479 Comments

We the people have been held hostage for decades by a byzantine tax system. Like anyone, I don't like paying higher taxes, but I'd gladly do so in exchange for not worrying about so many things that people in more advanced countries never worry about. Prime examples: the cost of healthcare, retirement, college education, housing, and on and on and on.

Recommend a book, "The Nordic Theory of Everything," by Finnish journalist Anu Partaken, which I'm reading to prepare for a family trip to Denmark and Norway. She relocated to the U.S. when she fell in love with an American. Her description of the overwhelming stress she experienced here makes one realize just what we live with every day. A telling, funny anecdote: she says ordering coffee at a Starbucks is more complicated than filling out her Finnish tax return.

Expand full comment

I agree. For example, conservatives argue that universal healthcare impedes on our freedom because then the state would make health care decisions for us. Well, the way I see it is that real healthcare freedom is freedom from worry that getting sick is going to bankrupt you and your family. Plus, it's a false argument because what we have now is the freedom of choice to choose which insurance company will rip us off and deny us the healthcare we need and force us to choose from a limited pool of doctors. The healthcare industry also interferes with our ability to govern ourselves by lobbying for their interests which are contrary to ours while SCOTUS declares that their money=speech that is more valuable than our input into our own governance.

Expand full comment

But is not the state already making health decisions by banning abortions even for rape and incest? Worse, I forget which state forbids leaving to go to another state for healthcare abortions!........ID or UT I think.

Expand full comment

Absolutely, although I was referring to the federal government. Of course, we will be facing a whole new reality if the MAGA GOP crashes the government and reorganizes it according to their authoritarian dream. We are potentially only a couple of weeks away and they have a lot of people with guns who want to see it running around the country.

Expand full comment

“Freedom” for the minority, small-minded to dictate “for Thee, but not for Me” policies. And since they have made god “ in Their own image”, of course they’re right?

Expand full comment

Freedom to or freedom from...

Expand full comment

I think that's why slavery has been referred to as "that peculiar institution," because to its advocates, being a slave is a wonderful thing to be, except for them.

Expand full comment

One again I recommend the wonderful book: God: An Anatomy for an idea of what exactly that image actually is in the Bible especially the OT although there is material on the NT. The best book I have read in ages.

Expand full comment

Old Testament New Testament, took me a few minutes.

Expand full comment

Sorry, I tend to be lazy when i am first up.

Expand full comment

Oh my MLRGRMI, now that's one special turn of phrase; "And since they have made god “ in Their own image”. I'm gonna want to use that - thanks for sharing that !

Expand full comment

They are certainly trying

Expand full comment

Idaho. Right here! Freedom

Expand full comment

Idaho. And some Oregon counties have voted to join Idaho.

Expand full comment

Likely Eastern Oregon I'd say. From Bend to Joseph. Beautiful, beautiful country but I could not stay there. I am conservative in many ways but I do not and will not demand that others do only, exactly what I do. There's the intolerable difference.

Expand full comment

and southern Oregon. Nothing wrong with being conservative, but now we are talking the far right.

Expand full comment

At its base, the argument for less taxes is racism. There is a pervasive belief (on the right) that taxes pay for black and brown people to loaf. It goes on from generation to generation primarily because it isn't publicly challenged.

"They" can't see the correlation between poverty among people of color and a system that denies them a chance.

Although plenty of white women have the same biased belief, women are also lumped into the category of "takers" from the taxes of the more privileged white men.

That most of US population, including whites, suffers from an increasingly unequal distribution of wealth, is an irony abetted by ignorance.

Expand full comment

We are, if nothing else, a nation of ironies. 1) The filibuster, which allows a minority in the Senate to talk the legislation to death rather than vote on it. 2) Protect children from drag queen story hour, but refuse to ban weapons used in mass shootings. 3) "Pro life-Force pregnant people and/or children to give birth even in cases of rape, incest, or danger to the mother's health while calling for the death penalty in capital cases 4)Manufacturing a debt ceiling crisis, which could likely result in a depression costing millions of jobs and hurting millions of people. The list is endless, this debt ceiling debacle is the definition of insanity. These MAGA extremists are batsh*t crazy and prove there ain't no dumbass vaccine.

