Specifically, so-called "medicine."

There is only one proper set of roles for people in medicine and those consuming it as a service: Consultant and customer.

Why?

Because its your ass, not anyone else's, and nobody else can be held responsible for it other than by executing them when they get it wrong, which we're not willing to do.

Fixing this requires several changes in law and regulation.  The FDA's "enabling legislation" and its amendments (FDCA of 1906, Durham-Humphrey Amendment of 1951 and them the FDAMA of 1997) all are responsible for the interplay and segregation of drugs into two broad categories (OTC and Prescription) and, within the latter, there are scheduling issues in the Controlled Substances Act (which most people are aware of when it comes opioids and similar.)

In addition there is a body of civil legal constraint that has grown up around the current improper assignment of roles -- that is, physicians are assigned the duty of telling you what is good and what is bad but they bear only civil responsibility and only if they go outside of what some group calls "consensus."  The problems with this should be apparent but you can't fix one without the other as no physician is going to accept being a consultant with no authority and yet be saddled with legal liability, civil or otherwise.

As this has expanded beyond its original remit pharmacists have wound up with the capacity to refuse to fill a drug order they disagree with and this can be by extension; that is, it can be corporate policy of a pharmacy chain, not the pharmacists individual opinion, that they are then able to enforce.  Witness refusals to fill Ivermectin prescriptions written by a licensed doctor if, in the pharmacy's view, it was for a "wrong" purpose despite the fact that one prescription in five today is in fact "off-label" -- that is, for some purpose other than which the drug was originally approved.

This all has to change but it must change all at once, because again no physician is going to accept liability without some measure of control, so at the same time the control is removed so must the liability for other than affirmative acts.  That requires Congress to act; the Executive cannot fix this misallocation of roles and the deliberate perversion that came from it which is killing people by the hundreds of thousands a year.

We must keep, for example, liability for cutting off the wrong finger, toe, removing the wrong organ and similar acts.  In fact that should be in each and every case a criminal act, not merely a licensure or lawsuit matter, yet today it is not.

At the same time we the people must reclaim our agency, as adults, to direct our health status as we wish and accept the liability for same.  With the possible exception of habit-forming medications you must be free to both obtain them for no other consideration than money and to obtain, for no other consideration than money, any testing necessary and appropriate in your view to do so safely.  Further, irrespective of how you pay for it -- cash, credit or "insurance" -- the price charged by a given provider for a particular good or service must be the same.

This decoupling will instantly drive a stake through the heart of the physician monopoly networks and insurance companies that all conspire to tell everyone what must be done for any given person and condition.  It also will instantly stop the monetary and care blackmail which many have had experience with -- "take this set of shots or you're fired as patient", for example.  Allowing that and gatekeeping means collusion becomes force for you to do as some physician demands and that is already illegal under 15 USC Ch 1 as a force-tied sale so there is a huge cudgel (10 years in the slammer for your doctor) the Executive can wield to demand compliance.

Finally when it comes to various things sold under the FDA's licensing scheme the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act must be amended to require that all ingredients in a given medication must be individually, through controlled trial, certified as to their adverse event risk at the expected exposure over the person's lifetime and on the recommended schedule in combination with all other recommended things and, in that context, be fairly and fully disclosed.  For example we have "vaccines" on the market today that use "adjuvants", or "immune stimulating boosters" (many containing aluminum) that have never been individually certified as to their long-term effects in the amounts of typical exposure over a typical childhood.  That something is safe in very tiny quantities does not mean it is safe when you multiply that same exposure by five, ten or FIFTY.  The current schedule includes fifteen different vaccines and all of them require multiple doses.  The raw count of "number" of vaccines has doubled since the mid 1980s and today's schedule requires FIFTY individual shots.

DTaP, for example, is a series of five doses and HiB requires four.  The adjuvants in any of those may be safe in one dose but are they safe at nine times that total exposure and thirty to fifty times when all other recommended doses are added in?

Nobody knows because nobody has ever tested it.  Indeed a newborn now receives close to thirty shots by their second birthday; are these doses of adjuvants and other "stimulants" safe in a newborn to two year old not as one dose but at thirty times the individual dose?

