    C) Fuck you for the obnoxious accusation! I have just lost all respect for you and have given up any hope that you might actually research what the hell you are talking about before you start typing.

    As for government, you refuse to let them provide any service. You are indeed an anarchist no matter how much you claim to be a libertarian. You are giving honest libertarians a bad name. Be self-honest. If you don’t want government just say so. Don’t beat around the bush and pretend to be a libertarian. Do a little introspection and learn to be comfortable with who you are. If you hate government in all of its forms, you are an anarchist. Wallow in it. Don’t try to hide your true nature from yourself or others.

    Don’t believe I know what I’m talking about? Well then name a single service you believe government should provide. If you can’t name one, then you are indeed an anarchist. That is the definition.

    Yes. I am in the U.S. So? The teabagger reference still fits since your viewpoints are as radical, ridiculous and not based on reality as all of their viewpoints. Would you like Sarah Palin to take office in your country? Those of us with brains in America would love it if you’d take her off our hands.

    As for self-loathing, sorry to disappoint you. You must not have read my page on the subject of my misanthropy. I do not hate myself or other individuals. I hate our species as a whole for the net effect we have on the planet.

    I guess you didn’t bother to read about the tragedy of the commons. Too bad, really, as it will be your children, not mine, who have to deal with the results. I wish them well despite their parent’s mistreatment of the planet. BTW, since it seems important to you what country one happens to be born in, where exactly are you? I’m curious what other country now also has to deal with the problems of the teabagger mentality.

  24. Grey Lady,

    You’re really hilarious. You think you’re so different than Americans??!!? You’re not more than 500 miles from me. You’re less than 8 hours away by car. Do you really claim that you didn’t know about the tea party or that they were called teabaggers as a derogatory remark. C’mon. I know what city you’re in; I can tell by your IP address. You’re probably less than 2 hours from the U.S. border. Don’t make it sound like you’re so far away. We’re practically neighbors.

  25. MS,

    Of course I know about the teaparty, of course I know you were being a deliberately rude host when you accused me of being a “teabagger”. Of course I was automatically aware that you think one dimensionally and in stereo types narratives hand feed to you by your betters. Of course I am not ignorant of the movement in your country.

    But I did think you were a Canadian blog, I was referred to you by a fellow Canadian, I was NOT informed that you were American.

    Had you been Canadian I would have been the one that paid for your snippage, no other “insurance” would have been in existence to take care of it. The funds would have been stolen from me, the middle class, the rich and old folks who live on fixed incomes. Such are the joys of universal health care. Men can be a putz and force me take care of their nutz.

    Tragedy of the commons I have read it before and again, I dismiss it as a near religious dogma that I do not believe. Sue me for not being converted. :OP

  26. GL,

    In your country, which I apparently love more than you do, I would be forced to pay for all the childbirths, prenatal care, and well child care. They’re each much more expensive than vasectomy. Do the math.

    You’re right, I was being a rude host by calling you a teabagger. I apologize for that. But, you still have not convinced me that you have any use for government, so are still, as far as I can tell, a genuine anarchist.

    Care to trade health care plans with me? My COBRA will run out soon. I’ll be paying about $15K/yr to get coverage that will still leave me paying $50/visit to my endocrinologist for my diabetes … if I switch to a doctor in my state. I will no longer be allowed to cross state borders to go to the doctor I’ve been using for 22 years.

    Sure you want to trade?

    If yesterday’s results are any indication, this will soon be the country you want. Expect Canada to be building a border wall when our government goes bankrupt.

  27. MS,

    “In your country, which I apparently love more than you do,”

    With all due respect, you have no idea of the depth and breath of my love for my COUNTRY just because I am dissatisfied with my GOVERNMENT. Country and Government are not even remotely the same and it behooves you to not confuse the two.

    “I would be forced to pay for all the childbirths, prenatal care, and well child care. They’re each much more expensive than vasectomy. Do the math.’

    Great the he hit me first defense for more silliness or the two wrongs make a right.

    “You’re right, I was being a rude host by calling you a teabagger. I apologize for that.”

    Accepted and back to open civility again shall we?

    “But, you still have not convinced me that you have any use for government, so are still, as far as I can tell, a genuine anarchist.”

    This is silly first I have no requirement to prove anything to you. I have stated my position and that is what I am. Second this is the same as saying since flat chested women have no obvious breasts and since women are supposed to have breasts, it would follow that flat chested women are not women at all but must men. You would be just as wrong. I have ten or so children, I want a free life for them but one worth living.