Expand full comment

How about editing #2 to "Protect children from books that acknowledge racism, but refuse to ban weapons . . ."? Too many liberals and progressives have swallowed the line that drag queen story hours are innocuous. They aren't. It's not that they're "grooming" kids -- that's total right-wing BS -- it's that they're parodying women, often in sexist or outright misogynistic ways, before a young audience whose young female members are already having to negotiate our society's screwed-up assumptions and expectations about sex and gender. Fwiw, I don't think it's doing the boys any favors either.

Expand full comment

Susanna I agree. The whole drag queen issue is ridiculous. The drag shows have always (?) been for ADULTS. And as far as I'm concerned, there's nothing wrong with that - for ADULTS. The whole right wing panic about them - "grooming"? Yeah - idiotic. I guess I just dont get why - all of a sudden - its considered a good "teaching experience" to bring children into the mix. With all the gender issues currently, adding to them really isnt a good thing.

Expand full comment

Susan's and Maggie

I don't think children see a sexual component to drag queen story time. Kids' entertainment has always featured larger than life characters. To see people who look like characters from their movies, TV, and books is cool! Nothing inappropriate at all!

Expand full comment

Yes, and the ironies for the most part belong to the Rs....the party of death.

Expand full comment

Yes but it is not irony. It is elitism enabled by corruption under many legal guises. Democracy here is an idealism, barely approached.

Expand full comment

IRONY ABETTED BY IGNORANCE

Expand full comment

"Irony abetted by ignorance"

Fair notice: I am stealing that gem. With attribution.

Expand full comment

And ignorance that this who are are proud to announce. I have always felt that the base of it is actually fear of being lesser than someone who knows that facts. My ex-classmate in Elkhart actually once told me she wouldn't like to be educated like me. Too unsettling probably for her religious faith. I did want to say that I was glad not to be a Christian like her, but I am generally polite. This week she is ranting about immigration. Most of the replies agreed with her, but there was one that noted employer exploitation of the undocumented. And yes, we have a lot of Italians in Elkhart. Maybe they came before the 1924 immigration act which reduced numbers of Italians coming by 90%. I even gave her the cite from A Fever in the Heartland which focuses on the KKK in Indiana and other places in the 1920s. I was tempted to say that sometimes reading has benefits, but I refrained.

Expand full comment

As a former Hoosier who grew up in the 50s and never knew the KKK was so strong, I am happy I went to IU in Bloomington where I joined a Christian Church religious student organization that taught me about the world [went to NY to the UN to observe the Security Council in action during a world crisis], inequality [to volunteer at Hull House settlement in Chicago], how to do non-violent sit ins in 1960, etc. I am certainly ashamed of the state of affairs among our politicians there now.

Expand full comment

I didn't know either growing up in the 50s, but did know that Indiana had the highest number of KKK members in the 1920s. Now I am learning how bad it really was. What's happening today reminds me of what I reading about what happened then. Same attitudes, different names.

Expand full comment

Michele, you are so much kinder than I. Intentional ignorance masquerading is a thing I have to little patience for.

Expand full comment

Thank you, D4N. I spent too much time last week with someone here who told me that I was too negative. He (and I sure this person is male) must have gotten up on the wrong side of the bed and needed someone to pick on. He did not describe me as anything close to kind. I don't really have much patience for intentional ignorance either, but tend to be polite online. I find myself liking certain individuals, but not humankind in general.

Expand full comment

I think for far too many - religious and non-religious - they are afraid to find out they are wrong. I admit - I dont watch FAUX - its part of my cable channels - apparently cant say no! But I do now & then read the blurbs on the internet - you know - Fox, Washington Examiner, Daily Mail etc etc. just to see what kind of crap they are spewing.

I dont think these "believers" do that. Maybe the headlines so they can spout off about the libs. The do not want to "know". (or be educated, like your classmate).

Expand full comment

They don't want to know partly because they would have to question their own beliefs. I once had to agree not to talk about religion with a colleague because I insisted that if God was omnipresent and omniscient, then he could be Allah too or any other name. I was in a car pool with her and one other Nazarene. They were finally down to gays to oppose and hate, so they were very upset when we had a lesbian legislator. I can't remember, but that legislator may be the person who is now our governor. I did tell them they were down to the last bastion of people to dislike. The daughter of one was dating a black guy, maybe married him, so that prejudice was out.

