American Health Care

Kyrel Zantonavitch's picture
Submitted by Kyrel Zantonavitch on Sat, 2017-03-11 05:27

The key to reforming America's health care system is identical to the key to reforming America's whole economy: deregulation. That's the magic word and concept. However boring, banal, unoriginal, and uninspired that prescription seems, deregulation is still the ultimate and definitive answer.

To understand how important this idea is, it must be borne in mind that regulation is just another word for regimentation, which is just another word for mandation, which is just another word for dictation, which is just another word for dictatorship. To solve virtually all of America's health care problems just get rid of the government tyranny involved. Let people live. Let people be free. This will work to solve virtually all of America's economic problems too.

And fixing these two seemingly beyond-hopeless messes is not –- as practically everyone today believes -– mind-bendingly difficult or infinitely complex. In fact, as already hinted at above, it's ultra-fast and ultra-easy. And anyone who says otherwise is considerably ignorant or morally dubious, if not both.

Step One is: Get rid of all the medical licenses. These constitute nothing less than a form of enslavement. They forbid people from working and acting as they wish and as society needs. So get these wretched bureaucratic waste-papers the hell out of the way.

No more government permissions or licenses needed for doctors, nurses, hospitals, clinics, pharmacies, pharmacists, nursing homes, personal home assistants, or other health care workers or facilities. Any medical business can open, and anyone can work in it, in a new and beautiful land of health care liberty, opportunity, efficiency, and excellence.

Licenses raise the cost and lower the quality of medical care radically. Every year, almost certainly, hundreds of thousands of innocent Americans die from them. And millions get terribly sick or stay injured or uncured. All for no reason except Big Brother.

Despite what virtually everybody thinks today, licenses weren't created to insure quality, competence, or minimal standards. They were created to kill competition and freedom. This they do very well. Also people.

With restrictive government medical licensing, large and disreputable elements of the health care industry profiteer wildly. And the pathetic suffering patients get financially and medically crushed. Under coercive government licensing -– which is absolute medical tyranny -- practically everyone gets gratuitously sick, injured, mangled, or killed.

Step Two is: Get rid of the F.D.A. The Food and Drug Administration is a heartlessly evil and dictatorial organization which has no right to exist. They too raise the cost and lower the quality of health care fantastically. Especially in the long run. Medical drugs, devices, and procedures are impacted dramatically. Especially in the long run. Almost beyond doubt, still more hundreds of thousands of innocents are mercilessly annihilated each year.

The F.D.A. says "no" when all the doctors, hospitals, pharmacies, patients, and customers want to say "yes." This is a government agency of pure regulation and tyranny. They create nothing but unspeakable agony and an extravagant slaughterfest.

Every one of America's totalitarian and death-worshiping medical rules, regulations, and laws needs to be immediately repealed. And every one of the F.D.A.'s employees needs to be instantly fired -– if not ruthlessly hunted down, like rabid wolves, and then exterminated from the face of the earth.

Under the Federal Death Administration the simplest drugs, devices, and procedures take decades to come to market. And that's assuming they get "approved" at all. Under the F.D.A. an aspirin worth two cents routinely costs five dollars each. A fifty-dollar hospital room generally costs two thousand bucks. And courtesy of F.D.A. control you normally have to share hospital rooms with strangers, like the worst flophouses imaginable. You have to wear hospital gowns which the poorest Bangladeshi beggars would refuse.

Altho' it's hard to estimate, probably 95% of all miracle drugs, devices, and procedures never even get invented at all, thanks to government regulation and the F.D.A. And so Uncle Sam's medical torture and bloodbath goes on and on. The F.D.A. Is a virulently anti-freedom, anti-human organization dedicated to inflicting misery and death upon every single defenseless American possible. Of the 2.6 million deaths recorded each year in the U.S. Probably more than 300,000 are unnecessary, even in the short run. So, at a minimum, the F.D.A. and the license laws perpetrate several new medical 9/11s every week of the year.

