The Right Prescription
Medicare for All Is a Killer
How and why Obama’s socialized medicine plan would deny you health care.
America’s Left/Liberals, and their spokesman Barack Obama, insist that everything about health care would be wonderful if only the government would take it over. Their preferred plan, embraced by Obama, is to throw Medicare open to everyone, and then over time force everyone into it. They say if you have employer-provided insurance, you can keep it. But that choice will be up to the employer, not you. As the government forces costly regulatory burdens, like guaranteed issue and community rating, onto private insurance, employers facing the soaring premiums will just dump their workers into Medicare. These costly regulatory burdens, plus the taxpayer subsidies for Medicare, will eventually drive out all private insurance alternatives.
This is what the left has been proposing for many years now. They have called it “Medicare for All.” No point in denying that now, when they have got the President and Congressional majorities to pass it. The question to consider is, “Is Medicare for All a good idea?”
Medicare Is Already Bankrupt
The Medicare Board of Trustees released their latest annual report earlier this month. It shows that Medicare is already hopelessly bankrupt. We don’t know how we are going to pay for all the Medicare promises we have already made.
The Trustees Report estimates that the unfunded liability for Medicare alone is $89 trillion. Social Security adds another $15.1 trillion in unfunded liabilities, for a total of $104 trillion. And that doesn’t even count Medicaid. The entire American economy right now only produces about $14 trillion a year.
By 2018, less than 10 years from now, Medicare Part A alone will be running a deficit of close to $100 billion. General revenue contributions for Medicare Parts B and D that year are now projected to be $364 billion. Consequently, the deficit for Medicare alone that year will be close to $500 billion. And this assumes a scheduled reduction in doctor and hospital reimbursements under Medicare of over 20% starting in 2010.
Medicaid will also be costing the federal government close to $500 billion per year by then, with another $300 billion spent on the program by the states. That is a total burden on general taxpayers for these two programs alone of $1.3 trillion by 2018, in addition to payroll taxes and Medicare premiums. Medicare premiums by 2018 are projected to be about $750 per month per beneficiary, covering only 14% of expenditures. Medicare will be spending by that year close to $17,000 per beneficiary.
Medicare Part A will run out of funds to pay promised benefits by 2017, with a 20% shortfall in revenues. Paying all promised benefits for Part A alone over the long run would require raising the total Medicare payroll tax from 2.9% today to 12%. That is in addition to the Social Security payroll tax of 12.4% today, which would have to increase to close to 18% to pay all promised benefits for that program. That would result in a total payroll tax rate of 30%.
Given this overwhelming financial disaster, does it make sense for the government to take on even more financial burdens through Medicare? Medicare is supposed to be for retirees. What would all these new financial burdens for everyone do to the program originally intended for them?
Indeed, one has to ask, do the Medicare for All nuts even understand numbers? Or are they what they appear to be, numerically illiterate?
Government Health Care Rationing
Medicaid, which pays for health care for the poor, shows where Medicare for seniors is headed. Medicaid promises free health care for the poor, but then refuses to pay the doctors and hospitals for it, or at least pay them enough to provide quality health care for the poor. As a result, about 40% of doctors and hospitals already refuse to take Medicaid patients.
This translates into real suffering for the poor on Medicaid. They have to scramble to get appointments with the doctors who will see them, and the doctors give them shorter appointments and less attention to fit what the government is willing to pay for them. They have to wait longer to see the essential specialists or for admissions to the hospitals willing to take Medicaid patients. The end result studies show is that the poor get less adequate health care, and suffer worse health outcomes, including more and earlier deaths from heart disease and cancer. This should be no surprise, because it is the inevitable result of all government-run health care throughout history the world over.
Medicare is already headed down this same road. The fees it pays are not as bad as Medicaid, but already doctors and hospitals are starting to opt out of the program, and it will be a lot closer to Medicaid after the 20% cut for doctor and hospital reimbursements now scheduled for next year. If Congress reverses those planned cuts, then all of the already unbearable spending numbers for the program discussed above will be 20% higher.
With the already intractable financial gaps in Medicare discussed above, more cuts in payments for doctors and hospitals serving seniors are inevitable. And that means less quality health care for seniors. When everyone is then dumped into Medicare under the perspicacious “Medicare for All” reforms, what is going to happen then?
About the Author
Peter Ferrara is Director of Entitlement and Budget Policy at the Heartland Institute, General Counsel of the American Civil Rights Union, Senior Fellow at the National Center for Policy Analysis, and Senior Policy Advisor on Entitlements and Budget Policy at the National Tax Limitation Foundation. He served in the White House Office of Policy Development under President Reagan, and as Associate Deputy Attorney General of the United States under President George H.W. Bush.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (123) | Leave a comment
Related Articles
More Articles by Peter Ferrara
More Articles From The Right Prescription
http://spectator.org/archives/2009/05/27/medicare-for-all-is-a-killer
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Hopesome| 5.27.09 @ 6:28AM
When wealth and monetary values etc., leave healthcare and a genuine desire to 'overthrow lack' comes into play then maybe we will all be on the road to recovery.
Obama has been left with a HUGE MESS to clean up.
give him a break or as America is so often telling us!
The Lord will heal you!
America put your faith where your voice has been and your hope where your hell has been.
Robert Rosencrans| 5.27.09 @ 7:34AM
There is no more enticing concept then "it's free" and con artists and politicians have been using it since the dawn of time to suck the gullible through the door for the kill.
I will concede that it's difficult at times to distinguish between con artists and politicians, but it's not hard to determine what is about to happen to the best health care system in the world.
The first result will be mass confusion as private companies start the layoff process and there are few experienced people left to push the ever innocuous paperwork through the system of yawning coffee drinking bureaucrats.
As the private system collapses under the weight of government edicts and competition, the best doctors will take their practices private, realizing they don't have to service everyone, only those who can afford their services. It's already happening.
In the meantime, fewer qualified physicians will enter medical school or try for a specialty. Many of the specialized fields spurred developments and advances, but those doctors will now receive the same pay as someone who diagnoses a hang nail.
Socialized medicine will ensure you stand in never ending lines, after waiting for months for appointments.
Don't kid yourself, 20 million illegal aliens get free health care is what this is all about.
Just one more American institution, one of the greatest institutions in the world. destroyed through the politics of victimization and government greed.
Pingback| 5.27.09 @ 7:55AM
The American Spectator : Medicare for All Is a Killer links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
DM's Posts --Yawn| 5.27.09 @ 8:13AM
garble, arble, blah, blah....conservatives ...blah, blah, garble, garble, oof, oof, woof, poof.... are bad....garble , garble, pffft, pffft....my IQ is -20.....garble, warble, lefty all good and knowing............woof poof, ooof, loof, grrrr, grrrr.........I'm angry for some reason.....grrrr, wooof, pooof, oofus, doofus, grrr, garble, garble....
Pingback| 5.27.09 @ 8:20AM
Twitted by donreding links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
jerryofva| 5.27.09 @ 9:10AM
The Progressive’s infatuation with socialized medicine is a product of the theories exposed by John Rawls. In his “Theory of Justice” Rawls argued that the most rational way to write a social contract was for each individual to pursue a maxi-min strategy because you don’t know a priori where your place in the income distribution will fall. You want to guarantee yourself a minimum acceptable standard of living. Rawls admitted that such a society would neither be the most efficient nor the wealthiest but would certainly be the most equal.
