At the close of the Obama administration, the top 50% of income earners paid 97% of the tax revenue collected by the IRS, while the bottom half paid a paltry 3% (the split being at $40,087 adjusted income). The total income tax collected was $1.4 trillion in individual income taxes. I know numbers are boring, but they are important when considering Democrat presidential hopeful Elizabeth Warren’s “Medicare for All” platform that the Massachusetts senator hopes will secure her the Democrat nomination.
Warren says her plan will cost a mere $20.5 trillion and that the middle class will not incur a tax increase. Taxpayers will allegedly also enjoy the manifold fruits of her socialized, single-payer healthcare plan at no cost to them. She claims that the revenue to fund this plan will come through military spending cuts, eliminating VA and current Medicare costs by rolling both programs into the new plan combined, of course, with punishing those ‘evil billionaires’ with a staggering income tax increase.
Several questions are starting to surface, however, that may bury her presidential hopes in 2020. Many who are not blindly salivating over the idea of ‘free stuff’ have begun raising questions ranging from the actual cost of the program to the quality of single-payer healthcare. Estimates from places like the Rand Corporation, Mercatus Center at George Mason University, and the Urban Institute estimate the additional government spending for Warren’s “Medicare for All” plan will be closer to the $31-$34 trillion range, with recent estimates from the Urban Institute as high as $59 trillion in a ten year span.
Given that the outlay of the federal government was $4.1 trillion in 2018 and the individual income tax collected was $1.7 trillion (total revenue collected was $3.3 trillion), Senator Warren’s promise of shielding the working class from more taxation echoes Obama’s empty promise “If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor.” Adding another $2.4 trillion to federal spending (using the $34 trillion/ten year figure less the $1 trillion a year spent on current medical programs) will increase the outlay to $6.5 trillion, effectively broadening the federal deficit to $3.2 trillion.
Figure 1 www.cbo.gov
The shortfall will be taken out of the pockets of the middle class both directly and indirectly, no matter how much Warren tries to persuade voters of the opposite (she recently told Andrea Mitchell that no one who isn’t a billionaire will pay one penny more in tax). If Senator Warren goes after Wall Street to fund her plans, she will be attacking middle class retirement investments and siphoning off dividends that belong to 401k and IRA investors. This means YOU, Mr. and Mrs. Middle Class. Likewise, increasing business tax will mean lower income, fewer full-time jobs, and another recession for workers and small business owners to overcome. Simply put, workers will be on the hook for Warren’s monster regardless.
Senator Warren has also promised to force down medical costs. On the surface, this seems like a great idea, but what costs will actually get reduced? Will doctors accept less pay? Will unionized nurses bow to the Democrats and accept fewer benefits? Will medical supplies, research and development, and lawsuit insurance magically experience a reduction in cost? Highly doubtful on all matters. What will suffer is the quality of healthcare for the individual. Reductions in staff, reductions in the number of qualified doctors, and fewer facilities will add up to longer waits, more misdiagnoses, and a dysfunctional records system. To fix this broken system, the middle class will be called upon in the future to foot the bill ‘for the greater good’.
Senator Warren has a decent chance to win the Democratic presidential primary. A Warren presidency openly threatens Wall Street, big business, and billionaires. But make no mistake, the working class will be attacked just as severely if she is allowed to carry out her “Medicare for All” plan. Whether directly or indirectly, working-class America will pay dearly for her hard-left politics.
The United States has long known about the brutal and bullying methods the Communist Chinese use to stifle dissenters within their borders. The protests that began in Hong Kong in early summer were sparked by a now-suspended law that would allow extradition of Hong Kongers to mainland China for trial. They have swelled to fever pitch and have the attention of mainstream American media. These protests differ from past dissention because the coordinators have remained fluid and elusive. This makes it difficult for the Chinese authorities to quickly root them out and turn them into a public example to scare the rest of the protesters into submission.
What has also caught the eye of the six o'clock news crowd this time is the bullying censorship tactics China uses to silence speech abroad. In the past, we have witnessed Hollywood change entire storylines to accommodate the Chinese government in order to get their movies played in Chinese theaters. However, the recent news of the National Basketball Association banning "Free Hong Kong" signs and throwing out ticket holders flashing them have given a lot of Americans uneasy pause. Likewise, Apple turning off a popular app in China because it was being used by protesters to track Chinese police shows the world that Apple is more interested in sales than they are in human rights violations. Finally, Blizzard's swift punishment and banning of Chung "Blitzchung" Ng Wai from his gaming win at a Hearthstone tournament for shouting pro-Hong Kong freedom slogans demonstrates the giant corporation's complete willingness to override basic freedoms in order to capitulate to the Chinese authoritarians guarding their lucrative market base.
In short, money talks. China controls 10.93% of global imports, second only to the United States. Unlike in the U.S., businesses wishing to bring their wares into China are not only required to follow China’s regulations; they must also allow goods and services to be scrutinized and changed lest they expose the dark side of Chinese communism or the human rights violations rampant within the country’s borders. Apparently, China does not keep this bullying within its own walls. Using its market advantage, China is pressuring U.S.-based companies into suppressing the free speech of Americans in our own country. Simply put, the Chinese expect complete capitulation if a U.S. business expects to tap into the lucrative Chinese market.
