Once Again ... "Everything Old Is New Again"...
As those of us who have chosen to be aware of such things know, the current debate over President Obama's healthcare policy, which has been developed by a cadre of "behavioral economists", including former Clinton Administration stooge Larry Summers, along with HHS "Secretary" Tom Daschle and OMB head Peter Orzag clearly smacks of the kinds of healthcare "policy" which was created by the Nazis close to seven decades ago.
There have been several interesting developments in recent days regarding healthcare, and what's currently happening should outrage the American people and spur them to take concerted political and social action, but so far, that hasn't happened yet due to the massive unleashing of the propaganda arm of the MIM(i)C -- the Military-Industrial-Media Complex (thank you, jasonb).
For example, here's something which the mass media should be telling you, but deliberately covered it up so you won't recognize it, or they've ignored it altogether.
The Obama White House is pushing to rush its "healthcare reform" into and through Congress much more quickly than most Americans realize, and to keep its details unknown as late as possible in the process, since the fascist denial of healthcare embodied in the plan will generate strong opposition as it is made public, particularly from various advocacy groups which would be the hardest hit by "healthcare reform", including the disabled, non-whites, the elderly and children.
Obama plans an Internet speech to "nationwide house meetings" on June 6, to try to remobilize his campaign support base to demand healthcare "reform." That speech is supposed to follow by less than a week the "final report from healthcare stakeholders" (the ones, such as the HMOs and medical associations, who are supposed to cut the costs and cut the care) promised by Secretary Kathleen Sibelius for June 1. And Obama's national call is to precede by only a few days to a week, the introduction of a cost-cutting healthcare bill in the Senate from Sen. Max Baucus and others.
Baucus has already held three, nearly day-long closed-door "working sessions" to prepare legislation; yet activist doctors interviewed by Bill Moyers on NPR May 22 said "There is no plan," meaning that the Obama plan is still a secret to even the most active and involved members of the public. Half a dozen members and staffs each from the House and Senate have had a meeting every Friday, for weeks, with Obama, Orszag, and others in the White House, and then between the two Houses, to "get healthcare done."
Yet even some of the regular participants in those meetings report that they have no idea which taxes are being seriously considered to pay for extending insurance to the 50 million uninsured. This question is being deliberately obfuscated by the constant circulation of many proposals and rumors of a tax on employer healthcare benefits, a tax on non-profit hospitals, a regressive national VAT tax, more tobacco, liquor or other "vice" taxes, including taxes on candy, soda and other products made with "unacceptable" levels of sugar or high-fructose sweeteners and snacks which have certain "unacceptable" levels percentage of fat and sodium, such as potato chips and popcorn (these "vice" taxes are in place not only to generate more tax revenue, but also to "program" people to make "healthier" choices by making so-called "unealthy" foods and behaviors prohibitively expensive and socially "incorrect").
The HMOs, clearly, are going to be kept in their dominant place to "cut costs," as leading Democrats reluctantly admit. That fact damns the "reform" sham to cut healthcare to hundreds of millions of vulnerable citizens, in order to absorb the immense costs of the financial bailouts to Wall Street, where the biggest HMOs were born and where many Democrats and Republicans get some of their biggest political campaign donations from.
Then, there's this ... The behavioral economists' lobby met today, on Capitol Hill, to plot their strategy to make health care "reform" happen and to make sure that behavioral economics is at the center of whatever reform emerges from Congress. The meeting was convened by the American Benefits Council, the trade group for Fortune 500 companies that sponsor or administer retirement and health plans. The Russell Sage Foundation and the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) were all over the agenda. Typical were David Laibson, a member of the Behavioral Economists Roundtable and a co-organizer of Russell Sage's Summer School on Behavioral Economics, and Dr. Alan Garber, the Henry J. Kaiser Jr. Professor of Medicine and Economics at Stanford University, as well as, among many other things, director of the health Care Program at the NBER.
Central to the discussion was the use of mass marketing techniques to brainwash people, through behavior modification, into accepting what are essentially Nazi policies, which the MIM(i)C is highly capable of doing, and doing very effectively. Garber was most explicit in this when he challenged the audience (which seemed to be drawn mainly of benefit managers for large corporations or the insurance business) to think about "what do they have the stomach for."
"We know how to lower costs but, it's not clear that we'll be happy with the consequences," Garber said. "For example, you could say we're going to limit the availability of all biologicals for second- and third-line treatment of advanced cancers. Those save quite a bit of money but it may be something you're not willing to do." Instead, he proposed, they may think about changing the defaults, that is, what people can expect to receive in terms of care (which makes one wonder what campaigns are going to be used in order to make it happen... perhaps the recruitment of various televangelists who will be told to use Scripture in order to convince the faithful that their mass premature deaths will hasten the "Second Coming" of Jesus?)
After dismissing the idea of trying to further shift costs to the employee, he said, "we could think about changing expectations and giving people not so much a financial skin in the game but more of an emotional and social skin in the game, by thinking about health care dollars as scarce resources, thinking about what would be appropriate care (and in the process, so desensitize them to the premature death of the next-door neighbor who has a slight fever or a curable injury that it doesn't even stir a sense of compassion and empathy within their already dead hearts and minds?). Think about end-of-life care, for example, where there's a lot of care that is enormously expensive that probably isn't going to do much good." So, therefore, the question is "what approaches would be acceptable," since cost shifting won't work.
The fact that Nazi policies which were once regarded as "crimes against humanity", which spurred the American conscience to participate in the Nuremburg Trials in order to secure justice for those who were victimized by Nazi "healthcare", are now being seriously integrated into American government policy is a clear demonstration as to our shocking lack of a sense of history, and just how deeply the American conscience has been seared due to the emotional manipulation, misdirection and deception which the MIM(i)C has pumped into the minds of the narcissists and the "virtuous victims", which are, sadly, the pervasive mind-sets which have built up a powerful stronghold within the minds of far too many Americans.