Why Wal-Mart Embraced Obamacare
There’s a school of thought that says when enemies suddenly become friends — watch out!
Senate Democrats have announced their proposal for a health insurance plan — and Wal-Mart is endorsing it. To hear the Left tell the story these last few years, Wal-Mart is the Great Satan of American commerce, abusing its employees with substandard working conditions, and crushing small, local businesses out of existence. So why are they suddenly on the same side?
First of all, let me emphasize that our current health care system is a mess, but not for the reason that most people assume. What makes it a disaster isn’t the 46 million uninsured. The vast majority of them, if something bad happens, will get medical care. It may be in an emergency room (which is expensive). It may drive them into bankruptcy (bad for them, and not good for the insured patients on whom the hospital will eventually shift the unrecoverable costs). But few people are actually dying in America because they don’t get medical care. It’s just a profoundly inefficient system.
Right now, I’m on a COBRA continuation health insurance plan. But by May of 2010, that’s going to expire, and I have no expectation of ever finding a permanent job with benefits. (I’m over 50, and because I make my living as a software engineer, that means I can only work contract jobs. No permanent jobs are available.)
Not surprisingly, I think that there is going to be a need for the government to be an insurer of last resort, for those who are unemployed and those who, like myself, are unable to find permanent employment.
What concerns me about Wal-Mart’s endorsement of a plan that requires employers to provide “affordable” health insurance coverage is that it will do something that Wal-Mart would never directly admit to doing. It will drive their smaller, less efficient competitors out of business. There are a lot of mom and pop operations — and some that are their own small, regional chain stores — that are struggling to stay afloat right now. This new requirement will cause at least some of them to throw in the towel.
The Democrats are fast turning into the party of Birkenstock-wearing fascism, pretending to be concerned for the little guy, while consolidating small and medium business into a small number of large, politically connected mega-corporations. (And yes, Mussolini’s Fascist Party and Hitler’s National Socialist Party used the excuse of helping the little guy to justify consolidation. It is no coincidence that the 1932 Nazi Party campaign slogan was “Common needs before individual needs.”)
Small to middle size business people should be hostile toward the Obama administration. Keynesian economic policies inherently victimize them. The big government types prefer to partner with fewer—and much larger corporations. This is much easier than fooling around with a bunch of “mom and pops.” Inevitably, the followers of John Maynard Keynes will actively seek to shut down these businesses.
The allusion to Facism stretches somewhat but is still appropriate. Its a soft glove facism. One must remember that National Socialism was the rage from Wilson’s time through its degeneration into Hitlerism. Prior to that, many key politicians, even in the US were sining its praises and mimicking its policies…FDR took special note.
What is missing with Obama is the “nationalist” fervor. He is more of an internationalist and hence, socialist. Facism was viewed by pureblood socialists as merely as step by capitalists to a more middle road toward pure socialism.
Our desire for security is not only eroding our liberty; it is also making us open to the altering of our economy in ways we will decry shortly. Charismatic leaders need crisis to maintain their popularity with the masses. Each economic crisis will be “spun” to further entrench his policies and power…with massive media trumpeting to assure the masses are brought in-line.
The mass media is complicit and will be until his policies threaten and contrain them…its coming…just give it time…
The allusion to Facism stretches somewhat but is still appropriate. Its a soft glove facism. One must remember that National Socialism was the rage from Wilson’s time through its degeneration into Hitlerism. Prior to that, many key politicians, even in the US were singing its praises and mimicking its policies…FDR took special note.
What is missing with Obama is the “nationalist” fervor. He is more of an internationalist and hence, socialist. Facism was viewed by pureblood socialists as merely as step by capitalists to a more middle road toward pure socialism.
Our desire for security is not only eroding our liberty; it is also making us open to the altering of our economy in ways we will decry shortly. Charismatic leaders need crisis to maintain their popularity with the masses. Each economic crisis will be “spun” to further entrench his policies and power…with massive media trumpeting to assure the masses are brought in-line.
The mass media is complicit and will be until his policies threaten and contrain them…its coming…just give it time…
I don’t think the link between a nationalized healthcare system and wal-mart driving small businesses out is as strong as you say. For wal-mart it’s about controlling costs – they won’t have to pay healthcare anymore because they will cancel their healthcare plans and have everyone go on the public system. Small businesses will do exactly the same, as will just about everyone else. It may even help the small business owners more because they don’t have the bargaining power in purchasing plans that wal-mart does.
Will this be a good thing? Check out what happened in Hawaii when they offered a state health care plan – everyone jumped from their private plan to the state plan. The costs for the state plan soared and it went under. The 1.8 trillion figure that Obama has suggested for his system will not even be close if it’s implemented. Even middle income families may move to the national plan if a) their employer decides they can’t afford a private plan anymore or b) employees figure they will save money on the amount they have to pay on the private plans.
“What is missing with Obama is the “nationalist” fervor.”
This was also true initially with Benito Mussolini. The nationalism was later, on a gut level, added to attract the majority of Italians. They desired a movement specifically geared to their personal goals and needs. Internationalism is too vague of a concept. Barack Obama would have eventually gravitated to some sort of “New America” approach. Extreme nationalism would have become a reality by no later than 2011. The ACORN storm troopers might have led the way. Thankfully, that threat is over. The odds are now that Obama has become a marginalized figure.
Ah yes, another example the corporate state. A match made in hell. Those with enough money can buy the elimination of competition. The war on entrepreneurs and small/mid-size business continues apace.
“There are three big problems confronting these small, often struggling businesses when it comes to providing health insurance. The workers don’t make enough to pay for their own health insurance. The businesses aren’t profitable enough to pay for employee health insurance.
Finally, the employers aren’t large enough to form adequate employee insurance pools to spread risk.”
How about if companies (small, medium or large) form a medical insurance COOPERATIVE and share their costs to afford decent medical insurance?
For example, a lawyer’s office, a dentist office, a construction firm form a cooperative and negotiate with a medical insurance company for better plans?
They are different companies, but they pool their employees and act as ONE company.
This could generate business for enterprising consultants and administrators. Who wants to be first?
Thanks for the link to more info on regulations that prohibit the creation of more insurance options and real competition that would lower prices. That is the message oponents to Obama-care should focus on – the simple solutions to make health care more affordable and transferable.
“How about if companies (small, medium or large) form a medical insurance COOPERATIVE and share their costs to afford decent medical insurance?”
This does nothing to address the spiraling costs of our health care system.
“Here’s a change that wouldn’t cost the federal government a penny in taxes, wouldn’t burden existing small businesses, and wouldn’t increase governmental control.”
So exactly what is the “change” you refer to? I couldn’t follow your reasoning.
The first thing that must be done to reform the health insurance industry is to get rid of the differing mandates of each of the fifty states . It is illegal to offer consumers a policy not approved by the political class. The insurance companies are therefore compelled to provide coverage for all sorts of things—that inevitably raise the rates. Arnold Kling often points out that the typical health insurance policy is comparable to an imaginary auto policy that covers oil changes, car washes, new tires, and regular maintenance.
7. vivo
This could generate business for enterprising consultants and administrators. Who wants to be first?
We shouldn’t need consultants and administrators standing between us and health care in the first place. America benefits from productive workers – not skimming middlemen.
#5 David Thomsond
“The ACORN storm troopers . . . threat is over.”
How can you possibly think that?
IF (And this is a huge IF) the government really wanted to reform health care to make it affordable, portable, and “rational” it would:
1. Require pricing transparency by all health care providers and health insurers. No more hidden anything. All costs must be known up front, and all estimates handled in the same way that all job estimates are under existing contract law. That also means that insurance companies must publish everything including their “proprietary” calculations (which are usually redlining schemes – and would be subject to law suits if they published them) of what and how much they will reimburse people for care.)
2. Disconnect health insurance from employment with the exception of providing a tax free incentive for employers to provide group benefits (at some percentage) of the total. For example, even though my company provides a health benefit it is relatively small, about 40% of the total. I pay 60% of the insurance costs for family coverage out of my paycheck. The principle function of the arrangement is that I am in a group and therefore can get coverage… (don’t try to live outside the hight and weight charts and expect to get any sort of coverage on the open market). Make all health insurance payments TAX FREE… so, my employer gets a tax cut for his 40% and I should get the balance of the tax cut for 60% (which I currently don’t). If I am like the author (and I am – Software Computer Geek with a History degree) and want to strike out on my own, I get to deduct 100% of my insurance costs from my income.
3. Allow for any combination of health care groupings regardless of state boundaries… so, if the Roman Catholic Church, Knights of Columbus, or Southern Baptists, or United Auto Workers Union want to issue a health plan they can and should be encouraged to do so. Health Insurers could be encouraged by tax incentives to write policies for people at various risks. Medical Savings accounts (coupled with #1 above and a menu pick of catastrophic/long term care plans) would go a long way to containing costs.
4. Do away with Medicaid, SCHIP, and other pork barrel plans. Fold them into Medicare. Make Medicare a voucher system with a menu of private plans available to the recipient, and means test the non-retiree portion of Medicare.
There is a legitimate role for the Federal Government to play in health care. It’s role should be regulatory, legal, and limited to maintaining a free and open market for health care services. It should only get directly involved when extraordinary events occur and should err on the side of the private provision of insurance, at all times.
THE BIG NUMBER FIVE:
We need legal reform yesterday morning. There needs to be a comprehensive review of medical practices, disciplinary reviews, and especially Tort Reform measures to rein in the astronomical overhead costs of non-criminal legal matters regarding malpractice. This must be done, without damaging the just portions of the tort system that compensate people for actual harm done.
Loser pays, limits on contingency fees, tighter judicial review of filings, limits to actual damages and strict limits on “pain and suffering” must be passed or nothing of the above would work anyway.
Oh, and for those fools who think it all will be better with Government run health care…
Just try to be those poor VA hospital patients who received colonoscopies with unsanitary scopes… Or the patients in UK hospital wards crawling with filth, disease, and staph. Who do you sue for your loved one dying of an infected bed sore, when Uncle Sugar exempts himself from any such things?
People need to get a grip. The answer is MORE privatization, not Socialized Medicine.
And for the Envy ridden… Where do you think the rich people are going to go to get their health care? In your blind jealousy and hatred, you will merely see them wave as they board their private jets and fly to some Caribbean Island that will provide world class fee based health care, while you sit enviously waiting for your appointment with the protologist and his filthy scope… for months…
Grr…
r/John TMF
Obamacare debate aside I was struck my this statement by the author: “(I’m over 50, and because I make my living as a software engineer, that means I can only work contract jobs. No permanent jobs are available.)”
Did I miss another one of Obama’s inane laws pass or a directive ordered from on high?
So you’re saying a software company will not hire you as a regular employee because you’re over 50? When you say you’re “over 50″ does that mean you’re like 92 and confined to a bed or you’re 52 and maybe you don’t want to work 9-5 M-F? Are no permanent jobs available because of this economy? Are there no jobs in the area you live and you’re not willing to relocate? I find it real hard to believe that there are “no permanent jobs” just because you’re over 50.
Can the author please address this statement?
Small and medium sized businesses have been the backbone of conservative fundraising for decades; the little guy supports Republican candidates and conservative economic priciples in general. The Democrats know this, so don’t be surprised when those businesses get it in the teeth.
Every small businessman I know of, and I am one myself, want’s to get out of the health care business and focus on what they do. It is absurd the amount of manpower business is required to devote to administer health care plans.
Our current health care system is crippling small business and has nearly destroyed the one man operations, specifically the one man operation who happens to suffer from poor health and does not have equal access to insurance.
Health care reform is long overdue. Though I favor a single payer I would be satisfied with a public option. And I’d be the first to sign up and send them my check.
And for the posters who pretend that “socialized medicine” is even remotely under consideration are either dishonest or hopelessly ignorant.
Eric, Raleigh:
If you are over 40 and look it, unless you have a security clearance or are working in the embedded field (computers embedded in hardware that ranges from microwaves to planes) it is VERY hard to find full time work. Over 50 (which Clayton barely is, I’m a few years younger than him), forget it. It starts to get very hard around age 35.
This is based on personal experience followed by a fair amount of research. In one job hunt I wasn’t getting responses until erased the only evidence of my age on my resume (when I attended college (MIT)), and was helped by the fact that I still look like I’m in my early 20s.
To look into this more do the following Google search, which get 170,000 hits:
programming OR software +”age discrimination”
Also look into the H1B visa controversy, one of the things many companies do his hire what are nearly indentured servants at low wages to replace their more experienced American programmers. This appears to have happened to Clayton when he was working at HP (check his blog) and something like it happened to me at Lucent in 2001 (I was making 80K vs. a young Jamaican perhaps more qualified for the particular job in question who was making 45K (the law or regulation requires posting that sort of detail for H1B employees)).
It’s one of the reasons undergraduate enrollment in Computer Science cratered after the “dot.com” bust (even at MIT, which lost more than half it’s enrollment, after being steady for more than two decades) and has not recovered or ever looks to. By then it had become clear this wasn’t e.g. just “mainframe dinosaurs” “unable to learn new tricks” (the excuse in the ’80s and through the mid ’90s) and the word had gotten out to the general population, parents in (or that had been in) the field universally tell their children to avoid it, etc. etc.
My personal recommendation is that unless you have a “calling” to it AND get into one of MIT, CMU, UC Berkeley or Stanford, do something else.
Way to contribute to the discussion there JHARP-Troll… When you don’t have an answer, just hurl epithets at your adversary.
Single payer schemes fail. They end up being rationing schemes for substandard health care that meets only the needs of the healthy, while bankrupting the government. The tax burden on the worker for such things will be astronomical, and few will be happy with the actual results.
I grew up in the Army. Socialized medicine is exactly what it is. Calling people names over the recognition of reality serves no one.
John – TMF
Do you remember how upset Chuck U. Shumer was with the Chamber of Commerce, and their only contributing to republicans? Well Chucky, you Dems receive exclusive funding from every anti-business concern in America. Most notably; unions, trial lawyers and environment extremist groups.
And these are the people that will supposedly correct the economy? Hard times ahead.
Cramer is on to something as far as he goes. There is more. Walmart also wants a piece of the action. It would mean billions of dollars in drugs and other medical supplies. Walmart doesn’t want left out in the cold.
John – TMF:
“Single payer schemes fail.”
29 of the 30 industrialized nations use some form of a single payer system. We are the only one who does not.
And all of them cover everyone and deliver the same level of care as us.
For about half the cost.
And single payer is not “socialized medicine”.
How to slash medical costs in 5 easy steps.
http://hyphenatedamericans.blogspot.com/2009/05/how-to-slash-medical-costs-in-6-easy.html
Canadians come to the US in droves to take care of issues that cannot be covered by their band-aids and iodine plan. Those plans are all teetering on bankruptcy constantly. They ration care with long waiting lists, and treat major medical issues with primitive drugs and pats on the back – as long as it is cheap.
Single Payer IS Socialized Medicine… the SINGLE PAYER is the Government. And governments are built to minimize costs, bureaucratize procedures, and ration services, not maximize them.
You are painting a Cow yellow, and calling it a chick.
BTW – You get what you pay for, and Canadians get terrible health care… so do most of the rest of the “civilized” world. They just lie about it because the lie makes them feel better. Especially when I can get Three MRI’s and a major neck surgery done to fuse two vertebrae… within 1 month, and all covered by my PPO.. of course I had to pay about $2,000 in copays… but I’d still be waiting if I were living in Canada.
You live a lie, you believe as if it were a religion in a false premise that the government can provide for all… It cannot and will not…
Single payer schemes FAIL – absolutely.
Ok… no more feeding the Leftist Talking Point Lie BOT for me…
Peace, Love, and Bobby Sherman…
John – TMF
jharp …you are mistaken.
they may say they cover everyone, they definitely do not provide the same level of care. (people who know the system or have friends in high places can get treatment in the USA to avoid the waiting lists, that is until the USA adopts the single payer plan) and as for price. it is too costly by any measure.
how can you say long waiting lists and denied service is the same as in the US ?
where do you get the figure for half the cost ?
did you just pull that out of @ss ?
This is simply not true. Period. The level of care is not as good. Many of the costs are hidden (socialized).
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/17/business/17health.html?_r=1
“The United States has reduced the number of preventable deaths for people under the age of 75 to 110 deaths for every 100,000 people, compared with 115 deaths five years earlier, but other countries have made greater strides. As a result, the United States now ranks last in preventable mortality, just below Ireland and Portugal, according to the Commonwealth Fund’s analysis of World Health Organization data. The leader by that measure is France, followed by Japan and Australia.”
John Moore:
And all of them cover everyone and deliver the same level of care as us.
For about half the cost.
“This is simply not true. Period. The level of care is not as good. Many of the costs are hidden (socialized).”
“The U.S. spends twice per capita what other industrialized nations spend on health care, but ranks 19th out of 19 countries on mortality amenable to medical care. There are wide variations in health care outlays across the U.S., with no apparent relationship to quality or health outcomes. Over 100,000 lives could be saved if all states in the U.S. performed at the level of the best state, at considerably lower cost. The U.S. could learn from best practices within the nation and from other countries on how to simultaneously improve quality and efficiency.”
http://www.commonwealthfund.org/Content/Publications/Testimonies/2008/Mar/Testimony–Health-and-Wealth–Measuring-Health-System-Performance.aspx
And regarding your absurd claim that most of the costs are hidden (completely false) and therefore “socialized” shows a level of ignorance that is surprising even for pajamas media.
Do you even understand what “socialized” means?
Half the cost? Is that why they are talking about letting the elderly and fat people die in these nations because they are saving so much money?
Poor deranged idiot. People like you destroy other people’s lives for your greed for other people’s wealth.
And all of them cover everyone and deliver the same level of
care as us.
For about half the cost.
All 3 assertions are indefensible based on objective evidence. Two of these are core reasons why government mandated as opposed to market driven health care reform will not work – level of care and cost. In your second comment you confess to an inability to follow some clear reasoning and a supporting link to an article concerning insurance pooling. It’s a bit hard to believe that a small business owner in the position of administering health care plans would not be able to understand this. You should not be calling people uninformed or ignorant about any aspect of health care reform until you demonstrate some understanding yourself.
“where do you get the figure for half the cost ?”
Right here but it can be easily found many places. It is a well know fact.
http://content.healthaffairs.org/cgi/content/full/23/3/10
Furthermore, as can be seen in Exhibit 1Go, U.S. per capita health spending continued to exceed per capita health spending in the other OECD countries, by huge margins, in 2001. After expenditures are converted into purchasing-power parity international dollars (PPP$), Switzerland spent only 68 percent as much on health care per capita in 2001 as the United States.3 Neighboring Canada, with a health care delivery system and medical practice styles fairly similar to those in the United States, spent only 57 percent as much per capita as the United States. PPP-adjusted per capita spending in the median OECD country was only 44 percent of the U.S. level (PPP$2,161).
Finally, the median percentage of GDP absorbed by health care in the non-U.S. OECD countries in 2001 was only 8.3 percent, compared with 13.9 percent in the United States.
jharp,
When you use the nytimes as a source, you can be sure that the data will only support single payer systems.
They don’t mention the significantly improved cancer survival rates in the US – rates directly attributable to better care. “preventable deaths” is an especially slippery category – how much is due to medical care, and how much to demographic and social trends? Are car accident deaths in the mix?
Furthermore, much of the treatment that those countries provide was developed in the US as a result of the profit incentives in our system. Those countries are free-riders on our innovation.
The “cost half as much” is also wrong. Many costs are hidden. In addition, they don’t value the costs of lives lost due to their triaging of care – like the British system where you can only have your glaucoma treated in one eye – the government has decided you don’t need too eyes. Add to that the costs accrued to patients but not accounted for in system costs due to long waits.
There is a reason that refugees from those systems come to the US. We have a Mayo Clinic here in Scottsdale, and it has quite a staff of translators. There’s a reason for that.
Our system has many faults, but to turn a blind eye to the problem of single payer systems is foolish. Just in our own country, we see that the single payer systems of Medicare, Medicaid and VA are screwed up: the first two undercompensate providers, resulting in the costs being passed on to the private system (these costs are not accounted for in the overhead of those systems, but they should be); the third is notorious for bad care.
The reason engineers (and many others) cannot get salaried jobs after about age 50 is EXACTLY due to our system of employer provided health care. The older workers (and I’m one of them) provide good value, but they drive up the cost of insurance for the company because older people naturally have higher medical expenditures.
If, by some remote chance, any of you would would like to learn something about an efficient health care system take a look here.
Warning! It completely contradicts the wingnut mantra.
http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2008/01/singapores_heal.html
The Singapore government spent only 1.3 percent of GDP on healthcare in 2002, whereas the combined public and private expenditure on healthcare amounted to a low 4.3 percent of GDP. By contrast, the United States spent 14.6 percent of its GDP on healthcare that year, up from 7 percent in 1970… Yet, indicators such as infant mortality rates or years of average healthy life expectancy are slightly more favorable in Singapore than in the United States.
“So exactly what is the “change” you refer to? I couldn’t follow your reasoning.”
Remove the restrictions that prevent Association Health Plans from crossing state borders.
Here is some more data from the leftist rag CIA World Fact Book.gov
The United States ranks 50th in life expectancy.
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2102rank.html
Or here from the same leftist rag CIA World Fact Book.gov that ranks the United States 44th in infant mortality.
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2091rank.html
jharp: What you are missing with the data is:
1. Some of these single payer plans get the costs down by rationing health care, especially for the elderly. Now, if you want to argue that this is a necessary step, make that argument. But it does make the comparison apples and oranges.
2. The Canadians have the advantage that they can send overflow into the U.S.–and they do. There was a shocking number of Canadians who gave birth last year in the U.S. because of the severe, nation-wide shortage of neonatal ICUs. In addition, Canadians who can afford it often come south for non-emergency surgery. I have relatives living in Canada; for most ordinary medical care, they do fine. For anything specialized, it’s a crap shoot whether you will get care in time.
3. The U.S. has some serious problems with lifestyle choices (such as obesity) that make our situation not exactly comparable to most European countries. Britain is catching up to us on the obesity problem, so I expect that the gaps will become more obvious in time.
4. Smoking, as bad a cost as it is, may actually save money for the Europeans. People that die of heart attacks, for example, tend to be cheaper than people that die of Alzheimer’s.
John Moore:
“Our system has many faults”
Yes, it does. It far too costly, and many un or under insured lose everything due to medical costs.
“but to turn a blind eye to the problem of single payer systems is foolish”
Who’s turning a blind eye? The facts are single pyer systems cots about 1/2 of what we spend. For the same level of care.
“Just in our own country, we see that the single payer systems of Medicare, Medicaid and VA are screwed up: the first two undercompensate providers, resulting in the costs being passed on to the private system (these costs are not accounted for in the overhead of those systems, but they should be); the third is notorious for bad care.”
Complete and utter nonsense. Medicare is a far more efficient system than private insurance.
And as for the VA. Take a look.
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/06_29/b3993061.htm?chan=tc&chan=technology_technology+index+page_more+of+today%27s+top+stories
JULY 17, 2006
Click here to find out more!
STORY TOOLS
Printer-Friendly Version
E-Mail This Story
Reader Comments
Click here to find out more!
RELATED ITEMS
Graphic: Winning Scorecard
Graphic: Medical Makeover
HEALTH
The Best Medical Care In The U.S.
How Veterans Affairs transformed itself — and what it means for the rest of us
Raymond B. Roemer, 83, has earned his membership in “the greatest generation.” A flight engineer during World War II, his B-24 was shot down over Potsdam during a bombing run. He managed to parachute out, but the jump landed him in enemy territory. Roemer spent 11 months in a German POW camp until he was liberated by General George S. Patton’s troops in April, 1945.
“A month later he came home to Buffalo with a Purple Heart and a few crushed vertebrae from that parachute jump. He married his high school sweetheart, started a successful metal-fabricating business, and signed up for health benefits with Blue Cross/Blue Shield. He can afford to be treated at any of some 20 well-regarded hospitals in the area, but Roemer has made what what may seem a bizarre choice. He goes to the Veterans Affairs Medical Center in Buffalo, a hulking, gray edifice first opened in 1950. He doesn’t go just for his service-related injuries, either. His primary care doctor is at the VA, he fills his prescriptions there, and he uses the hospital for his vision and hearing needs. He even persuaded his 59-year-old son and business partner, Nicholas, a Vietnam War vet, to enroll with the VA.”
LOWER COSTS, HIGHER QUALITY
“Roemer seems to have stepped through the looking glass into an alternative universe, one where a nationwide health system that is run and financed by the federal government provides the best medical care in America. But it’s true — if you want to be sure of top-notch care, join the military. The 154 hospitals and 875 clinics run by the Veterans Affairs Dept. have been ranked best-in-class by a number of independent groups on a broad range of measures, from chronic care to heart disease treatment to percentage of members who receive flu shots. It offers all the same services, and sometimes more, than private sector providers.”
“Yet, indicators such as infant mortality rates or years of average healthy life expectancy are slightly more favorable in Singapore than in the United States.”
Singapore is also a pretty controlling society. There’s a reason you don’t find bubblegum on the streets, and vandals find out what a whipping feels like. As of a couple of years ago, they were discussing whether to decriminalize homosexuality. (And yes, homosexuality increases medical costs, not just because of AIDS, but also syphilis and other non-lethal STDs.)
America has enormous freedoms–and there are costs that go with that freedom, too.
“Our system has many faults, but to turn a blind eye to the problem of single payer systems is foolish. Just in our own country, we see that the single payer systems of Medicare, Medicaid and VA are screwed up: the first two undercompensate providers, resulting in the costs being passed on to the private system (these costs are not accounted for in the overhead of those systems, but they should be); the third is notorious for bad care.”
One consequence of Medicaid’s undercompensation is that poor people and black people (and there is substantial overlap there) are not getting the benefits of declining colon cancer death rates, probably because Medicaid’s schedule of fees for colonoscopies is about 1/4th the cost of having one done. (Just had it done, by the way.)
Clayton E. Cramer:
jharp: What you are missing with the data is:
“1. Some of these single payer plans get the costs down by rationing health care, especially for the elderly.”
We ration today. We ration 50 million right out of having any coverage.
And check the VA. Are you claiming they ration?
“2. The Canadians have the advantage that they can send overflow into the U.S.–and they do. There was a shocking number of Canadians who gave birth last year in the U.S. because of the severe, nation-wide shortage of neonatal ICUs. In addition, Canadians who can afford it often come south for non-emergency surgery. I have relatives living in Canada; for most ordinary medical care, they do fine. For anything specialized, it’s a crap shoot whether you will get care in time.”
Nonsense. Canada’s infant mortality rate is 9 spots lower than the U.S.
3. The U.S. has some serious problems with lifestyle choices (such as obesity) that make our situation not exactly comparable to most European countries. Britain is catching up to us on the obesity problem, so I expect that the gaps will become more obvious in time.
4. Smoking, as bad a cost as it is, may actually save money for the Europeans. People that die of heart attacks, for example, tend to be cheaper than people that die of Alzheimer’s.
Wholly unbelievable. Obesity raises our health care costs but smoking lowers the costs in Europe.
Have you been toking on the bong?
Absolutely my immediate gut reaction the other day, too, when this particular partnership was very proudly announced..
PS.. Thanks for this.. Triggered memory of Alan Jackson’s song, Little Man, as being a battle cry-in-waiting in response to this whole mess that is the Stimulus and Health Care Reform of 2009.. Creative video responses desperately needed over there, responses depicting all the homegrown, family-owned and operated businesses going under in the wake of our country’s current disaster..
Cyber hugs from Talking Rock..
“So you’re saying a software company will not hire you as a regular employee because you’re over 50? When you say you’re “over 50″ does that mean you’re like 92 and confined to a bed or you’re 52 and maybe you don’t want to work 9-5 M-F? Are no permanent jobs available because of this economy? Are there no jobs in the area you live and you’re not willing to relocate? I find it real hard to believe that there are “no permanent jobs” just because you’re over 50.
Can the author please address this statement?”
Sure. I’m 53, and I’m in good health. Few permanent jobs are available because of the current state of the economy. I have actually managed to get two permanent job interviews over the last eight months (one in Boise, one in Reno), but it’s definitely an employer’s market.
In general, employers are reluctant to hire older workers, for several reasons:
1. If they can hire an older worker for $50,000 a year, or someone with three years of experience, they prefer the younger worker, because when the economy revives, the older, more experienced engineer may have job offers more in line with his past salary history.
2. There is a perception (and sometimes with some accuracy) that most engineering jobs don’t require 30 years of experience. The younger worker may have less experience, but perhaps be more energetic. (Of course, sometimes older engineers have learned the self-discipline that comes from many years of doing this.)
3. Group health insurance rates are a function of age of the primary insured. I noticed that when there was a big layoff at my employer last August, that almost everyone in the room was my age or older–some substantially older.
““1. Some of these single payer plans get the costs down by rationing health care, especially for the elderly.”
We ration today. We ration 50 million right out of having any coverage.”
But not out of medical care. There’s a difference. It’s not a very efficient system, and some of the uninsured end up with worse health problems because of it, no question.
If you want to argue that rationing medical care for those who are currently insured is a good thing, if it means that the uninsured get coverage, make that argument. But don’t pretend that there’s no rationing.
“And check the VA. Are you claiming they ration?”
You might want to talk to veterans. There’s enormous variation in medical care, and VA hospitals have a lousy reputation.
““2. The Canadians have the advantage that they can send overflow into the U.S.–and they do. There was a shocking number of Canadians who gave birth last year in the U.S. because of the severe, nation-wide shortage of neonatal ICUs. In addition, Canadians who can afford it often come south for non-emergency surgery. I have relatives living in Canada; for most ordinary medical care, they do fine. For anything specialized, it’s a crap shoot whether you will get care in time.”
Nonsense. Canada’s infant mortality rate is 9 spots lower than the U.S.”
Those aren’t contradictory. They send a lot of their likely problem cases to the U.S. And Canada doesn’t have the black population that the U.S. has–where much of that infant mortality problem we have is located.
“3. The U.S. has some serious problems with lifestyle choices (such as obesity) that make our situation not exactly comparable to most European countries. Britain is catching up to us on the obesity problem, so I expect that the gaps will become more obvious in time.
4. Smoking, as bad a cost as it is, may actually save money for the Europeans. People that die of heart attacks, for example, tend to be cheaper than people that die of Alzheimer’s.
Wholly unbelievable. Obesity raises our health care costs but smoking lowers the costs in Europe.
Have you been toking on the bong?”
Different illnesses have different consequences. Heart attacks often kill people in minutes to hours. Expensive per hour; but not long duration. Cancer, on the other hand, can take months to years to kill someone, and while the cost per hour is lower, the sum is enormous. The bills that my father-in-law ran up dying of melanoma were astonishing. Similarly, my step-mother-in-law is dying of Alzheimer’s. Low cost per week, but the overall bill is going to be huge.
Clayton E. Cramer:
Thankfully you have good health.
Yet you are in for a big surprise when your COBRA runs out.
Have you been quoted rates yet?
And if you’d have suffered a heart attack, cancer, or high blood pressure or any other of a host of issues, the insurers simply refuse to cover them. Period. And there isn’t a damn thing you can do about it.
I do not understand the argument against rationing; rationing is absolutely necessary.
Private health insurance companies today have very strict rationing policies, and they use every tool at their disposal to minimize the amount of health care they have to pay for.
Rationing is especially important in terminal illnesses such as cancer. Once a cancer has recurred it is unlikely to respond to the same chemotherapy, leaving only more expensive experimental drugs. Statistically speaking these drugs will increase lifespan for a year or two at a cost of hundreds of thousands of dollars. While anyone can spend their own money on these treatments, I don’t think that it is an essential right of everyone to get these treatments.
It is ironic that those who oppose a public healthcare option also oppose healthcare rationing – this reveals a great deal of ignorance.
Concerning the difficulties of finding engineering jobs past 50: my resume is here.
“It is ironic that those who oppose a public healthcare option also oppose healthcare rationing – this reveals a great deal of ignorance.”
I don’t recall anyone opposing rationing or denying it’s existence.
And for an excellent piece on health insurance market failure please take a looksie here.
http://www.anonymousliberal.com/2009/07/market-failure.html
“Thankfully you have good health.
Yet you are in for a big surprise when your COBRA runs out.
Have you been quoted rates yet?”
Yes. It’s going to be more expensive, no question about it. Hence my point about the need for relaxing the AHP rules to allow more group health insurance plans, and my concession that some sort of program where the government is “insurer of last resort” is probably unavoidable.
“And if you’d have suffered a heart attack, cancer, or high blood pressure or any other of a host of issues, the insurers simply refuse to cover them. Period. And there isn’t a damn thing you can do about it.”
There’s generally a waiting period on pre-existing conditions, depending on the insurer. And yes, it’s an argument for decoupling health insurance from employment. Our current arrangement is largely a consequence of World War II’s very high marginal tax rates, and the need of employers to offer a non-income benefit for employers.
“We ration today. We ration 50 million right out of having any coverage.”
But not out of medical care.
Wrong. Insurance companies are in the business of rationing health care every day.
“If you want to argue that rationing medical care for those who are currently insured is a good thing, if it means that the uninsured get coverage, make that argument. But don’t pretend that there’s no rationing.”
I have not pretended there is no rationing nor do I think it’s a “good thing”. It is however a necessary thing. There is no doubt about that.
“And Canada doesn’t have the black population that the U.S. has–where much of that infant mortality problem we have is located.”
Classy Clayton. Real classy. It’s all the black peoples fault. Do you have any evidence to back up your racist claim?
“I do not understand the argument against rationing; rationing is absolutely necessary.
Private health insurance companies today have very strict rationing policies, and they use every tool at their disposal to minimize the amount of health care they have to pay for.”
I can remember when insurers were making extensive use of managed health care–and the left whined about that–after having whined about rising health insurance premiums. I have not seen much evidence of anything but reasonable care from insurers in the last few years (part of why costs keep rising). Certainly my insurers have not spent much time hassling me about health care costs.
Of course, preventative actions would probably do the most good–but that’s easier for private insurers to do than for the government, simply because the government responds to organized pressure groups–many of which will get very upset if you suggest that certain high-risk behaviors shouldn’t be done.
“Rationing is especially important in terminal illnesses such as cancer. Once a cancer has recurred it is unlikely to respond to the same chemotherapy, leaving only more expensive experimental drugs. Statistically speaking these drugs will increase lifespan for a year or two at a cost of hundreds of thousands of dollars. While anyone can spend their own money on these treatments, I don’t think that it is an essential right of everyone to get these treatments.”
Ah yes. Complete agreement. Substitute the word “AIDS” for “cancer” and “multidrug cocktail” for “chemotherapy” and watch liberals scream “homophobe” at you. And then you see why government rationing of health care will turn into a political struggle, where the loudest and most obnoxious will win.
“And then you see why government rationing of health care will turn into a political struggle, where the loudest and most obnoxious will win.”
First, let’s be clear. You can keep the coverage you have if you choose to.
Second, if you are unhappy with the governments choices on rationing, you can punish them by voting them out of office. And there is no financial gain by those who are making the decisions.
Contrary to today when insurers companies are rewarded immensely for rationing, and there isn’t a dam thing you can do about it.
“And as for the VA. Take a look.”
1. VA is not everywhere. They get some economies of scale because of that. My older brother gets some of his care from VA–and shortly, he is going to be taking a bus 30 miles each way to the VA, because they are moving their center.
2. I’m sure that they have improved. But there was nowhere to go but up. A friend suffered a serious leg injury in Vietnam, and it has been a lingering source of severe pain ever since. The VA doctor decided that the best solution was to take the leg off, several years ago. Now he has a prosthesis. And the pain hasn’t changed at all. He doesn’t have a high opinion of VA.
“First, let’s be clear. You can keep the coverage you have if you choose to.”
I thought you were arguing for single payer.
“Second, if you are unhappy with the governments choices on rationing, you can punish them by voting them out of office. And there is no financial gain by those who are making the decisions.”
That’s why corrupt politicians never survive re-election.
“Contrary to today when insurers companies are rewarded immensely for rationing, and there isn’t a dam thing you can do about it.”
Which rationing are you talking about? The last time that I have had an argument with an insurance company about whether something was medically necessary was the early 1990s.
“Classy Clayton. Real classy. It’s all the black peoples fault. Do you have any evidence to back up your racist claim?”
1. I merely made a statement of fact. See this May 2, 2007 Washington Post article. Blacks have twice the infant mortality rate of the general population.
2. I wasn’t assigning blame, just pointing out that Canada doesn’t have anywhere near the black population of the U.S., which has higher rates not just of infant mortality, but also murder.
By the way, jharp, I expect an apology for you calling me a racist.
I made a statement of fact, one that anyone that has spent even a little time studying the problem of health care in the U.S. would know: there are substantial racial disparities in health outcomes in the U.S., and as with many other social statistics, this quite dramatically alters comparability to most Western European countries and Japan.
Here’s another racial disparity that explains why America has unusual health costs relative to Western Europe, Canada, and Japan: overweight and obesity rates for blacks are substantially higher than for other groups. The table shows the percentage of American adults who are overweight or obese by race: 59.6% of whites; 69.9% of blacks.
“First, let’s be clear. You can keep the coverage you have if you choose to.”
I thought you were arguing for single payer.
I do favor a single payer. Obamacare does not. And single payer does not necessarily do away with private insurance regardless.
“Which rationing are you talking about?”
Stuff like this. Where Cigna boosts their profits by refusing doctors advice and allowing a 17 year to die for the sole reason of profits.
If this doesn’t make your blood boil there is something wrong with you.
http://calnurses.org/media-center/press-releases/2007/december/rn-s-statement-on-death-of-nataline-sarkisyan-cigna-should-have-listened-to-her-doctors-and-approved-the-transplant-a-week-ago.html
RN’s Statement on Death of Nataline Sarkisyan: ‘CIGNA Should Have Listened to Her Doctors And Approved the Transplant a Week Ago’
The California Nurses Association/National Nurses Organizing Committee today blasted insurance giant CIGNA for failing to approve a liver transplant one week earlier for 17-year-old Nataline Sarkisyan, who tragically died last night just hours after CIGNA relented and agreed to the procedure following a massive national outcry.
On Dec. 11, four leading physicians, including the surgical director of the Pediatric Liver Transplant Program at UCLA, wrote to CIGNA urging the company to reverse its denial. The physicians said that Nataline “currently meets criteria to be listed as Status 1A” for a transplant. They also challenged CIGNA’s denial which the company said occurred because their benefit plan “does not cover experimental, investigational and unproven services,” to which the doctors replied, “Nataline’s case is in fact none of the above.”
9. jharp:
‘“How about if companies (small, medium or large) form a medical insurance COOPERATIVE and share their costs to afford decent medical insurance?”
This does nothing to address the spiraling costs of our health care system.’
Apples and oranges. This is about affordability.
12. RE:
7. vivo
This could generate business for enterprising consultants and administrators. Who wants to be first?
“We shouldn’t need consultants and administrators standing between us and health care in the first place. America benefits from productive workers – not skimming middlemen.”
I meant consultants to help create medical insurance cooperatives by pooling different companies to act as one. Get it?
“1. I merely made a statement of fact. See this May 2, 2007 Washington Post article. Blacks have twice the infant mortality rate of the general population.”
I think the Washington Post is as out of line as you were.
It has nothing to do with the color of their skin.
It’s because they are disproportionally poor. And my guess is white trash has an equally high rate. Wouldn’t it have more instructive to compare poor peoples infant mortality rate?
And I didn’t call you a racist. I thought your comment was though.
“Here’s another racial disparity that explains why America has unusual health costs relative to Western Europe, Canada, and Japan: overweight and obesity rates for blacks are substantially higher than for other groups. The table shows the percentage of American adults who are overweight or obese by race: 59.6% of whites; 69.9% of blacks.”
And Asian/Pacific Islander 34%.
Looks like whitey is a significant cause too. Their rate is nearly twice the Asians.
‘“How about if companies (small, medium or large) form a medical insurance COOPERATIVE and share their costs to afford decent medical insurance?”
“This does nothing to address the spiraling costs of our health care system.”
I stand by my post. Though if your point was that improves access for some you are correct.
“Stuff like this. Where Cigna boosts their profits by refusing doctors advice and allowing a 17 year to die for the sole reason of profits.
If this doesn’t make your blood boil there is something wrong with you.”
I would like to see a bit more detail about why Cigna initially rejected the claim. Obviously, they cover transplants; I would be curious to know why they initially characterized this as experimental. They could easily have been wrong; like any big bureaucracy, they are going to make mistakes. JUST LIKE THE GOVERNMENT.
“I think the Washington Post is as out of line as you were.
It has nothing to do with the color of their skin.
It’s because they are disproportionally poor. And my guess is white trash has an equally high rate. Wouldn’t it have more instructive to compare poor peoples infant mortality rate?”
Then show me the data showing that poor whites have comparable infant mortality rates to poor blacks. For that matter, show me the data showing that poor whites have comparable murder rates to poor blacks. (You can’t show me that data, because I’ve seen the data, and it is not the case.)
“And Asian/Pacific Islander 34%.
Looks like whitey is a significant cause too. Their rate is nearly twice the Asians.”
Yup. And if Canada didn’t have a significant Asian population, it might alter the data the other direction.
You seem to be looking for blame, when I’m just pointing out causes.
“I meant consultants to help create medical insurance cooperatives by pooling different companies to act as one. Get it?”
jharp is so horrified that someone might do well by doing good that it prevents him from reading carefully. There are situations where skilled organization can improve efficiencies of the health care system. Why, even President Obama has talked about that, and it’s true. There are a lot of areas where even processing the paperwork more efficiently can save a little. It just isn’t going to be enough to extend coverage to the 46 million who are uninsured.
It might be that getting all of them insured would save some money because the money spent on collection agencies, dunning notices, etc. from hospital emergency rooms wouldn’t have to be spent anymore–and that means that the rest of us wouldn’t be getting our hospital bills inflated to cover those uncollectable debts.
However, one of the problems is persuading the uninsured to get insurance. Most of them can’t afford it–that’s why they aren’t insured. But quite a few of the uninsured can afford insurance, but choose not to do so. They are young, healthy, and find it easy to rationalize that they don’t need it. And there are some who can afford insurance, but find it preferable to spend the money on drugs, cigarettes, or alcohol.
“I think the Washington Post is as out of line as you were. ”
The more I think about jharp’s response, the less reason I see to discuss this subject with him. He clearly believes that a statement of fact of relevance to his false claims of equivalence between the U.S. and other countries is “out of line.” This is clearly not someone who intends to have a serious discussion.
If I pointed out that the majority of syphilis cases are among gay men (who make up about 2% of the U.S. population), that would be “out of line” as well.
If I pointed out that cigarette smokers are disproportionately drags on our health care system, that would be “out of line” as well, I suppose.
‘Poor black trash’ or ‘Blacky’ as jharp likes to call ‘em are supposedly obese because they are ‘poor’? Uh. Ever seen a starving child in Africa?
Or did you mean p.h.a.t., harpy? You do realize many black people actually take pride in being ‘fat’ in the literal sense. Don’t ask me the frick why though. Fat is fat imho and it’s not attractive.
68. Clayton E. Cramer,
Jharp is a bigoted, anti-white mental midget who loves to play on his own circle-jerk-merry-go-round here on PJM.
Hopeless case.
This is perhaps the first time in world history when poor people are being oppressed by being overweight and obese.
Clayton,
The insurance companies are far from blameless in this. They can and do cancel policies just because your costs have gone too high. They call this “recision” and recently insurance heads, before congress, testified that they would not forego that practice.
Furthermore, I see no way in which the private system will cover people (like myself) with pre-existing conditions – except by excluding all risk from those conditions. The insurance companies have to fear adverse selection (which is what doomed the Mass. experiment) – where people only buy insurance when they get sick or have an expensive procedure to do. As long as the young can choose not to buy coverage, the old and sick will not be able to buy coverage. Generational transfer is necessary for the system to work – think of it as the modern, anonymous version of grown kids taking care of their ailing parents.
As for your resume, there’s a couple of problems:
All the non-work related stuff (which is quite remarkable and commendable) is likely to scare a lot of hirers.
And, of course, you don’t have any experience in FORTH!
“I would like to see a bit more detail about why Cigna initially rejected the claim.”
Cigna insurance initially declined to pay for the transplant for Nataline Sarkisyan because her plan did not cover “experimental, investigational and unproven services,” her doctors said.
On Dec. 11, four leading physicians, including the surgical director of the Pediatric Liver Transplant Program at UCLA, wrote to CIGNA urging the company to reverse its denial. The physicians said that Nataline “currently meets criteria to be listed as Status 1A” for a transplant. They also challenged CIGNA’s denial which the company said occurred because their benefit plan “does not cover experimental, investigational and unproven services,” to which the doctors replied, “Nataline’s case is in fact none of the above.”
Nataline dies December 20th.
And if it makes you feel any better, H. Edward Hanway, the CEO of Cigna made $10 million last year, while cigna made about $3 billion the past three years.
We are all Americans. And we all need an affordable accessible health care system.
The other 29 industrialized countries do it using some form of a single payer system.
And you claim we can’t because of too many black people.
“This is clearly not someone who intends to have a serious discussion.”
Yeah right, Clayton.
Take a look at my posts. I know more about health care than the rest of you combined.
“Cigna insurance initially declined to pay for the transplant for Nataline Sarkisyan because her plan did not cover “experimental, investigational and unproven services,” her doctors said.”
Yes, I saw that. On what basis did they made that determination? Do you have evidence that they intentionally misdecided that? If so, there’s a valid basis for suit, especially because the insured died, perhaps because of the delay.
Any system that tries to control costs (as you admit any system will have to do) is going to make some mistakes and poor judgment calls on questions like this. Please provide some evidence that private insurers do a worse job than single payer systems–keeping in mind that one of the criticisms that many Canadians and Britons have of their system is that so many people either die or suffer needlessly because of the long delays in their system.
“We are all Americans. And we all need an affordable accessible health care system.
The other 29 industrialized countries do it using some form of a single payer system.
And you claim we can’t because of too many black people.”
No, I didn’t make any such claim. I pointed out that the comparisons to other countries don’t work because our situation is different.
“Take a look at my posts. I know more about health care than the rest of you combined.”
And that’s why you didn’t know that our high infant mortality problem relative to Canada might have something to do with our larger black population? Yeah, you sure know a lot!
“Furthermore, I see no way in which the private system will cover people (like myself) with pre-existing conditions – except by excluding all risk from those conditions. The insurance companies have to fear adverse selection (which is what doomed the Mass. experiment) – where people only buy insurance when they get sick or have an expensive procedure to do. As long as the young can choose not to buy coverage, the old and sick will not be able to buy coverage.”
I agree with you. In some perfect libertarian society, we could leave all this to the market. But because the government has guaranteed a very basic level of medical care (through the impositions of the Hill-Burton Act of 1946), we are in the weird situation where the government has forced all hospital emergency rooms to be health care providers of last resort–a truly inefficient and clumsy scheme.
I do agree that the best method for solving this problem is to get everyone into a pool, and make sure that insurers can’t reject group health insurance plans. The most effective way to accomplish this is probably to have the government as the insurer of last resort–but required to not lose money while doing so, so that private insurers aren’t driven out of business by predatory pricing (and predatory taxation).
I cringe at the prospect of requiring everyone to have health insurance, but I don’t see much of an alternative, since the government has already stopped a free market from operating in health care.
“All the non-work related stuff (which is quite remarkable and commendable) is likely to scare a lot of hirers.”
It’s hard to tell. Some employers find it indicative that I’m not a narrow drudge. It also tells them that I know how to write extremely clear and readable design documents. One person that I ran into at a party had gone to work for a company where I used to be; he described my 140 page document used for introducing engineers to the company and the product as “the finest technical document in the telecommunication industry.”
I admit that it may keep me out the door in the 80% of software engineering jobs where leftists run things. But it isn’t like I’m likely to get a job in those places anyway. Perhaps we are better not wasting each other’s time. I remember one job solicitation I received about 1999 for a south of Market Street in San Francisco dot-com company. One of the unique benefits of working there was that they described as a “clothing-optional workspace.” Thanks for letting me know how weird you guys were; I didn’t bother to apply.
Another great example of our “best” health care system in the world.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/27/AR2007022702116.htmlTwelve-year-old Deamonte Driver died of a toothache Sunday.
A routine, $80 tooth extraction might have saved him.
If his mother had been insured.
If his family had not lost its Medicaid.
If Medicaid dentists weren’t so hard to find.
By the time Deamonte’s own aching tooth got any attention, the bacteria from the abscess had spread to his brain, doctors said. After two operations and more than six weeks of hospital care, the Prince George’s County boy died.
Deamonte’s death and the ultimate cost of his care, which could total more than $250,000…
That’s 250 THOUSAND at taxpayer expense that could have been prevented for 80 bucks.
And Deamonte is dead.
Sickening.
The fact is that each race has health issues that are unique unto itself. Whites are more likely to get osteoporosis; blacks are more likely to get skin cancer; Native Americans are more vulnerable to alcoholism than most people (that is, they are more likely to get addicted than someone else who drinks just as much). Pointing out the genetic differences that lead to health variations isn’t racist; it is merely stating a fact that must be dealt with. You can’t fix a problem that you are unwilling to acknowledge exists.
Clayton,
“The most effective way to accomplish this is probably to have the government as the insurer of last resort–but required to not lose money while doing so, so that private insurers aren’t driven out of business by predatory pricing (and predatory taxation).”
Praise Jesus!
Clayton agrees with me and Obama. Now be a good citizen and phone your representatives.
And maybe even make a new post here at PM letting everyone know.
“And that’s why you didn’t know that our high infant mortality problem relative to Canada might have something to do with our larger black population? Yeah, you sure know a lot!”
I truly don’t understand your point.
Our infant mortality rate is ranked 40th in the world. That’s 39 other countries have a lower rate.
What difference it makes what color of skin the dead infants have escapes make.
Black people are every bit as American as everyone else.
“Cigna insurance initially declined to pay for the transplant for Nataline Sarkisyan because her plan did not cover “experimental, investigational and unproven services,” her doctors said.”
“Yes, I saw that. On what basis did they made that determination?”
The doctors made it quite clear that that was not the case on December 11th.
And CIGNA still denied coverage until December 19th.
My money is CIGNA denied the claim to maximize shareholder wealth. After all, it’s their fiduciary duty.
“If Medicaid dentists weren’t so hard to find.”
So this government-run health plan isn’t so wonderful, is it?
“Pointing out the genetic differences that lead to health variations isn’t racist”
Oh, I see. Blacks are genetically predisposed to have a higher infant mortality rate.
Good Lord, where did you come up with that? Do you have any, you know, evidence to support your claim?
I am from Canada and it is not easy to compare costs. Our government health care does not include drugs or dental and things like wheelchairs, or scooters or any daily living aids. It is strictly doctors and hospitals. Most of us have plans that cover most of this through our jobs. In my province, it works out to $400.00/month per person through our taxes. If I have dental through my business it is about $80.00/month and the drug and extra plan is about $40/month. This is a taxable benefit. There is a small co-pay.
We certainly don’t worry about medical costs, but we do have incredible wait times. The costs are going up every year and definitely is non-sustainable as we have the same problem as the US where there are more and more people working for different levels of government or people covered under social assistance.
The biggest difference is it is extremely difficult to get large judgments here in lawsuits. It is very, very rare that a doctor or a hospital is sued, or that someone wins against them. You have trouble even getting anyone to testify and our judgments are based more on actual loss (ie lose a child, they had no income, so no loss)and almost non existant for general or emotional damages. It has to be income, etc. I would like to see the US adopt this part if nothing else and your costs would go down quite a bit.
I cannot decide which is better. Costs are probably about the same, we might be less as you have so much private and then alot of public. Both are in trouble because of the large amounts of people that don’t technically pay (government and poor). When we get about 30% of the population paying for 70%, it can’t go on forever. That is why socialism never, ever works.
Just wanted to make the point it is not easy to compare without all the details.
“Praise Jesus!
Clayton agrees with me and Obama. Now be a good citizen and phone your representatives.”
I’m not persuaded that Obama and I are in agreement. He has made so many conflicting statements about his plan that I suspect that he has no idea what is in it.
The $400.00 per person per month is the amount my provincial government spends on health care. Health Care costs are delivered by the Provinces. That may not have been clear. Also instead of have different “health care” programs at different levels of government (feds, state), we just have the one, which could save money. We do have many different government levels in our other social programs and none of them work very well at all.
“I truly don’t understand your point.
Our infant mortality rate is ranked 40th in the world. That’s 39 other countries have a lower rate.
What difference it makes what color of skin the dead infants have escapes make.”
You clearly don’t understand. My point is that your comparison of how much more cheaply other countries that use single payer plans (and of course, some, like Germany, don’t) are than the U.S. ignores that we have some aspects to our health care system that are NOT like those other countries.
That was an easy example. I can point to others. Because we are the only major nation without price controls, pharmaceutical companies make most of their profit from newly developed drugs in the U.S. This means that we are effectively subsidizing the health care systems of much of the rest of the industrialized world. I don’t like it–but what’s the alternative? We could impose price controls, too–and knock out so much of the profit that it would impair development of new drugs.
Or we could try to negotiate a deal with the rest of the industrialized world so set price controls somewhere between free market rates and price controlled rates. But I think that most unlikely to happen.
“Another great example of our “best” health care system in the world.”
I don’t know that anyone calls it that. For those who are insured, and live in or near a major city, we have the best health care system in the world. My daughter recently completed her MSW, and like freshly minted social workers, was awash in the “U.S. system sucks” propaganda. But she was part of a Facebook group of other expectant women, and as everyone sat around chatting online, she became painfully aware that without exception, the American women in their group were getting far better prenatal care than the Canadian and British women in their group–and the full force was brought home when one of them had a miscarriage–which might have been brought on by the poor quality of health care this gal had under single-payer.
For those who are uninsured, or who live out in the boonies, our health care system is not so good. And you would have a hard time finding anyone who would argue that our system doesn’t need fixing. I gave some examples above, but because you were in such a hurry to find some way to worship the Zero’s health plan (if you can even identify what it is), you missed that.
“A routine, $80 tooth extraction might have saved him.”
It appears that it isn’t all strawberries and cream in Britain, either, with significant variations in dental care available depending on your race and region.
““Pointing out the genetic differences that lead to health variations isn’t racist”
Oh, I see. Blacks are genetically predisposed to have a higher infant mortality rate.”
Hint: what is the rate of sickle cell anemia?
And while I agree that the difference is almost entirely a matter of environment, not genetics, keep in mind that many of the differences are likely not caused by lack of medical care, but that involve bad choices made in the black community: higher rates of drug abuse; higher rates of STDs; too early sexualization of girls. These problems aren’t going away just because of universal coverage.
“I am from Canada and it is not easy to compare costs. Our government health care does not include drugs or dental and things like wheelchairs, or scooters or any daily living aids.”
By the way, this is something that I don’t understand at all. My mother is constantly pointing out all the things that Medicare does not cover–like dentistry, and very high copayments on prescriptions. Yet I see these ads indicating that these powerchairs for the elderly are covered by Medicare. It makes you wonder who got paid off to cover those–while more basic forms of care are not.
Clayton E. Cramer:
“If Medicaid dentists weren’t so hard to find.”
“So this government-run health plan isn’t so wonderful, is it?”
It is far superior to NO Medicaid dentists to find. Geez.
“A routine, $80 tooth extraction might have saved him.”
“It appears that it isn’t all strawberries and cream in Britain, either, with significant variations in dental care available depending on your race and region.”
So what is your point?
The U.K. has a socialist health care system. No one is or has proposed a socialist health care system in the U.S.
Geez.
“The number of hospitalizations among adults with sickle cell disease (SCD) in 2004 was 83,149, which was equivalent to the number of hospitalizations in 1997.”
I can’t immediately find any data on children, but I know that it often kills young, so I would expect that there must be a lot of infant deaths caused by SCD. And while SCD does kill some non-blacks, they are relatively rare. SCD deaths in most of Europe and Canada are going to be tiny fraction what they are in the U.S.
Oh, I see. Blacks are genetically predisposed to have a higher infant mortality rate.”
Hint: what is the rate of sickle cell anemia?
Sickle cell anemia causes a higher infant mortality rate?
I had no idea. Link?
“And while I agree that the difference is almost entirely a matter of environment, not genetics, keep in mind that many of the differences are likely not caused by lack of medical care, but that involve bad choices made in the black community: higher rates of drug abuse; higher rates of STDs; too early sexualization of girls. These problems aren’t going away just because of universal coverage.”
Prenatal care, Clayton. That is what cuts down on infant mortality.
And our health care system sucks at it.
“because you were in such a hurry to find some way to worship the Zero’s health plan (if you can even identify what it is)”
Hmmm. So me stating I favor a single a payer plan over Obama’s plan is “worshiping the Zero’s” health plan?
And you tell me that I’m not trying to have a serious debate.
Obama’s plan, as it is now, is for a public plan to compete with private insurance. And even you said you supported it.
Geez.
“It is far superior to NO Medicaid dentists to find. Geez.”
This is not immediately clear. One side effect of insurance is that it tends to drive up costs–because there are now more dollars chasing the same resources. This is why vision insurance is actually a bad thing. I’m old enough to remember when no insurance plan covered glasses. Employers like the one that I used to have now offer it–and where it used to be that an eye exam and a pair of glasses might be $150, now it is common for it to come $500-$600. Not a big deal to those with vision insurance–but a very big problem for those without vision insurance, who now have to pay the insurance-inflated rate, but don’t have insurance.
“Prenatal care, Clayton. That is what cuts down on infant mortality.
And our health care system sucks at it.”
No, it is quite effective at it–for those who are insured. But remember that even poor women are covered by Medicaid. Or are you back to bashing the government-run health insurance system again?
“No one is or has proposed a socialist health care system in the U.S.”
No one? “So me stating I favor a single a payer plan….”
Why, you just contradicted yourself!
“Obama’s plan, as it is now, is for a public plan to compete with private insurance.”
The problem is that when a serious question was asked about this question of predatory pricing, Obama clearly didn’t understand the concept. Meaning he’s either stupid, or intentionally hiding his intentions on this.
Conservative Mom:
I am from Canada…
“We certainly don’t worry about medical costs, but we do have incredible wait times.”
Nonsense.
“The costs are going up every year”
Yet they are still half of what we Americans pay. And the cost for Americans are going up every year too.
“The biggest difference is it is extremely difficult to get large judgments here in lawsuits.”
Nonsense. Malpractice is about 1% of America’s health care costs.
“That is why socialism never, ever works.”
And who is proposing “socialism” or “socialized medicine”.
The answer is no one. Not a single soul.
And it is either dishonest or blatant ignorance to suggest otherwise.
“Prenatal care, Clayton. That is what cuts down on infant mortality.”
How will prenatal care solve these problems? (And I’m using the word “girl” here to emphasize how young and immature many of them are.)
1. Girls who get pregnant at 12 or 13, often with little or choice as whether they are having sex.
2. Girls who are infected with STDs while pregnant.
3. Girls who are eating poor diets, because there’s no responsible adult in the household.
4. Girls who are drinking or smoking while pregnant?
Conservative Mom:
“I am from Canada and it is not easy to compare costs. Our government health care does not include drugs or dental and things like wheelchairs, or scooters or any daily living aids.”
I’m curious then, as to why drugs, the exact same drugs sold in the U.S., are far cheaper in Canada than in the U.S.
Anyone?
Mama, who spilled the troll bait?
Infant mortality rates and sickle cell anemia. This study doesn’t exact give rates, but there is enough of it among the 1-4 year old cohort to be worthy of state by state analysis.
As I said, the major determinant of the higher infant mortality rate among blacks is almost certainly environmental (and I would include lead paint exposure in that category), but your unwillingness to confront that there are genetic causes as well says a lot about how little you know about this subject.
“I am from Canada…
“We certainly don’t worry about medical costs, but we do have incredible wait times.”
Nonsense. ”
Yeah, who are you are going to believe about how well the Canadian system works? Someone who actually lives in it, or jharp?
Clayton E. Cramer:
“Prenatal care, Clayton. That is what cuts down on infant mortality.”
How will prenatal care solve these problems?
1. Girls who get pregnant at 12 or 13, often with little or choice as whether they are having sex.
It won’t
2. Girls who are infected with STDs while pregnant.
It won’t.
3. Girls who are eating poor diets, because there’s no responsible adult in the household.
It might help. You’d be surprised how many don’t know the importance of diet.
4. Girls who are drinking or smoking while pregnant?
It might help. You’d be surprised how many are unaware of the risks.
And nevertheless proper prenatal care will still lessen the infant mortality rate.
You argue as if these 4 examples are the sole reason for our high infant mortality rate.
And you know damn well that is false.
“The doctors made it quite clear that that was not the case on December 11th.
And CIGNA still denied coverage until December 19th.”
If you consider eight days of CIGNA’s bureaucrats processing a request to be intolerable (and it may well have been lethal), I’m sure that you will be overjoyed with how rapidly a single payer system operated by the federal government will be.
I actually doubt that it will be any worse. Really big bureaucracies, whether governmental or private, work much alike: slowly. But I can’t believe that it will be any faster.
Clayton E. Cramer:
“No one is or has proposed a socialist health care system in the U.S.”
No one? “So me stating I favor a single a payer plan….”
“Why, you just contradicted yourself!”
Just as I thought. You, Clayton, don’t know the difference between a single payer system and “socialized medicine”. Not even mentioning the fact that private insurance is alive and well in most single payer systems. (not that that makes any difference but I mention it because maybe it will help you understand)
And since you stated it so clearly I doubt it is dishonesty. Therefore I conclude it is blatant ignorance.
jharp: We don’t have incredible wait times???? I didn’t know you personally made them shorter. We will have to all call you for our surgery appointments. You obviously know someone we don’t. Bypass surgeries can be over 1 year wait. And knees and shoulders, maybe longer. It is an average of 3 months for an MRI! How can you just say nonsense, you troll.
How can you say our costs are 1/2 of what American’s pay. As I illustrated, you have to compare apples to apples, not grapes and sofas. Show me a real study that includes everything and I might just be interested in what you have to say!
I was talking about socialized medicine because you trolls like to talk about how wonderful all these other countries have it, although you know nothing about it except charts from your far left websites!
I don’t believe your 1% number for malpractice suits, especially if you could the class action suits. Where is your data.
And our health care system sucks at it.”
“No, it is quite effective at it–for those who are insured. But remember that even poor women are covered by Medicaid.”
And 50 million are not insured and many of them are too rich for Mediciad yet too poor for insurance.
Sorry, but I’m not sure why you’re so excited about stats on infant mortality and life expectancy. It’s only among the US underclass that these rates are higher than first-world average; and it strikes me that *increasing* infant mortality and *decreasing* life expectancy among burdens-on-society is prudent policy. After all, a healthy economy needs mechanisms for winnowing out the weak and inferior.
In fact, I think that as a condition of welfare eligiblity, all applicants should be obliged to enter a lottery for involuntary organ-harvesting. That way, they can contribute at least something to society by extending the life of a productive citizen. I acknowledge that the effective return on this program will be fairly low, as most of the poor are riddled with drugs and disease and their organs will have to be discarded unused, but it would at least be a humanitarian gesture towards social justice.
“Yeah, who are you are going to believe about how well the Canadian system works? Someone who actually lives in it, or jharp?”
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/090710/national/poll_health_care
OTTAWA – Canadians think their American neighbours would be wise to look north as they grapple with a massive health-care overhaul.
That’s the conclusion drawn from a new poll published as Capitol Hill legislators debate a plan to cover nearly all Americans with government-run health insurance.
The Canadian Press Harris-Decima survey suggests 82 per cent of Canadians believe our system is better than U.S. health care.
The drugs were way cheaper in Canada because the Canadian dollar was worth .62 cents of a US Dollar. But I am rubbing my hands together, I am pretty sure with all of Obama’s spending the US dollar will be worth about .50 cents of a Canadian dollar and we can visit for 1/2 price. We used to buy your SUV’s and trucks, but you aren’t allowed to make them anymore………. I don’t know what we can buy from you anymore, just visit Disneyland I guess.
My pre-natal care was top notch…
and…dun-dun-dunnnnnnnnn…CHEAPER and with a MID-WIFE who delivered my daughter IN MY HOME with the help of 3 other mid-wives. The total cost for pre-natal care up until birth was 1/4 of the cost of what it would have cost in a typical hospital setting.
My daughter was born healthy and remained in the 90th percentile for height, weight and health throughout her early years.
We were broke and just starting a new business when I was pregnant and yet I managed to eat cheap but healthy food [fruits and veggies, rice, beans etc.].
Also, doctors often want to ‘rush’ a woman through her labor and will perform a c-section that is often not necessary.
How is 0bamacare going to handle women who want natural child-births with mid-wives and don’t want ‘traditional’ medicine or treatment?
“Just as I thought. You, Clayton, don’t know the difference between a single payer system and “socialized medicine”. Not even mentioning the fact that private insurance is alive and well in most single payer systems. (not that that makes any difference but I mention it because maybe it will help you understand)”
Single payer is socialized health insurance at least. And in Canada, it is ILLEGAL for a medical provider to take on private patients. (At least Britain still allows that, and may MPs take advantage of that.)
Part of why private insurance is alive and well in some “single payer systems” (even though there are multiple payers, obviously) is because the government insurance is pretty minimal, and many people consider it inadequate.
Rut roh, Clayton.
Bermuda’s Population
63% black, 33% white, 4% Asian and other
http://www.bermuda-online.org/population.htm
Bermuda’s Infant Mortality Rate
2nd lowest in the world. 2.46
United States Infant Mortality Rate.
40th lowest in the world. 6.26
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2091rank.html
Put that in your pipe and smoke it.
Oh, and in case you are wondering I’ll save you the time. Bermuda’s health care system comprises a public and a private sector.
Exactly what Obama is proposing.
“And 50 million are not insured and many of them are too rich for Mediciad yet too poor for insurance.”
I agree with you on this. And I’m looking for a solution. Your statement about prenatal care, however, was simply wrong.
“The Canadian Press Harris-Decima survey suggests 82 per cent of Canadians believe our system is better than U.S. health care.”
The other 18% have probably lived in the U.S., or have family that does. There’s no shortage of horror stories from Canadians about their health system–just like the horror stories about our system. There are some ugly trade-offs that each system makes–but it is apparent that jharp doesn’t want to hear what a Canadian has to say about the weaknesses.
“I don’t believe your 1% number for malpractice suits, especially if you could the class action suits. Where is your data.”
Here you go.
http://www.centerjd.org/air/pr/AIRhealthcosts.pdf
have stayed under 1% percent for the last 18 years. Medical malpractice premiums are less than one percent of total U.S. health care costs. …
“The drugs were way cheaper in Canada because the Canadian dollar was worth .62 cents of a US Dollar.”
Nonsense. The Canadian dollar and the US dollar were even when this was going on and even today it’s only a $1.15 and it still is true.
“Sorry, but I’m not sure why you’re so excited about stats on infant mortality and life expectancy. It’s only among the US underclass that these rates are higher than first-world average; and it strikes me that *increasing* infant mortality and *decreasing* life expectancy among burdens-on-society is prudent policy. After all, a healthy economy needs mechanisms for winnowing out the weak and inferior.”
Except that if you could reduce the damage being done, these wouldn’t be “burdens-on-society.” I’ve long thought that a useful expenditure of $30 billion a year would be to find every lead painted residence in the U.S., and hire the local population to sandblast and repaint.
1. It would reduce future lead exposure, which causes mental retardation (in kids) and aggression (in adults).
2. It would give a fair number of young people with no current job experience some actual working experience.
Canadian media is just as left wing as the US. The average Canadian citizen absolutely could not tell you how much our health care system costs them personally. They usually say its “free”. When I tell them how much it costs, they are totally shocked. Funny thing about social programs………
All we talk about up here is how our system is running out of money and yes they have started to cut things like MRI’s and cancer treatments.
“Bermuda’s Population
63% black, 33% white, 4% Asian and other
http://www.bermuda-online.org/population.htm
Bermuda’s Infant Mortality Rate
2nd lowest in the world. 2.46″
Excellent for the Bermudans. It’s a rather different population than the U.S.
jharp, a single payer system is socialism. It socializes medical insurance. That is socialism – state ownership of the measn of production, where what is produced is medical insurance. So yes, when you advocate for a single payer system, you do advocate for socialism. And thus, Medicare and Medicaid are properly described as socialism, since the state owns that means of production -so the Obama plan, even if not single payer should properly be described as socialism.
I know people use socialism as an insult, but it is also just a word. The U.S. military, which is intended to produce military victories, is a means of production wholly owned by the state. It’s a socialistic institution, not at all a free market one. I think we all prefer it that way.
And, BTW, the French system isn’t really single payer – see the bit about ‘Complementary Insurance’ here: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/9994.php
Germany isn’t single payer either, as mentioned. Canada allows supplementary insurance, so it really isn’t single payer. The Dutch system does not appear to be single payer: http://www.justlanded.com/english/Netherlands/Netherlands-Guide/Health/Healthcare
I think the reality is that there is wild variety in how nations pay for health care, not 29 countries vs the U.S.
Yours,
Tom
P.S. Love your blog, Clayton.
“And 50 million are not insured and many of them are too rich for Mediciad yet too poor for insurance.”
I agree with you on this. And I’m looking for a solution. Your statement about prenatal care, however, was simply wrong.
I stated “our system sucks at it (prenatal care).
And how you can possible think my statement is wrong when we have 50 million uninsured and an infant mortality ranking of 40th in the world is stunning.
I stand by my post. Our prenatal care system sucks.
“Excellent for the Bermudans. It’s a rather different population than the U.S.”
Yeah it is. It’s 63% black which according to you is the main cause of our high infant morality rates.
The U.S. on the other hand, is 13% black, yet has an infant mortality rate nearly three times that of Bermuda.
Clayton E. Cramer:
“Sorry, but I’m not sure why you’re so excited about stats on infant mortality and life expectancy. It’s only among the US underclass that these rates are higher than first-world average; and it strikes me that *increasing* infant mortality and *decreasing* life expectancy among burdens-on-society is prudent policy. After all, a healthy economy needs mechanisms for winnowing out the weak and inferior.”
Clayton,
I can’t believe you took J Swift’s post seriously.
That is Hitler stuff. Though I’m sure plenty of right wingers agree.
jharp, your comment about Bermuda’s infant mortality rates and African-American infant mortality rates is utterly beside the point. Clearly, we need to decrease African-American infant mortality rates. That will probably require changes to African-American culture, as well as some form of health care reform. And before you claim I am blaming the victim, please consider that one’s culture is essentially hereditary as well – and not easy to change.
Yours,
3om
What just amazes me is the extent to which jharp is fighting battles from another century. He acts as though there is some belief in black genetic inferiority or something, and that Bermuda somehow disproves it.
“Single payer is socialized health insurance at least.”
No. It is not. Single payer is exactly what it says it is. There is one single payer.
“I stated “our system sucks at it (prenatal care).
And how you can possible think my statement is wrong when we have 50 million uninsured and an infant mortality ranking of 40th in the world is stunning.
I stand by my post. Our prenatal care system sucks.”
You are assuming that our miserable infant mortality ranking is because our prenatal care system is bad. There are a lot of factors that play a part in the problems we have here, and blaming it all (or even mostly) on the high rates of uninsured is simply not justified by the evidence.
jharp,
If the single payer is the government, it is socialism by definition, since the government owns the means of produciton. If the single payer is not the government, I think that would be worse. Are you advocating for a single payer private insurance system?
Yours,
3om
““Excellent for the Bermudans. It’s a rather different population than the U.S.”
Yeah it is. It’s 63% black which according to you is the main cause of our high infant morality rates.”
I said nothing of the sort. I pointed out that this is one of several factors that immediately render international comparisons non-comparable.
“Clayton,
I can’t believe you took J Swift’s post seriously.
That is Hitler stuff. Though I’m sure plenty of right wingers agree.”
It was obviously satire (hence J. Swift.) But I’m not above ripping a hole in stupid satire. And as for “plenty of right wingers”– you might actually talk to some. It would destroy your stereotypes.
Tom DeGisi:
“jharp, your comment about Bermuda’s infant mortality rates and African-American infant mortality rates is utterly beside the point.”
Not if you read the entire thread. Clayton claimed our high infant mortality rate and high health care costs were due to our large black population.
Below is one of his quotes. I suspect he took the one down (due to embarrassment) claiming blacks were to blame for the high infant mortality rate in the U.S. He even went as far as to blame sickle cell anemia.
Clayton “Here’s another racial disparity that explains why America has unusual health costs relative to Western Europe, Canada, and Japan: overweight and obesity rates for blacks are substantially higher than for other groups. The table shows the percentage of American adults who are overweight or obese by race: 59.6% of whites; 69.9% of blacks.”
My post showing Bermuda having 5 times more blacks (as a percentage) while having 1/3 (as a percentage) of infant deaths completely refuted Clayton;s ludicrous claim.
““Single payer is socialized health insurance at least.”
No. It is not. Single payer is exactly what it says it is. There is one single payer.”
And the single payer is? The government. What is the definition of socialism? Government ownership of the means of production. Pretending that single payer health insurance isn’t socialism is stupid.
Liberal Justice Ginsburg said:
“I Thought Roe Would Help Eradicate Unwanted Populations”
Hmm.
If some ‘white’ Justice would have said that…
Hmm.
Clayton E. Cramer:
“What just amazes me is the extent to which jharp is fighting battles from another century. He acts as though there is some belief in black genetic inferiority or something, and that Bermuda somehow disproves it.”
Good God Clayton.
YOU were the one who falsely claimed our high health care costs and high infant mortality rate was due to us having a higher percentage of blacks.
And I have a record of it.
“3. Girls who are eating poor diets, because there’s no responsible adult in the household.
It might help. You’d be surprised how many don’t know the importance of diet.
4. Girls who are drinking or smoking while pregnant?
It might help. You’d be surprised how many are unaware of the risks.
And nevertheless proper prenatal care will still lessen the infant mortality rate.
You argue as if these 4 examples are the sole reason for our high infant mortality rate.
And you know damn well that is false.”
Except that I am not saying that these are the “sole reason.” You are the one stuck in the “it’s either this or it’s that.” The real world is more complicated than that.
There is already an enormous amount of advertising aimed at reminding women that alcohol and tobacco are bad for unborn children. (Excuse me: fetal tissue that we haven’t aborted yet, therefore not important to liberals.) Just like the advertising that is aimed at adults–who all know that smoking is lethal, and still do it.
Tom DeGisi:
“jharp, a single payer system is socialism. It socializes medical insurance. That is socialism – state ownership of the measn of production, where what is produced is medical insurance. So yes, when you advocate for a single payer system, you do advocate for socialism. And thus, Medicare and Medicaid are properly described as socialism, since the state owns that means of production -so the Obama plan, even if not single payer should properly be described as socialism.”
Utter nonsense.
Insurance isn’t anything more than the pooling of risks.
It produces nothing.
For the record. These are the two posts Clayton took down after realizing his stupidity.
Be a man, Clayton. Own up. You don’t seem to a bad guy even though you are painfully uninformed.
The truth shall set you free!
Clayton E. Cramer:
“And that’s why you didn’t know that our high infant mortality problem relative to Canada might have something to do with our larger black population? Yeah, you sure know a lot!”
Clayton E. Cramer:
Here’s another racial disparity that explains why America has unusual health costs relative to Western Europe, Canada, and Japan: overweight and obesity rates for blacks are substantially higher than for other groups. The table shows the percentage of American adults who are overweight or obese by race: 59.6% of whites; 69.9% of blacks.
The government… Socialized medicine… rationing… the federal government dictating to patients and doctors what sort of care can be given based on bureaucratic needs, regulation and law…
Of course not one Congress-critter, evil doing robber baron, or government lackey will be forced to wait three months for an MRI.
Funny I got three inside of a month… the third, on my neck was scheduled and performed on a Sunday morning in the radiology department of the hospital. The Radiologist’s office, which had two MRI machines and a PET scanner but it was closed on Sunday and I had some issues with work that made the appointment a perfect fit. I had my surgery 3 weeks later. In in the morning, no complications… out and recouperating at home in the afternoon, though I could have stayed the night if need be.
No Canadian or Brit, or any other “advanced” western socialized medical culture would have had the same service. From diagnosis of suspected disk rupture, to an MRI which identified two, to surgery to fix the one that was damaging my medial nerve… inside of two months. Oh? The other two MRI’s were for an elbow and shoulder… torn biceps tendon and a sprained rotator cuff… The shoulder is healing, the torn biceps I am leaving since it has been damaged for too long and the recovery time is 6 to 8 months of intensive physical therapy after surgery to graft in a piece of transplanted hamstring… I can have it done any time that I would like… but it’s MY CHOICE… not the government’s.
Anybody who believes that the Federal government is going to provide first rate care, or even second rate care is fooling themselves. If you hated HMO’s and EPO’s then you will despise socialized medicine.
Anyone who believes that this isn’t a scheme to force the US into socialized medicine is also living in a delusion.
AND No one has yet to tell me where in the US Constitution Medical care was identified as a right… or that the Government even had the right or power to do anything about it.
When I was a kid, I played football in 7th grade in the Fort Knox Post Football League. We showed up for our physicals, the doctor was sitting on a stool with wheels, and a Corpsman were standing in the middle of a shower room… There were 30 or so boys between the ages of 13 and 16 standing in a circle around the room… in their underwear. The doctor rolled up to the first boy… Stuck out his right hand for the Corpman to put on the rubber glove, then the doc stuck out his left hand… and the Corpman repeated the glove ceremony. There were two checks done… and I will leave the rest up to your imaginations…
That my friends is socialized medicine… and the second test is what we are all about to experience…
r/John – TMF
Jharp – You argue as if these 4 examples are the sole reason for our high infant mortality rate.
And you know damn well that is false.”
Clayton – Except that I am not saying that these are the “sole reason.”
You are unbelievable. I didn’t say that you said they were the “sole reason”. I said you argued AS IF they were the sole reason. And since these were the only 4 examples you cited it is a reasonable conclusion.
“And the single payer is? The government.”
First off, the single payer does not require the single payer to be the government even though it most often is. Second, Obama nor anyone else is proposing a single payer system.
So what in the hell are you bitching about?
“What is the definition of socialism? Government ownership of the means of production.”
And most importantly INSURANCE PRODUCES NOTHING.
IT IS SIMPLY THE POOLING OF RISKS. NOTHING MORE.
John – TMF,
“When I was a kid, I played football in 7th grade in the Fort Knox Post Football League. We showed up for our physicals, the doctor was sitting on a stool with wheels, and a Corpsman were standing in the middle of a shower room… There were 30 or so boys between the ages of 13 and 16 standing in a circle around the room… in their underwear. The doctor rolled up to the first boy… Stuck out his right hand for the Corpman to put on the rubber glove, then the doc stuck out his left hand… and the Corpman repeated the glove ceremony. There were two checks done… and I will leave the rest up to your imaginations…”
You are an ignorant fool.
When I was a kid I went through the same thing.
And there was no rule against having your own doctor giving you the physical and paying for it yourself.
Exactly what Obama is proposing.
What happened to our country that such ignorance is so rampant?
Jharp you need to do better than this. The preventable death rates are cooked. Canada, Ireland and others “cheat” by calling deaths over age 50 as due to old age. Of coarse we all know that old age is not preventable. QED low preventable death rates.
Costs. Hmm, tax rates twice what the US pays and yet their health care is half as expensive. The are getting cheated with rationed health care and delayed treatments.
I work in government and as government work places go we are excellent. Believe me though government is the most expensive least efficient way to do ANYTHING.
Wal-Mart has a former Clinton official in their executive ranks, Leslie Dach. He’s the EVP of Corporate Affairs. From SourceWatch – “Leslie Dach, the former vice chairman of public relations firm Edelman Worldwide and a former senior Democratic Party strategist.” http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Leslie_Dach
Dach apparently has a lot of influence inside Walmart and is probably the reason the new CEO, Mike Duke, worked with Andy Stern of SEIU on the recent letter the company sent to President Obama.
Walmart offers several insurance plans including a Health Savings Account option that is available to all salaried staff and may be available to hourly associates as well.
The HSA plan offers several combinations of deductible and premium. Sign up for a $10k premium and family coverage is only $57/month and Walmart funds the HSA up to $2400. The lower the chosen deductible, the higher toe premium. I don’t know why they aren’t pushing this option as the solution to rising costs as it actually makes people think about the cost of a doctor visit before they go for a sniffle or a boo boo. With an HSA the employee is the owner of the account and the unspent balance accrues year after year. A healthy individual can accumulate quite a nest egg.
I suspect that the author is correct in that Walmart has thrown in with Big Government to ensure its dominance at the expense of the little guy and individual liberty.
Michael:
“The preventable death rates are cooked. Canada, Ireland and others “cheat” by calling deaths over age 50 as due to old age.”
Both Ireland and Canada have a higher life expectancy than the U.S. Imagine how much worse we would compare without them “cheating”.
Canada 81.23
Ireland 78.24
United States 78.11
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2102rank.html
You are a certifiable idiot to make such a ludicrous claim.
And I’ve saved the best for last
You said “I work in government and as government work places go we are excellent.”
So says someone who sucks the teat of government and has government paid for health care for himself.
“The HSA plan offers several combinations of deductible and premium. Sign up for a $10k premium and family coverage is only $57/month and Walmart funds the HSA up to $2400.”
What in the world are you talking about?
10K premium? $57/month for family coverage?
You are a lunatic.
High cholesterol and high blood pressure are the two biggest killers, yet cheap generic statins and beta blockers are unavailable OTC that should be no harder than buying ibuprofen. Ridiculous.
YOU were the one who falsely claimed our high health care costs and high infant mortality rate was due to us having a higher percentage of blacks.
I didn’t falsely claim that. It’s a fact that black infant mortality rates are much higher than that of the general population. FACT. There’s no two ways around it.
We also have a higher black percentage than any European country, or Canada, or Japan. That’s also a fact.
You are completely insane.
For the record. These are the two posts Clayton took down after realizing his stupidity.
I didn’t take anything down. I can’t take anything down.
Utter nonsense.
Insurance isn’t anything more than the pooling of risks.
It produces nothing.
It produces a system by which people can afford health care. But you seem to be remarkably ignorant of almost everything about the way the real world works.
You are unbelievable. I didn’t say that you said they were the “sole reason”. I said you argued AS IF they were the sole reason. And since these were the only 4 examples you cited it is a reasonable conclusion.
Only to someone who thinks that if I discuss A that I assume nothing outside of A exists.
jack.compelling arguments,i disagree…but oh well.if you’re going to finally go to all the trouble of being taken seriously,perhaps you should cease with dispensing the insults.
“jack.compelling arguments,i disagree…but oh well.if you’re going to finally go to all the trouble of being taken seriously,perhaps you should cease with dispensing the insults.”
I agree. It’s the first time I’ve seen jharp actually follow through on an debate with supporting information. The refusal to acknowledge that a government mandated, run, and administered single payer system is socialized medicine with all the downside of another entrenched bureaucracy doesn’t say much for his intellectual honesty though. The statistics and poll data he keeps bringing into the discussion are also immediately obvious to a thinking person as cooked to show the best health care system on and in the history of the earth as middling at best. Lies, d**n lies, and statistics so to speak. The fact that the US health care system includes the research infrastructure that drives drug and procedural advances for the whole word and much of that incentive will fall off in a socialized medicine setting that pares away the profit motive is also passes over.
His argument fails at the start when he makes it clear in his first comments that he considers any other viewpoint one of ignorance and ends his end of the discussion the same way. No open mind there.
Still, food for thought and that’s a unique offering from jharp.
“Medicare is a far more efficient system than private insurance.”
Ya gotta be kidding me. I’ve spent 15+ years in the health care industry, both on the insurance side and the provider side, and believe me, you don’t want Medicare writ large and applied to everyone in the country. Not only is it inefficient, it’s incredibly non-user-friendly for both patients and providers. Frankly, it’s a nightmare that only a massive overbloated government bureaucracy could dream up.
“High cholesterol and high blood pressure are the two biggest killers, yet cheap generic statins and beta blockers are unavailable OTC that should be no harder than buying ibuprofen.”
The reason that statins aren’t OTC is that you need to be checked regularly for liver function.
“What in the world are you talking about?
10K premium? $57/month for family coverage?
You are a lunatic.”
I think he means a $10K deductible. An HSA combined with a High Deductible Health Plan is an excellent choice for someone who is well-off (because you are effectively self-insuring for the little stuff).
It is better than being uninsured for those who are not well off (the average Wal-Mart employee), especially for a single person. If you have something come up that actually costs you more than $10,000 in medical expenses, you will be glad to have the insurance to pick up the rest of those costs–and that $10,000 in expenses will be more than 7.5% of Adjusted Gross Income, so you get to deduct it on your Schedule A. But it’s still going to hurt.
By the way, jharp likes to…harp on our terrible infant mortality rate, but that paragon of single payer, Canada, isn’t doing so well, either.
There’s also a graph comparing how Canada’s infant mortality rate has fallen relative to the U.S. Canada’s infant mortality rate was higher than the U.S. until 1963, and since then, has a lower rate than the U.S. Interestingly enough, both countries have improved over time, and there’s no large and obvious improvement of Canada relative to the U.S. over the period since Canada went single payer.
There might well be some reason to believe that single payer improved Canada’s infant mortality rate, but it doesn’t jump off the page. As with most things, the problem of infant mortality is complex and multifactorial.
Thanks for the personal attacks jharp. Those always let me know I am on the right track. And yes there books are cooked. Go ask people who have lived in both places, especially in small towns.
By the way I do have health care. It isn’t the best but not bad. It is also not better than most other employer subsidized health car plans and is not run by any government agency.
Oh and most people think I have a very cool job that is important and needs to be done. Be that as it may you obiousely dispise those sucking on the govenment teat. Yet you still want those teat sucking government employees to run your health care?
Clayton E. Cramer:
“What in the world are you talking about?
10K premium? $57/month for family coverage?
You are a lunatic.”
I think he means a $10K deductible.
Maybe so. And if so he’s so far out in left field he’s invisible.
I’ve had a similar plan and the premiums were $1,000 a month. Family of four and the deductible was per person.
So an unhealthy year for my family cost $52,000.
“By the way, jharp likes to…harp on our terrible infant mortality rate, but that paragon of single payer, Canada, isn’t doing so well, either.”
Canad is not a “paragon” of single payer and I’ve never made such a claim.
Yet they spend 1/2 of we spend, rank 9 places ahead of us in infant mortality, and 42 places higher in life expectancy.
And nobody goes bankrupt because of medical bills and everyone is insured.
I said.
Insurance isn’t anything more than the pooling of risks.
It produces nothing.
Clayton: It produces a system by which people can afford health care.
Me again: Not in the United States. That is the exactly the problem.
Geez.
Another point–not everyone is playing with the same rules.
