You Inspire Me
You Inspire Me

You Inspire Me

Dark Skin
Dark Skin

Dark Skin

Riped
Riped

Riped

Uhhh
Uhhh

Uhhh

ninja skills
 ninja skills

ninja skills

import
import

import

entertaining
entertaining

entertaining

hoping
hoping

hoping

feasible
feasible

feasible

gibsons
gibsons

gibsons

🔥 | Latest

Bad, Bad Day, and Cars: Union Thugs Thursday at 5:15 AM- THUG SELF CHECKOUT SELF CHECKOUT CHECKOUT 6 ITEM 1-6 ITEMS 6ITEMS TIT Basket Bas Basket Basket LOVE YOU LOVE YOU NEVER USE A SELF CHECKOUT 1) They kill jobs 2) Self-checkout machines don't contribute with payroll taxes 3) They are really not that convenient SHARE IF YOU AGREE! Take Back Your Power Canada <p><a href="https://reperspectivity.tumblr.com/post/176047958000/libertarirynn-conservativecathy444" class="tumblr_blog">reperspectivity</a>:</p> <blockquote><p><a href="https://libertarirynn.tumblr.com/post/176047891639/conservativecathy444-doyouevenlibertybro-1" class="tumblr_blog">libertarirynn</a>:</p><blockquote> <p><a href="https://conservativecathy444.tumblr.com/post/176045162157/doyouevenlibertybro-1-people-have-to-service" class="tumblr_blog">conservativecathy444</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p><a href="https://doyouevenlibertybro.tumblr.com/post/176042387176/1-people-have-to-service-those-things-when-they" class="tumblr_blog">doyouevenlibertybro</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p>1. People have to SERVICE those things when they stop working, and generally require at LEAST one person to suprevise them, and assist when needed. Jobs just don’t magically dissapear when these things are put in.<br/></p> <p>2. Not sure what else I can say about this one aside from review #1 and think about it for a few minutes.<br/></p> <p>3. “Union Thugs”, the Facebook page that posted this, clearly has never met an introvert, or someone who is having a bad day and doesn’t want to interact with people, or someone who isn’t well with social interactions, or etc… I could go on, but that’s pointless. These things ARE CONVENIENT, especially when I’m just checking out with a few items (or even 1). <br/></p>I could rant about my time at Chick-fil-A, and how these things would’ve made my life a lot easier, but I’ll spare you the paragraphs of ranting I typed out. Point is, this graphic is wrong.</blockquote> <p>Someone has to build those machines - maintain them, etc.<br/></p> </blockquote> <p>“ItS gUnNa KiLl JoBs DoH”</p> <p>No driving cars! They put carriage drivers out of work! No airplanes! They put train conductors out of work! No refrigerators! They put the iceman out of work! </p> <p>There is absolutely no sense hamstringing innovation in the name of “preserving jobs“, especially since with every wave of technology people still have jobs maintaining it.</p> </blockquote> <p>Yes, but the number of jobs is shrinking. Cars also created jobs due to improvement of infrastructure. Same with airplanes. </p><p>Self check-outs just reduce the employment from 1 per cashier to 1 per store. And in a shrinking economy that’s already being strung up by fatcats constantly funneling cash up from lower levels, self check-outs are going to have a negative impact on the general populace.</p></blockquote> <p>The number of jobs not “shrinking”. In fact it’s higher than it has been in decades. Simple research, friend: <a href="https://money.cnn.com/2018/06/05/news/economy/job-openings-unemployed-workers/index.html">https://money.cnn.com/2018/06/05/news/economy/job-openings-unemployed-workers/index.html</a></p><p>Also what fantasy universe do you live in where the stores have one cashier per store? There are usually a few pods with several self checkout machines and at least one worker per pod, plus several human check out options. And as mentioned above there are still people who work to maintain the things. The “it kills jobs” excuse is more than tired.</p>
Bad, Bad Day, and Cars: Union Thugs
 Thursday at 5:15 AM-
 THUG
 SELF
 CHECKOUT
 SELF
 CHECKOUT
 CHECKOUT
 6 ITEM
 1-6 ITEMS
 6ITEMS
 TIT
 Basket
 Bas
 Basket
 Basket
 LOVE
 YOU
 LOVE
 YOU
 NEVER USE A SELF CHECKOUT
 1) They kill jobs
 2) Self-checkout machines don't contribute
 with payroll taxes
 3) They are really not that convenient
 SHARE IF YOU AGREE!
 Take Back Your Power Canada
<p><a href="https://reperspectivity.tumblr.com/post/176047958000/libertarirynn-conservativecathy444" class="tumblr_blog">reperspectivity</a>:</p>