Seen in this perspective you can understand why the Democrats are so determined to convert a system that is satisfying the needs of 80%+ of the population with high quality medical care to one where everybody, except them of course, is on an enhanced form of Medicaid. The goal of the Obama administration is the British National Health Service. Not NHS done right mind you, but the system as it is now.
Anastasia Mather| 5.27.09 @ 9:15AM
I'll tell you one reason Medicare is bankrupt.
My 78-year-old mother had an upper respiratory viral infection and she coughed so much, she sprained her back and had pain in her sternum. I took her to her physician who prescribed phenergan (to clear up the lungs) and codeine (to get her to stop coughing and get some rest).
Over to the pharmacy.
Where we were informed that Medicare part D does NOT cover cough syrups. But if the doctor had prescribed one of those fancy antibiotics that cost over $200 and up a pop, they would have paid for it.
She didn't need an antibiotic. She needed some rest and decongestion.
So her doctor did the right thing, and the woman who, together with my father, struggled to build their life and paid their taxes and were promised certain things by the gubmint ended up having to pay $25 for a generic cough syrup.
THAT is government healthcare in a nutshell. Get between the patient and doctor and demand the wrong thing.
Eyes wide open| 5.27.09 @ 9:52AM
"But as on every other issue, this is meant only to distract you from what is really going to happen, which is just the opposite. "
Truer words were never written.
Old Texican| 5.27.09 @ 10:05AM
Robert
I have come to genuinely look forward to your comments. Thank you.
My old eyes also appreciate your paragraph breaks. (smile)
Other commenters seem to only break paragraphs when needing the bathroom.
(I don't know where I heard that first, but it makes me chuckle every time I think of it.)
Anastasia
A Very succinct snapshot. Thank you.
Claire Solt| 5.27.09 @ 10:23AM
The development of insurance was an essential innovation making the age of exploration and expansion of commerce possible. The reserves that prudent insurance commpanies hold against possible claims are a rock of our economy. Governments are not insurance companies and run their programs into bankrup;cy. We don't need more of that!
bill carson| 5.27.09 @ 10:47AM
This writer is right on target! All you liberals worshipping Obama and desperate for a government run program should think like a doctor for one moment. Ask yourself as a doctor: "Would I work in the U.S. for the government and be paid $84,234 for a full year of work or would I be better off working in the Caribbean for six months making $189,456 and returning to the U.S. to hang out taking it easy?" Or maybe the doctor would permanently move away. I'd guess in the beginning that you'll see doctors working on U.S. patients in foreign hospitals for good wages part of the year.
But make no mistake, no matter what logic ANYONE comes up with to object to socialized medicine, the left is going to go for it. It's in their blood. My guess is that this country is going to have to suffer for quite a while before it comes to its senses and throws the socialists out of power. Look how long it took in the Soviet Union.
Repeal It All| 5.27.09 @ 10:53AM
Old Texican here, folks.
I just wanted to open some thoughts tangential to the splendid articles we get to read here every day.
Across a whole spectrum of issues, I'm thinking we should all be looking to the future, near term and long term.
I believe that once the American people come to understand the "bait and switch" con that has been pulled on them, and the inevitable trainwreck occurs, we are going to have to rebuild our country.
I think perhaps the 10th amendment movement has some legs. Some 33 States now have Resolutions on their legislative agendas.
Perhaps the tea-party might find some resonance with the States' legislatures too.
Possibly a groundswell for a Constitutional Convention will build among the States.
My thought here is to seriously discuss about how we repeal all the nonsense that is coming down the pike from so many directions.
The trainwreck IS coming. I think that reality has soaked in with many of us now the only question seems to be where the "bump" occurs.
The current administration seems to be totally incompetent to deal with international issues.
When choices domestically come up, they seem to opt for the dummest Options.
Anyway, when you see the "Repeal it All" user name, I shall look forward to your best thoughts
Geoff| 5.27.09 @ 10:59AM
Welll so lets talk about all of the people that don't have health care. How many times do I go to someone’s home and they have a 60" big screen and a car I couldn't possibly afford but they can't afford healthcare, sure lets keep supporting their lack of responsibility. And the migrants that come across our borders illegally, I guess the dems like supporting slavery. The illegals get lousy wages, no insurance incase of injury and no protection from employers. Oh and the employers they get cheap labor and no responsibility and you think that is good. Oh and the farm worker program that has existed for sometime but continues to falter wellll if the farmers were committed to use them instead of the much cheaper and no responsibility illegal migrants maybe it would work.
If for a change we would support the responsible people and punish the ones who are not, life would be better for all and there would be plenty of money and support for the poor. Seal the borders allow people to come in legally and have the opportunity to take advantage of all America has to offer.
Pete| 5.27.09 @ 11:03AM
Why can't liberals at least understand the supply problem (of skilled medical professionals) that is guaranteed to follow from their plans. Why would anyone go through 12+ years of schooling to wind up under the thumb of some idiot in DC, unable to make even the simplest of choices or apply any real judgment to a medical situation (not to mention have their pay regulated). Even the most altruistic souls wouldn't last long being told what they could and could not do to help. Wonder what triage would be like with some Sotomayor hospital administrator making the calls....
Stan Redmond| 5.27.09 @ 11:47AM
Medical care will indeed be free when there is nothing left to buy. "You get what you pay for" will be terribly applicable to government enforced healthcare. When politicians get a hold of medical decisions this country will truly be lost for generations. YOUR HEALTH will be sacrificed for politicians to redistribute your health care. There will be nothing left for the evil white christian heterosexual man. This is scary stuff. With no monetary incentive for students to endure 8 years of training to become doctors who will be treating us? Liberals are a disease in this country. Causing problems then proposing solutions to the problems they caused that cause even more problems. EVERYTHING they touch turns to garbage. Public schools, public housing, social security. All of it.
Robert Rosencrans| 5.27.09 @ 12:16PM
Old Texican: I salute you. Thanks.
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 5.27.09 @ 12:18PM
To: Stan Redmond
Kudos!
Gill O’Teen| 5.27.09 @ 12:29PM
I have the perfect solution and it is much cheaper than any nationalized health plan or our current health care system. We all accept that obumassiah is god’s anointed savior sent to earth to save us from THE EVIL BUSH, but it would never do for him to appear in public sans clothing since any who saw him in his natural glory would surely be blinded by his brilliance. I propose that every day he don a spanking new wardrobe for which we could budget say $50,000 per diem. This is a mere $73,050,000 for his first four year reign, an average of only $18,262,500 per year. His clothing from the previous day could be distributed throughout the country. Let’s see - 2 shoes, 2 socks, slacks, shorts, dress shirt, t-shirt, silk tie and suit jacket would be 10 items per day. That means we could place 3,650 sacred relics throughout the nation in easily accessible public locations per year. Everybody would be able to simply touch a holy garment whenever they are feeling poorly. Their faith will surely cure them. There will be no need for nationalized health care, Medicare, Medicaid, private medical insurance companies or health care professionals. But hey! Wal-Mart’s hiring!
Daniel| 5.27.09 @ 12:37PM
My brothers and sisters I share in your despair over the current state and possible future of this, our great nation. Where before government spending deficits could be written off as not mattering enough to worry too much about, as written in a previous issue of the Spectator, we have finally come to the point where the detrimental effect will be disastrous.
Adding a universal health care system to the mix will surely hasten the demise of this our current government.
