Many of us awoke the morning after the Obama Health Care Speech thinking many of the ideas he expressed were good ones. All of the protections that current health insurance holders deserve, plus a place for those without to compete for prices. What we didn’t have the morning after was any concrete examples of those principles in legislation or a way to pay for them. What we have instead are massive giveaways to leftist special interests and a major movement by social progressives away from what Americans are already happy with. Since two-thirds of those uninsured: make over $75,000; qualify but don’t bother to sign up; or are not citizens, one would think this gap would be relatively easy to close. But instead of fixing what ails health care, government intrusion, the left is trying to stampede more government into the chaos.
America has endured “managed care” of HMO’s and PPO’s for 35 years and its time to move on. The reason we have high costs is a consequence of government involvement. Anywhere you have government activity, as in education, you have soaring costs that can’t be managed. That’s because someone else is always paying the bill. When that happens, the incentive is to charge “the most”. If you have to choose between paying this doctor or that doctor, the incentive becomes to charge “the least”.
One thing I have heard that I would like to see and that is an end to pharmaceutical advertising. The only other First World country to allow that is New Zealand. Let’s end a drive for demand of pharmaceuticals by slick marketing gimmicks.
No bill before the House or Senate addresses costs, or how to pay for the additional care. Nothing in Congress also addresses the additional doctors that will be needed to treat and see these additional patients. The only way that will be handled, currently, is that it will be more difficult and take longer to make an appointment with your current doctor because he/she has more patients to service. In other words, rationing will begin.
America wants Health Care Reform. Citizens so far have been smart enough to read for themselves and realize that what Democrats in Congress are producing is not that. Not at all. We deserve better.
“two-thirds of those uninsured make over $75,000 per year”.
Please site. If you want to inspire intelligent debate you need to stop making stuff up. It’s insulting. According to the non partisan FactCheck.org the real number is 20% of “households” (so that means a combined income)NOT the 66% of individuals that you claim. Big difference Terry. So a legitimate argument might be that 20% of the 45+ million that do not currently have insurance can afford to purchase it now. Given the high costs of individually purchased family insurance I would argue even a family making 75K or more would struggle to keep up. But before one can have an honest debate on health care those of you that are trying to derail reform need to quit littering the debate with bogus claims.
http://www.factcheck.org/2009/06/the-real-uninsured/
Of course people with employer provided health insurance don’t want any changes as they are the beneficiaries of a nice government subsidy that would shrink or disappear inorder to cover the uninsured – let’s be honest about that and stop pointing the finger elsewhere. The government didn’t impose handicaps on themselves like not allowing Medicare to negotiate pharmaceutical prices (another big subsidy to private business) like the VA can.
I am self employed. My cost to insure I,My wife and two children is $12,000/yr with a $5,000 yearly deductible.
The self employed now pay these kind of health insurance membership fees basically only to cover a health catastrophe that would cause financial ruin.
We need help!!!!!!
“America wants Health Care Reform. Citizens so far have been smart enough to read for themselves and realize that what Democrats in Congress are producing is not that. Not at all. We deserve better”
The DEMS are the only ones addressing the issue.
REPS and Far Right Wing Conservatives are only concerned with defeating reform with the belief that in doing so the President will also be defeated.
The public gets it.
I have to agree with Baxter here. This video clip of Ron Paul was put up well before the August recess when the townhalls were dealing with HC issues.
Larry, I’ve got great hc coverage, but each year they ask more and more of my employer. And each year my employer has to pay more and I have to pay more – well above what modest pay raises we have received this past several years. The statistics are IN and the HC crises has to ba addressed.
Here is a good clip. MIDDLE CLASS WORKERS AND BUSINESS PEOPLE ARE THE MOST IMPACTED BY THE OUT OF CONTROL HC COSTS that need to be addressed:
http://news.google.com/news?source=ig&hl=en&rlz=1R2GGLL_en&q=Target%20Center%20speech%20Obama%20September%2012&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=vn
Well then, Red and Baxter, you are both unaware or purposefully ignorant of reality. I imagine its hard when numbers just don’t add up to the utopian dream.
The quote is: Since two-thirds of those uninsured: make over $75,000; qualify but don’t bother to sign up; or are not citizens
http://allnurses.com/social-health-care/truth-behind-census-416488.html
or
http://www.creators.com/opinion/david-harsanyi/how-to-lie-with-statistics-again.html
Thats two-thirds of ALL uninsured, to the commenter who doesn’t bother to read. So, I will repeat my claim. If you are for “universal health care” you are primarily for the interests of: the wealthy, the lazy and non-citizens. NO ONE argues about the need to take care of those chronically uninsured and that it would save money in the long run. That is NOT an excuse for the massive bureaucracy of HR 3200 or the manipulation of the freedom to choose the health care that works for you.
The Democrats aren’t doing ANYTHING about reform or Obama wouldn’t have had to come out to set them straight. If they actually had legislation that did the things he talked about, he wouldn’t have had to bother. Democrats have only shown they are incapable of enacting REAL reform. Just left wing dogma with an “oh, we just want to help!” face. Real details. Real facts the American people can read. Where is it? Produce it! Link to it! Show me!
And Vixen, if government just got out of the way and gave you freedom of choice – anywhere in the country, you could buy competitively with any insurance provider ANYWHERE, many of whom already have individual plans that compete with group plans. But that good idea would be like liberals agreeing to freedom of choice of schools. They just ain’t gonna do it.
You did again. It’s HOUSEHOLD income Terry!! You fail to mention that, and I did provide a link. What exactly is your argument? Is it that a household that grosses 75K can afford to pay for the costs of individually purchased family insurance. I suggest you read that Mr. Lomeli’s post on the costs again. Keep in mind that is with a 5k deductible. Without this high deductible the cost is even more. Also, are you saying that insurance laws should differ for those that live in this country legally, but are not an American citizen? You know that’s crazy right? Because that number you are quoting includes immigrants with legal work status, and all those that are still in the process getting citizenship. So again it’s a bogus number. We all pay for the uninsured when they show up at emergency room because the cost is passed on to the rest of us.
As R.V. states even those of us with insurance and employers that contribute to our healthcare, continue to see an increase in premiums. As of Oct 1st the open enrollment period starts at my work. I am very fortunate to have an employer that contributes 60% to the cost of premiums, and with several hundred employees we have some bargaining power with the health plans, but even for us the premium has gone up 8.5% this year. In past years it has been even more. I assure you that the net income of the company I work for, and that of most of it’s employees, is not increasing at the same pace. The following has been copied directly from a memo from my employer. Even those of us with insurance are on an unsustainable path. Why is that so difficult to understand.
“It is that time of year again to begin the Open Enrollment process for medical, dental, FSA and voluntary benefits. After weighing all available options, the Company has decided to remain with our current carriers for medical and dental, as well as for FSA and the voluntary benefits for the next plan year. The medical increase for you insurance is is 8.5%. This is the smallest increase we have ever had as a company, and is way below the trend that our insurance has been issuing to other companies for their renewals this year”
#6
OK, understand Baxters argument everyone. Families making over $75,000, which according to The US Census at http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/tables/09s0673.pdf makes up less than 38% of the population, does not need to be expected to pay for its own health insurance. I know readers live in California, where $200,000 doesnt go far. But we are talking the rest of the country, where $75000 is a very good living. They are not victims. Sorry.
Does anyone else see the total lack of depth of this argument?? I read the link. It says nothing new. They are self employed, or they work for one of the 19 or 20 big companies that still dont offer health insurance.
But what is this “they still dont have access”? The only reason they dont is a law somewhere. Some company, somewhere, would give them health insurance, if they could. But government is in the way.
And no Baxter, I actually wrote that it doesnt make much sense to try to sell universal care without offering it to EVERYONE. The problem is, no one will buy that program. Oh well. Thats a Democrat problem.
If you want your health insurance to go down, quit relying on it to pay for all your medical bills, get the government out of the way and let people buy from whatever state they want.
Get the government out of the way?
Like the way that the government was out of the way in the financial and housing markets? Yeah, that worked out real well, didn’t it?
The sooner we as a country disavow ourselves of this ridiculous notion that the free market is some morally-benign force, and that all we have to do is leave it alone and it will always lead us to the promised land, the better off we’ll be.
Interesting that New Zealand in mentioned, they have a single payer system, but you can buy extra insurance from private companies.
You pay $50.00 to see your doctor and there is a co-pay for drugs, everything else is covered.
Life expentancy is a little over 2 years more than we have here and the cost per year for this?
About $2,500 US Dollars per person per year, compare to our great private system at almost $5,000 more per year.
Perhaps we should just copy what they do.
Jim Benson,
The Netherlands has much the same system…basic coverage under single-payer with a private market for dental and other enhancements to coverage. Very high satisfaction among the public, and similarly better stats in terms of outcomes.
My question to those on the right who focus on Canada and England is; Isn’t America a better country? Can’t America do it better?
One thing I have heard that I would like to see and that is an end to pharmaceutical advertising. The only other First World country to allow that is New Zealand. Let’s end a drive for demand of pharmaceuticals by slick marketing gimmicks.
I’m with you on that Terry! (Or is that an excerpt from Dr. Paul, I didn’t have time to hear him out.) Do you know there is also no other country that allows insurance companies to make a profit? And no other country has even the concept of “pre-existing condition?”
if government just got out of the way and gave you freedom of choice – anywhere in the country, you could buy competitively with any insurance provider ANYWHERE, many of whom already have individual plans that compete with group plans.
Now THAT is righteous Republican snake oil! The reason the profiteers are clamoring for THAT “reform” is because then they will be regulated only by whichever state has the most lax regulation. (Mississippi maybe?)