<blockquote><p><a href="https://libertarirynn.tumblr.com/post/176047891639/conservativecathy444-doyouevenlibertybro-1" class="tumblr_blog">libertarirynn</a>:</p><blockquote>
<p><a href="https://conservativecathy444.tumblr.com/post/176045162157/doyouevenlibertybro-1-people-have-to-service" class="tumblr_blog">conservativecathy444</a>:</p>

<blockquote>
<p><a href="https://doyouevenlibertybro.tumblr.com/post/176042387176/1-people-have-to-service-those-things-when-they" class="tumblr_blog">doyouevenlibertybro</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>1. People have to SERVICE those things when they stop working, and generally require at LEAST one person to suprevise them, and assist when needed. Jobs just don’t magically dissapear when these things are put in.<br/></p>
<p>2. Not sure what else I can say about this one aside from review #1 and think about it for a few minutes.<br/></p>
<p>3. “Union Thugs”, the Facebook page that posted this, clearly has never met an introvert, or someone who is having a bad day and doesn’t want to interact with people, or someone who isn’t well with social interactions, or etc… I could go on, but that’s pointless. These things ARE CONVENIENT, especially when I’m just checking out with a few items (or even 1). <br/></p>I could rant about my time at Chick-fil-A, and how these things would’ve made my life a lot easier, but I’ll spare you the paragraphs of ranting I typed out. Point is, this graphic is wrong.</blockquote>
<p>Someone has to build those machines - maintain them, etc.<br/></p>
</blockquote>

<p>“ItS gUnNa KiLl JoBs DoH”</p>
<p>No driving cars! They put carriage drivers out of work! No airplanes! They put train conductors out of work! No refrigerators! They put the iceman out of work! </p>
<p>There is absolutely no sense hamstringing innovation in the name of “preserving jobs“, especially since with every wave of technology people still have jobs maintaining it.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Yes, but the number of jobs is shrinking. Cars also created jobs due to improvement of infrastructure. Same with airplanes. </p><p>Self check-outs just reduce the employment from 1 per cashier to 1 per store. And in a shrinking economy that’s already being strung up by fatcats constantly funneling cash up from lower levels, self check-outs are going to have a negative impact on the general populace.</p></blockquote>

<p>The number of jobs not “shrinking”. In fact it’s higher than it has been in decades. Simple research, friend: <a href="https://money.cnn.com/2018/06/05/news/economy/job-openings-unemployed-workers/index.html">https://money.cnn.com/2018/06/05/news/economy/job-openings-unemployed-workers/index.html</a></p><p>Also what fantasy universe do you live in where the stores have one cashier per store? There are usually a few pods with several self checkout machines and at least one worker per pod, plus several human check out options. And as mentioned above there are still people who work to maintain the things. The “it kills jobs” excuse is more than tired.</p>

<p><a href="https://reperspectivity.tumblr.com/post/176047958000/libertarirynn-conservativecathy444" class="tumblr_blog">reperspectivity</a>...