Expand full comment

Thank you, Michele.🤣🤣🤣 I cannot imagine why one would read(?).

Expand full comment

Aw shucks, you don't have to "attribute" or else I will have to do the same for some gems I find on Substacks! (Donald Dick is one) But thanks for the kind words.

Expand full comment

Count me in on that intent by Ally; I'ma borrow that one.

Expand full comment

Love your name...HOPE💙

Expand full comment

Thank you. It's a lot to live up to!

Expand full comment

Especially these days!

Expand full comment

I can imagine that's an especially difficult 'wear' the past many years.

Expand full comment

The irony is that those countries that lean more socialist than the US score higher on all measures of human well-being than the US. There isn't much freedom if you're always worrying about the basics of life.

Expand full comment

Hell, they are hardly even socialist by the classical meaning of the term. That is such a GOP bs trope. Social support benefits EVERYONE, including the rich who now have a healthier, more stable workforce. Pay those more and they spend it back into the larger economy - a virtuous circle of mutual well being.

Expand full comment

the GOP is right in one respect-- we've socialized losses. Financial bets that don't pay off, if big enough to be a "systemic risk," are underwritten by taxpayers (2008 financial crisis, auto industry bailout, current regional banking crisis). The payoffs from winning bets, of course, flow to shareholders, who pay relatively little in capital gains taxes. The wealthiest in our society, who reap the biggest rewards from late-stage capitalism, put very little back into the system that subsidizes them when they win, but when they lose, we're all on the hook for their losses. Socialism!

Expand full comment

This infuriates me. But that never stops them from screaming "Socialism!! Socialism!!" about every damn thing.

You can reason with a 2 year old easier than you can reason with one of these MAGAts.

Expand full comment

Agreed. I remember being admonished for "arguing with the toddler" that her underpants were on backwards.

Expand full comment

It has nothing to do with reason and everything to do with "messaging" coming from a party of liars with a bad agenda.

Expand full comment

Very well stated. Thanks.

Expand full comment

Chris Carmel

Absolutely agree. It's fine to bail out big corporations with taxpayer money, but Socialism when funds are used to prop up the safety net for ordinary citizens.

Expand full comment

Chris, they are not right in any respect that they lay claim and messaging to. They are only 'right' in the same way a broken clock 'can' appear right twice a day.

Expand full comment

Yes indeed, the degree of subsidy and social support to business is enormous. Much infrastructure is inherently designed to facilitate economic activity, apart from specific subsidies and tax supports to businesses - energy is a biggie, agriculture likewise, railroads, highways are built to handle heavy commercial traffic, mining, on and on. The payback is economic activity which creates employment, taxes of all kinds. And you're absolutely right about financial bailouts, derived from certain certain risks and instabilities in economic and financial activities. The 2008 crash was entirely the result of too risky underregulated behaviour. And, of course, there are tax deductions for retirement plan payments, which is massive. Etc. Sorry being so long.

Expand full comment

No apology needed Frank. I think your comment here is a great example of truth that 'needs' repeating and understanding.

Expand full comment

J. I believe there is a song line: "Freedom is just another word for nothin' else to lose".

Another gem by Janis Joplin.

Expand full comment

Written by Chris Kristofferson as well as many other songs sung by others.

Expand full comment

Another of his lines "Houses where the didn't' used to be"

I once thought of writing to the King of Sweden to try to get Kriss

nominated for the Nobel prize for literature. Popular literature perhaps but none the less wonderful.

Expand full comment

Gordan Lightfoot also sang that. But it's a true thing.

Expand full comment

And the Grateful Dead. Apparently, they learned it at the same time as Janis and both started performing it. Janis' vocal bit at the end was lifted from when Bob Weir was singing it to her and la la'ing it to demonstrate the melody.

Expand full comment

It's a great song.

Expand full comment

Americans would support Medicare for All. Put it to a vote.

How many Americans are stuck in jobs they hate - just because that job offers a healthcare plan? Americans that might have a great idea and want to work with a startup that can't afford health insurance.

