Health Care

Finding affordable dentist like pulling teeth?

by on February 1, 2013 @ 10:27 am · 5 comments

in Business, Health Care, Protectionism

It must be for some. And one man, 63-year-old Jose Santiago Delao of Texas, was willing to provide dental services on the cheap, despite not having a license. Eventually he landed on the authorities’ radar and was arrested following a complaint from a woman about a botched molar repair:

Delao admits he skirted the law, but isn’t remorseful.

“Jesus Christ didn’t need or didn’t have a license,” Jose Delao told Yahoo News during a jailhouse interview. “People hurt and they needed it. People didn’t have enough money to visit the regular dentist.”

Delao, a former dental lab technician, claims he couldn’t turn his back.

“It broke my heart,” he said, tapping his chest, “because I have the experience.”

But authorities say Delao, a native of Costa Rica, has never been a licensed dentist in Texas. If convicted, he could get two to 10 years in prison….

A survey of published news reports shows that as many as eight such underground dental clinics have been shutdown in the U.S. since last summer.

“I would clearly classify it as a problem,” said Dr. Frank Catalanotto, chair of the Department of Community Dentistry at the University of Florida. “It is potentially a big problem.”

I disagree that the problem is unlicensed dentistry. The problem is that there is obviously a market demand for low-cost dentistry that isn’t being met, probably because the barrier to entry in the field as a state-licensed dentist is so high, a barrier which licensed dentists have a vested interest in maintaining, as it protects their market share from would-be competitors like Delao. But people are far more likely to be uninsured for dental care than for medical care, or simply can’t afford to pay the high prices of mainstream dental work. Delao understood this and tried to meet the need, to his credit. He may have committed some crime (if, as the story reports, he did not let a patient leave when she wanted to), but trying to help people isn’t one of them.

(Cross-posted from A Thousand Cuts.)

{ 5 comments }

Myth # 273: In China, at least they do not have social security

by on July 23, 2012 @ 10:23 am · 0 comments

in Health Care, Immigration, Taxation

Part of the zeitgeist throughout much of the libertarian speaking circuit today involves a false dichotomy: that economically speaking, the US is on the way down and China is on the way up.  That entitlement programs in the US are dragging an already wounded thoroughbred down into an abyss.  And that China does not have these same sort of entitlement programs and is therefore becoming a bastion of free-market liberty.

For example, Jeffrey Knoll wrote in the TLS comments section two months ago:

One aspect of China that is more libertarian is that they have limited welfare and social security, so their society is not burdened with unfunded liabilities like the West is. This also forces the Chinese to save more which provides more capital for investment.

Another example is from Peter Schiff, who said in a debate four months ago that:

“[China has] accumulated massive savings, doesn’t have social security and doesn’t have a lot of the same government programs that the US does.”

Both of these statements are wrong.  In fact, here is the official website from the PRC explaining their social security system.  China’s public pension system has been operating in the red for many years now (due in part to a relatively low retirement age and longer lifespan), hitting a purported $267.6 billion deficit last year.  Chinese policy makers have even rolled out universal health care plan that is targeted for a 2020 completion date — what will the ultimate financial costs be for this?

Cato even published a paper (pdf) back in 2003 explaining the challenges that the Chinese pension system faces.   And this demographic issue is only going to get worse, or in the words of The Economist — China will become old before they become rich.

Not only has the Chinese government implemented several types of social security plans, but foreigners are fully co-opted into the apparatus too.

In fact, the only way for a foreigner to get out of the new laws that were passed last year are to sign a promissory note, saying that you will never work in China again.

So, just like the myth of a China that is visa-free was busted, the myth of a social security-free China should be taken off the list as well.

Below is a fantastic overview from Matthew Stinson regarding the new laws, specifically applied to foreigners.

[Keep reading…]

{ 0 comments }

The crusade to humiliate women takes a sinister turn

by on February 21, 2012 @ 2:46 pm · 5 comments

in Health Care, Nanny Statism

If a law currently up for vote in the Virginia House passes this week and is signed by Governor Bob McDonnell, it will require many women seeking an abortion to be raped.

No, you didn’t misread that.

