SYNDICATED COLUMN: Ted Rall Signs Up For Obamacare, Part I

Here’s How It Went

My pre-October 1st cartoon about the then-impending launch of the Affordable Care Act (henceforth to be referred by the initially insulting, then appropriated, now drolly cute Obamacare) anticipated that the websites for the 50 states’ “healthcare marketplaces” would immediately crash.

Even after all these years and all this crap, there are still Obama defenders and they jumped down my virtual throat. Faithless! They cried. They were right. I am faithless. And I was right about the crashes. Though the pro-Obama media made excuses for the Administration’s lack of preparedness: “But it remained unclear whether the array of problems — many people received messages saying the system was down, and others were unable to create accounts to buy insurance — stemmed more from heavy traffic or from flaws in design,” reported The New York Times. I’ll pick “(b) flaws in design.” Cuz, like, it shouldn’t have surprised anyone that millions of people would check out those sites yesterday.

Which is why I waited until today.

Here’s how it went.

Step one: Find the site. Not a problem for an English-speaking, web-savvy, former computer programmer who went to an Ivy League engineering school (though they did kick me out). To the Google! Honestly, though, I shouldn’t have had to do this. Everyone should have received a mailing containing the basics, including the URL. I get a postcard every year telling me where to vote. Why didn’t the government do the same thing for Obamacare?

Here’s what came up:

The website came right up. So far, so good. Yes we can! O-ba-ma! O-ba-ma! But then…an Error Message. Actually more of a You Might Get an Error Error Message. Which is even more confusing than an Error Message. It’s a like a store that puts a sign on its window reading “Maybe Closed, Maybe Open.”

Come back later? That’s not the American way! Did Chris Columbus come back later? (Basically, yes, but shut up. Telling people who know facts to shut up is the American way!) Did the Conquistadors come back later? (They were Spanish. SHUT UP!)

I need healthcare today, not tomorrow. Well, I do need it tomorrow, but you know what I mean. I hope, because clearly I don’t.

Anyway: onward!

What is an “insurance assistor”? Does it involve anal probes? I’m not asking and I’m not telling. “Get started” — that’s me!

Now I am not so happy. Registering for anything online sucks. Can’t I just log in with Facebook or Twitter or Klout like I do for everything else? Apparently not.

Let’s create an account:

Good news! The User ID I wanted is available. I’m ready to go on a mad shopping spree for some awesome Obamacare!

Or not so much.

I have to wait for the confirmation email to arrive.

Waiting…waiting…waiting…there it is.

I can click. I will click. There — I clicked.

A new browser window opens.

Untitled-26

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

OK, President Obama, you’ve got me back. Drones forgotten! Bankster bailouts a thing of the past. Who could resist the charm of a government program whose Secret Question Options include “first concert ever attended” (Sid Vicious solo) and “favorite comic book / cartoon character as a child” (Peanuts / Popeye)?  The “band poster” (Blondie, or was it The Clash) question is — dare we say it? — hip!

Let’s not dwell on the “last 5 digits of your favorite rewards card.”

 

I picked a password.

Untitled-12

 

 

 

 

There’s a lot of clicking “continue” to do. But I’m American. Like Coronado!

Untitled-13

 

 

 

 

Back to the first screen:

 

 

Obamacare is a metaphor for the Sisyphean metaphor for life: back to the beginning, under the virtual rock of the Sort of Error Message.

“Click Here to Login”? Sure. But then:

Untitled-14

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ooo, minimalism. I’ll reload.

Did you know, an artist once defined minimalism as an empty room containing one cat. I think he did. Or she.

Reload.

I tried to factcheck the cat line online, but I couldn’t find it. Maybe I dreamed it up. I slept a lot during art class. Reload. 9 am class with the lights off to show boring slides, what did they expect? Reload.

Untitled-15

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Whoa, there it is!

I don’t need no stinkin’ “invitation code.” I’m me. I invite myself in, yo!

Hm. Rules of Behavior.

Untitled-16

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Whatever. Not reading them any more than I’m reading the 57-page Terms and Conditions for updating to crappy new iOS7 on my phone.

Next up: a form where I’m asked to enter my full legal name (if you have a suffix bigger than “V” you’re out of luck), Social Security Number, gender, date of birth, address, phone number, email address, language preferences — can’t they get this stuff from the NSA? — and my consent to a General Privacy Attestation (the DMV? really?).

Untitled-17

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

But if I were blind, I couldn’t read the notice…

Next: some freaky Facebook-style (after you get locked out) identity verification questions that prove they already know all about you.

Reload…reload…reload…

Reload

It’s taking forever. Fifteen minutes so far. I’m afraid to hit reload. What if I lose all the work I put in so far?

The website moves glacially. Reminds me of that time I tried to buy train tickets in India online. I only got through at night New York NYC time because, it turns out, there’s actually someone processing the tickets manually on the other end, and they only work during the day.

So.

It’s been two hours. Deadline time is upon me.

That was interesting. All I need to get me some Obamacare is to:

  • Finish confirming my identity with creepy Facebook-like questions
  • Enter info about my family
  • Do something called a “Public MEC”
  • Enter my income details
  • Summarize my income, which apparently means something other than income details
  • Other stuff, whatever that is
  • Shop for a plan

As the Aetna insurance company says: “Exchanges are new and easy to use.”

If I’m ever able to access one, I’ll surely be able to confirm that.

(Ted Rall’s website is tedrall.com. Go there to join the Ted Rall Subscription Service and receive all of Ted’s cartoons and columns by email.)

COPYRIGHT 2013 TED RALL

P.O. Box 2760, New York, NY 10163; (917) 864-6545 / TED RALL ONLINE: rall.com

RALL     10/2/13

 

39 Comments.

  • LMFAO.

    There are still people in this country without computers, without internet, without email. The best thing about sending Obamacare signups through post-office mail is that paper doesn’t crash.

    SINGLE PAYER!!!!!!

  • Early-adopters get the punishment they deserve when it comes to luxury goods: they pay for the privilege of being first and therefore pay a silly premium. In the case of necessities, early-adoption presents a grotesque Hobson’s Choice — the longer you wait, the easier it is to apply, but the longer you go without service (and risk penalties).

    ***

    Keep in mind the savings of Obamacare versus single-payer. With Obamacare (I hate that name but, yeah, everyone’s calling it that now), you have the costs of all the bureaucracy needed to sign up. With single-payer, there’s the grueling cost of all the paperwork consisting of not a motherfucking thing.

  • ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException? Bwa-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha!!! Really good job they did testing this piece-of-shit system. Where did they outsource the building to, Bulgaria? Some 30k/yr coder who’s probably put some malicious algorithms in there to route your personal information to the Bulgaria mafia — so be on the lookout for your identity being stolen to boot.

    Compulsory enrollment.
    Higher taxes.
    No health care.
    Stolen identities.

    Thanks Obama.

  • I wonder if the employees hired to maintain the site, bug hunt and trouble shoot were furloughed yesterday.

  • The nation’s healthcare system has been marginally improved. Millions that had no chance of healthcare can now get healthcare. If you can afford the time and effort to get through the online crap, you can get healthcare. If you can’t, you can probably stand in line somewhere, which is WAY more frustrating than reloading or going back to start over in the comfort of your home. Did you really expect that the start-up of this would be convenient or easy? I don’t think so. What you got is fodder for more cartoons – so there REALLY is a silver lining to this.
    The people here are right – single-payer or social healthcare for all is what we really needed, but because we live in a nation where so many hate the poor or needy, we can’t get there at this moment.

  • How was Romneycare implemented back in his own state? Could have started there – but could’ve, would’ve and should’ve can’t even find their way into the dictionary, let alone into the mind of the dumbmobcracy or its erected reprehensletives. People are just no damn good! – George Tirebiter.

  • “Millions that had no chance of healthcare can now get healthcare.”

    This is a total bullshit lie, and I’m sick of hearing it. The accurate, truthful and factual statement is:

    “Millions that did not have health insurance are now legally mandated to purchase it.”

    So, stop lying and tell the truth for once. Additionally, millions are not going to be able to afford ANY of the available plans, even with the subsidy. Period. On top of that, those of us who can afford these plans are looking at a minimum of $4k per year in premiums alone, and that’s not including a huge deductible (up to $5k), and large out of pocket costs ($30 dollar co-pay for a basic visit).

    In short, Obamacare is a menace. It’s a massive giveaway to the health INSURANCE industry, on the backs of the middle class and slightly affluent. It’s a disgrace.

  • I posted on another comic on Wednesday that I heard a beautiful speech by Obama, where he introduced a young lady diagnosed with a brain tumour who had been unable to afford a physician to treat her tumour. Now, with the ACA (Obama said) she could get a policy for less than $100 a month that would give her full access to the best physicians in the US. I then said I didn’t believe the speech was entirely true.

    One comment was that I was extremely gullible. Another was that I was just being sarcastic. But what I wrote is what I saw, heard, and believe.

    This reminds me of the nuclear power debate of the ’60s: everyone agreed that the radiation would kill lots of people, but would provide limitless free electricity. Advocates vehemently argued that the benefits of the limitless free electricity outweighed the loss of some lives; opponents just as vehemently argued that we could do without limitless, free electricity to save those lives. Actually, electricity from coal is much cheaper, and more lives are lost to coal than to nuclear power electric generators. So it was a battle of wits between unarmed opponents.

    The Obamabots say the ACA will provide all Americans affordable care: it MUST, since that’s the NAME of the act. It will cost the government a lot of money, but America needs to do this so that poor people will have access to healthcare. The opponents say the cost is excessive and unfair, that it is wrong to tax the hard workers to provide free healthcare to all those too lazy to get jobs with employer health coverage. Like the old nuke debate, it’s the wrong debate. My experience is a single data point, but indicates that exkiodexian is probably correct: the ACA is a windfall for insurance companies.

    Many thanks to Mr Rall for advising Google over Obama. After Obama’s speech on Tuesday, I tried to get on healthcare.gov No luck. Then I followed Mr Rall’s advice and Google immediately directed me to the page for Texas. I filled out the from, and was told I was ineligible for coverage under the ACA, that 0, zero, zilch, zip plans would accept me, because of my pre-existing conditions.

    A plan has to cover the pre-existing conditions of those it accepts, but plans, at least in Texas, don’t have to accept anyone like me.

    The act passed in 2010, and parents with insurance could then pay for their uninsured children up to age 26, a popular provision. In 2012, most people who paid for their own insurance got a rebate just before the election, also popular.

    Now that Obama has been elected for the last time, everyone must get insurance or pay a ‘tax’, even if the maximum benefit is negligible. There can be no lifetime caps, but insurance companies have many other ways to limit coverage.

    The provisions of the ACA guarantee that SOME people will get real healthcare benefits from the ACA for much less than they have to pay in premiums, but as best I can tell, they are a minority.

    Since insurance companies have to make money, most of us will have to pay for a plan that returns only a small fraction of our premium costs, or else pay a tax that grows more punitive every year.

    So the big winners will be insurance executives.

    Meanwhile, the cost to the government will be negligible. Since the healthcare.gov computers direct people to private insurance companies, those companies should be paying the cost of the computers that are netting them customers. And, in any case, the total cost of the healthcare.gov website is lost in the round-off error of the Federal budget.

  • michaelwme, October 3, 2013 at 1:12 PM
    I filled out the from, and was told I was ineligible for coverage under the ACA, that 0, zero, zilch, zip plans would accept me, because of my pre-existing conditions.

    A plan has to cover the pre-existing conditions of those it accepts, but plans, at least in Texas, don’t have to accept anyone like me.

    Well, fuck.

    ***

    Soooooo, way way back in 2007, back before that whole Democratic primary thing, John Edwards came up with a great healthcare plan. Not to be outdone, Obama and Clinton followed. Because they had to. Obama’s plan was the worst of the three (Clinton’s was obviously inferior to Edwards’.) It was absolute shit. Krugman did an analysis and pointed out that Edwards’ was better.

    Online, pointing this out was a great way to get yourself banned from “liberal” sites.

    Authoritarian dems — who had just finished seven-point-five straight years of accusing the media of lying continuously — cozied up to the effluvia-stained mouthpieces of the Beltway and heralded Obama as a “rock star.” Clinton, in her arrogance, didn’t really care to campaign until it was too late, and everyone got the Historic Election(tm) they demanded by indulging in the worst act of tokenism in U.S. history. (Electing a populist wouldn’t be “historic,” you see.)

    Cue four straight years of authoritarian assholes acting surprised.

    And we now continue. Always keep in mind, no matter how the ACA/Obamacare turns out, that we don’t have single payer because hundreds of thousands of influential, well-informed democrats didn’t use their singular, rare moment of actual power to push for the candidate we needed, as opposed to the candidate that got their rocks off.

    This is important to note because I guarantee you that given a chance, they will do this shit again. No matter the political party, rightwingers are bad.

    And by the way: no matter how bad the implementation is, Obama has tons of political cover for its start. The shutdown has completely masked the fuckups of the implementation. The Republicans have shot themselves in the foot. This is a combination of stupidity and evil you expect from kids cartoon villains.

    I half expect Boehner to end the shutdown by screeching “Decepticons, retreeeat!”

  • Ted, FYI the “Identify Verification” questions you were asked were likely not from the Exchange or from any insurance company, – they probably contracted with a third party who culled public records to ask you those questions.

  • Very similar to the questions they ask when you get your annual free credit reports online.

  • alex_the_tired
    October 4, 2013 7:11 AM

    Just to get this out of the way:

    “The act passed in 2010, and parents with insurance could then pay for their uninsured children up to age 26”

    Okay. Two things.
    1. Why 26? If you’re 45 and outsourced, go screw yourself? Why does 26 become the magical cut off now?
    2. How much did the include-the-26-year-olds cost? About $30 more a year? Have you seen a 26-year-old lately? What percentage of 26-year-olds have severe medical conditions — WAIT!!! — severe medical conditions that were not ALREADY covered by a government program? The whole “Obama included the 26-year-olds” is one of the most patently nothing achievements ever mentioned. It’s like someone taking out an ad to congratulate themselves on saving 30 cents off a loaf of bread.