Take heart! Though the pain will be great, our very presence in these postings testifies to the fact that decent, thoughtful, and articulate Americans will exist after the coming crisis to guide our nation back to the light of freedom with responsibility. For my part, I do not fear, for I know there is a strength in the American spirit that will not be broken by the insidious evil currently guiding our course.
We will suffer, but we will emerge stronger for it.
As we say in my profession, "Pain is weakness leaving the body!"
drew| 5.27.09 @ 1:03PM
The recenty released “Republican” plan - referenced and glossed over by Mr. Ferrara - predicatably eliminates a public plan option all together and basically creates a system of mandatory insurance premiums vis a vis the private insurers - shocker. The plan also attempts to control costs by encouraging people to purchase cheaper, less comprehensive plans - fine, unless you’re really sick…..like an increasing number of Americans are. The minimum benefit package is so stingy that it will do little good for anyone who’s on it….and, there are serious doubts that the “tax subsidies”, that are the spine of the program, would be big enough to cover critical/long term care for truly sick Americans.
…..if this is the best the GOP can do, they are far from Mr. Steele’s vision of the “party of new ideas.” This proposal is the same “cater to the insurance industry”, “trust the free market to care for you” bologna that has been bandied about from the Right for years…
Supporting a "public option" is so far from calling for "socialized medicine" or "forcing people onto Medicare" that I don't even know where to begin in terms of a retort. Rather than walking readers through a hypothetical review of Medicare funding statistics (based on all sorts of assumptions and subjective conclusions about demographics, impacts of health IT and preventative/wellness programs, inflation, costs/impacts of doing nothing to fix the current system, etc.), Mr. Ferrara should offer solutions or proposals...or, at a minimum, offer a balanced critique of the GOP "plan", which is rife with potential problems.
jerryofva| 5.27.09 @ 1:40PM
Drew:
Nice strawman now let’s look at some realistic options that a consumer could choose.
Catastrophic coverage only: The Consumer could decide to pay for normal medical care out of pocket. This option would probably be good for a healthy single person.
A family plan that covers childrens vaccinations, oby-gyn services, annual checkups and of course catastrophic care. This would work well for young families.
Comprehensive care for specific illnesses: Good for someone with a problem like asthma, diabetes and those with a family history of a health problem.
All these plans would be lower cost the kind of unneeded comprehensive coverage that we have today.
All Federal employees can make these kinds of choices today.
The Democratic plan is just a way to get us to universal care British or Canadian style by stealth. The State of Hawaii just killed their government run healthcare program for children because everybody was bailing from private plans and putting the burden on the State. Single payer, i.e., state run medical care, is the administration’s ultimate destination.
Mike | 5.27.09 @ 1:57PM
David Matthews - Are you a real person? I ask because that is the biggest bunch of drivel I have ever read. Do you have a job or do you just post on here?
Louis Jenkins| 5.27.09 @ 2:11PM
Anything that sounds too good to be true is exactly that. We are promised health and comfort by the government, when in reality it can only furnish us with public and private debt, increased burdensome taxes and user fees, and decreased quality of services. Worse, it lulls the gulible into a false belief that all will be better for everyone, but neuters those who strive for their own and their family's welfare. We are being offered a premium for idleness, but it will only have the effect of increased poverty and misery.
drew| 5.27.09 @ 2:13PM
jerryofva,
While Hawaii has indeed ended their relatively small (2,000 children covered) and relatively new (begun in 2007) children's public program, there is a lot that Hawaii is doing that's working very well.
Hawaii became the first state to require minimum mandatory employer-based health insurance 35 years ago. As a result, a study released this March by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation showed that one in seven adult workers in Hawaii are uninsured, compared with one in five nationally.
Meanwhile, a study by the Dartmouth Institute in February showed that the national average cost of Medicare, which covers the elderly and disabled, was $8,304 in 2006, while the cost in Hawaii was $5,311, lowest in the nation.
In many ways, Hawaii is a unique case - but, there is lots to learn from it's approach. Obama has repeadedly stated that he does not support or want a move towards a fully public program and that he believes the solution lies in a hybrid model based squarely on the current employer-based modeal. I suppose, if you'd like, you can choose not to believe him....but doing so seems silly and based on little aside from anger, partisanship, and baseless fear, as what he saying is very clear.
The Right, rather than point to other successful models, always use "Canada and the UK" as anecdotal examples of "bad" or "worst case" systems. To be sure, these systems are less than perfect....of course, if they are less perfect than our current system is debatable given our massive challenges and problems. That said, there are many other models out there. For example, take the Swiss and Dutch insurance systems, which embody some of the same concepts that have guided health reforms adopted in Massachusetts and considered by other states and by federal policymakers. The two systems have many features in common: an individual mandate, standardized basic benefits, a tightly regulated insurance market, and funding schemes that make coverage affordable for low- and middle-income families. Both systems can boast many successes. Both have achieved universal health coverage among their citizenry, with patient choice, broad access, and low disparities. Residents in both countries enjoy among the longest life expectancies in the world (Switzerland is second only to Japan), and both systems have wide support of the citizenry. The Swiss and Dutch health systems provide real-world prototypes for a regulated competitive model with multiple insurance plans, which many believe is the most likely route to universal coverage in the United States.
jerryofva| 5.27.09 @ 2:30PM
Drew:
I see you have your talking points in line. Both the Canadian and British systems are failures. The dirty little secret among Canadian healthcare bureaucrats is the fear that the United States will socialize medicine and close off the safety valve that keep Canadians alive. If the US adopts a single payer system then the Canadian system will collapse.
Cancer survival rates are the best measure of access to quality medical care. No country in Europe matches US five year survival rates. The best the countries are small homogeneous nations like Norway. All the major countries lag far behind the US. US Medicaid patients have higher five year survival rates then most European countries. Europeans with money come to the US to get effective treatments that are not available at home.
Why is it that supporters of socialized medicine always lie about what they want? The President and the Democratic Congressional leadership all support the British and Canadian healthcare models.
drew | 5.27.09 @ 2:44PM
Hey as far as life expectancy is concerned, how many Detroits are there in Japan or Switzerland. As a devious liberal, I like to trick you guys into thinking that life expectancy is an appropriate health outcome measure.
Ya know, doctors should really tell their patients to stop smoking and eat their veggies. We need funding for doctors to tell their patients about thses vital issues. Cancer survival rates better in the US who cares?
drew| 5.27.09 @ 2:48PM
jerryofva,
thanks? my comments aren't "talking points" - they were facts. don't be scared.
to cherry pick a statistic about 5-yr cancer survival rates is borederline useless. while cancer survival may indeed be a bright spot, obesity related illnesses, including diabetes and heart disease are way up....we can go back and forth on stats all day long but the simply reality is that we spend the most per patient on the globe but have no where near the highest quality of care in terms of outcomes. Our system is economically and clinically broken - we need fixes, not scare tactics and anecdotes from Canada.
jerryofva| 5.27.09 @ 3:04PM
Drew:
Obesity related illnesses are caused by a combination of behavior and genetics. I don't see how a socialized medical system is going to change that. It's just another one of your strawman argument.