One shot of alcohol, for example, has very little risk of harming you but two fifths of liquor, which is what 30 shots constitutes, is almost-certain to kill you if taken all at once.  Everyone knows that's true for booze so why isn't it imposed on the manufacturers for everything else?

Every physician will tell you that this is "safe" even thought there is zero evidence that at this dose rate it in fact is safe.  What they won't tell you is that the insurance companies bribe them for compliance on a bulk basis with their entire pediatric practice in the form of a kickback for each patient.  This, by the way, is an illegal tied sale and thus a felony as it implicates 15 USC Chapter 1; you must take something you don't want (the shots) to get something you do (a consultation with the pediatrician) and if you refuse you will be fired as a patient.  Everyone involved in that must be told that they stop it right now or they're all going to prison -- no exceptions, no excuses.

Trump has roughly 100 days to get the medical monster under control -- and certainly less than one year because at that point the midterm campaign will begin and if Congress goes Democrat he becomes an immediate lame duck, never mind that the mandate for all new Presidents expires about that time irrespective of the margin unless confirmed in the mid-terms, which there is no guarantee of.

The childhood stuff is just part of it, of course.  Seed oils are another huge issue and again as with all things its a matter of dose.  That it is safe to eat kernels of corn off a cob boiled in water doesn't mean extracting all the oil from a bushel of corn and consuming that in the space of one meal is safe.  Nobody does or could eat an entire bushel of corn at one sitting yet on the math one bushel is about 112 ears of corn which yields about 12 ounces of oil.  One ounce of corn oil (e.g. retained in fried food cooked in it) would require you eat nine ears of corn at one sitting to consume the same amount.  This of course is so wildly beyond the amount you could actually eat at once that there is no possible way to map the safety of one (eating corn) to the other (eating processed corn oil) via indirect means.

I can tell you with absolute certainty that if I consume seed oils in any amount I can see the adverse effects in my Garmin data immediately and that those effects are both dose-dependent and 100% reproduceable.  Nobody has characterized this yet today the technology to do so for you, personally, is a couple hundred bucks on the lower end (the "Instinct 2") and you can prove it to yourself any time you're willing to stop listening to the person in the white coat without challenge to their claims or evidence that they're not full of crap and confront the very real possibility that their only concern is money -- and if you slow-poison yourself and fuck up your metabolic processes they will make a lot more money.

You think not?  Watch this and then tell me that physicians and everyone else involved is interested in anything other than money.  After all giving you cancer makes them a lot of money; that you are likely to die is not of concern to them:

Yes, ladies and gentlemen, that is how far this perversion has gone -- and not just here in America either.  This has to be fixed right here, right now -- it is bankrupting the nation and it has to be taken care of in a way that cannot be evaded -- and if anyone tries to evade it they have to go to prison (or worse.)  The good news is that the law already exists on the books to hammer everyone in the medical field with if they try to refuse.

You may worship men and women in white coats but all they worship, on the data, is money and the more they can nod and "agree" that you should do something that over the longer term will screw you, provided you can't see the adverse event instantly and thus blame them for it the more money they make and the more-miserable and sick you are.

Medicine must be returned to 4%, more or less, of GDP from where it is today which is approximately 20%.  This can only be done by removing all the gatekeeping and other anti-competition "features" in the current system, most of which  can be done without new law as existing law, specifically 15 USC Chapter 1, is sufficient to do a great deal of it if you start arresting and prosecuting on the basis of criminal felonies, not fines.  But make no mistake -- some of this does require legislation and to do so is not going to occur without lots of screaming because along with one dollar in five in the economy comes about one job in five too.

Yes, those jobs will get relocated into other areas of the economy -- but not in a day or a week.  In addition the lobbyists will scream bloody murder and people will of course claim everyone will die without the existing structure.  The pushback to this has to be that they killed your grandmother and either they cut this shit out or you're going to make them stop and you don't much care what has to be done to accomplish that.

Folks, we're out of time on this.  We are now in a generally-rising rate environment and while there will be times that rates go up and down the trend is now upward and will be for the next two to three decades.  This in turn means that debt levels must decrease or the nation will be destroyed.  We can no longer talk about a five or ten year plan, which has been the talk for three decades and has been a lie as everyone can see -- rather, we must do it right now and whether we like it or not this is where the problem is within the federal budget today.

