Mark Garrison was a combat pilot in Vietnam. For the nation's veterans, there are just some things you don't forget...
When Obamacare was being hyped as a "cure all" for all of what allegedly ailed the nation's healthcare system, it was commonplace for the stormy petrels and mainstream media talking heads to cite the "Canadian experience":
  • cheaper drugs;
  • no bills;
  • quality medical care;
  • quality infrastructure;
  • federal regulators who'd challenge the nation's medical-drug complex; and,
  • bending the cost curve...down.
Okay, that was the hype used at the time to get the bill passed and signed into law as well as to silence the critics who complained it was all hype--not hope--in the first place.

The folks over at the Frasier Institute--a non-partisan Canadian public policy think tank--have run the numbers to calculate the actual cost of "free" healthcare for Canadians. The study, titled "The Price of Public Health Care Insurance," seeks to educate Canadian families about the cost of Canada's "free" healthcare.

To wit, between 2005 and 2015:
  • the cost for providing healthcare to a Canadian family, regardless of size, increased 48.5%, and
  • increases in healthcare costs eclipsed the rate of increase for income (30.8%), housing (35.9%) and food (18.2%).

In 2015:
  • the average Canadian family with two parents and two children earning $119k+ will pay ~$11.8k for public healthcare insurance (~10% of gross income);
  • the average Canadian single individual earning $42.2k+ will pay $4.22k+ (that is, 10% of gross income); and,
  • that cost excludes dental and prescription drug coverage.
The bottom line: Canada's "free" healthcare system costs the average Canadian family and single person 10% of their gross pay, excluding dental and prescription drug coverage.
The Motley Monk hates to be redundant, but in this case, he can't help but be redundant: There is no such thing as a "free" lunch. Whether there's "the fog of" or "no fog of" controversy surrounding this or any other government funded program or entitlement, what's "free" is paid for by taxes or increasing the national debt (which inevitably will lead to higher taxes).

The Frasier Institute study notes a sad irony: Most Canadians don't know the actual costs associated with their "free" healthcare system. Why? Their politicians were very clever: Canadians don't receive bills for medical services provided and only a few pay "premiums" that have been imposed by certain provincial ("state") governments. Moreover, the Canadian healthcare system is funded not by a line item in the nation's budget--identifying the actual cost--but from the government's general revenues, burying the actual cost of "free" in a catch all, garbage can type of line item. wasn't the cost curve that was bent down in Canada.  Nope. It was the Canadian taxpayer who had to bend over. It won't be long before U.S. taxpayers find themselves in the same position.

Thank you, Mr. President, Vice President, and former Speaker of the House! Seeing what's in it in the clear light of day, Obamacare resembles a house of horrors that was obscured by the fog of your propaganda.

Let the discussion begin....

To read the Frasier Institute study's author's summary, click on the following link:
"Free' Canadian Healthcare at $12,000 per Family."
Alfred Hitchcock was one of The Motley Monk's favorite movie directors. To find out why, click here and here.

In The Motley Monk's opinion, this short video certainly qualifies as worthy of "The Alfred Hitchcock Hour":
For Hitchcock, the Catholic theme always emerge at the last moment, after the viewer had already made a misinformed judgment.
To avoid rash judgment, everyone should be careful to interpret insofar as possible his neighbor’s thoughts, words, and deeds in a favorable way: "Every good Christian ought to be more ready to give a favorable interpretation to another’s statement than to condemn it. But if he cannot do so, let him ask how the other understands it. And if the latter understands it badly, let the former correct him with love. If that does not suffice, let the Christian try all suitable ways to bring the other to a correct interpretation so that he may be saved."

                                          from the Cathechism of the Catholic Church (#2478)

How often and for how long have parents been offered the following two promises:
  • Beginning sex education during the grammar school years will lead to more responsible behavior on the part of the nation’s young people during their high school and college years.
  • Putting artificial forms of birth control into the hands of high school students would stem the tide of sexually transmitted disease, unplanned pregnancies, and abortions.