Bad, Bad Day, and Cars: Union Thugs Thursday at 5:15 AM- THUG SELF CHECKOUT SELF CHECKOUT CHECKOUT 6 ITEM 1-6 ITEMS 6ITEMS TIT Basket Bas Basket Basket LOVE YOU LOVE YOU NEVER USE A SELF CHECKOUT 1) They kill jobs 2) Self-checkout machines don't contribute with payroll taxes 3) They are really not that convenient SHARE IF YOU AGREE! Take Back Your Power Canada <p><a href="https://conservativecathy444.tumblr.com/post/176045162157/doyouevenlibertybro-1-people-have-to-service" class="tumblr_blog">conservativecathy444</a>:</p> <blockquote><p><a href="https://doyouevenlibertybro.tumblr.com/post/176042387176/1-people-have-to-service-those-things-when-they" class="tumblr_blog">doyouevenlibertybro</a>:</p> <blockquote> <p>1. People have to SERVICE those things when they stop working, and generally require at LEAST one person to suprevise them, and assist when needed. Jobs just don’t magically dissapear when these things are put in.<br/></p> <p>2. Not sure what else I can say about this one aside from review #1 and think about it for a few minutes.<br/></p> <p>3. “Union Thugs”, the Facebook page that posted this, clearly has never met an introvert, or someone who is having a bad day and doesn’t want to interact with people, or someone who isn’t well with social interactions, or etc… I could go on, but that’s pointless. These things ARE CONVENIENT, especially when I’m just checking out with a few items (or even 1). <br/></p>I could rant about my time at Chick-fil-A, and how these things would’ve made my life a lot easier, but I’ll spare you the paragraphs of ranting I typed out. Point is, this graphic is wrong.</blockquote> <p>Someone has to build those machines - maintain them, etc.<br/></p></blockquote> <p>“ItS gUnNa KiLl JoBs DoH”</p><p>No driving cars! They put carriage drivers out of work! No airplanes! They put train conductors out of work! No refrigerators! They put the iceman out of work! </p><p>There is absolutely no sense hamstringing innovation in the name of “preserving jobs“, especially since with every wave of technology people still have jobs maintaining it.</p>
Bad, Bad Day, and Cars: Union Thugs
 Thursday at 5:15 AM-
 THUG
 SELF
 CHECKOUT
 SELF
 CHECKOUT
 CHECKOUT
 6 ITEM
 1-6 ITEMS
 6ITEMS
 TIT
 Basket
 Bas
 Basket
 Basket
 LOVE
 YOU
 LOVE
 YOU
 NEVER USE A SELF CHECKOUT
 1) They kill jobs
 2) Self-checkout machines don't contribute
 with payroll taxes
 3) They are really not that convenient
 SHARE IF YOU AGREE!
 Take Back Your Power Canada
<p><a href="https://conservativecathy444.tumblr.com/post/176045162157/doyouevenlibertybro-1-people-have-to-service" class="tumblr_blog">conservativecathy444</a>:</p>

<blockquote><p><a href="https://doyouevenlibertybro.tumblr.com/post/176042387176/1-people-have-to-service-those-things-when-they" class="tumblr_blog">doyouevenlibertybro</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>1. People have to SERVICE those things when they stop working, and generally require at LEAST one person to suprevise them, and assist when needed. Jobs just don’t magically dissapear when these things are put in.<br/></p>
<p>2. Not sure what else I can say about this one aside from review #1 and think about it for a few minutes.<br/></p>
<p>3. “Union Thugs”, the Facebook page that posted this, clearly has never met an introvert, or someone who is having a bad day and doesn’t want to interact with people, or someone who isn’t well with social interactions, or etc… I could go on, but that’s pointless. These things ARE CONVENIENT, especially when I’m just checking out with a few items (or even 1). <br/></p>I could rant about my time at Chick-fil-A, and how these things would’ve made my life a lot easier, but I’ll spare you the paragraphs of ranting I typed out. Point is, this graphic is wrong.</blockquote>
<p>Someone has to build those machines - maintain them, etc.<br/></p></blockquote>

<p>“ItS gUnNa KiLl JoBs DoH”</p><p>No driving cars! They put carriage drivers out of work! No airplanes! They put train conductors out of work! No refrigerators! They put the iceman out of work! </p><p>There is absolutely no sense hamstringing innovation in the name of “preserving jobs“, especially since with every wave of technology people still have jobs maintaining it.</p>

<p><a href="https://conservativecathy444.tumblr.com/post/176045162157/doyouevenlibertybro-1-people-have-to-service" class="tumblr_blog">cons...