You are dead wrong on cost. The Europeans push off the cost on providers through lower incomes and lower quality care. You might be right about "quality" outcomes, well except for cancer, open heart surgery, pre-natal care/low birth weight babies (don't quote infant mortality rates because live births aren't record until 48-72 hours after delivery in Europe) and things like hip replacements. Yeah the Europeans are probably better at dispensing aspirin and pharmaceuticals developed in the United States.
drew| 5.27.09 @ 3:07PM
(the other) drew,
"how many detroits are there in Japan or Switzerland."
are you suggesting that these coutries don't have large/diverse cities? how about Tokyo, with a population about 12 times as large as Detroit? Yokohama with 3.5 million people? Osaka with 3m?or Zurich, with 400,000 people? to be sure, these cities - even massive Tokyo - are free of many of Detroit's problems - many of them uniquely American (gun/gang violence, huge wage disparities, rising/nationally high unemployment, low tax base, shrinking economic output, etc)....but to suggest somehow that other countries can't provide healthcare for large, diverse populations/cities is silly. to be sure, life expectancy is only a single measure...there are many others, too, where the US lags far behind....
drew| 5.27.09 @ 3:26PM
jerryofva,
chronic illnesses of all kinds (including obesity, heart disease, diabetes, COPD, etc) are statistically/relatively high in this country. obama's healthcare plan has preventative care/wellness programs (and support/training for primary care docs) as a centerpiece - with siginifcant funding for these programs already allocated in the stimulus plan - this is one way (perhaps the only) to address behavior and prevention. of course, if people can't afford care/to go to the doctor and simply show up at the ER when it's too late for effective treatment, then we'll never make progress on these types of preventable/chronic illnesses. expanding coverage will give us a shot at doing so effectively. period. read his plan first, criticize second.
if you'd like me to spell out the very long list of healthcare indicators where the US lags behind others in the developed world, I will do so (infant mortality, preventable deaths, asthma and HIV/AIDS rates)....I'm sure you're already aware of many of them.
i'm not sure where you're getting your "european income or quality of care" stats - in short, they beat us in almost every care indicator category...and, middle class incomes in this country have been stagnant for years with only 5% of the population making over $200,000 a year or more. if we were making so much money here we wouldn't have so many people going w/o healthcare or showing up at the ER with a runny nose.....
are you suggesting our system is working well?
drew| 5.27.09 @ 3:32PM
Yes
We need more doctors to tell people to eat more veggies, loose weight, excercise. That's what the health care system is for. But if you come down with lung cancer, it's your fault; no treatment because you smoked! Heart disease, no problem too many big macs disqualifies you from care! Doctors need to be trained for prevention! They should spend time educating and exhorting their patients to eat right and exercise!
We should be prevented from spending what we like for healthcare. It's immoral to spend so much on health care and a GDP cap is compulsory! The people should be ordered to spend money on running shoes and exercise- GOVERMENT ORDERS!! When we are old we should accept death gracefully and make way for the new generation! What, those old people need wheelchairs and surgery? Better to spend on the young. Let's make healthcare decisions on each individuals productivity quotient!
I've heard that Soylent Green tastes so good!
Old Texican| 5.27.09 @ 3:35PM
Both Drews
You are simply uninformed.
You spout off with "facts" that are simply lies.
If you like the Post Office, you guys are going to LOVE nationalized healthcare.
You yougsters have never been subject to the "military draft". Well buckle your seatbelts because that is exactly what you are going to get with nationalized healthcare.
...Terrifying in its absolute "bulldozer mentality".
If it goes through, please remember this one comment, and try to Repeal it All when you do understand.
drew| 5.27.09 @ 3:43PM
Old Texican,
Frankly, I have no issue with our postal service....it's one of the best in the world.
What "facts" are lies?
And, I'm certainly not a "youngster"....I just barely missed the draft, but I certainly remember it.
drew| 5.27.09 @ 3:47PM
Old Texican
I know it can be difficult to differentiate a nutty liberal from parody these days but, that was parody!
NavyBrat| 5.27.09 @ 3:51PM
Liberal Drew: Glad you brought up Holland. They actually view people as a liability to the ever shrinking profits of their broke ass system. They even have a board that decides cases of who should live & who should be euthanized. Read on:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/03/nationalizing_life_and_death.html
"Oh but that won't happen over here!" Yeah right. Just wait & see.
ralphy| 5.27.09 @ 3:53PM
Where in hell do democrat deceitful vermin come off calling republicans racist? Because we want our borders protected from ILLEGAL INVADERS? Treasonous slime you democrats are.
drew| 5.27.09 @ 4:12PM
NavyBrat,
We already have a system that weighs profits over patients - it's called your insurance company denying your claim...it happens hundreds of times a day. It's also called, "you can't get insurance because it's too expensive" or "you just lost your insurance because your employer can't afford to keep you employed and you've been laid off." Pick up a newspaper and come out of whatever vacuum you live in....
The two examples I referenced where not raised in an effort to claim those systems are perfect - simply to point out that there are a wide range of options between the mess we have now and GOP scares of "socialized medicine." Period.
oh, and "ralphy", labelling all illegal immigrants "invaders" is, indeed, racist....look it up.
Old Texican| 5.27.09 @ 4:21PM
Whichever "Drew" has his cap on with the sun visor pointed forward:
Sir, please think of a different moniker (user name)
I tend to scroll past the same old daily kos liars and idiots and I would not want to miss a cogent comment.
Thank you
Drew with his cap on backwards with the aluminum foil liner:
We have to go to the Post Office almost daily. Obviously you do not stand in LONG lines at the post office daily.
UPS and Fedex are so superior in service and competency it is NO contest. Actually, it is a pleasure working with UPS and Fedex people.
NavyBrat| 5.27.09 @ 4:49PM
Liberal Drew. Oddly enough, you can still get treated for your illnesses even if you DON'T have insurance. I know. I'm still paying off a kidney stone surgery & an ACL surgery. I'm not bitter about it, either. The fact remains is that there aren't a bunch of government bureaucrats determining whether you are worth the risk or not. If you think that it's bad with the insurance companies, just wait til EVERYONE is on the guhv-ment dole. You might want to read something other than your moronic rags, & get out of the fantasy land in which YOU reside.
Oh, & tell me how labeling someone who didn't follow the rules to get here as an "invader" is racist. MY ancestors followed the rules, as I'm sure yours did, along with everyone else. What's the illegals excuse? Or better yet, what's YOUR excuse for justifying their illegal behavior?
RM| 5.27.09 @ 5:14PM
This is nothing more than one more scheme to control the populace. Taking away Chrysler dealerships from Republican donors was nothing.
Wait til you see how they can deny care to whom they please. Talk about your one party rule!
jerryofva| 5.27.09 @ 5:22PM
Drew:
Sorry for the length of time in responding to your talking points but I passed out from some medication last night. Nnothing really serious but at 59 I thought it might be wise to talk to my doctor this morning. She thought I should see someone although she wasn't available she sent me to another member of the practice where I spent about hour getting checked out. You don't get same day treatment any other place in the world on this short notice unless it is a life threatening situation. Case Closed.
I am really surprised you trotted out the infant mortality rate since I have already pointed out that the rest the world does not cout live births as completely as the US. If the baby is delivered we count it. Premature babies have a high death rate in the first few days. The rest of the world only counts live births after they have survived 48 to 72 hours. There are more incubators for pre mature infants in Washington DC then there are in Europe.
All the other statistics are lifestyle issues and there is nothing in the Obama that can do anything about that.
jerryofva| 5.27.09 @ 5:56PM
Drew:
In my haste to go down to dinner I forgot to debunk your "they end up in the Emergency room" talking point.