Step Three: Even tho' it only moderately matters –- after blissfully terminating all medical permission papers and the lawless F.D.A. -- Americans need to be liberated in a few other health care areas as well. They need the freedom to purchase insurance across state and national lines, as well as buy drugs from overseas. And they obviously shouldn't be coerced into purchasing Affordable Care Act-type incompetent and over-priced government-regulated insurance plans.

All medical research should be capitalist and not communist, as most of it is today. The socialist National Institutes for Health, and similar state abominations, should also be abolished. Malpractice tort reform should bring together expert judges and juries who base their decisions upon science and medical truth -– not upon a desire to rob innocent rich people blind and help contemptible poor folks hit the litigious lottery. Medicare and Medicaid -– which serve mainly to torture and slaughter the old and the poor -– should be replaced by private insurance, personal savings, self-care, free internet advice, and charity in an overall health care system of exceptionally high-quality and stunningly low prices. A booming economy, under deregulated full capitalism, will also generate massive amounts of disposable income to lavish on health.

The current American welfare state system is horrific and murderous beyond compare. We need to bring a complete and immediate halt to Big Brother's on-going medical holocaust.


Andrew Atkin's picture

It's a touch of political pragmatism. If you propose a system that perceivably leaves people to bleed to death on the streets, then public acceptance is impossible. So the idea is that people have to pay for their own insurance, but unusual people who can't pay, for whatever reason, must be helped out.


Moly is a dork, not always right, and occasionally does some really stupid he once forced a young guy who called in to give private information about himself, so he could play the psychoanalyst on him. Intrusive and stupid! BUT, he is not without something to contribute and he is the only presenter around that I have seen that is prepared to look seriously and non-defensively into the child abuse issue, with a full and realistic overview on its far-reaching significance. For that he deserves a medal.


I think New Zealand could do with a pod cast show that is not afraid to openly challenge politically correct opinion, and intelligently. We lack that here.

The KZ Show?

Luke Setzer's picture

Kyrel, have you considered starting your own regular podcast to compete with these people and so garner enough attention to motivate them to debate you?

Minute 23 of the Borefest

Kyrel Zantonavitch's picture

I'm up to minute 23 of Dupe Pissta. Nothing of value. Pissta's best claim so far: The Church didn't completely squash reason, science, and philosophy during the Dark Ages -- ergo, they led them, and deserve all credit for the progress they gave to mankind. Hilarious.


Kyrel Zantonavitch's picture

"How the Catholic Church built Western Civilization"? It's hard to imagine a more false, evil, and destructive claim than that! I'm virtually certain I read an article on that topic by Tom Woods when his book came out in 2012. if memory serves, I found it transparently false, shallow, outrageous, and exceptionally repellent. Still, it may be worth reading, if only to hear how the religiosos choose to lie at their best. Reminds me of Ann Coulter shamelessly calling scientists "Darwiniacs" in her 2006 book Godless.

Doug says that "If any Objectivist were to debate Christian libertarians Duke Pesta or Tom Woods on Christianity they would be destroyed." Please. Someone tell these hopeless clowns to call me up. I'd be more than happy to wipe the floor with them intellectually, morally, and spiritually. And this is from someone who knows nothing about Christianity and adamantly refuses to learn. I'll make a quick, cursory study of whatever topic they prefer to debate (hopefully their strong suit) and that will be more than enough to intellectually annihilate them. But such a call will NEVER come, obviously.

Still, someone should inform them I have lots of free time, plus a high-quality internet connection and web cam. Same thing with that pitiful loser Stephen Molyneux. Or Amy Peikoff. I actually feel sorry for all of them, they're so weak.

On that wretched video posted above, Moly gives a merciless nightmare speech of almost SIX MINUTES before he even allows his prestigious guest to utter Word One. What could be more rude or abusive to the guest or audience? Moly is a permanent scumbag for all time based on that alone!

And I defy ANY Passionate Objectivist to listen to the full six minutes, as I did. In human time, it's over an hour. And not a single fresh or worthwhile word is spoken -- as Moly himself would admit.