How far will these companies go to appease their Chinese overlords? If Americans’ freedom of speech is less valuable than China’s market base, what else are U.S. businesses willing to concede to the Chinese in order to stay in their good graces? To answer that question, one need only look as far as our now far-left Democrat party.
Over the past few years, we have watched the National Football League, Anheuser-Busch, Dick’s Sporting Goods, Citigroup Bank, and many others cower to pressure from the left to the point of throwing any concern for future Constitutional rights violations to the wind in order to appease the outrage mob. If this hard-left mob, led by the leaders of the ‘Democratic’ Party, perceive a political opinion other than its own sordid philosophy, it is quick to rise up and make every effort to financially cripple any threat to their political ideology. In August, this outrage mob attacked Stephen Ross, a major real estate developer and major shareholder in Equinox and SoulCycle, simply for planning a fundraiser for President Trump at his home in the Hamptons. Unfortunately, conservatives have begun to pick up this abhorrent ‘cancel culture’ habit in retaliation to attacks from the left.
This insanity must stop if Americans want their future to remain free from tyranny. While protesters in Hong Kong are laying their lives on the line to retain the freedoms and rights to which they are accustomed, the left seems to be busy implementing the Chi-Coms bullying tactics to silence climate change skeptics, Second Amendment advocates, pro-life advocates, and straight-white-conservative-Christian-males. We simply cannot permit the Chinese or the leftists' cancel culture within our own borders to control our businesses and our personal lives. If left to their own devices, this is precisely what they will do. They have already shown us their intentions. Now it is time to push back. Hard. Even if it costs us a few dollars.
I initially paid only scant attention to the news about Greta Thunberg. I knew she was a ‘climate activist,’ that she is 16 years old, and that she sailed on a yacht to get to the United States to minimize the carbon footprint she used to get here. My only comments at the time were how big a carbon footprint did making that yacht create and how is she getting home since they flew over here and collected the yacht and took it back? I also read a statement by her and her family that she had Asperger’s syndrome. I had not seen any video of Ms. Thunberg prior to her visit to the U.N., just still photos.
My interest in Ms. Thunberg changed the other day when I saw the video of her making a statement about global warming at the U.N. I am very private on the internet, especially on Twitter (I am anonymous for a myriad of reasons). However, seeing Ms. Thunberg’s emotional state prompted me to take a risk. I have a child with Asperger’s syndrome. What I saw and heard from Ms. Thunberg struck home sharply because I could see and hear her frustration (which I will explain below) and related anger from a perspective that had nothing to do with the climate. I also read some characterizations of Ms. Thunberg both from people who believe in the immediate urgency of global warming and from those who do not. I realized that neither of these camps seemed to recognize the Asperger’s that I, as a parent of a Spectrum child, saw right away. People lionized her on the one side and vilified her on the other, and both sides commented on her “look.” Neither seemed to see her as I did.
I do not know the Thunberg family, the “handlers,” or the organizations that support them. I am neither a doctor nor a psychologist. What I am is the parent of an Asperger’s child, one who has been informed by wonderful professionals on the subject, read extensively on it, and actively participated in the Asperger’s world for years. Based on this hard-won knowledge, I wanted everyone involved in the Greta Thunberg circus, regardless of position, to get a glimpse into her reaction and her expressions based on my reasonable knowledge and observation of her as a person.
What is Asperger’s syndrome? Until relatively recently it was its own disorder. However, a few years ago, the DSM (DSM-5, or the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th Edition (2013)) melded Asperger’s into the category of Autism Spectrum Disorder. The Autism Spectrum is basically a four-fold chart with one axis running from high functioning to low functioning and the other axis running from high intelligence to low intelligence. I believe most Asperger’s people fall into the high functioning category. Asperger’s is characterized by a series of observable factors, not all of which each Asperger’s person experiences, and there is variation in the degree that each is affected. Some of the indicators include: 1) tactile issues 2) auditory issues, especially echoes, 3) difficulty transitioning from one task or event to another, 4) hyper focus on narrow subjects, 5) inability to make eye contact, 6) difficulty reading people’s emotions and emotional cues, 7) monotone speech, and 8) rule following. There are others that may exist depending on the individual, but the two that seem to be fairly universal are literalism and rigidity of thought. This rigidity of thought is more than being stubborn. It is receiving facts, and those facts are tattooed on your brain. Those facts are facts, even in the face of direct, contrary evidence, and those facts are more than mere stubbornly held opinions. This rigidity is closely tied with rule following and the expectations that others will follow those rules. The literalism means you literally follow the literal rules.