    “Care to trade health care plans with me? My COBRA will run out soon. I’ll be paying about $15K/yr to get coverage that will still leave me paying $50/visit to my endocrinologist for my diabetes … if I switch to a doctor in my state. I will no longer be allowed to cross state borders to go to the doctor I’ve been using for 22 years.”

    Crap that inter state commerce clause interpretation and decision by the supreme court really sucked eh? Isn’t government interference a rats nest of inconvenience and stupidity?

    My condolences on your illness Diabetes is a terrible disease.

    “you want to trade?”

    I’m not sure I would exactly trade, Canada would never give up it’s failing system but they do put up with 33 hour wait times at the hospital emergency rooms and regular delisting of services that are covered by our tax dollars. Simple things like eye exams are no longer covered,(as a diabeteic I am sure you understand the implications of that choice cut.) physio therapy for recovering accident victims or surgery, having to wait until you are 60 years old for a hip or knee replacement, even if we are only 49. WTHeck is 11 years with out quality of life when you are being rationed on procedures and diagnostic testing as a cost saving measure? It is illegal here to pay anyone else in Canada to do a hip or knee replacement. Surely there has to be a happy medium and room for both systems to co-exist? really when medical tourism to CUBA/India/Bolivia of all places is a reasonable alternative for quick, efficient medical care you know there are issues with our system.

    15 k a year is very dear but I hazard a guess that the 55% of our income that my family pays in taxes and “fees” to varying levels of Government kind of makes up for that. A good portion of that goes to the bureaucracy of medical care.

    Do you not think that tort reform and putting limits on medical malpractice rewards would have gone a long way to help alleviate your high cost of medical care?

    “If yesterday’s results are any indication, this will soon be the country you want. Expect Canada to be building a border wall when our government goes bankrupt.”

    Oh dear me no we don’t believe in walls… why that would make us like those scary racists in Arizona or wacko minute men. (Tongue totally in cheek.)

  28. With all due respect, you have no idea of the depth and breath of my love for my COUNTRY just because I am dissatisfied with my GOVERNMENT. Country and Government are not even remotely the same and it behooves you to not confuse the two.

    OK. Perhaps. I love your country and am envious of the many advantages your government has over mine, the same advantages with which you would dispense.

    “I would be forced to pay for all the childbirths, prenatal care, and well child care. They’re each much more expensive than vasectomy. Do the math.’

    Great the he hit me first defense for more silliness or the two wrongs make a right.

    I’m glad you also see childbirth as elective. At least you are consistent, whatever else I may say about your views.

    “But, you still have not convinced me that you have any use for government, so are still, as far as I can tell, a genuine anarchist.”

    This is silly first I have no requirement to prove anything to you. I have stated my position and that is what I am. Second this is the same as saying since flat chested women have no obvious breasts and since women are supposed to have breasts, it would follow that flat chested women are not women at all but must men. You would be just as wrong. I have ten or so children, I want a free life for them but one worth living.

    Horrible analogy. Labels help us as a shorthand for a set of beliefs. Flat chested women are still women who can give birth and nurse their babies. Of course they are women. More importantly, they still have 2 X chromosomes and no Y.

    The label liberal defines me fairly well as most of my views, both social and governmental, tend toward the liberal. I have a few differences with most of the liberals in my area, such as rent control and rent stabilization which are, IMHO, unnecessary welfare for the middle class. But, on most subjects, if there is an obviously liberal position, it is likely to be the one with which I agree. So, calling myself a liberal is a good shorthand.

    I claim that libertarian is not a good label for you as libertarians still want a certain base level of service from the government, including fresh water, money (fiat or not), law enforcement, etc. Since you have no use at all for government, the correct shorthand for you is anarchist. This need not be a derogatory term, unless you make it one.

    If you would like me to believe that you are libertarian, you must tell me what you want from government. Thus far, all of the views you have presented here are anarchistic views. You even used the term sovereign to describe individuals. How can a person possibly “hav[e] supreme rank, power, or authority” with a government in place? One with supreme rank, power, and authority, cannot be governed.

    Crap that inter state commerce clause interpretation and decision by the supreme court really sucked eh? Isn’t government interference a rats nest of inconvenience and stupidity?