Lindsay Perigo's picture

Your last sentence contradicts all the previous ones!

Uber style market regulation

Andrew Atkin's picture

The model I like for health, is to eliminate the need for licensing, and instead have hospitals as private businesses that must compete between each other for consumers.

They should be totally responsible for their own internal training - which means not over-training, and allowing for more specialization, in practice. No bullshit with creating barriers-to-entry for the sake of price (wage) inflation, via exaggerated education demands.

Critically, hospital performance should be rated and presented online (like Uber), which in turn mostly controls what hospitals can charge.

Direct market accountability is by far the most efficient and effective way to functionally regulate -and we have the tools to do it with the internet, and very well.

Innovation would be aggressively embraced, and clinical mistakes (including infections) and costs would collapse.

We should have private compulsory insurance, with the government providing financial assistance to the most needy, only where it can be rationally justified.


Olivia's picture

Olivia is somewhat better but she's got a grudge against Christianity for whatever injustices suffered when she was younger, real or imagined.

Better by whose standard, Doug - your silly one offered under the auspices of anonymity?
I bear no grudge against Christians other than I think they are profoundly wrong about what they assert to be truth. Best you keep your amateur psychologizing within the vicinity of your lonely little self.

Duke Pesta & Tom Woods vs any Objectivist ever

Doug Bandler The Second's picture

If any Objectivist were to debate Christian libertarians Duke Pesta or Tom Woods on Christianity they would be destroyed. What I mean by that is on factual grounds I'd wager that near 100% of what Objectivists would say about Christian theology or Christian history would be wrong. Even on metaphysics, Objectivists wouldn't get the Christian arguments for God right; ie "flying spaghetti monster" nonsense.

You can't listen to Duke Pesta's arguments in the above videos and not come away from them understanding that Christianity had enormous positive civilizational value. The militant Christianity hating atheism of Objectivism is really repulsive. The Austrian movement does not have this phenomenon and it has some atheists in it like Walter Block.

Objectivists share similar psychological ground with the left-atheists. This becomes more apparent more and more as I get older.

Surface irrationality but deeper merits

Doug Bandler The Second's picture

Objectivists should look beyond the surface irrationality of the Original Sin idea and do better at figuring out why Steven Mallory seems to have got it so right—especially since the Drooling Beast is so clearly prowling through OrgOism as much as anywhere else.

That's what I meant. Original Sin is a pre-scientific way of accounting for human nature which DOES have strong tendencies to destructiveness. Rand was wrong in her objections to "tendencies to depravity" as she was wrong about so much. All the fields that I mentioned, evo-psych, behavioral psych, neuro-biology, etc, etc, are painting a much more informed portrait of human nature. Something Rand completely ignored because she confined herself to such a small patch of intellectual land (where Objectivists have resided ever since).

Christianity was a beginning attempt at understanding human nature and its destructive impulses. Kyrel is a nitwit on this. Olivia is somewhat better but she's got a grudge against Christianity for whatever injustices suffered when she was younger, real or imagined. And Christianity does offer improvements over the Greco-Roman worldview. An emphasis on the worth of an individual soul for one.

Objectivists are ridiculous with this "Greco-Roman but not Judeo-Christian" nonsense. Even when it comes to American politics, not to understand that the Founders and earlier generations were *deeply* influenced by Biblical history and theology; ie Subsidiarity (which is an early form of decentralization which was central to the original American project - but don't tell that to Objectivists because as far as I can tell they are all Hamiltonian Nationalists).

O'ists are very uninformed about Christianity and European / American history. I WOULD NEVER trust an Objectivist with these matters. Objectivism has some things of merit but oh boy does it have its weaknesses.