Seniors covered by Medicare have become the biggest burden in emergency room treatment. They have to go to the ER because increasing numbers of physcians will not take new Medicare patients because the government will not pay them. Senior medicine is socialized medicine and like all socialized systems care get rationed because there aren't enough doctors to treat patients. Obamacare will extend that system to everone.
BJC| 5.27.09 @ 6:30PM
Mr. Ferrara has this precisely correct in what's going to eventuate in this country, if we are unsuccessful in halting the government takeover of medical treatments, by means of seizing control over all health insurance.
But about that Caribbean island, where the physicians are still free to treat patients as they mutually see fit and contract, where gas combustion cars people want to drive are still available.... For the past few weeks, I've been thinking seriously, which alarms even me, that one or some of the wealthier Right-thinking principled conservatives really ought to buy an island we can all escape to and where we can re-implement a free constitutional republic actually adhering to the U.S. Constitution. Dub this paradise "American In Exile"? "Libertytopia"? "Isla de Rush"? That really sounds good to me right about now.
RM| 5.27.09 @ 9:33PM
BJC - not wealthy, but I'm in!
Daisy| 5.27.09 @ 10:10PM
Navy Brat, I've read that healthy older folks in the Netherlands are afraid to go to the hospital for tests. They're terrified that some overly zealous medical worker will slip them a hypodermic needle. Ain't that nice? Sounds like the culture of death in action. Hell, Obama supports infanticide--not much of a stretch to off old people, too.
Aspiring young doctor| 5.28.09 @ 12:26AM
One of the reasons why I want to become a doctor is to actually help people. What good would I be if I know that when they (a patient) leaves my office, 8 out of 10 times they won't be able to recieve the full treatment that they need and they'll die?
This will become a moral conflict! The doctors and patients will have to work under the table or pay off government supervisors for mercy to look the other way. Why even have doctors? Why even care if you get some disease? Chances are the government will turn you down or worse yet start getting rights over life and death...
This is sick, F-ing sick. They expect everyone to sleep that much better, knowing that a life the government considers to be worthless (most likely based on class and income and ultimately connections that give them VIP treatment courtesy of the government) gets turned down and dies because of some ridiculous injury or inability to access equipment to properly diagnose someone.
Yes everybody deserves the right to proper healthcare; that shouldn't even be disputed! Logic and the ability to feel empathy and work effectively on a solution such as towards healthcare is like the government knowing that there is a needle in front of their eye and they walk towards it and wonder as to why they're crippled and spend years recovering from emotional trauma.
I want to cure people and give them what they need no more and no less. I don't want jackals and snakes playing the middle man. The solution isn't to kill off more than half the country, it's to let the patient deal as they wish with themselves. The idea of knowing your life is controlled by someone who can give poop who you are or anything is terrifying, I can't deal letting that happen.
If there's a God please help us somehow.....
SFranz| 5.28.09 @ 1:32AM
Silly Spectator. The plan is to offer a public competitor to the private health plans. If you don't trust the public plan then you keep paying for the overpriced, inadequate private plan you've always had.
UnitedHealth ($922 million in Q1 profits, $1.5 million spent on lobbying and $3 million in CEO pay) suggests the following (translated into English)
1) Pay doctors less 2) Get terminal patients into hospice sooner and reduce cancer treatments 3) Do fewer transplants and only at top transplant centers 4) Quit making people sicker in nursing homes and hire nurse practitioners instead of MDs to treat nursing home patients
5) Keep people out of the hospital 6) Quit aggressive treatments and get people to accept hospice or DNR orders sooner 7) Get better medication control for heart failure patients 8) See if a nurse can treat chronic patients over the phone. 9) Make hospitals call the insurer before admissions and get patients to be healthier to keep them out of the hospital
10) Use cheaper family practitioners as gatekeepers to coordinate and approve care 11) Quit paying doctors so much and give them bonuses to deny care. 12) Black list doctors that don't do things cheaper 13) Make the doctor call the insurer before ordering an X-Ray, CT, or MRI 14) Make the doctor call the insurer before ordering radiation therapy for cancer patients 15) Take longer to approve claims and reject more claims for more reasons.
COPY OF THE PLAN: http://tinyurl.com/r6j7xp
More of the same, only worse or lets suck it up and deal with this thing. Your call.
Elizabeth| 5.28.09 @ 3:21AM
Sure, SFranz--there's no way a private insurer can compete with the deep pockets of the government. Obummer can just print more money, tax us to death some more, ya know? Course, we know you libs already know this--just joshin' us, right? We're gonna get Canada's disgusting inadequate care--just like lucky Natasha Richardson or perhaps the filthy infectious medical care the Brits are stuck with. DMV Government health care--now that's a winner! Ugly troll.
Lisa| 5.28.09 @ 5:15AM
France has already implemented a version of the current plan being proposed and guess what? They are statistically more satisfied with their health care than Americans.
SORRY FOR SPEAKING THE TRUTH. FEEL FREE TO DISREGARD.
Doug Roberts| 5.28.09 @ 9:06AM
You can cite all the cherry-picked anecdotes you want but if you look at the real picture, with all the statistics, the Canadian health care system is better in every measurable way than the present American 'system'.
Average lifespan is longer. Infant mortality is much lower. Everyone is covered, period! No one suffers the financial burden of having to pay thousands of dollars for emergency medical care.
The total cost of health care per capita in Canada, where everyone has health coverage, is lower than in the U.S., where fully 10% of the population has no coverage whatsoever.
What is the big fear about a fully funded health care system? Big Insurance, Big Pharma and Big HMO loses out, that's what! Boo hoo!
SFranz| 5.28.09 @ 9:32AM
Funny how scared the insurers get of the government doing it cheaper and better at the same time they are writing press releases about how expensive and inefficient government programs are. If they can't compete with a bloated bureacracy, then maybe they should be out of business.
Old Texican| 5.28.09 @ 10:31AM
Gosh, Guys
I certainly have no problem with the CONCEPT of a government run healthcare system...
I have a problem with the Lying, Cheating, Incompetent, Insulated, above the law, politicians and bureacrats...
GAINING A MONOPOLY OVER OUR HEALTHCARE.
Didn't any of you people ever take Junior high economics? MONOPOLIES ARE ALWAYS BAD!
It doesn't matter who the Monopolist is.
Heather| 5.28.09 @ 10:31AM
I have many problems with a nationalized health care.
First of all, it will raise taxes, whether directly or through the prefered method of the Fed creating more money to cover it thereby causing inflation. The economy is in serious trouble because of the Fed doing too much of this. Demanding that the government take on more costs is insanity. Inflation disproportionately effects the poor, the very people "free" healthcare is supposed to help. This "free" healthcare is anything but free.
Secondly, under a truely free market health care system, prices would not be nearly as high as they are now. We have a system where government is almost 50%, distorting prices. I firmly believe that under a true free market system, health care and insurance would be more affordable.
Third, I feel that the government is a big reason why Americans are so unhealthy to begin with. Our government subsidizes corporate farms, subsidizes high fructose corn syrup, and our fda is ineffective at best, corrupted at worst. Those are only a few reasons why I feel this way. I cannot trust government to not act corrupt and in it's own interest. The prospect of putting it in charge of my health is truely frightning. Besides all of the sound economic reasonings leading to things like rationing, think of the political pressure to start regulating people's lifestlyes that are more risky than others. Since everyone will be paying for each other, people will feel entitled to tell others how to live.
Capt. A.| 5.28.09 @ 10:37AM
A fascinating article ... with fascinating comments as well.