    I’m not sure what you’re referring to in this. Perhaps that issue is not high on my priority list. What I want from health insurance is more government interference. Right now, we ration health care based on a person’s wealth rather than health. I want a single payer system, such as the one you have.

    My condolences on your illness Diabetes is a terrible disease.

    Actually, as chronic illness goes, diabetes is not so bad. I keep mine in tight control and have no complications as yet.

    “you want to trade?”

    I’m not sure I would exactly trade, Canada would never give up it’s failing system but they do put up with 33 hour wait times at the hospital emergency rooms and regular delisting of services that are covered by our tax dollars. Simple things like eye exams are no longer covered,(as a diabeteic I am sure you understand the implications of that choice cut.) physio therapy for recovering accident victims or surgery, having to wait until you are 60 years old for a hip or knee replacement, even if we are only 49. WTHeck is 11 years with out quality of life when you are being rationed on procedures and diagnostic testing as a cost saving measure? It is illegal here to pay anyone else in Canada to do a hip or knee replacement. Surely there has to be a happy medium and room for both systems to co-exist? really when medical tourism to CUBA/India/Bolivia of all places is a reasonable alternative for quick, efficient medical care you know there are issues with our system.

    I have mixed feelings about giving special health privileges to the wealthy. On the one hand, I feel that a decent basic level of care should be provided to all. On the other, I have no issue with paying out of pocket when you want better. My only problem with it is that when the wealthy pay out of pocket, it will make it OK to have that certain basic level of care decline to the point where it is no longer decent.

    That Canada would not give up it’s excellent care system that still delivers higher life expectancy and lower infant mortality than the U.S. for about half the cost is not surprising. The question though was what you would ideally want, not what you think you can actually get.

    Regarding eye exams, I bet if you check that you are talking about optometrist visits for corrective lenses. Most U.S. plans also don’t cover that. Diabetic retinopathy exams are performed by ophthalmologists (also specialists like endocrinologists for which I pay $35 copay instead of only the $15 for general practitioners). Ophthalmologists visits are, I would strongly bet, still covered on Canada’s plan.

    15 k a year is very dear but I hazard a guess that the 55% of our income that my family pays in taxes and “fees” to varying levels of Government kind of makes up for that. A good portion of that goes to the bureaucracy of medical care.

    I pay about the same in federal, state, and property taxes or maybe only 53 or 54%. Then I pay my current bargain rate of $12K/yr with the benefit of being able to cross state lines and pay only $35 for my endocrinologist (then the insurance pays $31 and the doctor eats the $134 remainder of the bill that he is not allowed to charge to either me or the insurance company). Once COBRA coverage from my prior job ends, I will be left buying my insurance myself at full price and with fewer options than group insurance.

    Oh, and regardless of who is in office, U.S. taxes will be going up … a lot … in the very near future. Someone has to pay for all the terabucks we borrowed from China to give to wealthy corporate executives and to blow up people in far away countries.

    Do you not think that tort reform and putting limits on medical malpractice rewards would have gone a long way to help alleviate your high cost of medical care?

    No. I think that the insurance companies would just make more in profits. And, doctors would no longer be responsible for gross negligence. Frivolous lawsuits should indeed be reduced as best we can. But, to cap the malpractice award simply says that one cannot show legitimate damages from real negligence and expect to be compensated. I’d rather the doctors remain responsible for their actions.

    “If yesterday’s results are any indication, this will soon be the country you want. Expect Canada to be building a border wall when our government goes bankrupt.”

    Oh dear me no we don’t believe in walls… why that would make us like those scary racists in Arizona or wacko minute men. (Tongue totally in cheek.)

    Tongue in cheek? Do you mean that you agree with the scary racists and wacko minute men?

    Either way, if we in the U.S. continue on our current path, when our society collapses, you will build a wall or, more likely, collapse right along with us. The U.S. economy is still a major force in the global economy. It is not clear what will happen with the decline and fall of the Holy American Empire. All I know is that the emperors, one after another after another, have been getting really good with their fiddles.

  29. One more way to sum up our two countries’ health care systems.

    Canada has a health care system administered by incompetent bureaucrats tasked with providing health care to the country.

    The United States has a health care system administered by highly competent thieves tasked with maximizing corporate profits, i.e. denying coverage for health care.

    Your system covers 100% of the population adequately if imperfectly for about half the cost of ours. Your system delivers higher life expectancy and lower infant mortality. Our system leaves 47 million people getting all of their care from emergency room visits.