Americans might want to work less than the required 30+ hours a week temporarily to raise pre-school kids - but can't because they need the healthcare policy.

Medicare for All would reduce, yes, REDUCE the total cost of healthcare for Americans. Medicare has an administration expense of about 4%. Private insurance companies harvest 20% or more (guess why).

Medicare for all would stimulate the economy by freeing people to start new businesses, assist young families in raising their kids and it would be CHEAPER.

In a recent non-binding ballot question here in Massachusetts, voters were asked if they would support a universal healthcare plan that would also outlaw private health insurance companies. It passed. Too bad it was just a non binding question. But a revealing one, nonetheless, eh?

Expand full comment

First I full support Medicare for all - Universal Healthcare, it also important to note this is not Medicare Advantage which should really be called Medicare Disadvantage. For many with Medicare Advantage your are back at fighting with the insurance company for needed coverage. Sure you get some add-on like dental and vision but if you need a mitral valve repair and your back in an insurance fight. I just had mitral valve repair last November under Medicare, big bill and No Fighting. In my lifetime I have seen insurance go from being coverage for your needs to a nightmare profit making machine that only serves the insurance company and their stockholders.

Expand full comment

I suffered more than 2 years of pain because I couldn't afford insurance. Didn't even know whether it was my back, hip or knee. But I cried every morning because the pain was so bad and I had to haul myself through another day. The minute I became eligible for Medicare, I signed up, saw a doctor, and had hip replacement surgery about 10 weeks later. I felt 10 years younger and brand new!

Medicare paid 80% plus a good bit of the physical therapy I needed.

Never bought into so-called Medicare Advantage because my doctor and surgeon were on different plans, so if I bought one, I couldn't go to the other. But both accepted Medicare, and that worked for me.

Medicare doesn't cover a lot though, so if we ever do manage to get Medicare for All, coverage needs to be greatly expanded to truly be Universal Medical coverage .

Expand full comment

I guess I'm very lucky because I've had a Medicare Advantage plan for 20 years when I first signed up for Medicare. But then - so far - knock on wood - other than cataract surgery & bunion surgery - have been very fortunate. I admit, that could all change in a moment.

Expand full comment

It's possible to have secondary Medicare coverage without it being a Medicare Advantage plan. That's what I have, and there's still some over-managing by the insurance company, but overall I think the Advantage plans are probably much worse.

Expand full comment

My Medicare Supplement plan (F) covers everything that Medicare doesn't. I have never had a bill in 8 years.

Expand full comment

I have the same, but many people don't.

Expand full comment

I wasn't clear in my original comment that I have a Medicare Supplement plan that covers the 20 percent that Medicare doesn't after my deductible. For us they follow Medicare with no push back. Works well in my experience.

Our son and his family moved to Canada because he took a job there as a professor at the University of Waterloo in Ontario. They are quite happy with their medical coverage and have one child, now a young teen born there. They all became Canadian citizens and now have dual citizenship. I joked about going to live in their basement, maybe I should stop joking about it.

Expand full comment

Medicare Advantage is private insurance masquerading as Medicare. I had it during my first year of eligibility. Never again!

I’m a Type 1 diabetic with an insulin pump and a continuous glucose monitor. That’s two medical devices needing replacement parts every month, plus insulin. I have original Medicare and a supplement, and a reimbursement account as a retiree benefit (I worked for a state university). I pay the Part B deductible at the first of the year, and my reimbursement account pays me back for the premiums. And that’s it. Medicare covers everything else. To be honest, I’m healthier now than when I was working. I had an endocrinologist tell me that, if it weren’t for Medicare regulations, she would only see me once a year.