When the evidence indicated those promises weren't fulfilled, they were pushed down in some places into the early elementary school years.

Since those who've continued to promote those false promises cannot move much further down the educational chain, guess what? They've decided to move higher up the chain. Why? Lo and behold! Statistics indicate that all of that sex education and all of those free artificial forms birth control distributed to the nation’s young people over the past 5 decades has failed! 

It's in this context The Motley Monk read an article published by Inside Higher Ed reporting that a couple of years back, the American Association of Community Colleges in alliance with the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy (NCPTUP) launched a campaign to encourage community college faculty members to incorporate "pregnancy planning" into their academic courses.

The ostensible goal? To help community college students "make smart decisions about sex and relationships."

Implicitly admitting these failed promises motivating these interventions, NCPTUP's Senior Director of Public Policy, Andrea Kane, noted:
It's surprising to people who work in colleges. Having faculty and staff at the college realize that by the time students come to them, while they may think a student knows everything about preventing pregnancy, they don't. It depends on where you live. You may not have gotten terrific sex education or you might have gotten it a while ago or what you learned then might not be the same as what you need now….
So, guess what? The New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene in alliance with the City University of New York system last week announced the "Maybe the IUD" campaign to promote the awareness of intrauterine devices.

The goal is to provide information for college students—particularly minorities or those from low-income homes—about their reproductive options. Students will see posters promoting the campaign. In addition, each institution’s "Wellness Center" will distribute information about artificial forms of birth control. More importantly, students will receive information about IUDs, whether Medicaid will cover one, and how students can find a provider who will insert the device.

Why? The altruists note that unplanned pregnancies are deterring too many  coeds from graduating. The facts, according to NCTPUT:
  • ~24% of female teens get pregnant by age 20;
  • 50% of all pregnancies are unplanned;
  • 61% of women who have children after enrolling in community college fail to earn degrees, 65% higher than for women who didn’t have children;
  • 87% of community college students say a pregnancy would make it harder for them to achieve educational goals;
  • 35% said they were likely to have sex without using birth control in the next 3 months;
  • unplanned births account for nearly ~10% of dropouts among women at community colleges and 7% of dropouts among all students at community colleges; and,
  • 61% of community college students who have children after enrolling do not complete their programs.

According to the President of LaGuardia Community College, Gail Mellow:
Having access to good reproductive health is essential, and we want to make sure that students are able to make choices about if they want to have children and when they want to have children. I know personal stories of students who because of a pregnancy or the cost of pregnancy or the challenges of caring for infants and struggling with multiple jobs just made college impossible.
Reflecting upon all of this, Kane noted:
This is not about people telling other people not to have children. This is about helping students align their own aspirations with their actions.
Truth be told, what NCPTUP and the folks spearheading the "Make the IUD" campaign are doing is to assist community college coeds to use an abortifacient to ensure the termination of pregnancies. Not only are they using federal and state taxpayer $$$s to promote abortion among community college coeds—after all, an IUD is an abortofacient—in their attempt to stop any unplanned "pregnancy," they’re also implicitly admitting that fact.

Worse yet, by keep those students enrolled to complete their programs, all of those altruistic administrators—"It's all about caring for our students"—are ensuring that the tuition $$$s keep pouring into their coffers.

All of this simply by using IUDs to abort "unintended" children.

The fact: Chastity. 100% effective, 100% of the time!

Let the discussion begin…

To read the Inside Higher Ed article, click on the following link: 
Sometimes the story takes on a life of its own...
Interesting to see in retrospect how the story got distorted and who then promoted the distortions.

Let the discussion begin...
Frequently, restaurants serve such large portions that there's about 2 meals' worth of food. So, The Motley Monk isn't shy about taking home leftovers whenever he dines out and warming the leftovers up or making something else out of them. For example, a piece of leftover steak makes for:
  1. a great sandwich...take a cibatta, thin-slice the steak, slather with horseradish sauce, add thin-sliced red onion, and top with some green leaf lettuce;
  2. a beef burrito...warm a burrito, thin slice the steak placing it in the center of the burrito, add some good pico de gallo sauce (corn and black beans is best), top with shredded Mexican cheese mix, fold the burrito, heat in the microwave, and top with some sour cream.

