non sequitur

I'm not sure I spelled sequitur correctly, nope, oh, well, you'll never know since I've corrected it now. Guess I pulled one over on you, huh?
Ever notice how common it is to have people comment on how important their good health is. Yea, we've had a pretty bad run of luck lately but at least we still have our health. You're only as old as you feel and I feel like I'm in my 20's. We never had all the things we wanted in life but we had our health. Why is it that something that is so important it seems to transcend every other aspect of our lives is something we don't want to have to pay for? We'll drive to a doctor appointment in our new 20,000 dollar car then complain that our co-pay went up from 10 to 15 dollars. Isn't something a little out of whack here? We are going to bankrupt the country so people who own nice cars, HD flat screen tv's and nice houses, and who pay no income tax, can push their health care on to the tax payers. We need to look at the many ways we can make our health care system much more responsive to peoples needs and more affordable without destroying our economy.
Here's what I think is actually going on. It's, I believe, a little like the man-made global warming situation. Intellectuals, (this is sorta funny so I have to tell you, I misspelled intellectuals) who are smart enough to think for those of us who aren't, figure they need to perpetrate these scare tactics in order to scare us into doing what they know is best for us. They are either lacking confidence in their persuasive abilities, or in the general public's IQ. You see, it doesn't matter that there is little evidence pointing to man's involvement in global climate change, what matters is that the smart people help guide this country to the right moral choice as pertaining to our consumption habits. We use entirely too much of the worlds resources, so we hand the world a tool to beat us over the head with. Man-made global warming to be exact. Health care, on the other hand, is a tool to move this country toward a more socialist disposition. We need to be brought in line with the rest of the world. No one country should be more successful or prosperous than any other country. It just isn't fair.
If employees were taking home the money their employers are spending on their health care they could purchase insurance on their own that would be much more appropriate for their needs and would often cost less than the employer is paying and would go with the employee if they found a better job or were terminated. Additionally, in the case of HSA's a nice nest egg could be accumulated over the life of a younger worker putting money into his account. In conclusion, if good health really is such a wonderful thing then I say to the American people, put "your" money where your mouth is, not mine.

A View of Global Warming from Flyover Country

Man made global warming has taken a big of a hit recently. While the idea has been around for quite a long time I've always been sceptical of the theory. In my simplistic evaluation it seemed that an increase in temperatures would result in an increase of evaporation from the plentiful water surface on the earth which would then result in more clouds, more diffusion of the sunlight and therefore a cooling. While clouds do tend to hold the temperatures a bit warmer at night I figured that effect would be more than offset by the daytime cooling. This evaluation may be as silly as the theory itself and may only serve to exhibit my ignorance, however, my scepticism is also fueled by the behaviour of those who push the theory forward. First we had ozone holes, then global warming, then global climate change. A little like a religion changing it's doctrine when the facts don't seem to fit their beliefs. I read a study when I was in high school about an experiment to increase snowfall in the mountains using a cloud seeding technique. While the article tried to put a positive spin on the results they were disappointing. The hope was to one day be able to force a tornado producing storm to rain itself out thereby stealing the energy the storm would otherwise use to produce the tornado. That was almost 40 years ago and while I haven't followed the subject specifically I would guess we would have heard if that goal had been accomplished. My point is that our attempts to effect meaningful change to the weather have been rather futile at best and now we are to believe that we are inadvertently destroying the planet. I just don't see it. While the switch over to the new Freon was a huge boost to certain segments of the economy and, to the chagrins of the ozone hole crowd, made a few large corporations lots of money, I'm not convinced that it fixed the holes in the sky. Of course we may never know since the ozone hole scare has been put on the back burner for now. Wouldn't someone be curious enough to see if we've improved that situation? In conclusion I'm sure the recent set backs will only dampen the global climate change movements enthusiasm for the moment. After all, "What if it's true?" I'll subscribe to their theory on the basis of "What if it's true?" When they all convert to Christianity. After all, the new heaven and earth will be more durable then this flimsy bit of created mass we live on now.