Expand full comment

“ The answer to our health care crisis is clear. We propose a publicly financed, non-profit single-payer national health program that would fully cover medical care for all Americans.”

https://pnhp.org/

Expand full comment

Remember how the commodification of home mortgages led to the real estate bubble in 2008 that crashed the world economy? Private insurance companies have done something similar with doctors and healthcare. Now, all the insurance companies have to do to increase their market value is to slightly increase their percentage of routine claim denial, or slightly delay their payments to providers, just like tuning the knob on a radio dial. To the insurance company, providers are just the tool that provides them a product to manage at a minimum expenditure and a buffer to soak up liability for medical decisions that are actually being made by themselves. That's why United Healthcare is valued as the 12th most valuable company in the United States, higher than JP Morgan. https://companiesmarketcap.com/united-health/marketcap/

Insurance companies and most medical practices work very hard to make sure that doctors have no idea what is charged for their services, who charges, who pays, and who's responsible. They are flattered that they're somehow above it all, that they should only pay attention to the "important" issues of medical care only, no reference to fact that financial reasons are the primary reason for patient noncompliance with treatment. Patients are looked on as the source of problems, complaints, and nonpayment, not as the most likely allies in what is an obvious war between medical providers and insurance companies.

I wish we had mechanisms for doctor-patient coordination for the coordinated billing to insurance companies, so that claims denial can be addressed instantly by the doctor and patient jointly, instead of by the secretive, piecemeal current non-system of appeals. Instead of behaving like adversaries, we patients should band together with providers to get every penny owed us by the insurance companies.

Expand full comment

Dirk, it’s all divide and conquer.

Expand full comment

In some places, they have subscription medical care where you contract with a group of doctors. These bypass insurance companies completely. My friend in Alaska has that.

Expand full comment

I hope the Alaska thing is different from the rise of the "concierge" medical practice in the Atlanta area, where for an extra annual fee, you get preferential treatment, like earlier appointments, discounts on cosmetic care (yes, in-house liposuction) and even get seen by the doctor (gasp!), instead of just by the PA. My own primary care physician has a dual practice -- the ones who pony up for the "concierge" service get to see the old pill-pusher himself (with complimentary botox injections), while the hoi-polloi like me get the assistants.

Even if your Alaskan friend's doctors are honestly trying to set up an alternative model for medical delivery (hooray for them!), it still leaves out the other, arguably more important providers, ie. pharmacies, hospitals, equipment providers, and outpatient procedure facilities. I sense a mighty incentive, applied God-knows how, for all the providers to behave like separate nations, each cutting separate deals with the insurance companies, never cooperating more than the bare minimum to get through the next billing period.

It seems strange, on reflection, that the patients and medical providers are so unwilling to see themselves and each other as natural allies against the real adversaries, which are the third-party payors. And frankly, a patient-provider coalition would have that same adversarial relationship with the third-party payor regardless of whether the payors are private companies richer than nations, like we have now, or a single-governmental payor, as often proposed. One side will always want to maximize services, the other to minimize costs.

Nevertheless, I believe that a single-payor, non-profit system would be more efficient, both in controling costs and in coordinating payments between the multiple providers that often attend with each medical "event." It would also be more accountable, literally, since the government, which for good or ill is our only truely democratic institution, would have to play a much more comprehensive role than they presently do. The current clusterfumble (eh-hem) is mainly a way to extract maximum wealth from sick people and deliver it to the holders of financial investments, all while delivering the minimum possible healthcare as a sideline.

Expand full comment

If I may reply to my own comment, on reflection, the "mighty incentive" I referred to above is not very mysterious, it's baked into the system. Because despite patients and providers being natural allies against third-party payors socially and economically, the business structures used to organize medical p;roviders are, by default, the same structures used to organize the insurance companies. (I suspect this is by dafault ibecause historically patients have the least power in a medical setting, and government has taken a "hands off" approach to healthcare delivery, so the only models left for orgainizing medical providers in America the is for-profit business model.)

Since medical practices have the same structure as insurance companies, with partnership shares, senior partners, CEO's, and the like, the incentives used to motivate those at the top of those organizatoins are more like those of insurnace executives. Their purpose is no more to deliver medical care to patients than it is Ford's purpose to make cars -- both businesses exist to make money for their owners, their product is merely their means of doing it. And those at the tops of their medical provider "heaps" would have to take a real hit to their wealth in order to run their firms like a government agency, providing medical care at minimum cost.

So, what will we offer those folk who are benefiting extraordinarily from our current clusterfumble? What will we give them in exhange for giving up their outsized gains, gains which they, of course, consider completely justified and authorized by law? I think we'll have to do better than a promise of clemency during the next Peasant's Revolt.

Expand full comment

Boy, I can just imagine the money put into a campaign against, but I’m all for it.