Albert Einstein, Goals, and Life: I WANT NOTHING BUT POSITIVE VIBES SURROUNDING ME. The people we choose to surround ourselves with impacts the way we think, act and feel on a day-to-day basis. In many ways, entrepreneurial success is determined much like success in any other aspect of life. As entrepreneurs, we are responsible for ourselves. Surrounding yourself with the right type of people can help success come more naturally to you than being around those who might hold you back. - Here are the 4 types of people to surround yourself with for SUCCESS: - ✔️HARD workers. You probably know somebody who is a relentless worker, or perhaps you are one yourself. These types of workers push us to work harder each and every day. While measuring personal success against the success of another is like comparing apples and oranges, we can measure our drive with the drive of other relentless workers. True passion and commitment will breed a successful business. ✔️Positive attitudes. People tend to be better at what they’re doing if they’re happy. Negative attitudes can drag down work ethic and they don’t offer any inspiration for success or innovation. ✔️ People who ask questions. Albert Einstein once said “the important thing is to not stop questioning.” As entrepreneurs, we should constantly be asking questions about ourselves and our business. However, no single person will think of every important question. People who ask questions may provide a different angle on an issue or an idea, and these questions could ultimately lead to an important breakthrough for you or your business. Perspective is everything. ✔️Some non-entrepreneurial types will consider all entrepreneurs “dreamers.” However, we understand that setting goals and working hard will help us achieve what many consider to be unachievable. To keep this drive going, we should always be surrounding ourselves with people who have similar goals in mind. - success harwork millionairementor
Albert Einstein, Goals, and Life: I WANT NOTHING
 BUT POSITIVE VIBES
 SURROUNDING ME.
The people we choose to surround ourselves with impacts the way we think, act and feel on a day-to-day basis. In many ways, entrepreneurial success is determined much like success in any other aspect of life. As entrepreneurs, we are responsible for ourselves. Surrounding yourself with the right type of people can help success come more naturally to you than being around those who might hold you back. - Here are the 4 types of people to surround yourself with for SUCCESS: - ✔️HARD workers. You probably know somebody who is a relentless worker, or perhaps you are one yourself. These types of workers push us to work harder each and every day. While measuring personal success against the success of another is like comparing apples and oranges, we can measure our drive with the drive of other relentless workers. True passion and commitment will breed a successful business. ✔️Positive attitudes. People tend to be better at what they’re doing if they’re happy. Negative attitudes can drag down work ethic and they don’t offer any inspiration for success or innovation. ✔️ People who ask questions. Albert Einstein once said “the important thing is to not stop questioning.” As entrepreneurs, we should constantly be asking questions about ourselves and our business. However, no single person will think of every important question. People who ask questions may provide a different angle on an issue or an idea, and these questions could ultimately lead to an important breakthrough for you or your business. Perspective is everything. ✔️Some non-entrepreneurial types will consider all entrepreneurs “dreamers.” However, we understand that setting goals and working hard will help us achieve what many consider to be unachievable. To keep this drive going, we should always be surrounding ourselves with people who have similar goals in mind. - success harwork millionairementor

The people we choose to surround ourselves with impacts the way we think, act and feel on a day-to-day basis. In many ways, entrepreneurial ...