The bill, which is similar to laws passed in seven other states, requires women to undergo an ultrasound procedure before an abortion is performed.  The ultrasound is not medically necessary; it has not even been rationalized as such by the bill’s defenders.  It is simply another tactic adopted by anti-abortion crusaders to humiliate women, in the hopes that they may change their mind about going through with the procedure.

But since most abortions are performed in the first trimester, and abdominal ultrasounds are not able to produce a clear image of the fetus in most cases, Virgina’s law mandates the use of transvaginal ultrasound – that is, a probe must be inserted in the women’s vagina to view the fetus.  Women cannot refuse this if they want to get an abortion, and the law does not allow for any exceptions such as rape or to protect the woman’s health.

I can’t even imagine what a rape victim who has become pregnant might think of this, after having already been violated once, and then being told by arrogant politicians that she must be violated again in order to undergo a commonly available medical procedure.  It also forces her doctor to perform a procedure that is not medically necessary, and violates their oath not to cause harm to their patient.  As one Virginia House Delegate pointed out, the bill may actually require doctors to sexually assault their patients, as it is a crime to vaginally penetrate women with any object without their consent.  (To add insult to injury, the woman must also pay for this state-mandated procedure.  Where’s Obamacare when you need it?)

It’s not even cognizant of the doctor-patient relationship that is generally so well-respected – except when women’s medical choices are involved.  Then it’s absolutely imperative that the government asserts jurisdiction over a women’s vagina, to ensure she’s actually making the best medical decisions for herself.  It’s not just humiliating; it is paternalistic in its very worst sense.

Note that I haven’t even addressed the issue of abortion itself.  That is because regardless of where one stands on abortion – if one considers it murder, or the right of a woman to make decisions regarding her own property (i.e., her body) – this intrusion by the state into private medical affairs, which would not be tolerated under virtually any other circumstances, is simply not justifiable.  And perhaps anti-abortion crusaders are aware of that, and are adopting these tactics to set up a constitutional challenge that leads to a Supreme Court review of Roe v. Wade, hopefully this time to overturn it for good.

Regardless of the anti-abortion camp’s motives, their degrading and humiliating tactics are despicable.

{ 5 comments }

Helmet Laws and Needless deaths

by on July 4, 2011 @ 11:49 am · 2 comments

in Health Care, Nanny Statism, Political Correctness, Victimless Crimes

Yahoo News reports the death of a motorcyclist during a protest ride against New York’s helmet laws. While it is certainly tempting to simply cite this as a case of someone “asking for it” and getting it, consider the specifics of this case: Philip Contos was riding without a helmet at this place and at this time specifically because he was protesting against the state. Whether or not he normally wore a helmet, even, is irrelevant. He would not have been riding there and then if not for the state. The sad truth is that protesting laws against risky behavior unfortunately requires actually engaging in risky behavior. I, a nonsmoker, despise anti-smoking laws. How could I protest against these laws, however? By engaging in the banned behavior is the most obvious way. So, too, with helmet laws.  At minimum, Contos’s death, whenever it would have happened, would not have happened at that time at that place, under those circumstances, except for the meddling of the busybodies who claim the right to decide what is best for a 55 year old man.

{ 2 comments }

On Rand Paul and Slavery

by on May 13, 2011 @ 8:48 pm · 1 comment

in Health Care, Nanny Statism, Political Correctness, Racism, Totalitarianism

Reason’s Matt Welch criticizes Rand Paul for Paul’s assertion that the right to healthcare implies slavery. While it is true that in minds of many, the term “slavery” specifically refers to chattel slavery as practiced in the United States prior to the end of the American Civil War, the term itself is not so limited. And this is not the first time that a prominent person has used the term in regard to employment restrictions: Curt Flood was well known for saying “A well paid slave is nonetheless, a slave.” The same applies here. Indeed, I have compared modern attitudes and events to slavery myself, more than once. Of course, there are critical differences between Rand and Flood and myself, with melanin levels likely being the most important one. But just as Flood’s comparison in the past was apt, so to is Paul’s comparison in the present an accurate description. It is easy to see that there have been far worse tortures in the past than waterboarding, or even beatings, but I would certainly still call the latter “torture.” So, too, would I call forced labor of any sort “slavery.” Wearing a smock rather than rags does not change the name.

{ 1 comment }

← Previous Entries