Expand full comment

Thank you Bill A. !

Expand full comment

My daughter has a progressive spinal condition that she inherited from me. She's had 3 surgeries in 10 years, the last one in 2022 after spending 2021 going to doctors and having many tests and treatments in order to get her insurance company to approve her for a 4th surgery. Those bastards, after she met the deductible and jumped through all the hoops, took so long to decide to cover her surgery that the hospital couldn't schedule her until 2022. She's still paying off a $5,000 bill from the Jan. 2022 surgery and may need more surgery either this year or next. Meanwhile, she lives in constant pain.

Expand full comment

😟😡

Expand full comment

these stories are so real and so awful. Take care.

Expand full comment

When you go on Medicare many decisions are totally out of your control, unless you have considerable wealth, or enough disposable income above and beyond average daily living expenses. Remember "the death panel" fright messaging when this was debated long ago ? The fact is the NAMI, industry and commerce types, including the Chambers of Commerce, threw nations worth of money to defeat any sort of universal care for the simple reason that the provision of healthcare is the main attraction of employment packages - they despise any form of competition for employee attraction and retention.

Expand full comment

* As a matter of fact, when one signs on for 'any' medical insurance plan, much is outside of your control; Not to mention that one 'needs' a small army of experts to read through, evaluate, understand thoroughly and knowledgeably to recommend any insurance plans; the fine print, inclusions, exclusions are always a nightmare most of us are not fully up to if we're honest.

Expand full comment

Why are we so behind the other developed countries in social services, education, healthcare, etc.? In one word - conservatives. A very undemocratic system of government in the worlds oldest democracy. The misrepresentative Senate exists, if I am not mistaken, as a compromise to the slave states. When will this nation wake up to the fact that we are forced to live under minority rule.

Expand full comment

Harvey, yes. That's exactly why De Fascist and other conservatives want to whitewash and censor history - to obscure truths like this -"The misrepresentative Senate exists, if I am not mistaken, as a compromise to the slave states".

Expand full comment

Sorry, but yes, you ARE mistaken. It was a compromise demanded by the "small," i.e., less populous, states -- favoring, e.g., RI (69K population in 1790 census), VT (85K), with very few "human chattels," and disfavoring the more populous, e.g., VA (ranked 1st by a wide margin at 748K, 39% of them enslaved, but the most populous even without counting the enslaved). So no, the coequal Senate was a compromise demanded by the "small" states, not the slavery states.

Expand full comment

At that time, though, slaves were not considered people and therefore did not count toward the population. It's also worth noting that senators were appointed by state government and only much later were elected directly by the people. Very much an exclusive club for the wealthy.

Expand full comment

"[D]id not count toward the population" -- no, they DID count -- x 3/5 -- for apportionment of the House of Reps, giving extra representation in the House to the White men in the slavery states. (THAT was a compromise that favored those people in those states.) You other point is spot on: U.S. senators were appointed by state legislatures until (drum roll) after ratification of the 17th Amendment in 1913!

Expand full comment

They had the advantage of the additional 3/5 of the slave population and the luck of not having them vote. Some how makes me think of today - suppress their vote and have only 3/5 or less of 'them' voting. Do what it take to keep the white men in power.

Expand full comment

Anybody been asleep while republicans impose their religious views on our health care decisions. Well, for women primarily, Viagra still available nationwide, maybe at Jiffy Lube…

Expand full comment

I remember reading something about Viagra one of the VA's "perks" for vets? Could that be right?

Expand full comment

I agree.The worry that millions of us wake up to every single day of having a catastrophic illness and be under insured, uninsured,or some combination of that grinds on our quality of life.It doesn’t need to be this way and it certainly shouldn’t be.

Expand full comment

I was talking with a person from Norway who is wealthy and she was not complaining about the taxes which are high because of the benefits that they provide. I think about the mountains of stress around health care for example that our system aids and abets. i had a cousin who worked in the health insurance industry and they had to sign nondisclosure statements. However, it was obvious that the main thrust was denial of benefits whenever possible for whatever reason. She called it death care, not health care.

Expand full comment

Insurance companies' business model: collect premiums; don't pay benefits.

Expand full comment

Yep.