Lindsay Perigo's picture

Nothing the Goblians said exceeded Aristotle or the Stoics or the Epicureans when it comes to pre-Randian pre-individualism. It's true that the Prots emphasised each individual's relationship with God vs the Catholics Church's claim to be the intermediary between individuals and God; but given that both Caths and Prots propounded sacrifism, the distinction is not that important. It's also true, as I said earlier, that Goblianity made a yoooooge contribution to the advancement of music—the single greatest window to a man's soul and barometer of men's culture—from Gregorian Chant on up, culminating in Romanticism, many of whose exponents were not Goblians (or at least, not serious Goblians). The Romantic genre in music is a key component of Western Civilisation, and Exhibit A in the blinding superiority thereof. That so few Westerners get this is a sure sign that WC is fucked. One can bang on for ever about the virtues of the free market; if the dominant musical aesthetic is that of headbanging caterwauling, then one knows nihilism has triumphed and no free market can survive such an onslaught of brute barbarism. Especially when the self-touted leading exponents of reason and freedom—Obleftivists—have no clue about music and equate the free market with bestowing the benefits of free trade upon totalitarian filth.

I shan't worry unduly if what ends up replacing Obamacare is not 100% what you'd find in Galt's Gulch. I shall keep worrying if the pervasive cultural values aberrantly driving America continue to be pomo-nihilistic hatred of the good for being the good ... and its corollary, love of the evil for being the evil.

Philosophy vs. Religion in the Ascent of Man

Kyrel Zantonavitch's picture

I haven't studied this well, so I'm not in a strong position to comment. Nevertheless...

The strongest argument I've heard which claims that our Western liberal philosophy, culture, and lifestyle is at least partially based upon, and uplifted by, Christianity alleges that the Jesus folks partially promoted, or at least advanced, ethical individualism. They say Christians valued each and every person and soul -- which is superior to what the Greeks and Romans did. Perhaps Ayn Rand herself argued this. But even if she did, I dispute it entirely.

Religion or monotheism -- by its false and evil nature -- involves an ethics of service, and servitude, to "god". Also to mankind or the collective. Religiosos always champion and practice self-sacrifice. They hate achievement by, and pleasure for, the Holy Individual. All of this is the diametric opposite of the egoism of Enlightenment liberalism and Objectivism.

So my radical claim is this: the Jews, Christians, Muslims, and Mormons gave the West and mankind nothing. Only when these god-squaders studied real philosophy -- which means Greek-created and reason-based philosophy -- did they advance the thought and happiness of mankind.

Western Civilisation ...

Lindsay Perigo's picture

... is the creation of Greece and Rome. Goblianity contributed yoooooge advances in music. God bless it for that—and may He damn all headbangers to the Hell they recreate and worship.

The doctrine of Original Sin is absurd on its face, yet I can see its powerful appeal. It's very hard to observe human events, especially contemporary ones, without concluding there is a deep impulse toward evil woven into everyone's DNA. How to account for Nancy Pelosi, or Rachel Maddow, or Don Lemon, or Yaron Brook, or quacking moronnials, or Snoop Dogg and headbanging caterwaulers, or The Filth generally? Objectivists should look beyond the surface irrationality of the Original Sin idea and do better at figuring out why Steven Mallory seems to have got it so right—especially since the Drooling Beast is so clearly prowling through OrgOism as much as anywhere else.

Like it or not...

Olivia's picture

Western Civilisation is the product of White Anglo Saxon Protestantism - but it really took off when the Deists took the Enlightenment seriously. Here they dropped the notion of Original Sin and put great stock in Providence, a more benevolent outlook.

Original Sin is the concept that all mankind inherited the guilt of Adam's first sin, which is preposterous! That sin was Adam's desire to know good from evil: Genesis 2:17 "In the garden of Eden you may eat of any fruit, but from the tree of knowledge of good and evil you may not eat. In the day that you eat of it, you shall surely die."

Man was cursed for his curiosity, but we know man's curiosity is one of his greatest attributes (tell Aristotle that he must *not* know). Original Sin is nonsense on steroids.