That's fine for people, like The Motley Monk, who take the leftovers home and let them go to waist. "Creative cuisine," it's called.

But what about all those who don't and, by law in many municipalities, toss their leftovers straight into the trash? Couldn't all of that food be reclaimed in some way that would benefit the hungry in our midst? It is estimated that 40% of all food goes to waste in the United States.

The answer to those questions makes for a great story of legal immigration.

The son of Korean immigrants, Robert Lee, was taught by his parents never to waste food. (Ditto for The Motley Monk's parents.) Reflecting upon all of the leftover food in New York City going into the trash, Lee started a nonprofit--Rescuing Leftover Cuisine (RLC)--to collect fresh food that would otherwise be thrown out. After a "rescue," the RLC distributes the leftover cuisine to people in need.

RLC approaches the two large issues of hunger and food waste in three ways:
  1. Localizng the issues into sets of communities that can help sustain themselves. After identifying the homeless shelters of a needy community, RLC proactively finds restaurants, hotels, and catering companies with excess food in that vicinity that could help support these disadvantaged communities. That's real "sustainability."
  2. Leveraging technology to facilitate the identification and handling of excess food. Thus, these partner food providers will be using a smartphone application to report when excess food is occurring, and the same app is used to engage community members, because volunteering with RLC can be as easy as taking a brisk walk. That's a "smart" use of technology.
  3. Tackling food waste at its root, aiming to eliminate as much food waste as possible and bringing the remaining excess food to where it is needed most. The data of when food waste occurs is used in RLC's analysis of what types of food waste could be avoided, and RLC suggests ways that partner food providers can reduce waste at its root. That's principled leadership: "Waste not, want not."
Restaurants--including Starbucks and Panera--as well as other organizations are working with RLC to fulfill its mission of ensuring that fewer people and families go hungry!

To date, RLC has "saved" 100k+ pounds of food and Lee plans to expand RLC to expand to other cities. 

An immigrant who already is giving back to his new homeland! That's what real immigration enriches the nation, adds to its diversity, and builds "e pluribus unum."

Meanwhile, the nation's Food Police and their Chief, Michelle Obama, continue to turn out all of those so-called "healthy choices" for the nation's public school students. Where are those meals going? Right into the trash bin.

Perhaps RLC could salvage those?

Not a chance...their mission is rescue leftover cuisine

Let the discussion begin...

To learn about RLC, click on the following link:
"He who loves his neighbor has fulfilled the law....'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.' Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfilling of the law."
                                                                                St. Paul to the Romans 13:8,10
Auto insurance policies differ from state to state but the most common insurance benefits include: liability, collision, and comprehensive. However, a USA Today article reports data from a telephone survey indicating that most people don’t know what those terms mean.

Is each of the following 4 beliefs (B) about auto insurance true or false?

  • B1: The color of an automobile impacts the price of the insurance premium.
  • B2: Insurance doesn’t cover repairs for the driver at fault.
  • B3: Even when the accident isn’t the driver’s fault, the driver has to pay out of pocket for repairs.
  • B4: Auto insurance replaces items stolen from a vehicle.

These are the facts (F) associated with those 4 beliefs:
  • F1: 42% of respondents think so. WRONGO. Who believes this? 53% are Millennials, 44% graduated from college or grad school, and 36% earn $75k+ annually.
  • F2: 44% of respondents think so. WRONGO. 50%+ of Millennials think so.
  • F3: 20% of respondents think so. WRONGO. Liability covers the other party's expense while collision and comprehensive protect drivers' against their own loss from collision or non-collision damage.
  • F4: 34% of respondents think so. WRONGO. Homeowners and renters insurance pays for the loss of stolen property.

In the end, not only werent the survey’s participants aware of what auto insurance covers, some also dont understand what affects auto insurance rates.

Let the discussion begin…

To read the USA Today article, click on the following link:

What caption best captures this image?