Reader Mail
Warning: Low Battery
Volt’s charge account. Bunion care in New Zealand. Pulling grandma’s plug. End of life costs. Not mean enough. Plus more.
(Page 5 of 5)
Traditional insurance structures benefits in order to preserve the sufficient ratio of the large pool of premium payers to the smaller pool of benefit recipients. The specific assortment of benefits is negotiated between the insurance company and your employer. (For instance, one’s employer may seek less mental health coverage for greater dental benefits)
In a government one payer system, the effort to cover all things for all people will at first seek to reduce costs by eliminating “unnecessary tests and imaging” and telling all healthcare providers how much they will be paid. Eventually, these measures yield only shrinking returns.
The next step is to limit accessibility. One such means is to institute a system of co-pays in which the benefit recipient pays a fee to the healthcare provider along with the payment by the government. Another step is to arbitrarily limit the number of places any service may be provided. Another possible step would be to establish quotas in which a healthcare provider can perform a particular procedure only so many times a year.
Of course, there is always the temptation and inborn desire for those in favor of government run healthcare to “rationalize” medical care. For example, they may mandate the use of topical or oral medicines for children with chronic ear inflections instead of ear tubes. Or, Eliminate ultra-sounds for newly pregnant women. Or bar tonsillectomies except for the worst cases. Or allow only a certain number of medical students to go into the various specialties with the majority going into family practices. Or what if we get some flakes in authority who believe most sicknesses can be cured with herbal teas?
With such efforts to make nationwide health care “sensible” one can almost hear it already: “Just think of how many childhood immunizations one hip replacement or organ transplant could pay for!”
Somehow, I don’t think our forefathers fought in the Revolution risking their lives, fortunes, and reputations so a panel of experts could tell them what their doctor and hospital can do for them.
Makes “Give me liberty or give me death” more than a rhetorical
flourish, doesn’t it?
—Mike Dooley
Sorry Bob, I would much prefer the government to spend MY tax money on healthcare for every LEGAL citizen/resident of this great country than to spend it some of these other left wing programs being forced through the Congress.
Just take the money that the politicians spend on bogus travel, pork, set asides, and earmarks (e.g., airplanes) and the problem would almost solve itself. Add the total cost for the messiah to travel the country and the world since his inauguration and we would probably have a surplus.
Return what is left in the stimulus giveaway to the treasury, cancel cap and trade [tax] and the rest of the messiah’s “get us to socialism” programs. These measures would save the trillions in debt for which he is committing us.
My wife and I have paid into Social Security our entire working lives; something the politicians and government employees do not have to do. In addition, we have paid into Medicare and Medicaid our entire working lives and, since retirement, we have paid additional premiums for Medicare — something the politicians (I’m not sure about government employees) do not have to do.
How much do you think it cost to get the illustrious Ted Kennedy his brain surgery? Under the messiah’s healthcare proposal, Mr. Kennedy would not be eligible for such a procedure — oh I forgot, under the messiah’s healthcare proposal he would not have to participate — nor be subject to the decisions of the “death panel.” No member of congress — current or past, will have to worry about the contents of their thousand plus page healthcare reform legislation — legislation which most of them have not read, nor understand, nor care about, other than to rename it “Insurance Reform,” since we have already been told they will be exempted.
One quick fix to the cost of health care would be to immediately pass and enact a strict (no loopholes) Tort Reform Act. But, since the Congress has such a large percentage of lawyers in its membership, this is a silly notion. Another fix would be to ban lobbyists (as the messiah said he would). Another — force the politicians to write their own legislation PERSONALLY, with the assistance of a greatly reduced staff (maximum 5 pages) and input from their constituents. Force them stop spending our tax dollars to get themselves re-elected.
Finally, pass a law to force the Congress TO VOTE for their pay increases instead of the current, obscene law whereby the increase is automatic UNLESS the congress VOTES NOT TO TAKE THE INCREASE! Included in this law should be term limits — no one stays in government for more than a TOTAL of 12 years. And, this is blue sky of course, take away at least 75% of their perks and retirement benefits. Let them serve their country as they were elected to do, instead of serving themselves.
I reckon this screed will most certainly get me reported to the
White House “fishy” communications forum by someone!
— C.D. Lueders
Melbourne, Florida
I do not want to “bankrupt this great country.” I do want to be left alone. I have spent my entire life building up a nest egg for my wife and I. This is my money, not yours, the Government’s, or my children’s. If I decide in the last 90 days of my or my wife’s life to spend it all to get another 90 days for us, then that is my business, not yours, the Government’s, or my children’s. That is what this is all about.
Leave us alone sir, just leave us alone.
— Mark Andreasen
Letter to the Editor View all comments (22) | Leave a comment
More Articles From Reader Mail
http://spectator.org/archives/2009/08/19/the-last-ninety-days
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Way Beyond the Lemonade Stand
- Revenge of the Fruitcakes
- Gerry Ford at 100
The Spectacle Blog
Democrat Dan Maffei Blames Budget Cuts for Girl’s Rape, Mother’s Murder
Robert Stacy McCain | 6.18.13
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
frost| 8.19.09 @ 7:01AM
That Groucho Marx comment has also been attributed to a gentleman named Ernest Benn.
How appropriate!
Michael L. Hauschild| 8.19.09 @ 8:41AM
Until fuel cells are perfected and the distribution and storage issues of separating and storing hydrogen and oxygen are resolved all this hoopla about “green” transportation is unrealistic. Fossil hydrocarbon fuels are incredibly efficient within the context of some established frameworks (the efficiency of trains and barges for instance will boggle your mind). Progress does not flourish under the government stipulation to politically correct scenarios.
Wars, depressions, and recessions are the motivators for innovative solutions. Scientists and freedom loving individuals do best in times of stress and you will soon witness the vehement rejection of the socialist principal of “abandonment,” be it proven technologies, proven economic principles, or proven democratic political systems.
The Red Editor| 8.19.09 @ 9:58AM
To the wonderfully confused Loretta Austin of New Zealand: Maybe it has something to do with the fact that the US population exceeds that of your native country by a mere 300,000,000 people. Or maybe it has to do with the belief in individual liberties this country was founded upon, as opposed to individual entitlements. This is not a Socialist nation, nor is it a Democracy...it's a Representative Republic. You also mentioned the ol' cliche about "a mark of a civilised country shows in how we treat the underprivileged." Needless to say, US citizens donate more to charity and social causes around the world than any other country, and most if not all combined. FORCED CHARITY IS NOT CHARITY. No US citizen wants to see their fellow man/woman without adequate services, some of us are just smart enough to recognize when those services are administered improperly or to the fault of those receiving said aid. Please, you can come here and get an education, but stay out of political arenas you admittedly don't understand.
2Anglico| 8.19.09 @ 10:18AM
Loretta: People who cannot afford/choose not to buy insurance, GET CARE IF THEY NEED IT. There is a little law duly passed by our congress that makes it so.
As to "violently" opposing .... obviously you know NOTHING about violence.
The house bill being discussed DOES NOT ALLOW a dual plan as in NZ. We are opposed to our government trying to GRAB POWER they are not allowed to have!
Ned| 8.19.09 @ 10:21AM
In reply to Loretta Austin's letter, "CAN"T FIGURE US OUT", from Red Beach, NZ:
The health care reforms Mr. Obama is tossing about are no more about health care than the global warming scam (Cap & Trade) is about the environment. Both are naked attempts to seize power in the US government in a manner that their supporters believe will be irreversible, and remake the country in ways most Americans oppose.
If there was even the least bit of honesty in these two packages of corruption, Americans - the most generous people on the planet - would not be so outspoken against them. If "health care reform" were the real objective there are a myriad of changes and solutions to issues that heavily effect the overall health care outcome in the country. Tellingly, not one of those changes or solutions is even under discussion in the most dishonest, calculating, manipulative White House in American history.
And, by the way, none of those changes or solutions require 1000 pages of impenetrable jargon to enact.
Were there even a hint of honesty in Obama's schemes, there would be at least grudging admission that most of the problems in American health care costs are caused by the very government that now pretends it can "fix" them. If there were a shadow of truth in the room, proponents would not feel obliged to falsely inflate the numbers of uninsured to the commonly quoted 47 or 50 million, but would address the 9 or so million 'core' uninsured.