Expand full comment

Yes Hurwitz. Taxes in other Western countries are much higher than here because of the extra benefits they enjoy in healthcare, education, maternal/paternal leave and much else.. They do not get a daily barrage of mail from charities desperate for funding.

Expand full comment

Well said, Edwin Hurwitz. Too many Americans do not understand what “democratic socialism” is. Recommending Tony Judt, friend of Timothy Snyder.

Expand full comment

Are you recommending any particular books by either of these guys? Hurwitz & Judt?

Expand full comment

Amen!

Expand full comment

I wish I could like this comment 100 times.

Expand full comment

We don't even have that choice. You're either stuck with the insurance provider selected by your employer or pay hundreds of dollars to get coverage from another company. The system is rigged against ordinary citizens.

Expand full comment

Unless, of course, you're a member of Congress.

Expand full comment

Exactly!

Expand full comment

Insurance companies can make the health care decisions or government can. It’s already rationed.

Expand full comment

There's not evidence that the government will ration health care. When insurance companies do it there is no recourse, unless you are very wealthy. When the government does it, at least we theoretically have recourse through elections and lobbying. Of course, the Roberts Court has tried to reduce that recourse as much as possible.

Expand full comment

I am an American ex-pat, having lived in Switzerland for 50+ years. Upset by the Maga Republicans’ total misuse of the words ‘socialism’ and ‘communism’, I wrote a book which, among other things, describes the Swiss ‘welfare system’ which includes a reliable social safety net, universal health care and quality education for all. Furthermore, the trade unions here are robust and public radio and television prevent the spread of fake news. I like to take Switzerland as an example of the fact that public services and a free market economy are not mutually exclusive but should be mutually supportive. Switzerland’s private sector is thriving and is home to some of the world’s biggest companies (Nestle, Swatch, Novartis, etc.) For the past ten years Switzerland has been placed at the top of the list of the world’s most innovative countries by the UN’s World Intellectual Property Organization.

I am so deeply saddened by the erosion of our democratic institutions in the USA. Maybe you would like to read my 📕 book, ‘From Montgomery to the Matterhorn: Reflections on Life in My Two Homelands’. It is available on line.

Expand full comment

Piss on Nestle, sorry but they are evil

Expand full comment

I was in Switzerland last year for the first time. So, so beautiful. Lucky you.

Expand full comment

Congratulations on your book. I'll look for it.

I'm heading to Switzerland in July for the first time....Geneva, Zurmat, and to see the land of 72 waterfalls. 😎

Expand full comment

We’re moving to Portugal in September for all these exact reasons

Expand full comment

Mobileholmes, Maybe I’ll see you in Lisbon. I have several American friends who have moved to Portugal and Spain in the past few years. No regrets. They are very happy. And relieved. I’m visiting for a month in September. Working with Habitat for Humanity and hiking around. Good luck to you and your family. I would love to move, but my family, much younger than me and with children and jobs, find a move out of the country challenging. I find living in this country challenging.

Expand full comment

Habitat for Humanity was started by President Jimmy Carter. Volunteers help build and or repair homes for families in need, in USA and Internationally. I worked in Porto in 2019 for 10 days. Then the Pandemic and War in Ukraine closed down many international builds, including one to Armenia that was canceled. Now we’re on schedule again. Volunteers pay their own way. Airfare and cost of expenses. https://www.habitat.org/

Expand full comment

I find that living in the United States challenging, and it has became unbearable thanks to Donald TUMP and the domestic terrorists that some call MAGA's.

Expand full comment

It's not quite so unbearable to the people who are so stupid that they think Trump "can fix it" while not believing that he's the worst enemy this country has ever had.

Expand full comment

Irenie, tell me more about working for Habitat for Humanity outside the country. I could easily see myself doing that as a first step to liberation. Thanks !

Expand full comment

I hear you too, but dying here in eternal optimism I feel this still fledgling country yes IS a challenge ...to see gains & solid growth in hope and liquidity.We have the ability , earth itself does , to struggle through this learning to walk stage , with great minds and resources...of many and the some whom read these Letters AND comment .I do so hope for it/them/us and wish all safe travels, comfortable homes, and strength to bare the growing pains.

💙VOTE💙

Expand full comment