America, Arguing, and Crime: ITS EASY TO FORGET THAT FOR DECADES THE U.S. HAD A HEALTHCARE SYSTEM THAT WAS THE ENVY OF THE WORLD. WE HAD THE FINEST DOCTORS AND HOSPITALS, PATIENTS RECEIVED HIGH QUALITY, AFFORDABLE MEDICAL CARE, AND THOUSANDS OF PRIVATELY FUNDED CHARITIES PROVIDED HEALTH SERVICES FOR THE PO0 RON PAUL TURNING POINT USA <p><a href="http://redbloodedamerica.tumblr.com/post/165630900777/bushmeat-said-when-they-tell-you-how-ghastly" class="tumblr_blog">redbloodedamerica</a>:</p> <blockquote><p><a href="http://bushmeat.tumblr.com/" title="bushmeat">bushmeat</a> said:</p><blockquote><p>When they tell you how ghastly socialised healthcare is, remember what they are saying is absolute bullshit <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-40608253">http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-40608253</a></p></blockquote><p>If I had a nickel every time some leftist moron linked to a World Healthcare Organization or Commonwealth Fund study, well, I would have a shitload of nickels.</p><p>Since my previous source’s website is currently down–<a href="http://redbloodedamerica.tumblr.com/post/142352613032/that-red-guy-montypla-weaselwonderworld">which I’ve used in the past</a> to slap this idiotic notion that other countries’ healthcare systems are somehow superior the US’s private system–I’ll instead point to this <a href="https://object.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa654.pdf">other great explanation</a> by the folks over at CATO on why this pathetic claim is always made by these left-wing think-tanks:</p><blockquote><p><i> The debate over how to reform America’s health care sector often involves comparisons between the United States and other countries, and with good reason. Looking at other countries can help us learn which policies, if any, to emulate, and which to avoid. </i></p><p><i>There have been many attempts at international health care system comparisons.Among the most influential are the World Health Report 2000 published by the World Health Organization, several studies published by the Commonwealth Fund, and individual measures such as infant mortality and “mortality amenable to health care.” Generally in these studies, the United States performs poorly in comparison to Europe, Australia, and Japan. Therefore, scholars often use the studies to argue for adding even more government regulations to our already highly regulated health care system. </i></p><p><i>However, these studies suffer from several problems. First, they often rely on unadjusted aggregate data—such as life expectancy, or mortality from heart disease—that can be affected by many non–health care factors, including nutrition, exercise, and even crime rates. Second,they often use process measures, such as how many patients have received a pap smear or mammogram in the past three years. Process measures tell us what doctors do, but provide only an indirect measure of doctors’ productivity. Third, some of these studies inappropriately incorporate their own biases about financing in their statistics, which makes market-driven health systems appear worse even if their outcomes are similar or better. </i></p><p><i>An additional limitation of these studies is the omission of any measure of innovation. None of the best-known studies factor in the contribution of various countries to the advances that have come to characterize the current practice of health care in the developed world. </i></p><p><i>Every single health care test or treatment must be invented at some point. We would be living in a different world today were it not for the remarkable genius and hard work of health care inventors in the past, as well as investments from government health agencies and pharmaceutical and medical device companies. The health care issues commonly considered most important today—controlling costs and covering the uninsured— arguably should be regarded as secondary to innovation, inasmuch as a treatment must first be invented before its costs can be reduced and its use extended to everyone. </i><br/></p></blockquote><p>Furthermore, from another Glen Whitman <a href="https://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/bp101.pdf">article</a>:</p><blockquote><p><i> Those who cite the WHO rankings typically present them as an objective measure of the relative performance of national health care systems. They are not. The WHO rankings depend crucially on a number of underlying assumptions- some of them logically incoherent, some characterized by substantial uncertainty, and some rooted in ideological beliefs and values that not everyone shares. <br/></i></p><p><i> The WHO health care rankings result from an index of health-related statistics. As with any index, it is important to consider how it was constructed, as the construction affects the results. </i><br/></p><p><i> There is good reason to account for the quality of care received by a country’s worst-off or poorest citizens. Yet the Health Distribution and Responsiveness Distribution factors do not do that.Instead, they measure relative differences in quality, without regard to the absolute level of quality. To account for the quality of care received by the worst-off, the index could include a factor that measures health among the poor, or a health care system’s responsiveness to the poor. This would, in essence, give greater weight to the well-being of the worst off.  Alternatively, a separate health performance index could be constructed for poor households or members of disadvantaged minorities. These approaches would surely have problems of their own, but they would at least be focused on the absolute level of health care quality, which should be the paramount concern. <br/></i></p><p><i> The WHO rankings, by purporting to measure the efficacy of health care systems, implicitly take all differences in health outcomes not explained by spending or literacy and attribute them entirely to health care system performance. Nothing else, from tobacco use to nutrition to sheer luck, is taken into account. </i></p><p><i>To some extent, the exclusion of other variables is simply the result of inadequacies in the data. It is difficult to get information on all relevant factors, and even more difficult to account for their expected effects on health. But some factors are deliberately excluded by the WHO analysis on the basis of paternalistic assumptions about the proper role of health systems. An earlier paper laying out the WHO methodological framework asserts, “Problems such as tobacco consumption, diet, and unsafe sexual activity must be included in an assessment of health system performance.” </i></p><p><i>In other words, the WHO approach holds health systems responsible not just for treating lung cancer, but for preventing smoking in the first place; not just for treating heart disease, but for getting people to exercise and lay off the fatty foods. <br/></i></p><p><i> Second, the WHO approach fails to consider people’s willingness to trade off health against other values. Some people are happy to give up a few potential months or even years of life in exchange for the pleasures of smoking, eating, having sex, playing sports, and so on. The WHO approach, rather than taking the public’s preferences as given, deems some preferences better than others (and then praises or blames the health system for them). </i></p><p><i>A superior (though still imperfect) approach would take people’s health-related behavior as given, and then ask which health systems do the best job of dealing with whatever health conditions arise.<br/></i></p></blockquote><p>In other words, its a bunch of meaningless cherry-picked measurements framed in a way to make the private system appear terrible in order to push for more socialized medicine.  </p><p>Despite all of it’s flaws, which are usually thanks to government market intervention, the United States still has the best health care system on the entire goddamn planet per capita.  It’s most likely that the life-saving equipment and procedures that are used in other hellholes using slave healthcare to save lives are thanks to us.  </p><p>You’re welcome.</p><figure class="tmblr-full" data-orig-height="250" data-orig-width="450"><img src="https://78.media.tumblr.com/b97a460c917c68f3900de0bc46e50c59/tumblr_inline_owpcxquafE1r1jtxd_540.gif" data-orig-height="250" data-orig-width="450"/></figure></blockquote>
America, Arguing, and Crime: ITS EASY TO FORGET THAT
 FOR DECADES THE U.S. HAD A
 HEALTHCARE SYSTEM THAT WAS THE
 ENVY OF THE WORLD. WE HAD THE
 FINEST DOCTORS AND HOSPITALS,
 PATIENTS RECEIVED HIGH QUALITY,
 AFFORDABLE MEDICAL CARE, AND
 THOUSANDS OF PRIVATELY FUNDED
 CHARITIES PROVIDED HEALTH
 SERVICES FOR THE PO0
 RON PAUL
 TURNING
 POINT USA
<p><a href="http://redbloodedamerica.tumblr.com/post/165630900777/bushmeat-said-when-they-tell-you-how-ghastly" class="tumblr_blog">redbloodedamerica</a>:</p>

