Neatorama Alien

• Cristina
  September 5th, 2007 at 1:00 am

  I cannot believe you have to pay for this

  But then, I remembered you don’t have free medical care like the rest of the world…

  It’s such a basic human right, how can you stand it? It’s amazing

• Alex
  September 5th, 2007 at 1:09 am

  Er, what does this have to do with the price of bananas?

• Sid Morrison
  September 5th, 2007 at 3:08 am

  What’s a basic human right, Cristina?
  “Somebody” has to pay the doctors, nurses, and others who work at the hospital. Do you expect them to work for free? If that somebody is “the government” then please realize that “the government” only gets its money by taxing its citizens. It can’t just print more without instantly devaluing the currency. So, through taxation these funds must come. Why should anyone be forced to pay for anyone else’s children or health expenses, especially when its not a sudden emergency involving the destitute?

  I’m not criticizing the artist — He looks to be doing things the right way. If he elected not to pay for health insurance or to work for an employer who offers it as a benefit of employment (employers compete for employees on the basis of benefits like these, not just salary), he works hard to save money to pay health expenses himself, essentially self-insuring. That’s what the free market is all about and kudos to him for using the internet to sell the product of his artistic skills.

  Nothing is *free* — ultimately SOMEONE (real people, not a faceless government) pays for it. If you live somewhere where you think healthcare is “free”, then either you or someone else is being robbed (taxed) of their property to pay for it. And unlike “free” healthcare, property rights ARE a basic human right.

• Cristina
  September 5th, 2007 at 3:49 am

  Why dont you pay in the same way for police protection, firefighters or town cleaners?

  I mean, why not pay for police only when someone robs you? Does it makes sense?

  What I meant for free, is that the government will pay (so you will pay through taxes). Correct. In Europe the average tax is 15%. And the government manages to offer very good services.

  Why should anyone be forced to pay for anyone else’s children or health expenses, especially when its not a sudden emergency involving the destitute?

  Why you are paying for police? And so many other taxes? Why, basically, you give your money to government?
  Why should be health care an exception?

  As far as I am concern I pay taxes so I dont have to stress over money if I get sick or if my kids can go to college.

  And I accept maybe I’ll never be so sick (right! :D) and my money will be “waisted” on other people.
  And maybe my children will never want/have the ability to go to college and some poor kids will afford to go. This is civilization for me.

• L
  September 5th, 2007 at 2:18 pm

  Cristina brings up some good points. My first thought was the same when I read this article: Why does he have to pay for the birth of a child? (And second to that was: Why is he now up to six kids when he obviously can’t afford that many?)

  Most people will never have to call the fire department. Does that mean we should all stop paying taxes to cover that service? Let those people who need the fire department pay, right? The thing is, you never know what’s going to happen. You could need the fire department tomorrow. Or you could be hit by a bus this afternoon and need medical care. If you have no insurance, you not only have to worry about that shattered pelvis… you also have to worry about losing your house.

  Personally, I’d rather pay taxes and know that I’m covered if something nasty happens. Yes, it does bug me that people go and abuse the system by having a ton of kids. But do I have the right to deny people who really need assistance just because I don’t like ALL of the things my money is spent on? That seems kind of selfish to me.

  Government health care, even with all its problems, seems like less of an annoyance than having to put up with fundraisers for every uninsured person who ends up with a medical crisis and can’t afford to pay for it.

• Sid Morrison
  September 5th, 2007 at 5:35 pm

  Nothing keeps you from buying your own health insurance (or choosing to “opt out”, assume the risk, and put the $ towards something you value more. Having the freedom to choose a healthcare policy to meet their needs also allows them to purchase the most efficient product for their situation. They may choose to get a very inexpensive policy that only covers against high-$ unexpected expenses. For single, healthy people, this is often a better strategy that keeps more $ in their pocket. I used to do that and it protected me against bank-draining risk of a serious problem at very low cost, but I paid for ordinary doctor visits on my own. Now that I am older, and also have a wife and young child who depend on me (and can get themselves), I buy a much more comprehensive policy.

  Police, fire, and street cleaning are not practical examples to “sign up for” on an individual basis. Ditto the court system and military. But, if you want to change the subject and offer extended examples like those, I will counter by saying that food should be a basic “right” too! Everyone needs food, so why should people have to buy food on their own? Shouldn’t it just be free? Why don’t the governments just give us all food regardless of our ability to pay or desired to eat the particular food doled out? No thanks - I would rather choose the food and healthcare that meets my needs and let the sellers of each compete against their respective competitors to offer the best products to meet my needs at the best prices.