However, I could make an exception concerning Doug. Eye

Smarter than ALL of You

Kyrel Zantonavitch's picture

Christianity provided no civilizational value. Smiling At the least, it hurt humanity far more than it helped. Name one thing of positive value the religiosos gave mankind. I'm waiting. "Original sin" is raw evil. It says mankind is inherently and permanently depraved, when in fact he's born morally neutral or somewhat good. The best of the West, and our intellectual base, is Greco-Roman -- not "Judeo-Christian". To say Western liberalism is partially based upon Judeo-Christianity is very ignorant and a smear of the West. To the extent Rand argued this, she was wrong too. She didn't read history correctly. The best Greeks and Romans were liberal all along -- especially after Aristotle, Epicurus, and Zeno the Stoic.

"Religious Right" smarter than Kyrel

Doug Bandler The Second's picture

They say he has "original sin" and is "utterly depraved"

When I read this type of idiocy I realize how pathetic I was because I used to say the same things.

Christians believe that men are tempted by LUSTS which can destroy a man if they are not controlled. That's was one of St. Augustine's messages; Augustine btw who started out in life as a Pagan who lived a debauched life. The Catholic view is that human nature places man in a continuous position where lusts can lead him astray. Thus moral virtue was needed for righteous and successful action. In broad outline, that's not that different from Classical philosophy.

If you have read any of the literature on behavioral psychology, evolutionary psychology, neurology, etc, you realize that the Cristian view of human lusts is not wrong. Neural pathways for happiness and pain often cross and humans are VERY emotional creatures. The Objectivist condemnation of Christianity is uninformed.

I'm not a Christian and I think that modern science combined with an understanding of psychology can provide a moral framework to replace religion. But attacking "Original Sin" as if it was completely stupid and the product of the "religious right" and the inherent backwardness of Christians is asinine not to mention anti-intellectual. The idea that Christianity provided no civilizational value is offensive and Objectivists are unlikeable for holding it.

Josh Umbehr

Doug Bandler The Second's picture

The man who started Atlas md was interviewed by Tom Woods in 2015:

I think he was also in an interview with Molyneux.

Left-Wing and Right-Wing vs. Up-Wing

Kyrel Zantonavitch's picture

Andrew -- The Religious Right holds a dark picture of the common man too. They say he has "original sin" and is "utterly depraved". Hence a vengeful "god" and iron-fisted fascist state are needed to keep him in line. Only neoliberals today see the average man as deserving of liberty and capable of functioning well under it.

Yes, and the welfare state

Andrew Atkin's picture

Yes, and the welfare state can be described as an insult to humanity. It shows no faith in people to the end of taking care of each other...hence, the presumed need for forced charity. Socialists hold the darkest picture of the common man!

Taking Care of The Poor

Kyrel Zantonavitch's picture

Andrew -- Under laissez-faire capitalism the rich grow in number fantastically, the poor shrink similarly, and the desire and ability of society to take care of its most unfortunate people rises exponentially. Such is private charity under political freedom vs. gov't charity under the hyper-evil welfare state.


Kyrel Zantonavitch's picture

Lindsay -- This amazing medical plan by Atlas MD has been promoted at least 3 times in the past few weeks by ultra-popular American radio host Sean Hannity. (Listen to whole shows here:

This health group ...

Lindsay Perigo's picture

... had a rep on Hannity today. It charges affordable flat monthly fees for different age groups and seems to offer everything at ridiculously low prices.

Note the name: Atlas MD!

Bottom-up welfare

Andrew Atkin's picture

The illusion people have is that government is necessary to make sure that the poorest and most disabled creatures are taken care of.

It's not true. What's needed as general prosperity. A prosperous and healthy society never leaves its less fortunate people to starve or bleed on the streets. If you trash the welfare state, the welfare function merely occurs from the bottom-up, not top down, which in turn leads to social accountability. Basically, free-loaders who exploit other people's generosity get the humiliating slap across the face that they need. They are accountable to the hand that feeds them - as they should be.

Boy. If we had only a micro-government in today's industrialised high-tech societies, we would be *so* rich.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.