This I've never seen before in a political campaign.

The Harris campaign paid $1 million to Winfrey’s company on October 15, according to a report in the Washington Examiner, coming after a star-studded town hall that Winfrey hosted for the vice president in September.

Winfrey also appeared at Harris’ final rally in Philadelphia on the eve of Election Day, with the talk-show star offering a rare endorsement of a presidential candidate.

So Harris paid Oprah $1 million and got in return not just appearances -- but an endorsement.

Paying people doesn't break any laws generally, but it sure does sound a lot like prostitution, and is in your face and in the context of a campaign it would appear to me that it also violates the spirit if not the letter of campaign finance laws.  Paid political advertising must disclose who paid for it in all cases except.... it appears this sort.

Is that legal?  I'm not sure it is; did anyone at the time disclose that these were paid endorsements?

Of course not.

The FEC says that ALL public communication made by a political committee must be disclosed.  A paid appearance or endorsement is made by the committee and certainly would appear to fall under this law.

If the candidate or campaign authorizes and finances a covered communication (including any solicitation), the notice must state that the communication was paid for by the authorized committee. 

So paying an entertainer who endorses a candidate, and a "covered communication" is extremely broad in scope, must disclose conspicuously that it is in fact a paid solicitation and it has to be clear and conspicuous at the time.

This event, and its not just one (Oprah was not the only one paid) certainly appears to have been illegal as it looked like Oprah made that endorsement on her own initiative and at no time was it apparent that any of the acts, performances or other events in which celebrities showed up and endorsed Harris were paid to do so.

Will Harris be prosecuted for this?

She should be; we're talking about millions of expenditures on what amounted to paid advertising with zero disclosure under the "rubric" of "organic support."

That certainly appears to be illegal.

I'll give it to you long, hard and dry on why Democrats lost:

• Parents, especially parents of girls, are tired of the bullshit about boys in their locker rooms and on their sports teams.  Oh, you think not?  Well then you're fucked in the head.  Every adult man knows goddamn well how he would have reacted at 13 to the prospect of being able to look at some 13 year old pussy in the shower!  Give me a fucking break; this is so goddamn stupid that nobody except 40+ year old women who mass 400lbs and couldn't get laid by a rabid convicted rapist would support it.  By the way the official Democrat party position is that any boy who says he's a girl can ogle your daughter in the locker room and run against her in a Cross-Country meet -- this isn't just some lunatic fringe thing, Harris/Biden really did that to Title IX as a mandate.  (PS: If you're on a dating site and have "trans rights" in your profile then you've self-tagged as a fucking lunatic as you clearly support teen boys in the girl's locker room. Nobody wants to date mentally-ill people -- well, except others who are as well, of course.)
  
  
• Everyone is tired of the inflationary bullshit.  20%?  What drugs are you on?  My grocery bill has doubled and so has yours unless you've traded down.  I know it has because I run all my household expenses through plastic and into Quicken, so it takes 30 seconds to pull up everything spent in a year on groceries.  Car and homeowners insurance are up by fifty percent.  These are mandatory expenses.  And don't kid yourself -- The Fed won't save you.  Powell said so, directly, under questioning, and his "stay the course" path means you might catch up in about 50 years, assuming the Government doesn't do that shit again (if you're not dead first, that is.)  You want that shit to stop?  Well fixing that starts when the excuses stop, does it not?  Yes, Trump was the asshole who started it when Covid hit and even before but the Democrats not only threw gasoline on the fire you have such mental midgets as AOC and Harris demanding more-more-more of it!
  