Here’s a thought: "Socialism is stupidism" ~ Stefan Kisielewski
Here’s another thought: Government, the State only does ONE thing better than the private sector: kill people. Period.
A final thought: Americans ... as well as others that believe in “legalized plunder,” extraction and redistribution of other people’s wealth; they don’t always get what they want—but they will surely get EXACTLY what they deserve. You can take that to the bank.
C’est la guerre,
Capt. A.
Principaute de Monaco
“Anyone who needs to be persuaded to be free, doesn’t deserve to be.” ~ L. Neil Smith
mike smith| 5.28.09 @ 11:26AM
The thing that nobody seems to talk about relative to consumer driven choices is that the medical industry does not offer visibility. Any consumer driven choice needs to be backed up by forcing the medical industry to publish pricing, publish track records. How can I make a choice if I don't know that the hospital kills 300 people a year in secondary infection, or the doctor only has done the procedure once. Visibility is key to any consumer driven choice, which we do not have today, nor under any proposed plan.
geo8rge| 5.28.09 @ 11:35AM
bill carson| says Ask yourself as a doctor: "Would I work in the U.S. for the government and be paid $84,234 for a full year of work or would I be better off working in the Caribbean for six months making $189,456 and returning to the U.S. to hang out taking it easy?"
This is a scam public school teachers use. They find a small wealthy suburb with high teacher salaries and say if the teachers in New York City are not paid the same they will all leave and go there. I want to see evidence of that exodus. From what I read the problem is doctors leaving the Caribbean for the US.
As to medical rationing, if you do not have a veterans or government employee plan, you are being rationed. I doubt my medical care can get worse or more expensive, so as a personal issue it does not affect me. If I were an airport screener, I would be pissed. No doubt.
RagnarDanneskjold| 5.28.09 @ 11:54AM
I find it interesting that Obama, who would no doubt state that he is anti-monopoly, wants to forcibly create the biggest health care monopoly in the world. He will use your tax dollars to subsidize his undercut of the competition, in order to put the competition out of business. Then he (or whatever moron gets elected president) will have absolute control over health care. And afterwards you won't be able to stop them with anything less than a small army, because they will claim absolute use of force.
Coercive monopolies can ONLY exist with government sanction. There have been private monopolies in the past, but without government sanctioned force on their side, they simply offer low cost goods and services, because they can't force anyone to do anything. Now this government monopoly will be much worse, because it won’t have to worm its way into congress to get the government's force sanction, it will have it inherently because it will be the government. George Washington said, “Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.”
History has given us examples of these kinds of government monopolies: Adolf Hitler, Benito Mussolini, Josef Stalin, Mao Tse-tung, etc.
The Irrevelance Of| 5.28.09 @ 12:31PM
Republicans are irrelevant.
shane| 5.28.09 @ 12:57PM
FACT: The govt-run healthcare system is ALREADY BROKE.
FACT: Enlarging this bureacracy will only exacerbate the problem.
FACT: Americans, for the most part, ALREADY have a quasi-socialist healthcare system; there is, virtually, no aspect of healthcare and insurance that is not ALREADY regulated by one, or more, governmental jurisdictions (Federal, State, Local). This has led to degradation of services and higher costs (though not to the degree claimed by 'liberals').
FACT: ANY federal meddling in healthcare and insurance is COMPLETELY UNCONSTITUTIONAL. They are federal welfare programs, and the federal govt was never granted the authority to institute national welfare programs.
FACT: NO ONE has a 'right' to healthcare, it is a SERVICE provided for by highly-trained and skilled professionals who have sacrificed years of hard work and money attaining their positions; nor, does ANYONE have a 'right' to insurance, it is a PRODUCT offered by legitimate businesses. People have the right to contract, or not, with whomever they choose.
FACT: NO ONE has the 'right' to steal my, or anyone else's property (wages/income), in order to provide goods/services for themselves. This is THEFT, even when it is done by govt on behalf of the 'needy'.
FACT: Most 'liberals' seem incapable of understanding basic economic principles. "Gimme, gimme, gimme!" they shout. They NEVER seem capable of explaining just HOW they'll pay for all of the wonderful goodies they promise us.
I'm afraid it'll take a complete economic/fiscal/political collapse before things really "change". It may be too late, at this point, to do anything about it.
shane| 5.28.09 @ 1:02PM
It'll be interesting to see the Obama-ites excuses when the govt system fails to work as planned.
They're already making excuses for him backing off of his campaign promises to restore the rule-of-law and end the overseas wars.
Bunch of suckers!
LIBERALS, A QUESTION| 5.28.09 @ 1:07PM
How, exactly, do y'all intend to close that $100 TRILLION gap while ENLARGING this federal welfare program?
'Free' healthcare for all (not to mention housing, food, clothing, transportation, education, etc., etc., etc.) sounds nice, but nothing is ever really free, is it?
shane| 5.28.09 @ 1:26PM
Does anyone even believe a word that comes out of Obama's mouth, anymore?
It's AIPAC agenda| 5.28.09 @ 1:44PM
According to Zionist Rabbi Stephen Wise, until 1900, American Zionism was confined to immigrant Jews (Khazar Ashkenazim), and the mass of American Jews (mainly German "Western" Sephardim) were opposed to it. However, by 1910, a million Jewish immigrants had arrived in America from Russia and the Zionist lobby began to represent a significant number of voters. Today, Jews represent approximately 3% of the American population but occupy more or less 90% of all the key positions in the US-Administration. Just as in Russia following the Bolshevik Revolution, the number of Jews numbered around 10% of the population, whereas the number of Jews in the Bolshevik government was approximately 90%. Another interesting "coincidence", President Franklin Roosevelt (from a Jewish family) had seventy-two advisors around him when he led the USA into World War II of whom fifty-two were known Jews. The Elders of Zion consist of the Sanhedrin, the highest Jewish authority since Biblical times, officially numbering 71, and the Judaic texts also reveal the existence of a King, making 72. Whilst in Britain in 1999, the Labour government admitted that it has 72 official "advisors" or "spin-doctors". Both Roosevelt and Blair have implemented social "reforms" called the "New Deal", which in the USA was also known by those in the know as the "Jew Deal". Do we see here history repeating itself?
As the well tried and tested truism says: those who refuse to learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat them.
The British and American governments were manipulated by the Zionists - against the overwhelming opposition of the Western Jews and the Palestinian Jews and the majority of Gentiles - to commit themselves to the creation of an official Jewish homeland in Palestine, which had nothing to do with British national interest, at an enormous cost during a time - the First World War - when all manpower and resources were desperately needed to fight the enemy.
Why this should have occurred is against all logic. However, the most revealing insight into the modus agendi and the modus operandi of the world manipulators is acquired through reading the Protocols
KyMouse| 5.28.09 @ 2:33PM
Dear 'It's AIPAC agenda,'
So sorry they couldn't get the rabies vaccine to you in time.
alan jacquemotte | 5.28.09 @ 3:17PM
Don't blame Rawls for this idea. You CAN create a system that gets equality AND service for all, you just have to be very careful with anything that involves "insurance" (the root of all evil). If you give everyone a $2000 deductible major medical policy (and no other coverage), give them the $2000 in cash but require they have to put out the $2000 out-of-pocket first, healthcare spending (and ER-as-Primary Care usage) will plunge.