    Seems that incompetent bureaucrats tasked with providing care still do a better job at providing care than competent thieves tasked with denying care.

    As for travel to other countries for care, some of our insurance companies are now requiring strongly encouraging their insureds to travel to India for non-elective surgeries like coronary bypasses.

  30. Oh lord love a duck,

    Do not believe that Mike Moore propaganda about our health care system, cleanse yourself, please.

    You have corporate hacks that steal your money and we have politico hacks that lose BILLIONS in Ontario alone to untendered consulting contracts to their political cronies.

    The Health care system here is really no better, we have lost most of our doctors to the US because we refuse to fund surgery hours enough so specialists can even keep their accreditation for their specialty.

    We have millions in Ontario alone that do not have any hope of having a family doctor, they only have the emergency rooms or a clinic to go to. Clinics where you wait hours upon hours just to get a prescription refill.

    R recently we had a case where a Doctor in Windsor removed the breasts of women mistakenly having told them they had breast cancer. These women did not have cancer. Government has another government entity the hospital investigates it`s self, conclusion… Shit happens….One doctor and one person reading the test results got it wrong on every case, but it is well within the statistical probability of error. Sure it was…

    These ladies have no other recourse for the statistical probability of error they have been dealt, they are needlessly mutilated and they have no where to go to get redress. Surely the inability to make incompetent doctors accountable must be a concern for you.

    You seem to be impressed that we `pay` less for our medical care then you do. Could that be because we do not have the amount of very expensive equipment that you have easy access to. Could it be that we already pay thru our taxes for the education of these doctors. Your doctors must pay for their own medical school, therefore it stands to reason that their expenses are much higher then ours and they need to make more money in order to pay off their student debt.

    But the fact that the taxpayer already funds 80% of our students cost is NOT factored into the cost of medical care.

    You need a PET scan or an MRI it can be had at a price, we do wait anywhere from 6 months to a year to get access to these important diagnostic tools. Because we don`t have them. There has not been the capital investment in these things. Believe me when I say some DIE waiting or their cancers spread while waiting. People die needlessly here too, don`t kid yourself.

    A system when it is monopolized become arrogant and cumbersome. We need the ability to pay privately if we want or can. At the very least the rich will be spending their money here instead of else where. Doctors that can`t stay do to accreditation reasons will be able to practice both privately and the public system.

  31. Grey Lady,

    It’s not from Michael Moore. It’s from the United States Government’s CIA World Fact Book.

    U.S. has 6.14 deaths per thousand live births.
    Canada has 4.99

    http://tinyurl.com/24s4d7

    U.S. Life expectancy is 78.24
    Canada’s is 81.29

    http://tinyurl.com/yrq7l8

    As for cost, the U.S. spends about twice what Canada does as a percent of GDP. You’ll need to show me a link that says that the education cost is A) not included in that and B) makes up for the vast difference in price.

    Regarding the equipment, perhaps we have the best. Perhaps it’s not making a difference. I can’t say why. Can you?

    Maybe the U.S. at just 4% of world population and consuming 56% of the world’s medication is just a bunch of overmedicated fools and that is taking its toll on us. Who knows?

    What is obvious is that you’re doing better with less.

    Yes, neither of our systems is perfect. Nor is anyone else’s. There will never be enough medical funding for everyone to qualify for every test or treatment.

    You prioritize based on need.

    We prioritize based on wealth.

    Does either of these choice strike you as inherently more fare, even if both are still imperfect?

  32. U.S. has 6.14 deaths per live birth.
    Canada has 4.99

    So basically you have 1 more death per 1000 then we do. I do not find that an alarming stat.

    U.S. Life expectancy is 78.24
    Canada’s is 81.29

    Not sure why but have you considered that your country seems to have an serious obesity problem? That you have a large number of active service personal that are always in harms way? That you have serious gang violence in your country that we are not really experiencing yet? I’m thinking these groups, other cultural differences just might be partially responsible for the difference of 3 deaths per 1000.Do you think these could be contributing factors as opposed to dropping it all at the door of health care?

    As for cost, the U.S. spends about twice what Canada does as a percent of GDP.

    Actually the last I saw it was around 15% to our 10%.

    You’ll need to show me a link that says that the education cost is A) not included in that and B) makes up for the vast difference in price.

    No I do not have a link that shows that having your education paid for by the taxpayer was not included, but why would the WHO include something that is not standard and exactly quantify able?