  
• Speaking of inflation if we don't get the deficit spending under control (cutting it to zero right now) and collapse the cost of health care and other necessary expenses such as insurance, vehicles, groceries, rent and similar -- which we can do by enforcing existing law both with health care firms and expelling all the illegal immigrants (thus collapsing demand for rental housing, cars and of course insurance costs will drop since those jackasses can't drive and don't have either insurance or money forcing you to pay their bill) there is a very real risk of an exponential runaway in federal spending, a collapse in the debt markets which in turn means all asset prices will collapse and there may even be a civil war.  Not because of Democrat green-haired fantasies -- simply because people can't afford to eat.  Of course people WILL eat if that happens. They'll eat you, to be specific.  Trump may or may not have been wrong about cats and dogs but this is no joke and if we don't cut this shit out that's in the offing -- and not far off either.  No nation has ever managed to get out of this sort of exponential deficit expansion without collapsing except by cutting all of that shit out, all at once.  Though all of recorded history there is not one instance of success in trying to play "MMT" games.  NOT ONCE.  What DOES reliably happen is civil unrest, the death of millions by internal collapse and even civil war.  Would you rather have the price of your house go down by 60% and your stock portfolio drop by 80% or be what's for lunch as you cook in your home that is literally burnt around you by a starving mob?
  
  
• No "evil" carbon dioxide EVER!  Uh..... are you planning on asphyxiating yourself, may I ask?  No?  Leaving aside that CO2 is literally the gas-of-life without which every single plant dies, and we are only about a third of the way to the optimum level for plant growth (and that level is non-toxic to animals, including us, by the way) are you intending to bomb Asia to ruin?  Oh wait, that would mean fires, smoke and.... CO2, right, never mind they'd probably nuke us if we tried it.  Well they are the ones producing all the gains in emissions, and not a little either -- our output is going down, theirs is going parabolic and by the way they have 1,000 new coal-fired plants (which will make more of course) in the process of construction.  Now I get it that lying about what you intend is part and parcel of being mentally ill (see above on boys running around in the girl's locker room) but a quadrupled heating bill in the winter tends to focus the mind and this lunatic bullshit is going to do exactly that, never mind the millions of birds your windmills kill and the incessant noise they produce 24 hours a day, including at night when it used to be nice and quiet with crickets chirping.  Oh, that same noise?  It fucks up whales and their sound-based navigation when you put that shit offshore, including endangered species of whale.  I thought you said you cared about wildlife?  Never mind fertilizer (without which you starve as yields go down 50% or more), none of your nice things can be made (plastics and rubber are all from carbon), there is no medicine (want a syringe or IV bag for a drug you need? Guess what they're made of?) and more.  Carbon is why we have a modern society and without the exploitation of it we are literally back in the 1800s -- if we're lucky.  Indeed carbon exploitation is why deaths from extreme weather events are down by 98+% over the last 100 years despite the population deliberately putting itself at risk of such events going up by more than a factor of ten.  Simply put carbon means we can deal with it by, for example, using portable generators until the linemen can get the power restored and that grill bottle of propane - carbon fuel - means you can cook food to eat in the meantime as well.
  
  
• We're so compasssssionate about all those poor people from Venezuela and elsewhere -- open the border!  Uh huh.  You know that daughter you have?  Multiple "migrants" Harris and Biden let in are accused of rape or murder -- and in some cases both.  In the meantime you approved giving them all $2,000 a month between EBT cards and "housing assistance"; that's $20 large a year tax free and thus those who don't rape and murder work for less and can pay more for your apartment.  Thus you lose both your job and place to live.  But instead of saying "heh that's fucked up!" you call those of us who said that would happen and now that it has we want it stopped and all of them removed racists.
  
  
• And what's this trans shit anyway when you get down to it?  Puberty blockers with a known permanency risk never mind that if the person continues down that road and chops things off they can never have either a normal adult sexual experience or a child of their own, ever, 100% of the time.  If you're one of the people who thinks a child has the capacity to deal with the reality of that especially when being egged on by social media and all the "cool kids" you're out of your fucking mind.  The "cool kids" used to talk your son or daughter into smoking a joint or chugging a beer, which could cause some problems.  Now those same "cool kids" talk them into cutting off their own dicks by telling Mom and Dad they're going to kill themselves if Mom and Dad don't go along.  You're free, as an adult, to do whatever you want so long as you're willing to pay for it. If you do this to a kid or let it happen you're mentally ill and in a rational world you would be immediately hanged as a child-abusing monster -- period.  The people advocating for this crap are such miserable assholes they can't attract anyone who wants to sleep with them and rather than deal with that they choose to screw your kids out of ever having an adult sexual life as their way of taking revenge.
  