A recent study indicates that increasing serum vitamin D levels (25(OH)D) to at least 40 nanograms per milliliter of blood sample year-round could significantly reduce rates for cancer, cardiovascular disease, diabetes mellitus, respiratory infections, and dental/periodontal diseases. If we give everybody a free yearly checkup and pay them $10 for every nanogram of vitamin D their blood serum level is above 30, we could probably wipe out most disease within our lifetime, and save a bunch of money in the process.
jim| 5.28.09 @ 3:23PM
This whole healthcare-insurance fiasco is typical of govt meddling.
Relatively free-market system in place does a fine job of providing services for ALL, though it can never be perfect. No complicated, societal system can be perfect.
Govt finds an excuse to meddle, ususally for the "common good" or to "protect consumers" from Big Business (the same folks who own most politicians).
Govt screws things up, blames the free-market, and comes up with a "new solution" to the new 'problems' it created by meddling in the first place.
The "new solution" fails, and once again, govt blames the free-market; more govt meddling ensues to 'fix' the problem that IT created.
Repeat, ad nauseum, until the system collapses, all the while blaming someone else for the failure.
End result: conditions FAR WORSE than when govt decided to start 'fixing' the non-existent 'crisis' in the first place! Less freedom, less prosperity, and more problems.
johnny| 5.28.09 @ 3:28PM
Conservatives and libertarians have to STOP ceding the moral high ground to Statist scum who want to use govt FORCE to impose their ideas of "social justice" on society.
There is NOTHING moral about using the coercive power of govt to FORCE people to do the 'right' thing.
If individuals want to form private, consensual collectives who think they can live in communistic harmony...I say more power to them! Show us how "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs" works in the REAL world. VOLUNTARILY choose to support someone else (and their families) unable or unwilling to support themselves.
Just leave the rest of us alone! Don't use govt to FORCE YOUR IDEAS onto ME.
alan jacquemotte | 5.28.09 @ 3:39PM
Johnny, Actually the main thing that govt does (going back to Cain and Abel and certainly as justified by Locke who was had a vested interest in justifyinbg the theft of the land of native North Americans is to force privatization of property onto everyone. As Paine pointed out in Agrarian Justice, the government owes compensation to everyone for that impairment. If we had that compensation already in place, we wouldn't be having this discussion. Also, the main intrusion of the govt is to hold down the supply of healthcare providers. If we had as many healthcare [providers per capita as Cuba, we would have dirt cheap healthcare (as they do in Cuba).
Aisha| 5.28.09 @ 4:11PM
0bama isapying my rent and buying my gas. Now he be wanting to pay for my beauty treatments. O how I luvz him!!
Smitty| 5.28.09 @ 5:50PM
Canadian socialized health care stinks--just ask poor Natasha Richardson. Oops! She can't answer.
Richard Roark | 5.28.09 @ 11:04PM
The reason that the Obamatrons are going to take over healthcare is to get the general populace to accept rationing of healthcare to seniors. The statistics show that in the last year of life medicare expenditures average five and one half times the average of all other years. If everyone is in the same rationing pool, then the government will be able to sell their wisdom of cutting off care to those persons whose healthcare costs are starting to show the upward spiral that the computerized records indicate the beginning of the terminal year. Then the government's line will be, "It's for the children. Would you take funds from them just to extend a senior citizen's life six or seven months? You heartless bastard?" In reality it will be the government's thirst for dollars for vote buying and cronyism.
Of course the government will not allow their decisions to be litigated. I can see delays taking well past the day of death and the law written that heirs have no standing as plaintiffs.
I read recently that fraud in the medicare system was pegged at 31% of total expeditures. Maybe the government needs to hire some people from those evil insurance companies' audit departments. No insurance company could survive at that rate and the taxpayer shouldn't have to pay that as well as the overhead costs, like all government versus private industry costs are well over what they should be.
Amy| 5.29.09 @ 12:45AM
Forget the auditors--government is responsible for most of that 31% fraud. Count on it.
Liza| 5.29.09 @ 12:47AM
You mean the 51 million 'children' who've been aborted? Obummer doesn't give a damn about them, either.
Bob| 5.29.09 @ 6:22PM
Although the intentions of those who advocate for socialized (government controlled) medical care might be good, history shows that most government run programs are rife with mismanagement and waste and consequently extremely costly. The reality, unfortunately, is that a government-run plan will most certainly fail and the consequences will be catastrophic both for the continuingly worsening federal balance sheet and, likely, the health and lives of many Americans. There was a comment left above by 'Pete' which really described the problem best - an intelligent physician or health care provider will not be able to tolerate being controlled by a government clerk who cannot possibly, of course, understand the nuances of medicine nearly as well as the physician. The physician has in her or his mind a complicated yet logical decision tree based upon years of study and experience. Requiring them to take direction from a government clerk would, of course, be one of the great absurdities of mankind. Equally problematic is that paying for the layers of government administration will be, at a minimum, as wasteful as any excess amount paid to health insurance company executives and the like. It is a foregone conclusion, then, that government run health care in America will fail. The only hope then is for the private sector to solve the problem of making care available to the citizenry at a manageable cost. Fortunately, capitalist America has a tremendously positive track record of success in a wide range of human endeavors. Admittedly, capitalism has its flaws (ie, monopolies), but fortunately our American history shows that our government has actually performed quite well in ameliorating such flaws (anti-trust regulation, fraud, racketeering, etc.). So, why not employ some of our tried and true American methodologies - have the government ensure that health insurance companies are operating in a fair and free market and let the capitalist system operate in this arena as it has so successfully done over the ages. Certainly the passage of a few sound laws (game rules) by our legislature which is already on the payroll is exponentially cheaper than adding another army of government workers. Could it be as simple as passing a law that says to the insurance companies - 'if you insure one you must offer to insure any at the same price - including, of course, those who are already sick'. Would not competition among the insurance companies provide the best value for the lowest price? Could it be that easy - or am I overlooking a critical component? In closing, I suppose I could finish with the rhetorical remark - 'you got a better idea?'
Ron Greiner | 5.31.09 @ 7:09AM
Tax free HSAs have tax free deposits, growth and withdrawals. Total tax freedom. I enrolled America's 1st HSA in 1996 so you can trust me. The Republican plan gives a tax credit of $2,300 to an individual and $5,700 for a family. A 30-year-old male can get HSA insurance in Tampa for $57 a month or $684 a year. With the Republican plan the government would pay 100% of the premiums PLUS deposit $1,616 into his tax free HSA at the bank.
Rush Limbaugh and FOX News are wrong for censoring the Republican plan. I have been after Rush Limbaugh's producer Kit for years to discuss Republican health care reform and the tax free HSA. Kit is such an ass that he says "TOTAL TAX FREEDOM" is boring. Kit Carson's phone number is (212) 445-3966. If one of you calls Kit and demands that Rush discuss the centerpiece of Republican health care reform, the HSA, then there will be 2 of us. This could be the start of a movement.
I have been advertising the HSA on Rush for 12 years in selected markets and it's TIME that loser discusses Republican health care reform and the tax free HSA. The younger that you are the lower the cost on your HSA insurance and the LARGER your HSA deposit from the government. This isn't a complicated idea. When you call Kit tell him it's so easy that a caveman could do it.
I'm not teasing you. I'm deadly serious. Here is Rush's producers cell phone number, (973) 953-6339.
I figure if we can get Rush to mention the tax free HSA and Republican health care reform then maybe Hannity will get a clue. Maybe Glenn Beck might discuss Republican health care reform too. I know it's just a dream that somebody on talk radio might discuss Republican solutions when we are knee deep in propaganda from the White House on Socialized Medicine.