    Regarding the equipment, perhaps we have the best. Perhaps it’s not making a difference. I can’t say why. Can you?

    I alluded to some other ideas, I think it’s possible there might be more I am not aware of.

    Maybe the U.S. at just 4% of world population and consuming 56% of the world’s medication is just a bunch of overmedicated fools and that is taking its toll on us. Who knows?

    What is obvious is that you’re doing better with less.

    Better for whom? The who may think it’s Jim Dandy , but folks that sell their homes, have block fairs to raise money so they can go to the Mayo clinic for treatment are not very impressed.

    Yes, neither of our systems is perfect. Nor is anyone else’s. …snip…. even if both are still imperfect?

    Exactly NO PROGRAM is perfect for everyone. But it should not be against the law to have private health care. Some sort of combo of the two systems would please me, We need the ability to buy extra should we chose, whats wrong with that?

    I am not fond of wiki but you might want to read some of the following link:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_the_health_care_systems_in_Canada_and_the_United_States

    Look at the Malpractice and it’s effect on costs, the equipment and it’s effect on cost, the salaries and their effect on cost, it even mentions education cost for the doctors and nurses…..

  33. GL,

    Perhaps we both need to look at other countries for better examples of how to implement health care. That said though, I still read that very good write-up as saying that Canada wins overall.

    Regarding malpractice, why keep bringing it up? Your own link states it well.

    The extra cost of malpractice lawsuits is an insignificant proportion of health spending in both the U.S. (0.46%) and Canada (0.27%).

    I was not aware that even the much smaller percentage the U.S. government spends on care amounts to more per person than Canada. Canada manages to cover 100% of the population for that. We don’t come close even when you add in the private sector insurance.

    I think Canada’s system may not be the best. But, the U.S. system is the worst among developed democratic nations.

    As for the differences in infant mortality and life expectancy, they are enough to put Canada solidly in the middle of developed democratic nations’ rankings. The U.S. is consistently at the very bottom of the list of developed democratic nations, often getting beaten out on one or both by developing nations.

    According to the CIA, Cuba beats the U.S. on infant mortality. And, Jordan kicks our ass on life expectancy.

  34. MS,

    I agree neither one of us has the best Health Care system.As I have consistently stated I think there is room for a combo of the two. I want choices, not dictates.

    I like how you ignored the idea that “cultural”, life style differences could make up a portion of the difference in the life expectancy between our two countries, surely not all of it should be laid at the feet of Health care alone. You know that old Maxim correlation does not necessarily make a causation…….

    Have a nice day, I have enjoyed our meanderings. Come on over to my place to play one day….

  35. Yes. I somewhat ignored that. It is almost certainly a factor in our life expectancy numbers. But, it’s equally unlikely to be a factor in infant mortality.

    Either way, I have always assumed that the bulk of our problems in both life expectancy and infant mortality have to do with the fact that 15% of our population has no health coverage at all and another large portion is underinsured. I suspect that is a far larger factor than obesity, though I have no statistics to show it.

    Regardless, the stats don’t lie (or at least not as much as the politicians and special interests). If you’re looking at the U.S. for how to run health care, you are looking at the worst and most expensive model among all developed democratic nations. You may want to check for other sources on this one.

    As for coming to your place to play, you mean your country or your literal house?

    I tend to go to the remote locations in Canada, like Pond Inlet, Whitefish Lake (headwaters of the Thelon), Bathurst Inlet, and a bunch of slightly less remote locales. Even when I end up in places like Nova Scotia, or Manitoba I go to parks like Kejimkujuk or Riding Mountain or Churchill.

    I figure that living in New York I can meet people from all over the world without having to leave home. So, when I travel, it’s almost always to see other species.

  36. LOL. No I was not inviting you to my literal house. That would be a tad bizarre don’t cha think? I hesitate to guess what the Cattleman would think of that. Honey A friend I met in the internet in a thread is coming for dinner…..One day in the near future feel free to come visit my blog (which has been very quiet as I have high needs “out of country little people guests” at present) and we can tussle over a specific topic you disagree with instead of alllll over the map :O)

  37. As a matter of fact, I found it very odd, yes. I don’t personally think of the internet as a safe place. Nor do I assume everyone is as they present themselves on blogs. I’ve been busier than usual myself, though it may not show from my responses on a few choice topics of late. However, you may have noticed that I have not added a new topic in quite some time and that my travel list is several years out of date with no new travel blogs in even longer.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: