The American Spectator

Mary Louise | 8.22.09 @ 8:30AM

Unfortunately, increased governmental control almost certainly would put political before patient priorities.

No matter how good intentions may be, this is unavoidable. That's the law of unintended consequences that everyone with a lick of common sense knows will take effect sooner rather than later.

Paglia reminded us in one of her recent pieces of how big a Country we are and what Byzantine system would have to be installed to attempt to meet the requirements of nationalization. In short, we're probably the population least suited or constitutionally amenable to this attempt at nationalization. In addition, the party in power is waging this attempt as siege against those who want no part of it.

In his address to the Heritage audience, MP Hannan said that that there was no end to the complaints of Brits against the NHS, but that it's so much a part of their existence that anytime serious modification is suggested they retreat in fear because the foundation that existed before NHS has been completely destroyed. They have visions of complete abandonment. That is and enslaved mindset. I hope we're more durable than that. For the moment, at least we're smart enough not to trust this administration any more than insurance providers, and smart enough to trust and respect our doctors more than the president and congress. Obama's sales pitch about government keeping the insurance providers honest is laughable in the extreme to that Reagan marker of 59%

I thought Michael Steele was strong when he told the president and congress "up or down, baby," pass the poison, if you dare. You never know how things are going to play out, but if this is rammed through the senate via reconciliation maybe the cry for '10 will be "give us the numbers and we'll repeal this despotic and un-American legislation."

Via Hot Air, Forbes has a good piece. Here's the meat:

**The refrain of a health care system in "crisis" is not just overwrought, but obviously untrue for most Americans whose personal experience is of a health insurance system that works pretty well, albeit with some inconvenience, most of the time and provides state-of-the-art care, albeit inefficiently, almost all of the time. We are not creating a one-time obligation, but a fundamental entitlement that will be with us indefinitely.

Finally, the town hall confrontations across America have shown a political class that brazenly refuses to read--much less master--the details of the legislation, an irresponsible arrogance that was tolerated when it came to the stimulus legislation but which voters are much less willing to accept when there is no need for panic.

There is a growing perception of condescension surrounding the selling of the White House's health care plan. Common sense tells us the government cannot simultaneously expand coverage and reduce costs. The government cannot dramatically inflate demand for health care services and eliminate market mechanisms for allocating them without devising some way of rationing supply and demand through political means. To suggest otherwise, as the White House has, is not just misleading but insulting. And the American people don't like to have their intelligence insulted.**

When I travel to Italy the subject of WWII and Mussolini inevitably comes up. When my relatives bring it up they usually begin by lamenting Mussolini's election, reminding me that he instituted universal education that raised the level of literacy in the Country. They despise him the most when I remind them that he allowed Germany to occupy. They think he met a fitting end, and so do I. But anytime I start beating up on him myself they become defensive. It's a thing of nationalism which is what Hannan's tale of Britain tells us too.

O/T. I'm surprised you haven't written anything yet on Ridge's allegations. He's done himself no favors by being suspected of lying either before - when he counters what he's now alleging- or now.

If what he's alleging is true, that coupled with present circumstances w/Obama and health care, both names will become imprecations by future generations.

Here's the link: http://tinyurl.com/m6psmc.

James Waller| 8.23.09 @ 2:57AM

Americans seem only to be interested in the NHS at this moment in its history. Please dont forget that for nearly 20 years the NHS suffered massive cutbacks and closures from the Conservatives under Margeret Thatcher. Labour came into power at the NHS' lowest point in it's history. After many billions investment the NHS looks somthing like a proper health service again but money alone was and is not the answer. An Americanised "target" system was introduced in order to push forward the development of a working system, unfortunately this was (in some cases)(the ones quoted the most)) abused by some policy makers and managers in order to meet targets. The NHS needs to drop the target system now and move forward. This is part of the continuing evolution of the NHS, from it's humble beginings over 60 years ago to it's now top heavy beuracracy. In ten years time there will be other issues but as always, at it's heart is it's primary role, to treat every UK citizen regardless of income. Is this not what the world should strive for?

James Waller| 8.23.09 @ 3:11AM

And no, the UK does not have an enslaves mindset. We understand that without free healthcare for all, a large portion of our population would suffer as yours does. Perhaps we should hear more the wishes of the American "have nots" rather than the opinion of those who can comfortable afford comprehensive insurance and therefore think there is nothing wrong with the current system.
Unfortunately this issue will be decided by the those who dont need a more forgiving system of health care and the changes would most likely be cosmetic. I know with certanty that I could not afford the treatment I have had the privalige of recieving my entire life from the NHS.

Patriot| 8.24.09 @ 2:50AM

James, 85% of Americans are satisfied with their health care insurance. Doesn't it make sense to help the remaining 15% WITHOUT hurting the other 85%?

Socialized medicine is not about health care--it is about government power and control--and we DON'T want it. We are just different from you Brits; we value our freedom.

Sorry, but you DO have an enslaved mindset. Pity.

Patriot| 8.24.09 @ 2:56AM

And, James: From the numerous British government health care horror stories I've read emanating from your country--there seems to be plenty of suffering going on in your population.

As Sarah Palin says, "Thanks but no thanks." Works for me.

James| 8.24.09 @ 8:44AM

hmm.. im not sure the 85% is quite accurate. Yes 85% can afford it but are all 85% happy? The WHO's list of national care quality, rate the US at No. 37 Britain in the top 5. I dont particularly care weather your government tries to nationalise health care or not. I just find it a little amusing that the richest nation in the world willfully dis-allows its poorest 15% adequate health care. I dont mind admiting that the NHS is not perfect and that is why we dont have an enslaved midset. on the other hand you feel that there is nothing wrong with your system, THAT is an enslaved mind set. Just make a concerted effort to protect those who need it most.

Patriot| 8.24.09 @ 3:54PM

Don't put words in my mouth, liberal. I did not say our system is perfect, I said we can help the 15% of Americans who don't have good health care without destroying the good to excellent health care of the other 85%. To say otherwise means you're more interested in increasing liberal government power and control than health care for all Americans.

If you did any research you'd see that my 85% figure is correct.

You readily admit that your health care system is faulty: I've read numerous accounts of your elderly and seriously ill routinely left to starve to death in hospital wards; yet you do nothing to try to fix such terrible abuses--that's an enslaved mind set.

I suggest that you try to fix the health care nightmare that exists in your country instead of sticking your nose in our concerns.

You enjoy bending over and assuming the position for your authoritarian system of health care--we don't.

James| 8.24.09 @ 6:44PM

erm, getting a little agressive, but then I suppose that is to be expected...

In fact I see no point in repudiating your attack as you dont seem in anyway interested in a reasonable discusion. I'm not about to begin some childish tit-for-tat spat.

If you would care to read my first post again you will realise that I simply pointed out a few things related to the NHS, the UK has not attacked or belittled US health care as you are doing to the NHS.

Please respond so that I may ignore it.

BYE BYE| 8.24.09 @ 8:16PM

Buttinsky, don't you have enough of your own problems at home? Why intrude your meddlesome opinions into our discourse when no one has asked for them?

Surely you understand my point: Would you like it if I obnoxiously lectured you on your country's policy matters?

You liberals are all the same--imperious, condescending and thin-skinned.

You British used to be courteous: Too bad that's no longer true.

I notice that you didn't refute my charges of abuse and neglect of your elderly and seriously ill. You have no soul and no conscience, Sir. How dare you lecture us about our "inhumanity," hypocrite.

Truth to liberals is like sunlight to vampires.

Jonas| 8.25.09 @ 8:13PM

Patriot, save your vitriolics and look at yourself! you talk about meddleing? think about a cirtain country who is willing to go to war, sacrifice its own solders, kill civilians for their administration's vested intrest in the big O-I-L. dont make me laugh.

http://www.prospect.org/cs/art....._is_so_bad

Read this article and then tell me it's us Brits who are assuming the position for authoritarians!! Again, its your administration's vested interests in pharmaceuticals that you need to examin.

And no just for the record, your sorry excuse of a 85% stat was clearly orchestrated to reasure yourselvs that your system is "good to excellent".
dig a little deeper if you can or just do what you have done so far, assume the position to listen to another of your politicians tell you how good your system is compared to those savages across the water.
You are a rude, self-satisfying, agressive, blinded by a corrupt sense of psudo-patriotism.

It seems that truth to you is nothing more than an inconvenience to be ignored. A*S**LE

NO BRITISH WIMPS!| 8.27.09 @ 3:04AM

Jonas, Good God in heaven! I hope you're not really British because your spelling absolutely sucks!! I guess your school system is as hopelessly incompetent as your health care system. Good luck in front of your Death Panels, moron.

You are losers and we don't want to be like you whiny wimp wussies. Buzz off, Bozo

Patriot| 8.27.09 @ 3:06AM

Oh, Jonas: Bend over, grab your ankles REAL tight--and enjoy! Sheep boy.

Kevin, Meath| 8.27.09 @ 6:22AM

Came to this site for some intelligent comment on the health care debate that has been going on across the pond --- got that one wrong. As a Brit (don't view myself as enslaved in the mind but of course I could be wrong-- as can anybody) the comments coming out of the USA about our 'evil' 'stalinist' 'death boards' etc are not only offensive but don't fit with reality. Many of the accusations regarding the NHS from the US are exactly those put up at its foundation in 1948 the vast majority of which were unfounded.
However I wouldn't advise simply making a copy because it has many faults and is far from perfect but the central idea that a medic treats everyone free of charge (not cost because that has to be met somewhere) seems ,to me, a basic human right. Most Brits do not understand how the 'richest' country in the world, with the most advanced health care, the highest spend on healthcare , can not have the 'best' healthcare system?
I live in Ireland and some political parties here want to copy the US system, they are not that popular. Hope the English and grammer are acceptable cos I dos sek de queen anglish i dos.

Patriot| 8.27.09 @ 3:29PM

We do have the best health care; sick people from all over the world come to the USA for our state of the art medical breakthroughs. It's just not perfect.

85% of our citizens are happy with their health care coverage and don't want the government to come in and screw it up! We can find a way to help the other 15% without getting trapped in an authoritarian health care system run by big government.

No offense, but Americans are just more independent than Brits. Remember the events of 1776? We do.

If you like your socialized medicine system it shouldn't matter what others say about it, right?

Kevin, Meath| 8.27.09 @ 4:25PM

Remember 1776? of course it was when George Washington fought for his rights how did he put it? 'As a free born Englishman'.
Spent a few hours looking at different articles and there are simply complete untruths being put as facts eg "if Steven Hawking lived in Britain he'd be allowed to die' well he wouldn't and he does live in Britain, but as I said the NHS is far from perfect but its far from the monster its be painted by some in the USA. We could throw stats and horror stories from both systems until the cows come home ( no I don't mean my mother-in-law, may god bless her). I read on a site that the French are rated the best system, (not that I like to praise the French just doesn't seem right) they spend 11% of GDP the UK spend 8-9% and the USA spends 16-17%. USA spend the most but doesn't have best or most healthy population!

Kevin, Meath| 8.27.09 @ 4:36PM

By 'best' I meant healthcare system not population, that would be a value judgement at which I suspect we'd not agree.

Anon| 8.27.09 @ 5:10PM

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/.....57343.html

peter| 8.27.09 @ 5:28PM

As a former US citizen who now lives in France, I can clearly see the difference between UK and US healthcare.

The UK gets screwed by whatever policies or spending cuts are deemed appropriate from their government. i.e. Under a Labour government healthcare has improved greatly in comparison with the Thatcher cabinet.

The US gets screwed by the insurance companies. It is they who dictate your level of healthcare, not you or your doctors; hence why you spend twice as much per paying head for treatment and it is still not the "best"

Ann Marie| 8.27.09 @ 8:06PM

Something has to change with our system, The 85% happy does not reflect the reality of American healthcare. The insurance monopolies are attempting to squeze every last penny they can from us without rousing too much suspicion to pay for vast legal teams to contend treatment plans to reduce the risk of being sued over mal-practice and in some cases refusing trestment. This often results in costly, unneeded tests to verify conditions and treatment plans.
There is a massive number of fully covered US citizens who do not regulary see a doctor with their concerns and those that do often do not submit prescriptions or forego elective sugery, all because they are afraid that their premiums will rise.
Insurance companies will often not cover those with pre-existing or continuing illnesses, in short, they only want to insure healthy people.

The damage is the overheads that insurance companies must cover, as there is no real competition they can (off the record) agree rates and this hurts us a citizens.

If they could lower rates and we could reduce our healthcare spending by only 5% then that would go a hell of a way to helping the 46 million who have non at all. But healthcare in the US is primarily a business, a very big business, one that will not release it's strangle hold as that would hurt it's profit margins.

Even with this against us, we do have world renowned speciaists and surgeons carrying out procedures not found anywhere else in the world; which is probably where our idea of "best" comes from.

Hope this helps your understanding a little Kevin

Patriot| 8.27.09 @ 10:44PM

We can reform health care without government intervention. I trust private enterprise more than state control because government has the power of force. Competition will cease to exist.

The more people find out about this obamanation, the more they detest it.

53% of Americans reject ObamaCare for many reasons, but one big objection is that insurance will be provided for millions of illegal aliens at the expense of the elderly. MediCare is going to be stripped of funds and rationing of care is inevitable.

Obama received the votes of about 52-53% of Americans last November--only 43% approve of ObamaCare today--he's lost 10 points. That's a lot. His favorables have dropped from 70% in April to barely 50% today; ObamaCare could permanently cripple his presidency.

Democrats out in 2010/2012!

Kevin, Meath| 8.28.09 @ 6:30AM

I thought America was a democracy, government has the power that you allow it (we're back to 1776). I understand a fear of big government , the NHS is a symbol of that as the article above outlines you can become odssessed with statistics and targets, the government of the day wants to 'prove' to the media its doing a 'good' job with your tax 'dollers/pounds'. My wife worked as a midwife in a large NHS hospital the media and public were shocked when statistics showed it was the 'worst' hospital, most deaths, least natural births most complications etc huge media storm, small hospital up the road was perfect zero in almost everything. That was because you were only allowd to go there if they thought it would be a safe delivery any sign of a problem then they were transfered. Try telling that to the media who want a story, they would much prefer the horror story of the hospital hell. Now it might be that your politicians are more mature and less slaves of the press than ours and your media less biased more responsible and less prone to sensationalism and political bias, we have government television/radio after all, but I doubt it.
But I wouldn't trust a system run by private companies they are interested in profit, my daughter wins an expensive sports car (i wish) no one will insure her, too risky not profitable. If she should fall ill who wants to treat a high risk patient?
I trust the state more than someone who wants to make money out of me.
Where does the USA go? I would look to Germany they have a private insurance led scheme backed by government, if I what I have read is correct no untruths on the internet!, 100% coverage as you would expect from Germany very efficient ,if slightly humourless.

Ann Marie| 8.28.09 @ 1:40PM

I dont believe any private insurance group would touch that 15% with a barge pole, the profit margins would be too small, they would have to offset the costs by raising premiums for the rest of us. There would have to be some kind of government intervention and that is what scares the Insurance companies. The govornment would deploy a cheaper alternative and people would switch or the government would back the existing insurance companies in order that they can then extend their reach. The 15% wont be covered for free or by some miracle.

Befor you shoot me down patriot, offer an alternative.

Doug| 8.28.09 @ 7:26PM

85% happy, not bad. Trumped by the NHS tho, 98% happy.

I dont say this to cause a stir; simply to point out that the US has been very unfair and insulting of our system. The so called facts we hear from the US are plain, simple lies.

Here is the proof of stats:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/hea.....nment.html

Doug| 8.28.09 @ 7:32PM

The article also points out that we are continually trying to improve the system, further illustrating that the UK is not the draconian, dystopia portrayed by your officials.

Surely it must make you wonder why they are trying to convince you of this?

Patriot| 8.29.09 @ 1:32AM

Look, both of our health care systems have problems, right? 4,000 of your women have delivered their babies in elevators, hospital hallways, ambulances, etc. because of your severe shortage of maternity ward beds and too many Americans use the Emergency Room as their basic medical care here.

A majority of us (53%) would just prefer to enlist the private sector rather than the government to fix our health care system. It's just a difference in philosophy.

Ann Marie, 15% of Americans covered by a creative coalition of private and public insurance entities makes more sense to me than the government covering 100% of Americans. Once the government takes over; our alternatives will cease to exist.

Patriot| 8.29.09 @ 1:33AM

Only 43% of Americans support ObamaCare.

Kevin, Meath| 8.30.09 @ 5:39PM

95% of statistics are made up.

Doug| 8.30.09 @ 5:46PM

Erm, If you had done your research you would have seen that this was 4000 out of 706,711 births through the NHS last year.

This equates to .56%, in other words 99.44% of births last year in the UK were fine....

I think you'll find that the UK doesnt really care what the US does with it's healthcare, it doesnt affect us. What we do care about is the lies, used in order to scare your population away from any thing other a private medicine, ITS HIGHLY INSULTING.

I do agree with you though about your system probably not being able to sustain govournment tampering, but that is mainly to do with the 2.5 trillion dollar, private system you already have in place.

The UK does have private healthcare insurance the largest body is called BUPA, google it of you dont believe me.

Ann Marie| 8.30.09 @ 5:53PM

Sorry patriot, you misunderstand me.

I wasnt suggesting the governement take over 100%, I was suggesting the the private sector would not touch the unprofitable 15%. I speculated that it would be upto the govournment to cover the 15% and if they did, would do it cheaper than the private sector, there would be a great (as in big) rebalancing and the private sector WOULD loose out hence why it is "brown pants" time in the private sector.

Patriot| 8.30.09 @ 5:59PM

Kevin; including your statistics.

Patriot| 8.30.09 @ 6:22PM

Dug, what lies have I told? C'mon, I'm waiting.

You didn't refute the facts I cited, you just excused them. I highly doubt if those 4000 poor women who had to give birth in elevators and hallways are quite as understanding as you about their harrowing experiences. Easy to dismiss when you're a man, you know? Callous, too.

If you don't like what's blogged on American web sites I suggest you don't read them. It's none of your business anyway. It's amusing that not only are you thin-skinned but you go looking for insults to boot.

Dug, if you'd done your research you'd already know that government interference is one of the main reasons health care costs are rising in my country. Too many greedy lawyers are a problem, too. Of course corrupt democrats don't want tort reform because trial lawyers are huge financial contributors to democrats.

More government interference would just assure higher costs and poorer care. No thanks.

I'm aware of private insurance in your country; but how many of you can afford it after being taxed out of your mind for government health care?

We can agree to disagree. At the core of the issue is the fact that we're just very different people. And that's okay with me.

Patriot| 8.30.09 @ 6:27PM

Ann Marie--85% of Americans covered by private insurance; 15% of Americans covered by a creative coalition of PUBLIC and PRIVATE entities.

Is that clearer?

I don't think it would be "Brown pants" time for private insurers.

doug| 8.30.09 @ 7:14PM

"Dug, what lies have I told? C'mon, I'm waiting."

I didnt say you had lied, I was refering to your politicians who are willing to lie in order scare you away from thinking about alternaives; and its working!

"You didn't refute the facts I cited, you just excused them. I highly doubt if those 4000 poor women who had to give birth in elevators and hallways are quite as understanding as you about their harrowing experiences. Easy to dismiss when you're a man, you know? Callous, too. "

No, your right I didnt refute the FACTS and no I didnt excuse them, I put them into CONTEXT; something your senators and congrespeople seem willing not to do.

"If you don't like what's blogged on American web sites I suggest you don't read them. It's none of your business anyway."

It certainly is my business, your leaders in office have made it my business by lying about something that has nothing to do with them nor do they understand!

"if you'd done your research you'd already know that government interference is one of the main reasons health care costs are rising in my country."

Have you any proof of that or is it just something you have been told by your government?

"Too many greedy lawyers are a problem, too. Of course corrupt democrats don't want tort reform because trial lawyers are huge financial contributors to democrats. "

Exactly... vested interests
Given the influence of highly effective Washington DC lobbyists, the number of senators on both sides of the aisle beholden to the insurance companies, and the number of politicians willing to downright lie about what is being proposed, I think passing true Health Reform Bill is an almost impossible task.