  
• Oh, the homeless should be able to live where they want including in the park and on the street.  Ok, that sounds good.  Its compassionate, right?  Except shit happens for all humans so where do you think they're going to shit?  By the way the reason we got rid of all those nasty diseases of a couple hundred years ago was not due to vaccines -- it was because we started shitting in toilets thereby containing, transporting and treating the waste, separating it from the water supply.  Now you want to go back to people shitting on the street -- for real.  Never mind the injectable drugs and of course disease-laden needles thrown all over the place.  Would you like a helping of cholera and dysentery with that America?
  
  
• Oh, its horrible that we jail people for stealing -- let's stop arresting them.  Ah, now the homeless have a way to "make money" -- they just rob stores and people.  No jail, no problem, except of course that the stores can't deal with unlimited losses nor will shoppers put up with having their purses and wallets snatched, so the stores all close.  What sort of mental midget couldn't have seen that obvious outcome in advance?  How many people would be lined up out the door of the bank if you announced that robbing a bank would not get you either arrested or shot?  Yeah, you folks in the Democrat party really are that short on IQ points.  What, you don't want to live in a literal world of shit with no stores or places to buy anything except drugs on the closest street corner?  Why not -- that's what you voted for!
  
  
• We're all for FREEDOM you scream.  Freedom to abort a child, freedom over our own bodies!  Right up until you demanded OTHER people take an injection for a fucking flu that yes, in vulnerable people is pretty dangerous but has statistically zero risk in children and healthy young adults.  If you refused to go along and sing the praises as directed by Fauci and Biden?  Why into the GULAG with you!  And if someone dares just speak about the dangers of those shots and catalogs the injures in the public eye?  Why they must be banned immediately from the town square, fired and disposed of.  Freedom eh?  You mean free to be and think just like you, but not in any other way, right?  Why you'd have put me in a concentration camp if you thought you could get away with it, roughly HALF of Democrats supported doing that and the CDC actually was working up plans to do so.

When you get down to it Harris was uniquely full of shit and voters were tired of being bullshitted.  Repeated claims that Biden was perfectly fine mentally by her personally were over the top crap anyone with two IQ points to rub together could see.  Neither Biden or she had any sort of plan to actually do something about the inflation problem and the reason is simple -- the parties have constituencies that get nicely wealthy out of screwing you and aren't going to stop by being asked nicely; you have to be willing to jail them and Harris and Biden aren't.  Younger people in particular are getting relentlessly fucked by the illegal alien invasion and driving of ordinary living costs, especially groceries, medical and car insurance.  The entire "I've got a vagina and I'm black so vote for me" crap doesn't work on them (it shouldn't work on anyone, but of course sometimes it does) any better than it did for Hillary and her "its my turn" garbage.  Worse, after getting spanked multiple times trying to buy votes through "forgiving" college loans Harris had an entire cadre of deeply-indebted people who now have every reason to believe that despite getting a letter saying they're good its going to blow up in their face as those gibs were ruled unlawful and rather than drop it when the first loss happened or go after the colleges for unlawfully deceiving students as to the value of their coursework they doubled down with more of what the courts told them they can't do!  Waking up every morning thinking you're going to get a letter in the mail telling you that $100,000 you had to pay is still in fact owed any day now is not a motivator to get you to pull the lever -- who votes for more butt-screwing and uncertainty?

Why did the Democrats lose?

Because the Republicans could have run SATAN, literally, and beaten them.

That's why.

If the Democrat Party doesn't want to disappear it had better cut all that shit out -- right here, right now, publicly, and excoriate and excommunicate all the assholes in the party who did that stupid shit and will continue to unless they find themselves whacked upside the head with a clue-by-four and expelled from party ranks.

Assuming there's anything in that cranium to be whacked, that is.

I have my doubts.

Ed: If you want to see this column, and future columns, distributed it is on you to post the link to this column around on social media.  So-called "free speech" X has handed me a 7 day suspension for telling the AP to stick their recommendation to get more covid jabs in their own butts, deeming that "violent speech."  This is what "AI" is capable of today -- no more "intelligent" than a two year old, and its no better at driving a car than that either, but this is the world we live in where someone's computer will blackball you with no human review of any sort and no right of appeal (incidentally, you might think about that before riding in or owning a car with that garbage in it as yes, that data IS SOLD to others who will fuck you in the ass with it), so if you want to see these ideas propagated, its on you.  I will be looking at the linkbacks which will tell me whether its worth continuing to write these columns from organic activity, that is people like you, spreading them around.  That which nobody reads there is no reason to write and publish -- I can go ski and drink beer instead this winter, should that be the decision of the polity at large.

Medicine is no longer "medicine"; it has been irredeemably corrupted in the United States.

Only severing, with prejudice, the source of that corruption can resolve this.

Witness this article from 2015:

“A lot of what is published is incorrect.” I’m not allowed to say who made this remark because we were asked to observe Chatham House rules. We were also asked not to take photographs of slides. Those who worked for government agencies pleaded that their comments especially remain unquoted, since the forthcoming UK election meant they were living in “purdah”—a chilling state where severe restrictions on freedom of speech are placed on anyone on the government’s payroll. Why the paranoid concern for secrecy and non-attribution? Because this symposium—on the reproducibility and reliability of biomedical research, held at the Wellcome Trust in London last week—touched on one of the most sensitive issues in science today: the idea that something has gone fundamentally wrong with one of our greatest human creations.

"Something"?

Let's talk about the basic issue: Science is not a result or a statement of fact.

It is a process whereby one first begins with a hypothesis (that is, a belief or theory), one designs one or more experiments, hopefully to try to disprove said theory although attempting to prove it is also acceptable, data is collected and analyzed and then results reported publicly.

You might think that is where it ends.  You're wrong.

Replication by disinterested and even hostile parties is next.  The first experiment means literally nothing from a scientific point of view because there's no proof you didn't tamper with it.  If the hypothesis is proved its even worse if you were the one who stood to benefit from that.  That is, human corruption has to be filtered and the only way to do that is to have disinterested or even hostile parties confirm what you found by repeated running of, and examination of, your experiment.

We don't do this anymore when it comes to "medicine" and we don't even bother attempting it when it comes to other things such as "climate."

As a result trillions is stolen and people die.

Nobody cares about the dying part either -- only the money part.

At the core of this corruption is the money motive and over 120 years ago Congress recognized that men and women would corrupt the various areas of commerce by all sorts of means, every one of them foul, and by doing so ultimately destroy what had driven an incredible burst of progress in this nation called America.  They recognized that the patent and similar laws, passed to incentivize inventing things, could be perverted if you had a way to choke supply and demand so that those "protected" things were perversely required and others deliberately downplayed or overlooked -- or worse, outright prohibited.

They passed 15 USC Chapter 1; the Sherman Act was first, quickly evaded and Clayton followed to make clear that this was not a paper tiger and a line of BS; it was a deadly serious felony for which you'd go to prison.

Robinson-Patman followed stating that in the context of goods buyers of like kind and quantity could not be discriminated against.

These laws have been on the books for over a century.

Virtually every single medical office, every pharmacy, every pharmacist, dentist, hospital and physician violates them every day.

They're 10 year federal felonies, not a jaywalking ticket.

Simply put its illegal to charge different people different amounts of money for the same thing -- like kind and quantity.  As soon as you collude in an attempt to prevent, irrespective of the means, competition on price you've broken the law.  If you obscure the price of a procedure or thing so that it is effectively impossible for a consumer of that thing to shop before purchase, you tie sales together so I have to take (and pay for) something I do not want to get something I do want, or you charge me $2 for something you give to someone else for $1 where we both wanted to buy the same thing under the same set of circumstances you have broken the law; you are a felon.

More than forty years ago the Supreme Court ruled (in Royal Drug) that insurance companies are not allowed to "negotiate price" on a differential basis and that McCarran-Ferguson, another law exempting insurance companies from some aspects of anti-trust, did not apply because "purchasing agreements with vendors of a thing" is not the business of insurance.  It is, in fact, nothing more than attempting to negotiate a volume transaction.  That decision was confirmed a few years later in Maricopa County when the medical providers tried once again to circumvent 15 USC claiming that there was some special aspect of it when an insurance company was involved.  They lost the second time as well.