<blockquote><p><a href="http://bushmeat.tumblr.com/" title="bushmeat">bushmeat</a> said:</p><blockquote><p>When they tell you how ghastly socialised healthcare is, remember what they are saying is absolute bullshit

<a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-40608253">http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-40608253</a></p></blockquote><p>If I had a nickel every time some leftist moron linked to a World Healthcare Organization or Commonwealth Fund study, well, I would have a shitload of nickels.</p><p>Since my previous source’s website is currently down–<a href="http://redbloodedamerica.tumblr.com/post/142352613032/that-red-guy-montypla-weaselwonderworld">which I’ve used in the past</a> to slap this idiotic notion that other countries’ healthcare systems are somehow superior the US’s private system–I’ll instead point to this <a href="https://object.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa654.pdf">other great explanation</a> by the folks over at CATO on why this pathetic claim is always made by these left-wing think-tanks:</p><blockquote><p><i>

The debate over how to reform America’s
health care sector often involves comparisons
between the United States and other countries,
and with good reason. Looking at other
countries can help us learn which policies, if
any, to emulate, and which to avoid. </i></p><p><i>There have been many attempts at international
health care system comparisons.Among
the most influential are the World Health Report
2000 published by the World Health Organization, several studies published by the
Commonwealth Fund, and individual measures
such as infant mortality and “mortality
amenable to health care.” Generally in these
studies, the United States performs poorly in
comparison to Europe, Australia, and Japan.
Therefore, scholars often use the studies to
argue for adding even more government regulations
to our already highly regulated health
care system. </i></p><p><i>However, these studies suffer from several
problems. First, they often rely on unadjusted
aggregate data—such as life expectancy, or
mortality from heart disease—that can be
affected by many non–health care factors,
including nutrition, exercise, and even crime
rates. Second,they often use process measures,
such as how many patients have received a pap
smear or mammogram in the past three years.
Process measures tell us what doctors do, but
provide only an indirect measure of doctors’
productivity. Third, some of these studies
inappropriately incorporate their own biases
about financing in their statistics, which
makes market-driven health systems appear
worse even if their outcomes are similar or better. </i></p><p><i>An additional limitation of these studies
is the omission of any measure of innovation.
None of the best-known studies factor in the
contribution of various countries to the
advances that have come to characterize the
current practice of health care in the developed
world. </i></p><p><i>Every single health care test or treatment
must be invented at some point. We would be
living in a different world today were it not
for the remarkable genius and hard work of
health care inventors in the past, as well as
investments from government health agencies
and pharmaceutical and medical device
companies. The health care issues commonly
considered most important today—controlling
costs and covering the uninsured—
arguably should be regarded as secondary to
innovation, inasmuch as a treatment must
first be invented before its costs can be
reduced and its use extended to everyone.