"More government interference would just assure higher costs and poorer care. No thanks."

The proof?

"I'm aware of private insurance in your country; but how many of you can afford it after being taxed out of your mind for government health care?"

We dont NEED it but it is an option IF one want to pay, Im surprised you can offord your premiums considering your governments tax expenditure on arms.

"We can agree to disagree. At the core of the issue is the fact that we're just very different people. And that's okay with me. "

agreed; but i dont think we, as nations are too disimilar there simply needs to be more understanding.

Ann Marie| 8.30.09 @ 7:16PM

....and who would force the private insurers to pickup the bill?

Ann Marwe| 8.30.09 @ 7:31PM

I suppose, what I meant to say was:

The premiums of the other 85% would be raised to meet the costs.
A competative public scheme that a lower-income portion of the 85% would find more appealing would cause the brown pants.

Patriot| 8.31.09 @ 2:57AM

Ann Marie, I'd rather be taxed for the health care of the 15% and keep my current health care plan than be taxed a lot more for the government to cover 100% and lower the quality of my health care.

Liberals are the only ones with 'brown pants', because they've lost this debate and 2010 is looking REAL BAD for them right now.

Social Security, MediCare, MediCal, the Post Office, Amtrak, etc. are broke or nearly broke and all have fraud, inefficiency and waste issues.

It would be insane to let the government take over the most massive program in our country's history with their poor management track record.

Patriot| 8.31.09 @ 3:23AM

Dug, care to cite some of those "LIES" you keep ranting about? Where's your proof?

Yes, you DID excuse the disgraceful mistreatment of 4000 laboring women in your country because it didn't affect you. Callous, shocking and shameful!

You are a moron! Why would my government tell me that their interference would lead to rising costs and worse health care? I told you that you're just a big government robot; you kneel before the altar of authoritarian Big Brother. You are the one who doesn't question authority; that's why we reject your way of life and governance; we are more independent thinkers. You made my point for me, fool.

You're ignorant. Insurance companies have already signed onto ObamaCare--we're fighting them, too. I told you it was Tort Reform that was needed and you ignored me, so I know you don't know what you're talking about.

Yes, we have a larger defense budget than you do, but that's because somebody has to be responsible for leadership in the world and we sure as hell know that Europeans don't have the guts to do it. Besides, you didn't lose 3000 people on 9/11, and I find it quite offensive of you not to take that into account. But you also didn't give a crap about 4000 of your fellow Brits so I already know that you're a boor.

I think we understand your country quite well and that's why we reject your health care system--it wouldn't work for us because we want LESS government NOT MORE.

Doug| 8.31.09 @ 5:37PM

You are so full of yourself....
maybe, one day, when you pull your head out and have a look around, you may find that things apear quite different possibly better.

But unfortunately your descent into petty insults to make yourself feel bigger have shown you for the cowardly bigot you are.

I'm glad that many of your countrymen are far more amenable to forthright discusion of such a topic; that is how progress occurs. Also it offsets some of the blind opinionists that plague your country.

Lastly, you assume far too much about me and my country. If you really think that I don't sympathize with your losses on 9/11 or that I dont lament those 4000 women or the children gunned down in columbine then that just makes you an unbearable arse, not wothy of the misguided opinions you hold so dear.

Im sure you will post just to get the boot in, to make youself feel like the big man. But it is no victory when your opponant walks off shaking his head in disbelief while you still throw punches, again a sign of a thin-skinned coward.

Patriot| 8.31.09 @ 10:59PM

I'm a woman, doofas; an American woman--but I most likely have more balls than you. And, it's because of our independence of thought and courage (qualities your country no longer possesses) that we will fight authoritarian government encroachment.

You're just pissed because you couldn't back up your silly accusations. I called your bluff and you backed down. You're a bully, and like all bullies, you're weak.

You liberals are all alike: You start a fire fight and then whine about the fire you receive in return. You can dish it out but you can't take it.

American| 9.1.09 @ 2:23PM

Weak, whiny liberals. You are the real cowards.