But to do that they would also have to admit that even that core group actually gets health care when they need it. It may be inconveniently delivered, but health care is available, even to the millions upon millions of illegal aliens here that you, Loretta, don't have to worry about. And to admit that there are actually fewer uninsured than there are illegal aliens in the system, and they all get care, reduces the scope of the problem to something manageable without a complete make over of the American economy - but then, that's the actual goal, isn't it.
One thing that Americans really do not like is being taken for chumps.
2Anglico| 8.19.09 @ 10:23AM
Also Loretta, millions of Americans have died so that others would not have to live in tyranny. DO NOT PREACH to us about caring for the "underprivleged".
Ned| 8.19.09 @ 10:31AM
And, as the Red Editor points out above, Loretta, having a perfect health care system in an isolated country of 4M is an altogether different question than providing for more than 300M. Hell, we have at least three times as many illegals here than you have citizens!
Appleby| 8.19.09 @ 10:47AM
Loretta, I was in your country in 1991 when it declared bankruptcy. I have a good friend in Wellington who lost his job with Air New Zealand when it was privatized, who has kept me posted over the years on how that worked out. I understand that since the cold shower bath taken by the people of your country (and I heard the public service announcements instructing all the Needy and Underprivileged that the gravy train had ground to a halt and they should report to their Nannies to find out what happens next) and the injection of market capitalism into many areas previously socialized, that things have dramatically improved, to the point where your post office gives everybody one day of free mail per year. I also understand your dollar is now 67 cents to the US Dollar as opposed to 50 cents in 1991.
I very much enjoyed the three weeks I spent in New Zealand and I recommend it to any sports tourist in the world except race car drivers not involved in rally. H owever, living there would give me the creeps because your population is so small and isolated that you pretty much all have the same face.
Ray| 8.19.09 @ 11:57AM
"Can you please explain exactly why Americans are so violently and maliciously against providing care for those who can't afford insurance?"
Loretta. no one is being denied health care in America. Let me repeat that, NO ONE is being denied health care in America. Not even the people who are just visiting America and have no insurance can be denied health care. I don't know where you get your information, but it's false.
David Govett| 8.19.09 @ 12:38PM
Not only does New Zealand pay nothing for the international security system paid for by the overburdened American taxpayer, it won't even let American Navy ships drop anchor there. Freeloaders like NZ often have disposable money to spend on health care, etc., and are particularly happy to proffer advice to the U.S., as long as they don't need to contribute. My disgust with NZ is boundless.
JerseyJ| 8.19.09 @ 1:09PM
A splendid rant by C.D. Lueders. I heartily agree.
PolishKnight| 8.19.09 @ 2:31PM
Has anyone noticed that socialist paradises always seem to work (somewhat) when there's a small population in a large resource area, isolated (on an island or far north), and usually almost entirely lily white?
Crack open your borders, Loretta, and let all the illiterate people with health problems in from near you and then give us a call and see how it's working out for ya.
Smithy| 8.20.09 @ 5:31AM
As an immigrant from Britain to New Zealand of 52 years I can understand some replies to Loretta's letter. PolishKnight touches a good point since large numbers of Pacific Islanders have flooded into NZ causing a blip in health, education, and policing services in some parts. NZ officials would of course deny any problems, but we older types can see the negative differences. David Govet is both right and wrong. NZ has supplied men and material to both world wars, exceptional in relation to it's population. Helped out the US in Vietnam and has an SIS detachment in Afghanistan. Yes, some of us don't like the big anti-nuclear lobby that exists here and so the refusal to have US nuclear ships in NZ ports. It is sad there is an undercurrent of anti-Americanism among many Kiwis. Personally I have helped host American farm visitors to this country and would say they are the best. It is my concern at the moment the way western democratic nations are being undercut by the left, and old tried and true systems are coming under fire, a propaganda war is in progress to force our western cultural inheritance into submission to a foreign miasma.
Pat| 8.20.09 @ 11:07AM
Loretta Austin,
If you were indeed a student in the United States, you would have an adequate understanding of why most Americans are so “violently and maliciously against providing care for those who can't afford insurance”. You are a shill and a fraud…