</i><br/></p></blockquote><p>Furthermore, from another Glen Whitman <a href="https://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/bp101.pdf">article</a>:</p><blockquote><p><i>

Those who cite the WHO rankings typically present them as an objective measure of the relative performance of national health care systems. They are not. The WHO rankings depend crucially on a number of underlying assumptions- some of them logically incoherent, some characterized by substantial uncertainty, and some rooted in ideological beliefs and values that not everyone shares.

<br/></i></p><p><i>

The WHO health care rankings result
from an index of health-related statistics. As
with any index, it is important to consider
how it was constructed, as the construction
affects the results.

</i><br/></p><p><i>

There is good reason to account for the
quality of care received by a country’s worst-off
or poorest citizens. Yet the Health Distribution
and Responsiveness Distribution factors
do not do that.Instead, they measure relative
differences in quality, without regard to the
absolute level of quality. To account for the
quality of care received by the worst-off, the
index could include a factor that measures
health among the poor, or a health care system’s
responsiveness to the poor. This would,
in essence, give greater weight to the well-being
of the worst off.  Alternatively, a separate health
performance index could be constructed for
poor households or members of disadvantaged
minorities. These approaches would
surely have problems of their own, but they
would at least be focused on the absolute level
of health care quality, which should be the
paramount concern.

<br/></i></p><p><i>

The WHO rankings, by purporting to
measure the efficacy of health care systems,
implicitly take all differences in health outcomes
not explained by spending or literacy
and attribute them entirely to health care system
performance. Nothing else, from tobacco
use to nutrition to sheer luck, is taken into
account. </i></p><p><i>To some extent, the exclusion of other
variables is simply the result of inadequacies
in the data. It is difficult to get information
on all relevant factors, and even more difficult
to account for their expected effects on
health. But some factors are deliberately
excluded by the WHO analysis on the basis of
paternalistic assumptions about the proper
role of health systems. An earlier paper laying
out the WHO methodological framework
asserts, “Problems such as tobacco consumption,
diet, and unsafe sexual activity must be
included in an assessment of health system
performance.” </i></p><p><i>In other words, the WHO approach holds
health systems responsible not just for treating
lung cancer, but for preventing smoking
in the first place; not just for treating heart
disease, but for getting people to exercise and
lay off the fatty foods.

<br/></i></p><p><i>

Second, the WHO approach fails to consider
people’s willingness to trade off health
against other values. Some people are happy
to give up a few potential months or even
years of life in exchange for the pleasures of
smoking, eating, having sex, playing sports,
and so on. The WHO approach, rather than
taking the public’s preferences as given,
deems some preferences better than others
(and then praises or blames the health system
for them). </i></p><p><i>A superior (though still imperfect) approach
would take people’s health-related
behavior as given, and then ask which health
systems do the best job of dealing with whatever
health conditions arise.<br/></i></p></blockquote><p>In other words, its a bunch of meaningless cherry-picked measurements framed in a way to make the private system appear terrible in order to push for more socialized medicine.  </p><p>Despite all of it’s flaws, which are usually thanks to government market intervention, the United States still has the best health care system on the entire goddamn planet per capita.  It’s most likely that the life-saving equipment and procedures that are used in other hellholes using slave healthcare to save lives are thanks to us.  </p><p>You’re welcome.</p><figure class="tmblr-full" data-orig-height="250" data-orig-width="450"><img src="https://78.media.tumblr.com/b97a460c917c68f3900de0bc46e50c59/tumblr_inline_owpcxquafE1r1jtxd_540.gif" data-orig-height="250" data-orig-width="450"/></figure></blockquote>

<p><a href="http://redbloodedamerica.tumblr.com/post/165630900777/bushmeat-said-when-they-tell-you-how-ghastly" class="tumblr_blog">redblood...