    Now, on to Obamacare. It’s a mess. Why? Because it was not designed correctly. Ever make tomato sauce? Did you throw in some scrambled eggs? No? Why not? Because they weren’t necessary? Right. Same with healthcare. Sketch it out on a bar napkin: it should be non-profit. A seven-figure CEO isn’t needed. How does it work then? Patient walks into hospital. Doctor sees patient. Doctor recommends care. Doctor bills government. Rinse. Lather. Repeat.

    What’s that? It would cost a fortune? Fine. Don’t build a battleship. What’s that? We need them to keep Americuh safe? Right. Like they kept us safe on 9/11? Let us cut the crap, readers. America’s threats are not troops massing on our borders. Our threats are not enemy flotillas steaming toward our harbors.

    You want to cut health costs? Start by removing the cigarettes from the pharmacies. Instead of frisking teenagers, have the cops start ticketing smokers who throw their butts in the street.

  • “Why 26? If you’re 45 and outsourced, go screw yourself? Why does 26 become the magical cut off now?”

    Because if you can’t be a self-sufficient adult by 26 you should look in the mirror and admit you’re a fuckup. A fuckup that mommy and daddy should not be carrying water for, much less the taxpayer. How about getting on grampa’s plan while you’re at it? How much god damn nannying do people in this country need for chrisssakes? The utter lack of taking responsibility — shamelessly — is just disgusting.

    “How does it work then? Patient walks into hospital. Doctor sees patient. Doctor recommends care. Doctor bills government. Rinse. Lather. Repeat.”

    Oh, right. Sure. While we — the backbone — continually get soaked. In theory that would work, but not in the US. This country is a population of fat pig slobs who refuse to take care of themselves (“FREEDOM!!!”), and then demand everyone else pay for their egregious and repeated mistakes.

    Typical American: “I’m a 400lb slob who eats greasy cheeseburgers for breakfast, smoke, drinks and don’t exercise because I’M an AMERICAN and I value FREEDOM!!! Now — all you working people PAY FOR MY MEDICAL CARE, WHICH MUST BE FREE!!! My Cancer and Heart Disease treatments MUST BE FREE OF ALL CHARGE, because I’m an AMERICAN”.

    My answer to Typical American: “Go fuck yourself, go fuck your kids, and go fuck your family. I couldn’t care less about your health problems because you refuse to take care of yourself. If you die right in front of your kids while they cry and whine, read my lips: I DON’T GIVE A SHIT!”

    I am fucking fed up with Entitled America. Go fuck yourself.

    • @ex:

      Be serious. Not for one second do you or anyone else believes that the government made the cut off age 26 in order to make some sort of statement about personal independence.

      It was political, pure and simple. It doesn’t cost much, as Alex says, to provide insurance for people who are young and therefore mostly healthy. And in the age of the manchild and womanchild, even college students and recent graduates are infantilize and pretty much not expected to hold full-time jobs that can support themselves. Which is good, since the economy doesn’t provide them.

      The Democrats liked it because it was a way to pretend that they were providing care for young people. It was a dry run. It was easy. That’s why they did it. It had nothing to do with responsibility.

  • @Ted, yes they did. It’s the same reason that one cannot obtain Medicare coverage until they’re 65 — because they’re expected to be an independent adult capable of obtaining insurance through the workplace, and now through Obamacare. It’s the exact same logic, in reverse. To put it another way, between the ages of 26 and 65, you are expected to be a responsible adult, pull up your big boy pants, stop crying for your nanny, stop crying for your nanny state, and fend for yourself.

    And I’m sick and tired of hearing, “there’s no jobs”. Or “my job is so shitty I can’t afford it”. I went to the Obamacare website and an individual earning $20k per year can get the bronze plan for FREE! That means, at the very least, they won’t be ruined if they get cancer or heart disease. They can get the Bronze plan for $85 per month.

    So drop the “poor us” routine. It’s tiresome. When I lived in NYC in my twenties, I made between $6/hr and $9/hr for SEVEN YEARS! I was NEVER on public assistance of ANY KIND, and had health care coverage through my shitty job. I lived with roommates that whole time, took the subway, and cooked my own meals. It was paycheck-to-paycheck for all of those SEVEN YEARS, but I did it — and I repeat, I NEVER ONCE never even applied, much less took, ANY public assistance.

    I am pretty fortunate now, but I lived the “poor working class” reality for SEVEN YEARS. So, save it. I’m not buying it. Not now, not ever.

    And to paraphrase Rummy, you go with the economy you have — not the economy you wish you had.

    • @ex:

      “So drop the “poor us” routine. It’s tiresome. When I lived in NYC in my twenties, I made between $6/hr and $9/hr for SEVEN YEARS! I was NEVER on public assistance of ANY KIND, and had health care coverage through my shitty job. I lived with roommates that whole time, took the subway, and cooked my own meals. It was paycheck-to-paycheck for all of those SEVEN YEARS, but I did it — and I repeat, I NEVER ONCE never even applied, much less took, ANY public assistance.

      I am pretty fortunate now, but I lived the “poor working class” reality for SEVEN YEARS. So, save it. I’m not buying it. Not now, not ever.

      And to paraphrase Rummy, you go with the economy you have — not the economy you wish you had.”

      The difference between our worldviews is that I don’t think that economic misfortune in a society as rich as ours is something that can’t be controlled, like the weather. This is something that can and should be changed. Not only is it unfair to pay hard-working people subsistence wages, it’s not good for the overall economy, hell it’s not even good for the rich themselves. It’s a system that doesn’t work very well. Can and must be changed, otherwise it will collapse or succumb to revolution. History is clear on this point.

      Maybe it’s something in my upbringing, but I will never be able to sympathize with the “too bad for you, I went through bad times myself” mentality.

  • Sorry — one edit on that last entry: “They can get the Bronze plan for $85 per month.”

    I meant to write: They can get the SILVER plan for $85 per month. The Bronze plan, as noted, will be free for someone earning $20k per year (aka, $10 bucks per hour).

  • Oh, and to be doubly clear on my NYC life. That was in the nineties, and I always lived in Queens, worked in the city. So anyone who even tries to call “bullshit” on me can blow it out their ass. Don’t bother.

  • The simple fact that the USA still cannot grope its way to a single payer plan or social insurance like many of the other “developed” countries in the world is ridiculous. I live in Lithuania at the moment, and I have a better healthcare plan than most of the people in the USA. A few years back, I slipped in the snow, broke a couple ribs, and was taken to the hospital. It cost me nothing. Zip. I pay the equivalent of a few hundred dollars a year in taxes for this coverage. Translated to American, this is about a thousand dollars a year or a little bit more in what a dollar is worth here. You guys are getting burned and ripped off faster than you can hand over the money you have. Wake up!

    • @rik, It’s not so much that the United States can’t grope its way to a single-payer healthcare system as the fact that the political class is in the pockets of the healthcare corporations and insurance companies who have billions of dollars invested in keeping things just the way they are. It isn’t incompetence. It’s a feature.

  • The difference between our worldviews is that I don’t think that economic misfortune in a society as rich as ours is something that can’t be controlled, like the weather. This is something that can and should be changed. Not only is it unfair to pay hard-working people subsistence wages, it’s not good for the overall economy, hell it’s not even good for the rich themselves. It’s a system that doesn’t work very well. Can and must be changed, otherwise it will collapse or succumb to revolution. History is clear on this point.

    @Ted: When it comes to wages, the free market does pretty well. There should be a baseline though, and we have that baseline — it’s call the minimum wage. That, coupled with a generous safety net — is why America doesn’t look like the outskirts of Bombay.

    Maybe it’s something in my upbringing, but I will never be able to sympathize with the “too bad for you, I went through bad times myself” mentality.

    @Ted: And here’s the difference between your worldview and mine. I never once said in my posts “I went through bad times”. Never once. I had a shitty job, yes — but that was to support me as I was “living the dream” of trying to become a full-time musician. In fact, those were some of the BEST years of my life. I loved NYC in my early twenties and I repeat that I supported myself just fine on that meager salary. Why? I took responsibility for my choices.

    So — try again. My statement was never about “it was bad for me so screw you”, so don’t misrepresent please. My statement was, and always will be, about taking responsibility for one’s self, for one’s choices. In fact, that was the original point of the post about why young adults are expected to purchase their own insurance by age 26: Responsibility.

    In fact, here ….

    Maybe it’s something in my upbringing, but I will never be able to sympathize with the “I think the nanny state should take care of all our needs and obviate personal responsibility” mentality.

    • Sorry, @ex, but when it comes to wages, any system that pays CEOs tens of millions of dollars a year to sit on their fat asses in an office shuffling papers while people who do the real work make eight dollars an hour is not working for me or for anyone else.

      The minimum wage isn’t even close to being a baseline for what qualifies as a decent living. Nowadays, even in the most rural parts of the United States, it’s hard to subsist on less than $25 an hour.

      Free markets aren’t anything close to being free. Unfortunately, the balance between labor and management has been so radically tipped in favor of capital that laborers aren’t even allowed to form unions or go on strike without the state and corporations colluding to prevent them from doing so.

      This is, of course, the inevitable consequence of capitalism foreseen by Marx and Engels. Aggregation of power and wealth was going to cause this and, and here we are. Never played Monopoly? The game? Whoever gets a head start almost inevitably wins. Just as it is in the real world.

  • The Obamabots keep saying a) every system has glitches when it starts (like Google?); and b) the ACA servers are designed to handle the long-term load–it would be unreasonable to have built them with the requisite capacity to handle the initial demand of everyone who is uninsured, that would be wasteful.

    The Obamacare computers are working when the Pandacam is shut down because the ACA means that the Obamacare computers are NOT paid for with any government money, they’re paid for by the provisions of the ACA. The Obamabots say that’s a good thing.

    The RWNJs say that Obamacare will bankrupt the US paying for outrageously expensive death panels. Clearly nut cases.

    The Obamabots say the ACA HAS to provide all Americans with affordable care, since that’s its name.

    Best guess: it’s a windfall for the insurance executives. The Supreme Court would never have found it Constitutional if it would adversely impact insurance company profits.

    One might think that, if Republicans are against it, this can’t possibly benefit the insurance company executives, but most Republicans are for Obamacare, only the libertarian Republicans are against it.

    The libertarians don’t want government money wasted on anyone. Not on lazy, elderly people living on Social Security and kept alive by Medicare, but they also don’t want government money wasted on insurance company executives. Mainstream Republicans want to see that the government does what it should: transfer money from the 99% to the 1%. The libertarians want the government shut down.

    So they’re fighting tooth and nail.

    No idea how it will come out.

  • Sorry @Ted, but there you go again. As usual, and like most liberals, you think your opinion is the accurate assessment of reality, as opposed to the results of market forces of labor. You don’t get to make up your own version of reality, or impose your worldview — the market decides.

    “Any system that pays CEOs tens of millions of dollars a year while people who do the real work make eight dollars an hour is not working for me or for anyone else.”

    “The minimum wage isn’t even close to being a baseline for what qualifies as a decent living.”

    “Nowadays, even in the most rural parts of the United States, it’s hard to subsist on less than $25 an hour.”

    These statements are ALL opinions, nothing more. The market says otherwise.

    I’ve already noted that I lived on just above minimum wage for seven years with no need for public assistance of any kind. I’m sure your response would be, “well we don’t all have to do it your way” or “some people want a better life”, or ” some people don’t want roommates”, or any other number of personal opinions. The fact still remains: I lived that life just fine, worked my way up just like most people do, lived within my means — responsibly. But that can’t be acknowledged by those who want to impose their opinion on reality.

    But never mind that. If your opinions are correct, where’s the revolution? Where’s the civil unrest? Where’s the marches to demand a standard of living? Where ….. ANY of that?

    It’s nowhere, because America has the highest standard of living for ALL its citizens in the history of the planet. Translation: People are doing just fine. It’s human nature to be greedy and always want more, hence people always say they don’t make enough. Everyone. Yet, I’ve seen people who live on minimum wage with smartphones and 56 inch HD TVs, with the deluxe cable package. Some poverty. Oh – the humanity!

    Your Marx shtick is tired. It’s an anachronism. That nonsense went over in the sixties, not today. Marx was an immoral taker: “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need” is the most immoral and repugnant slogan in history.

    • You’re right, that’s just my opinion. Guess what? Politics is the act of people with differing opinions hashing out their differences and coming to some sort of broad-based consensus about what, if anything to do about problems, assuming that the consensus is that a problem exists.

      If most people agree with you that the minimum wage of $7.50 an hour is fair or helps the economy move along decently enough, then nothing will change. If most people agree with me, on the other hand, then there will be discontent. If most people are willing to do something about their discontent, there will be unrest.

      If the system responds to popular discontent to an extent that most people deem minimally satisfactory, that will be the end of it. If, on the other hand, the system resorts to repression or is otherwise unresponsive, eventually on the rest will result in rebellion.

      Right now, with this conversation, you and I are part of that political act of trying to determine what kind of society we would rather live in. It seems that you are pretty much fine with the way things are. At least when it comes to wages. I am not. I think that most people probably agree with me, even in the United States. Polls tend to indicate that. When asked, roughly 1/3 of the US population says that they would get rid of capitalism as a system. And at least 50% of Americans are generally dissatisfied with capitalism. It is unscientific, but an artist who set up a billboard with the question “is capitalism working for you?” In Times Square found that roughly 50% of respondents said yes and 50% said no.

      In other words, to say that what I am saying is only my opinion isn’t saying anything at all. Of course it’s only my opinion. And opinions can and do change the world. It just takes time.

    • Regarding your dislike of Marx in general and of his prescription from each according to his need:

      It depends if you see the world as a place with finite resources or one with infinite resources. I tend to see it as one with finite resources.

      In a world of finite resources, how you divvy things determines whether or not you survive.

      It’s also a matter of simple morality.

      What would you do if you were on a plane that crashed in the Andes? It seems that the Libertarians won out in the famous case of the rugby players who crashed in the 1970s and wound up eating the corpses of their fellow passengers.

      Attempts to ration failed. Survivors of the crash pretty much just ate whatever they felt like in the first few days of the crisis. They assumed that they were going to be rescued any moment. More long sighted survivors wanted to ration, but they lost out. The result was that they began to starve much sooner than they would have had they gathered all the food aboard and carefully rationed it as long as possible.

      In other words, communism would have been a better solution in this example. Everyone who was strong and relatively uninsured should have worked as hard as they possibly could to try to resolve the situation. They should’ve taken care of the injured, who should not have been required to work. Those who needed more food should’ve gotten more food. And there should have been a central committee to govern it all.

      I would much rather be in a crisis situation under communism than under libertarianism.

  • “If most people agree with you that the minimum wage of $7.50 an hour is fair or helps the economy move along decently enough, then nothing will change. If most people agree with me, on the other hand, then there will be discontent. If most people are willing to do something about their discontent, there will be unrest.”

    Exactly — which is why my opinion is not just an opinion, it’s fact. People are not rising up, there is no unrest, not even a march with a “hey hey ho ho” chant. That means my opinion that the free market coupled with a basic safety net is working, is fact — not just opinion.

    ” I am not. I think that most people probably agree with me, even in the United States. Polls tend to indicate that.”

    Totally meaningless. I’ve already stated that people ALWAYS say they want more, except in rare cases. If someone polls me and asks me if I should get more, I’d say “sure, why not”. So a poll in totally meaningless. What is relevant, is action — and there is none. Other than some mild and expected increases in the minimum wage to match inflation, the minimum age is accepted as sufficient.

    Look — not everyone is going to get their own apartment, their own home. They’ll need to share, and that’s not just an opinion either, it’s a fact. Inventories mandate the sharing of housing resources. I did it, so do other people. The minimum wage does not and SHOULD not afford a single person their own 1-bedroom apartment, or home. That’s an outrageous demand on any economy, and one that’s truly off-the-charts greedy, a total waste of resources. You want more in life, then you work your way up and earn more. Then you get perks. The minimum wage does exactly what it’s supposed to do, and does it well.

    • People aren’t rising up now. But history is very clear on the fact that you cannot keep people unhappy forever. Eventually, they rise up. It’s inevitable. That is the true historical fact. The fact that it hasn’t happened yet doesn’t prove anything.

  • I can’t comment on the Andes plane crash as I don’t see it as remotely relevant. As to Marx, it’s the second part that’s sinister: “To each according to his need.” That’s a nebulous statement that can be re-jiggered from generation to generation to mean anything one wants. From where I sit, the needs of Americans ARE met. Hell — that’s why illegals sneak into the country to go to an emergency room. They KNOW America will take care of them. But, more to the point: What are one’s needs? The left is great at constantly re-defining that notion, because it is totally subjective. Today the left thinks one’s needs are a standard of living so off-the-charts from a relative standpoint that if Marx came back today, he’d never stop throwing up (to quote Woody Allen).

    I believe the needs of the less fortunate are being met. Nothing’s perfect, but for a multicultural country of this size — the standard of living that’s been achieved is astonishing.

  • @Ted: Also, on that last comment about Marx. You once wrote in a column that the entire assets of Michael Bloomberg should be seized by force and redistributed. That’s really as amoral as it gets.

    • Actually, what is truly immoral is that one man could possibly control such a huge amount of money while people are sleeping outside on the street.

      • Actually the city of New York provides free housing (at a cost of over $100 per night) to any person in the city of New York, no matter how recently arrived. So anyone who is sleeping on the streets of NY are doing so of their own accord.

        Also answer me this, Ted. Why do you almost never see illegal immigrants sleeping on the streets or begging for money? Why can they manage to support themselves even though it is ILLEGAL for them to be employed?

        Why are those homeless people sleeping on the streets lining up for work outside Home Depots like illegal immigrants? Why are they applying for jobs to work on farms, where there is always a shortage of workers?

        After you have answered these questions then you may return to commiserating with the terrible plight of the homeless.

      • Please source that claim about the city of New York providing $100 per night lodging to anyone who wants it.

  • “Actually, what is truly immoral is that one man could possibly control such a huge amount of money while people are sleeping outside on the street.”

    Right, so seize the assets of those who have worked really hard to obtain them. Why stop with Bloomberg? Just go ahead and seize the assets of anyone you think (your opinion again) that doesn’t “deserve” them.

    Hey — you’re a restaurant owner that worked thirty years to become successful, open a dozen restaurants, and become a millionaire? Too bad — Ted Rall says you don’t deserve it, and since there’s some people out there homeless, we’re going to forcibly seize your assets and give them away.

    That’s repugnant. And pitting the perception of Bloomberg (rich guy who doesn’t deserve it) against the perception of the homeless (totally innocent and blameless) — is even more repugnant.

    I know this is hard to believe, but there are homeless people and poor people who are NOT good people, they are NOT the kind of people you’d want to associate with an any capacity. It may be even harder to believe but some of them are in their predicament due to their own failings. Endorsing a full seizing by force of the assets of someone like Bloomberg in service of that wholly invented perception, designed to trigger an emotional response, is — as noted– as amoral as it gets.

    “People aren’t rising up now. But history is very clear on the fact that you cannot keep people unhappy forever. Eventually, they rise up. It’s inevitable. That is the true historical fact. The fact that it hasn’t happened yet doesn’t prove anything.”

    History is clear: That only happens when things are SO bad that there is virtually no other choice. The U.S. is not even with the realm of the possibility of that even becoming as slight notion in the most minor aspects of the national consciousness. In other words, it’s not happening in our lifetimes. Not a chance in hell.

    • @ex: No one deserves anything. Working hard doesn’t entitle you to make a lot of money. Nor does being a bad person that you deserve to be homeless. Those ideas date to America’s precolonial past as Puritans, in which selective determinism was our primary value.

      Actually, people do deserve something. Just by virtue of being alive, and whether you were a card or you are lazy, or whether you are smart or stupid, or good or mean, you deserve certain basics: education, housing, food, healthcare, transportation, all the basic necessities of life plus whatever the overall GDP of your society can sustain in a fair way.

      It is, of course, impossible to predict if and when revolution will come. However, it is not necessarily true that proletarian dystopia is required. At least not for a rebellion or uprising. Quality-of-life in Tunisia was quite high before the Arab Spring, yet there you go.

      I think what is more important in the early 21st-century is the gap between expectations and reality. When people see a greedy 1% lording it over them while they suffer, even if that suffering pales in comparison with the suffering of the Third World, they get very very angry.

      Not to mention, and maybe you don’t see it, there is an extraordinary amount of truly desperate poverty in United States. Tens of millions of people are literally starving to death. Tens of millions of people are literally suffering from horrible diseases because they can’t afford healthcare. Drive through West Virginia. You’ll see.

  • @ ex – “the standard of living that has been achieved is astonishing”? Looks like you haven’t been much outside of the USA or seen the deep pockets of poverty living within the USA. Ever been to Norway or Sweden? Ever been to a small city in the South of the USA? There are millions upon millions living a higher standard than the USA, and there are millions in the USA living without a 56inch TV. Have you ever seen a couple of police officers pick up a drunk teenager off the sidewalk, and simply take him home? You live in a bubble, ex. And Ted, you know bettter than I that things will have to get much worse in the USA for anything like a real revolution to happen. I am real serious when I say that people like Ted Cruz need to be dealt with, and fast! You don’t need a full out revolution if a few examples are made of what is expected of a “legislative representative”, a corporate head of an industry, or a Koch brothers style billionaire. Otherwise, agressively vote them out of office or get the Citizen’s United laws made illegal. Get Big Money out of our democracy!

    • @rik:

      As I have written and argued repeatedly, I don’t believe that reform is possible within the existing system. Not anymore. There was such a time, when I was a kid, when working within the major parties could get stuff done. Not anymore.

      The system is too ossified. Special interests are too entrenched. Voting to get money out of politics is like having sex to restore virginity. You’re only encouraging them and making it worse. The best thing you could do is not vote.

      Still, your comment about Ted Cruz got me thinking. What we do need to do is start working on redefining the ideology call spectrum in United States. People like Ted Cruz and the tea party and in fact the mainstream Republican party should be identified and categorized as being so far outside of the mainstream, like the Nazi party, that they should be banned. After all, their politics are virtually indistinguishable from that of the Nazis. They believe in militarism, aggressive wars of choice, torture, concentration camps, genocide, etc.

      Of course, they have no sense of style, so that’s different.

      What needs to occur is for us to get back to a political spectrum that is closer to what you see in most of the industrialized world. For example, mainstream Democrats like Nancy Pelosi are about as far right as America should tolerate. The left should of course communist or socialist.

      The good thing about that is that it can occur through punditry and discussion online. It’s just a matter of repeatedly hammering away, much the way that the tea party does.

  • “No one deserves anything.”

    You nailed it with this comment, right off the bat. But then, realizing your mistake, you write later:

    “Actually, people do deserve something. ”

    Nope — you had it right the first time. You can’t have it both ways.

    “Tens of millions of people are literally starving to death. ”

    This is truly a ludicrous comment and it’s why it’s hard to discuss things with you in an intellectually honest manner. That is just a flat-out lie, and a really bad one. No further comment needed.

Comments are closed.

css.php