Come on Rush you can say, tax free HSA.
Wrinkle Cream | 6.1.09 @ 5:40AM
Such a really or wonderful site and great information give me plz some more suggest for me thanks so lot
Doug Roberts| 6.1.09 @ 12:00PM
Smitty (5.28.09 @ 5:50PM) wrote:
Canadian socialized health care stinks--just ask poor Natasha Richardson. Oops! She can't answer.
Ms. Richardson was the author of her own misfortune. She was attended to immediately and was offered medically escorted transport to a nearby hospital. She refused the offer. She said she was fine. By the time anyone realized her condition (a slow bleed into the brain), it was too late. Nothing would have saved her by then, not even some magical, American wonder hospital. So your comment has nothing to do with one system or another; it is about awareness of what can result from a seemingly minor bump on the head.
Until you have a more meaningful argument than "Canadian socialized health care stinks", just shut your fucking pie hole!!
Jon| 6.3.09 @ 6:56PM
A few posts here have tried to point out Hawaii's great healthcare system. They should call a few doctors there before quoting statistics. Hawaii is a mess that has been getting worse for quite some time. Good doctors won't stay as the income is too low. Hospitals struggle to stay open, the newspapers are littered with gloom and doom. I would be interested to hear about the quality of care.
I, like others are reading this and many other sites for information so please be accurate.
thomas brooks| 6.5.09 @ 5:04AM
Somebody must make a profit on my being sick, or I will refuse treatment!
Kate| 6.7.09 @ 7:35PM
Well, we are all going to die, so take care of yourselves using preventive methods from nature, like eating good foods and keeping your weight down. If you have an illness, buy something over the counter. My mother had cancer and fasted for 6 weeks, came back with no signs of it and it never returned. If you don't want to use the skills and tools we have now for free, then don't complain when you get a boo boo and you don't have healthcare. What do you think they did back in cave days and prehistoric time? Did we call a specialist at John's Hopkins and demand that they see the doctor now and fully paid for by taxes? Ha! Life will lead to death and in death you will have everlasting life. Forget healthcare reform and worry about your soul's reform.
Pingback| 6.8.09 @ 12:52AM
Ten Reasons Why Medicare for All Will Be AWESOME! - Smart Girl Nation links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
euro steve| 6.9.09 @ 3:23PM
i hope you americans stay with your over priced private health care system that leaves out 50million of your citezens now thats what i call rationing , we europeans dont have to worry about the cost of our medication and our health care systems are not dragging the rest of our industries into the abyss , you guys cant even provide health care for your citezens yet you call your self a world power your a joke. We hope you never get universal healthcare so you drown in your own medical bills have a nice day suckers . euro steve god bless the european union
Pingback| 6.13.09 @ 4:44PM
Offspring Parody: Obama, Keep Your Hope and Change | CatherineFavazza.com links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 6.16.09 @ 9:38PM
Welfare Secretary Kathleen Sebelius to insurance companies: do what we say if you kno links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
hopi| 6.22.09 @ 2:57AM
Transportation is a public infrastructure that provides universal coverage. Those who can afford to drive on route-61 in an SUV as well as those who drive a bicycle can have access at different levels. Just because it is free, no one wants to keep going round and round in the local beltway. Perhaps a universal healthcare system will be just like that. Some will use it more, some less; some will get speedy results and some will have slow results. It is interesting that while education is left to "local" funding and the various disparities resulting from that, healthcare discussion is looking at national financing of what would eventually turn out to be for local access.
ummm| 7.22.09 @ 11:43PM
Um, Medicare is going broke because the entire pool consists of old and sick people who use a lot of health care, so of course more gets paid out than what comes in. To eliminate the private industry and bring a lot of young healthy people into the same pool, Medicare would be fine financially. The key is the elimination of the private industry that leeches money away from a large diverse pool. This is not rocket science, people, cmon.
norris hall| 8.5.09 @ 2:50AM
More and more Americans are dropping out of the US health care system and choosing to take advantage of medical care in countries like India, Thailand, Korea and Singapore.
Those countries are eager to cater to Americans who are uninsured, underinsured and priced out of the American system.
I have used Thai public and private hospitals for the last 4 years and find the service to be excellent.
And the cost savings are astounding.
The cost of the same medical procedure is generally 1/10th to 1/20th the cost of the same procedure here in the US.
If I didn't have to have medical insurance to cover me for an unforseen medical emergency like a car accident, I'd drop my insurance and save all my medical needs and have them taken care of in Thailand.
If you are interested in finding out more...google "medical tourism"
There are many countries gearing up for the flood of Americans visiting their hospitals...especially if there is no healthcare reforms and Americans by the millions are still underinsured or uninsured.
norris hall| 8.5.09 @ 3:10AM
More and more Americans are dropping out of the US health care system and choosing to take advantage of medical care in countries like India, Thailand, Korea and Singapore.
Those countries are eager to cater to Americans who are uninsured, underinsured and priced out of the American system.
I have used Thai public and private hospitals for the last 4 years and find the service to be excellent.
And the cost savings are astounding.
The cost of the same medical procedure is generally 1/10th to 1/20th the cost of the same procedure here in the US.
If I didn't have to have medical insurance to cover me for an unforseen medical emergency like a car accident, I'd drop my insurance and save all my medical needs and have them taken care of in Thailand.
If you are interested in finding out more...google "medical tourism"
There are many countries gearing up for the flood of Americans visiting their hospitals...especially if there is no healthcare reforms and Americans by the millions are still underinsured or uninsured.
norris hall| 8.5.09 @ 3:10AM
More and more Americans are dropping out of the US health care system and choosing to take advantage of medical care in countries like India, Thailand, Korea and Singapore.
Those countries are eager to cater to Americans who are uninsured, underinsured and priced out of the American system.
I have used Thai public and private hospitals for the last 4 years and find the service to be excellent.
And the cost savings are astounding.
The cost of the same medical procedure is generally 1/10th to 1/20th the cost of the same procedure here in the US.
If I didn't have to have medical insurance to cover me for an unforseen medical emergency like a car accident, I'd drop my insurance and save all my medical needs and have them taken care of in Thailand.
If you are interested in finding out more...google "medical tourism"
There are many countries gearing up for the flood of Americans visiting their hospitals...especially if there is no healthcare reforms and Americans by the millions are still underinsured or uninsured.
Markweee| 9.8.09 @ 12:53AM
Good article. Mind mapping is really help for remember the information. my be
Online Finance degree AND PhD history
Markweee| 9.8.09 @ 12:54AM
Good article. Mind mapping is really help for remember the information.
--
Duaneh, editor of ibs medications
online phd degree
Markweee| 9.8.09 @ 12:54AM
What a GREAT job you're doing on anabubula: thank you. I've recently discovered http://bubbl.us/ which is a really attractive, simple, free, web-based mind-mapping tool and allows sharing and collaboration. Worth a look? Dave
masters degree business
Markweee| 9.8.09 @ 12:55AM
This is amazing
Online School
Lingerie | 9.17.09 @ 9:39PM
sexy lingerie wholesale lingerie
Trackback| 12.24.09 @ 10:48PM
connecticut credit repair, on connecticut credit repair, links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pengamat | 1.12.10 @ 11:56AM
medicare for all is good as long as government will pay all of medical cost for everyone.. Let's Think Out of The Box|Astaga.com Portal Lifestyle On The Net