Africa, Community, and Dreads: Miami-Dade Largest Vegan & Vegetarian Restaurant is Black Owned & Delicious! HUNGRY LAC While vegetarianism and veganism are on the rise in the African-American-Black community; it’s still a relatively new frontier for our people, especially African-Americans. Vegetarianism was relatively low in West Africa, home to our ancestors, so changing your entire diet to a plant based one can be challenging. Following the coronation of Haile Selassie I as Emperor of Ethiopia in 1930, Black vegetarians in the western hemisphere began to rise in large part due to Rastafarianism—a religion developed in Jamaica in the 1930s and rawfoodist such as famous African-American comedian Dick Gregory. Both these factors were contributing forces to the early stages of Black dietary shifts in the U.S, in addition to the phenomenal soulful flavors used in creating African and Caribbean inspired vegan and vegetarian dishes. Vegetarian Restaurant by Hakin, located at 73 NE 167th Street in North Miami Beach, FL 33162 is continuing the delicious tradition of vegan and vegetarian soulful innovation. Just steps away from all three major highways and Jackson Hospital North, the restaurant sits right off 163rd street in an unassuming strip mall with a gigantic sign outside that reads VEGETARIAN RESTAURANT. To be honest, I have driven by this place a trillion times and never stopped. I just wasn’t interested in Vegetarian food in my 20’s, but now, I want to live so I made that stop out of curiosity and have been a customer since! Various organic and natural products are on display near the entrance and to the right, there is a full fledged mini health food store. I was even able to pick up some shea butter and organic oils for my dreads! The restaurant has been in continuous operation for over seven years in the same location. A recent expansion will allow for larger dine in parties in a semi private dining space. Owner and operator Hakin, plans to make his restaurant not only the largest Black owned, but largest vegetarian and vegan restaurant in Miami-Dade period. blackhealthmatters blackownedbusiness afrovegan blackvegan vegan rawvegan fruitarian plantbaseddiet alkalinefoods cellfood electricfood melanindiet SOURCE:https:-www.google.com-amp-s-thehungryblac
Africa, Community, and Dreads: Miami-Dade Largest Vegan
 & Vegetarian Restaurant is
 Black Owned & Delicious!
 HUNGRY
 LAC
While vegetarianism and veganism are on the rise in the African-American-Black community; it’s still a relatively new frontier for our people, especially African-Americans. Vegetarianism was relatively low in West Africa, home to our ancestors, so changing your entire diet to a plant based one can be challenging. Following the coronation of Haile Selassie I as Emperor of Ethiopia in 1930, Black vegetarians in the western hemisphere began to rise in large part due to Rastafarianism—a religion developed in Jamaica in the 1930s and rawfoodist such as famous African-American comedian Dick Gregory. Both these factors were contributing forces to the early stages of Black dietary shifts in the U.S, in addition to the phenomenal soulful flavors used in creating African and Caribbean inspired vegan and vegetarian dishes. Vegetarian Restaurant by Hakin, located at 73 NE 167th Street in North Miami Beach, FL 33162 is continuing the delicious tradition of vegan and vegetarian soulful innovation. Just steps away from all three major highways and Jackson Hospital North, the restaurant sits right off 163rd street in an unassuming strip mall with a gigantic sign outside that reads VEGETARIAN RESTAURANT. To be honest, I have driven by this place a trillion times and never stopped. I just wasn’t interested in Vegetarian food in my 20’s, but now, I want to live so I made that stop out of curiosity and have been a customer since! Various organic and natural products are on display near the entrance and to the right, there is a full fledged mini health food store. I was even able to pick up some shea butter and organic oils for my dreads! The restaurant has been in continuous operation for over seven years in the same location. A recent expansion will allow for larger dine in parties in a semi private dining space. Owner and operator Hakin, plans to make his restaurant not only the largest Black owned, but largest vegetarian and vegan restaurant in Miami-Dade period. blackhealthmatters blackownedbusiness afrovegan blackvegan vegan rawvegan fruitarian plantbaseddiet alkalinefoods cellfood electricfood melanindiet SOURCE:https:-www.google.com-amp-s-thehungryblac

While vegetarianism and veganism are on the rise in the African-American-Black community; it’s still a relatively new frontier for our peopl...