  And by the way, if the guy wants to have 6 kids, or 12 for that matter, more power to him — as long as he can pay the bills somehow (including via selling artwork) without resorting to the government picking my pocket. “L” is suggesting that healthcare should be “free”, but not for people who have “too many” kids. Well, is “too many” 6 ? Or is it 4? Or maybe it even 2 kids is too many, as in Red China. Even the first child must be pre-approved and if you violate protocol they forcibly drag you out to a “clinic” for a forced abortion. Ummm, no thanks. I’ll have as many kids as I want and you’ll not have a word in the decision, since the added ones don’t cost you a penny. Liberty is what it’s all about — pass it on.

  Straight talk from Sid.

• Len
  September 5th, 2007 at 8:40 pm

  Len here. The “guy who can’t afford six kids” and also the artist behind Monster By Mail.

  I don’t have to share this with you, but I will. For the record, I work for myself. I run my own marketing business that I run out of my home and I have been doing it for six years. I pay for my own healthcare, out of pocket, every single month. For seven people. When we were choosing plans, my wife and I opted not to pay for the maternity rider because it would have doubled the cost of our healthcare. We decided on our own that if we did end up having another child, we would find a way to pay for it somehow. We weren’t going to wring our hands and freak out about it like some people would. Monster By Mail happened to be that answer.

  I for one value a free market. It allows me to do what I’m doing and I appreciate all the people who have helped us out.

• Sid Morrison
  September 6th, 2007 at 2:39 am

  Go get ‘em Len! You and I are complete agreement! Great artwork (I love the videos of the process as well) and good luck with the impending new addition!

• Len
  September 6th, 2007 at 7:14 am

  Thanks Sid! I guess what you and are are describing is the American spirit…something that I feel has been lost a but over the past few decades. But I smell a comeback!

• L
  September 6th, 2007 at 12:54 pm

  The “American spirit” seems like a capitalist nightmare to me. But then, I’m just a stupid Canadian whose financial situation would force me to choose between a roof over my head and private health insurance (if I had to choose). I take it you guys don’t believe in welfare, food stamps, or food banks, either.

  I wasn’t suggesting that people who have lots of kids shouldn’t be covered. I was just saying it was frustrating to know that your tax dollars were going toward supporting people who get pregnant over and over again (often by accident), can’t afford the kids they already have, and end up using other taxpayer-funded services as well. If you can afford the kids, that’s great. I’m not suggesting anyone be “cut off”. It’s just annoying. (I apologize to Len, here. I didn’t mean to offend you, and I applaud your efforts to support your family. I am just kind of tired of seeing these sorts of things, whether it’s fundraising by private citizens or shows like “Extreme Home Makeover” where they help people who’ve been devastated by medical bills. If everybody had some kind of medical insurance, raising all this money wouldn’t be quite as necessary.)

• Sid Morrison
  September 6th, 2007 at 3:05 pm

  L-
  To answer your questions:
  Welfare? No.
  Food Stamps? No.
  Food Banks? Not unless the money comes from voluntary donations, not tax dollars extracted under threat of prison. Lots of private charities run food banks and that’s great. When governments *force* people to support others, that’s not cool. Forcing people to work twice as hard to support slackers and moochers equals an absence of liberty.

  You raise some good points in your second paragraph. Unfortunately, as you can see, there is inevitable subjectivity in deciding who is “deserving” and who is not. Libertarians like myself would prefer to pay our own bills and be responsible for financing our own healthcare, and saving for our own retirements. I am free to give to private charities (which I do) and I have great confidence they administer their dispursements to truly needy FAR better than a huge building full of government bureaucrats on high saleries and juicy lifetime benefits.

  Inevitably, people who live on the dole grow lazy whilst those who have to get up early and look for work to feed their families are forever more productive members of society. The tremendous contributions American inventors made BEFORE the creeping socialialization in our country was a direct consequence of an essentially unlimited potential for success. At LEAST equally important was an absence of the dole / welfare / public assistance (whatever the least shameful term is these days). People worked hard or their kids went hungry. It sounds harsh, but honestly, the country’s standard of living today (our “poor” are fat, with satellite TV and cell phones) is high today because of it. I won’t even get into the myriad of medical advancements that took place because doctors and researchers weren’t shackled under a government run health system that wouldn’t let them reap the rewards of their own efforts…

  S.T.F.S.

• onur
  September 10th, 2007 at 7:08 am

  funny

Want your own avatar? Get one for free at Gravatar!