The only way to fix this, short of simply shooting everyone who is financially raping the American public to the tune of trillions a year via these felonious schemes that twice have been ruled illegal at the Supreme Court and which call for 10 years in the federal slammer for each person who commits said offense is to mandate (and start throwing people in jail if they won't do it) that all persons must be charged the same price for the same thing consumed by a single person in the medical and pharmaceutical industry and "insurance" must be prohibited from coupling paying, provision of service and similar.

This is one of the core holdings in the plan I have promoted for over a decade.

Insurance companies can legally set a "payment rate" of $x for some procedure but they can't condition that on you going to a specific provider as that is an illegal restraint of trade and monopolist practice; if the payout rate for an appendectomy is $5,000 then it has to be no matter where you have it done because you are the principal -- not the insurance company.  Likewise the hospital has to publish each and every thing in a way that the ultimate consumer which is you, not an insurance company, can determine the cost of a procedure with certainty before you obtain it.  Charging someone for a thing they did not agree to is void under long-standing consumer protection laws.

Further 15 USC Ch 1 absolutely bans the payment of "incentives" (bribes) by insurance companies to physicians or hospitals on various metrics -- for example, payment for vaccination rates.  That amounts to an illegal force-tied sale that is shoved down the customer's (patient's) throat under penalty of being fired, and a thing they may not want and once again is not "the business of insurance"; and again the Supremes so-ruled in Royal Drug.  This practice, which is near-universal and was extended to covid shots, is illegal and it is a criminal felony carrying 10 years in prison for not just the insurance company executives that put it in place but also every individual physician who complies with and benefits from it.

Medicine has one very specific circumstance that doesn't arise in general with other services: You might be flat on your back and unable to shop or negotiate.  In every other line of work abusing a person of diminished capacity is a further felony -- in medicine its how money is made.  This must change and such an offense must be dealt with through extreme prejudice, including permanent license revocations, prison sentences and forced disgorgement of all assets obtained by such a practice.

This isn't a "radical proposal"; in fact all of it was mandated by the Supreme Court more than forty years ago.

If our government will not enforce the law and by deliberately refusing screws the American people out of trillions of dollars per year there is absolutely no reason for the American people to peacefully permit that to continue for even a single day.

Actuaries compute the value of human lives every day; the medical and "health insurance" system violates those limits  on a wild-eyed basis every single hour and by doing so commits offenses sufficient to call for the imposition of the death penalty.

We cannot fix a system that has designed itself to be corrupt other than by removing those capacities.  Those who have and are profiting from this will, of course, resist such a change and have for decades.

We're no longer in a position to ignore this problem as, at the present time, the entire budget deficit and thus the entire inflationary problem in the United States is driven by CMS, which is in fact Medicare and Medicaid, and further medicine generally has expanded from about one dollar in 20 to one dollar in five over the last several decades, with virtually all of that expansion being stolen.  We are talking about six trillion dollars a year in the United States alone and if there is a monetary theft that is worthy of forcing to stop no matter how or what people must to put a stop to it -- this is it.

This is Trump's first and most-important job because the entire Federal Budget Deficit lies here, there is no other way to fix it than to dismantle the medical monopolies and he can do it without a single new law being passed by prosecuting every single hospital and pharma company that prices on any sort of differential basis and arresting, charging everyone involved with a 10 year in the prison felony, who does not immediately implement 100% level pricing all disclosed up front and with every link to so-called "insurance" severed.

THIS IS THE PATH OUT OF THE MELTDOWN and note the date it was written.  No, we cannot avoid the hit to GDP and unemployment in the short term that fixing this will cause.  It will come but we can avoid the destruction of the medical system entirely and the destruction of the federal government's funding capacity.

IT MUST BE DONE ON TRUMP'S FIRST DAY IN OFFICE AND NOTE THAT NOT ONE NEW LAW IS REQUIRED AND THUS CONGRESS IS NOT ONLY NOT REQUIRED TO DO ANYTHING THEY CAN'T STOP IT EITHER.