Wednesday, February 29, 2012

Status Update

Financially, February was another bust.

The Arizona election really has me down. I am so sick of this game in which we pretend that Conservatives are interested in restoring freedom, when conservatives consistently vote for the stooges of big centralized economics and big government.

I've written to every "Tea Party" and "Libertarian" group I can find in Arizona to see if anyone was interested in hosting a meeting on "Health Freedom" or "Self-Funded Health Care" and have not gotten any firm response; so, I've decided to scrap the idea of a trip and concentrate on the important matter of survival.

What is killing our country is that politicians use freedom in their rhetoric, but systematically favor economic centralization in their actions. Conservatives and "Liberals" are both playing a game that undermines the liberties that the Founders sought to establish.

Dialectics is a game in which politicians take a false dichotomy and shrilly debate thesis/anti-thesis while consolidating power in their grips.

The false dichotomy of health care is: Who should own the group pool: Big business or big governmentment.

Neither. The individual should be the owner of their body and should be the one to own their health care resources.

Now, the restoration of liberty cannot come through dictates.

To restore liberty, there must be an open dialogue about freedom. People must be engaged in a conversation about themselves.

This "Medical Savings and Loan" project, from the start, has been a call to engage people in this dialogue.

Monologuing cannot solve the problem. I hate the monologues of Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck. These monologues are part of the problem.

Restoring freedom must come in the form of a dialogue. It cannot come from a single book, a single dictate, or even a product.

I know, I present my idea as a product: "The Medical Savings and Loan."

I chose this name because MSA was a term in widespread use before 2003, and I wanted to emphasize that the HSA included in the MMA Act of 2003 was inadequate to put us back on a path of restored health freedom.

The name is just a gimmick to start a conversation.

My goal for the last four years has been to find a group willing to discuss self-funded health care and to challenge the politicos by saying that the out of control spending in health care is a direct result of the use of group funding for individual consumption.

Oddly, neither the tax free savings account nor the interest free loans are fundamental to my real argument. The foundation of my argument is self-ownership and property rights.

Property means "say-so." Property rights means that you have say so over your health care and you have say-so over the resources you build to provide that care.

You cannot sell the risk associated with your body without losing the say-so over your body.

Group funding of individual consumption leads to corruption (the tragedy of the commons) even when the group is owned by a corporation.

My hope was that the name "Medical Savings and Loan" would be catchy enough to grab peoples attention and help start the conversation and that the name for the effort would change before going public with the conversation.

It is possible that I was wrong on that calculation.

Anyway, I have a program to start a conversation about self-funded health care. I am dead broke. I would either need to borrow money or find a way to generate an income stream to pay for my travel. I have a fundraising gig at the ready.

I would still hit the road if I could find a group willing to debate this concept, but there must be enough people in the group for my fundraiser to raise enough money to pay for the gas and a hotel.

It is devastating to think that in three years of letter writing, tweeting and actively engaging in this health care debate, I've been unable to achieve my goal of a dozen people in a room to discuss self-funded care as an alternative to

No comments:

Post a Comment