Unlike a disease such as diabetes, Asperger’s is an observable condition. Ms. Thunberg’s anger, tears, frustration, and facial expressions (or lack thereof) and her inability to keep her eyes focused are instantly recognizable as Asperger’s related. So, in the hope of providing some understanding of what this young lady was presenting to the world, I drafted a thread for Twitter that included a summary of Asperger’s (the forum is not amenable to great detail) with the following observations about Ms. Thunberg’s UN video. The following is the cleaned up version of that thread:
As Ms. Thunberg suffers from Asperger’s, she likely experiences rigidity of thought and literalism, along with hyperfocus. The hyperfocus is why Asperger’s was known as the “little professors’ disease.” Especially children could become experts in narrow subjects, even at an early age. The expertise is not a creative expertise, but a rote one. Causation and emotional understanding are difficult for Asperger’s sufferers, especially children.
Asperger’s sufferers are also very strict adherents to “the rules,” once those rules are established in their minds. This adherence ties to the rigidity of thought. If a person with Asperger’s establishes a set of “facts” in their minds, it is extremely fixed. It is so fixed that even contrary facts presented to them are rejected in favor of the previously established “facts.” If the counter information continues, the sufferer becomes frustrated. The frustration turns to anger, because of the literalism, rigidity, and the way their minds attach to rules and items that they have already established is concrete. The concrete fact is often the first “fact” on the subject they hear.
Now imagine a person with these predisposed inclinations hearing for the first time: 1) the Earth’s atmosphere is heating an incredible pace; 2) humans are causing this rapid heating; 3) the whole planet is going to die if it is not fixed in 12 years. These three items, for persons not on the Spectrum, can be weighed, evaluated, and put into perspective. Contrary points can be reviewed and expectations adjusted. For the Asperger’s sufferer, this is not easily achieved, if it can be at all. The anxiety compounds. You have the anxiety of being told you are going to die coupled with the anxiety and frustration of having contrary facts running against your established “facts” and literal implications.
Parents of children with Asperger’s struggle against this convergence every day. How does one teach perspective and thought flexibility to a person whose mind demands literalism and structured “facts” (incidentally, this is why some Spectrum people are great coders). The answer is patiently doing so. Demonstrating the safety of exceptions to rules and the reasons for alternatives. When I see Ms. Thunberg, I see all of the frustration of my child with none of the attempted perspective and flexibility of thought. In some ways, Spectrum people appear robotic because of their very rigid mindset, but they are not. They are frustrated, hurt, and angry. For a person like me, seeing her rigidity makes me unhappy. However, seeing her frustration and tears at the UN makes me angry. Those pushing her into the spotlight on these issues deserve shame. She is not a robot. Her beliefs are tainted by the Spectrum that frames them. She is being compelled into corners her mind has difficulty navigating and that only feed her fears (of literal death), and the frustration that her mind’s eye does not square with the messy, grey, emotional world. Asperger’s sufferers must learn to navigate these areas. These areas are instinctive for those of us not on Spectrum. No matter where you are on this issue of global warming, remember Ms. Thunberg’s view is not your view. Someone should be helping her navigate her rigidity and anxiety, not using her as an “automata” prop.
The thread already had 14 parts, so that’s where I stopped. I could not go into the fact that her frustration was compounded by her lack of understanding of why other people did not behave in a way that matched her iron-clad certainty that she was going to die along with the whole world in 12 years. Can those involved not comprehend the sheer terror caused by having that thought burned into one’s conscience? I also did not have the characters to explain that for many the compulsion I was describing was not just of others behavior, but of her own thoughts seeing her world and her fear being confronted not just by the arguments of people who disagree but a whole world not conforming to her viewpoint of a dire emergency.
Finally, I was greatly affected by the reaction to her appearance. Rather than beatification and vilification of her face, I saw a young lady who I know has to or had to learn to laugh. Please consider this for a moment. One of the most instinctive and greatest joys of being alive is the ability to laugh. Can you imagine the heartbreak for a parent discovering that their child does not do this, even though they may find something funny or joyous?
Ms. Thunberg’s face, when she does break a rare smile is beautiful. Not because she is “standing up” for (or being stood up for) anything, but because I know what effort and education went into her showing that emotion. I experienced this with my own child who has learned to laugh, in a somewhat rote way, and even tells jokes (many of them in a shotgun approach to humor).
As people with Asperger’s mature, they tend to learn more and more about navigating the greys and messy emotions of the world. My great hope is that Ms. Thunberg finds this path and that those surrounding her start helping her to learn these waters so she can find joy.
Bear Shrugged/Ursa Major Wit.
P.S. - The thread and this article resulting from it merely scratch the surface of the world of Asperger’s and Autism Spectrum Disorder. There are so many components to Asperger’s that I have not touched upon, several of which emerged from reactions to the thread. I wanted to give some awareness to the issue. Thank you to whomever at Twitchy posted the whole thing. So many people were genuine in appreciation of learning even a little bit about Asperger’s, and a number of people with Asperger’s confirmed and appreciated my description.
Just a gaggle of people from all over who have similar interests and loud opinions mixed with a dose of humor. We met on Twitter.