Something that jharp should be thinking about–perhaps our differences are exaggerated by how we record deaths.
“I’ve had a similar plan and the premiums were $1,000 a month. Family of four and the deductible was per person.
So an unhealthy year for my family cost $52,000.”
I don’t see how. I have been looking into similar plans, and they had a $5000 per family deductible, and premiums of about $800 per month.
Yes, if all four members of your family had catastrophic health problems in the same year, it would be a very, very bad year. How likely is that?
“Clayton: It produces a system by which people can afford health care.
Me again: Not in the United States. That is the exactly the problem.”
For most Americans it does produce affordable health care. And even for some of the uninsured, it produces affordable health care. Remember that some of the uninsured can afford health insurance, but choose not to buy it.
And of course, our current system provides emergency health care for everyone. It’s not optimal, not even close, but it isn’t like lots of people are dying from lack of health care. There are examples, sure. But there are examples in single payer countries, too.
“And nobody goes bankrupt because of medical bills and everyone is insured.”
It’s not clear how many Americans actually go bankrupt because of medical bills. A lot of people have misrepresented what the Himmelstein study of medical bankruptcy found.
jharp keeps saying Canadians pay 1/2 of what the US pays and I keep saying that you are comparing apples to oranges. There is no statistic that accounts for the private portion of Canada’s health care (for those that have it) being dental and drugs, etc. And yes our taxes are VERY much higher than the US and yes the service is worse. No one in Canada wants to admit to the true cost of the our health care. AND don’t say nonsense to the canadian dollar vs the US. When all those people were ordering drugs from the US and the scandal was in the news, the Canadian dollar was 67 cents to the US. The Canadian dollar skyrocketed from 67 to even and is NOW back to 85 cents.
The comments seem to have drifted a bit – the thread was about Wal-mart supporting socialized medicine (yes, jharp, that’s what it is – it’s just not being SOLD that way. Shame you can’t see past the packaging.). Sadly, my wife and I have concluded that we will not be shopping there anymore, nor at Sam’s once our current membership expires. I don’t like to give up the convenience or the prices, but there are other prices than money to consider.
Oh, and jharp? The reason Canadians pay less for the same drugs is because we are subsidizing them. Any more straw men, false claims or other fluff you’d like to have shot down?
So an unhealthy year for my family cost $52,000.”
“I don’t see how. I have been looking into similar plans, and they had a $5000 per family deductible, and premiums of about $800 per month.”
I have two deaf children (one ear for one). And though I’ve always been insured when I moved out of state no insurer would accept us except at these outrageous rates. And otherwise we have excellent health.
“Yes, if all four members of your family had catastrophic health problems in the same year, it would be a very, very bad year. How likely is that?”
Let’s see. There at least 100 million households in the U.S. Let’s say 1 out of 20,000 had a catastrophic year. A very low number.
That is 5,000 families having a very very bad year. Losing homes, and worrying about money when they should be concentrating on getting well.
Our health care system is a national disgrace.
Too many other people already have coverage so meager that a medical crisis means financial calamity.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/01/business/01meddebt.html
Insured and bankrupt at 64.
One of them is Lawrence Yurdin, a 64-year-old computer security specialist. Although the brochure on his Aetna policy seemed to indicate it covered up to $150,000 a year in hospital care, the fine print excluded nearly all of the treatment he received at an Austin, Tex., hospital.
He and his wife, Claire, filed for bankruptcy last December, as his unpaid medical bills approached $200,000.
_________________________________________________
It’s over for Mr. Yurdin. He’s 64 and lost everything he worked his entire life to acquire.
“I have two deaf children (one ear for one). And though I’ve always been insured when I moved out of state no insurer would accept us except at these outrageous rates. And otherwise we have excellent health.”
I find this curious. I can see if they had a condition that required regular and expensive medical care why they might trot out the pre-existing conditions denial. But deaf by itself isn’t something that would be extraordinarily expensive to take care of for a health insurer. Is there something else that you are leaving out?
“Let’s see. There at least 100 million households in the U.S. Let’s say 1 out of 20,000 had a catastrophic year. A very low number.
That is 5,000 families having a very very bad year. Losing homes, and worrying about money when they should be concentrating on getting well.”
You think it is likely that there are 5,000 families where all four family members in the same year have $10,000 worth of medical expenses? I find that highly improbable. Let’s see some data on this.
“Insured and bankrupt at 64.
One of them is Lawrence Yurdin, a 64-year-old computer security specialist. Although the brochure on his Aetna policy seemed to indicate it covered up to $150,000 a year in hospital care, the fine print excluded nearly all of the treatment he received at an Austin, Tex., hospital.”
You might want to actually read the article you linked to.
There are people who cheap out on health insurance, and buy completely inadequate coverage. My son is off at college. There is a “Student Health Insurance Plan” with a maximum coverage of $50,000. Of course I didn’t buy it. We kept him on my wife’s insurance, because it would not take a spectacularly serious health problem to get up to $50,000.
The description of this guy as “computer security specialist” suggests that cheaping out wasn’t driven by financial insufficiency, or stupidity.
“And though I’ve always been insured when I moved out of state no insurer would accept us except at these outrageous rates.”
There are people who really, really should be part of a group health insurance plan. I have known people who were stuck at a particular job because they had group health insurance, and had a child with a serious condition that made it too expensive to buy individual insurance. I’m rather surprised that jharp doesn’t work for the government, or a large corporation, where there is group health insurance available–and pre-existing conditions aren’t a problem.
There are people who, even with good health insurance, end up running through the lifetime cap. A friend had a co-worker whose HPV infection in his throat (acquired the way you might expect) meant that he was having to regularly have cysts removed–and had gone through the million dollar lifetime cap. There might well be a case for the government to be insurer of last resort for a few of these extraordinary cases. But this is hardly an argument for single payer.
“I find this curious. I can see if they had a condition that required regular and expensive medical care why they might trot out the pre-existing conditions denial. But deaf by itself isn’t something that would be extraordinarily expensive to take care of for a health insurer. Is there something else that you are leaving out?”
Only that my daughter has a cochlear implant. And it does not require regular nor expensive doctor visits or treatments.
And at the time it was deemed necessary for the implant the insurer refused to pay for it. This, in spite of the fact there is a window of opportunity for children to learn to speak properly and my daughter was exactly in that window. After a long battle we finally won but it very much sucked.
It was after these events that we moved out of state and became uninsurable.
“There are people who cheap out on health insurance”
Damn right. Ones who can’t afford it among them.
And I read the article in it’s entirety. And AETNA is preying on the poor and stupid.
And no one, no one, should lose everything over a medical condition.
We are the only country in the (industrialized) world where this happens.
One interesting solution to the problem of medical bankruptcy (which while not as common as some would like to believe, does happen) would be to change the current medical expense deduction on Schedule A to a medical expense tax credit, which could be carried over indefinitely. So if you had $50,000 in unreimbursed medical expenses, a $50,000 tax credit would wipe out your federal income taxes for this year, next year, and probably a number of years into the future. This isn’t a perfect solution, but there aren’t any perfect solutions on health care–just different trade-offs.
One of the more important useful proposals that went nowhere from President Bush was to offer a $5000 a year tax credit to pay for health insurance, and tax health insurance benefits provided by employers that exceeded that level (to try and make the tax credit revenue neutral). This would have been enough money (about $400 a month) that most of the working poor would have been able to afford health insurance (although in some states, probably it would have still been $50-$100 out of pocket to pay the premiums).
Clayton,
“There might well be a case for the government to be insurer of last resort for a few of these extraordinary cases.”
I’ll bite. If not a single payer then how do you propose the government be the insurer of last resort?
Keep in mind Medicare is the insurer of last resort for the elderly and it is a single payer system.
“Only that my daughter has a cochlear implant. And it does not require regular nor expensive doctor visits or treatments.
And at the time it was deemed necessary for the implant the insurer refused to pay for it. This, in spite of the fact there is a window of opportunity for children to learn to speak properly and my daughter was exactly in that window. After a long battle we finally won but it very much sucked.”
Who was this insurer? (They deserve some public shaming.) That’s a remarkably short-term view to take.
So you moved out of state and became uninsurable. What sort of job do you have that it doesn’t have group health insurance available? There are few occupations that don’t have that as an option. Right now, jobs are in scarce supply–but they sure weren’t the last few years.
“Limited benefits aren’t right for everyone, and it clearly wasn’t right for Mr. Yurdin,” said Cynthia B. Michener, an Aetna spokeswoman.
“But Aetna also acknowledges that a limited-benefit plan was inappropriate in Mr. Yurdin’s case because his age and condition — an irregular heartbeat — made him likely to require more comprehensive coverage.”
Yet AETNA sold him the policy they knew wasn’t right after denying him a full coverage policy.
And you don’t have a problem with this?
Mr. Yurdin is broke, busted, has nothing. At age 64.
For a 64 year old man who has worked his entire life to have to suffer through this is a national disgrace.
“Damn right. Ones who can’t afford it among them.
And I read the article in it’s entirety. And AETNA is preying on the poor and stupid.”
But the example you give is someone who doesn’t seem to fit the description of poor or stupid.
I’m a strong supporter of coming up with a scheme for making sure that people who aren’t making much money can afford health insurance. It’s not only good for them; it’s good for those of us who get stuck with the bills when the uninsured end up in the E/R. But there are people who can afford health insurance, and simply refuse to spend the money. Whatever system we come up with needs to means-test–and that is something that I can guarantee no Democrat will ever support.
“What sort of job do you have that it doesn’t have group health insurance available?”
Self employed in international trade. Been doing it for 25 years. And the move was strictly for business purposes.
And to be honest I don’t recall the insurer. It’s been 14 years ago and my wife was the one who spearheaded the battle. I was traveling outside the country most of the time during that period.
“I’ll bite. If not a single payer then how do you propose the government be the insurer of last resort?
Keep in mind Medicare is the insurer of last resort for the elderly and it is a single payer system.”
1. Medicare is not the insurer of last resort, but of first resort. Nearly all private insurance plans stop at 65–because they know that Medicare is there.
2. Single payer means that the government is the insurer–not the insurer of last resort. (That’s why it’s called “single payer.”) Medicaid is effectively the insurer of last resort for the poor. If you have less than a certain income, and effectively no assets, you might still have private health insurance through your employer. Most do not, but there are poor people who have coverage through work.
3. The government acting as insurer of last resort could pick up expenses exceeding one million dollar lifetime caps, for example. This means that the vast majority of Americans would never, ever make a claim against it. And because the major costs of medical care aren’t those remarkable tragedies, but doctor visits, E/R visits, the total cost of the government picking up the tiny number of cases where persons go through the lifetime cap would be pretty small.
“Self employed in international trade. Been doing it for 25 years. And the move was strictly for business purposes.
And to be honest I don’t recall the insurer. It’s been 14 years ago and my wife was the one who spearheaded the battle. I was traveling outside the country most of the time during that period.”
So you aren’t poor. Probably not even close to poor.
“But the example you give is someone who doesn’t seem to fit the description of poor or stupid.”
It certainly wasn’t very smart of Mr. Yurdin to buy the policy he did. Or take the definition of poor to mean not wealthy enough to afford health insuance.
How about AETNA is preying on the vulnerable? does that work for you?
“I’m a strong supporter of coming up with a scheme for making sure that people who aren’t making much money can afford health insurance.”
Fine. I agree. Let’s hear your proposal.
And that is exactly what Obama is trying to get done. You can keep your insurance if you desire. The public plan is to insure those that fall through the cracks.
And to keep the private insurers honest by providing competition. And I love that part.
“How about AETNA is preying on the vulnerable? does that work for you?”
The problem is that the article doesn’t describe Aetna preying on the vulnerable. It is very clear that the plan Yurdin bought was described as what it was–and he either wasn’t prepared to spend the money on a better plan, or didn’t think he would need it. Now AARP’s marketing of the United HealthCare limited benefit plan does sound like “preying on the vulnerable.” but AARP is one of your allies on this.
“Fine. I agree. Let’s hear your proposal.”
I’ve made several proposals, both in the article and in recent comments.
“And that is exactly what Obama is trying to get done. You can keep your insurance if you desire. The public plan is to insure those that fall through the cracks.
And to keep the private insurers honest by providing competition. And I love that part.”
The problem is that in the press conference, one reporter asked a question that demonstrated that either Obama isn’t aware of predatory pricing (in which one company drives another out of business) or that this is the intent: to have the government crush all competition by selling insurance at a loss.
“So you aren’t poor. Probably not even close to poor.”
I’m not even close to poor is correct.
I would simply like to have equal access to health insurance for myself and for all Americans. That comes first.
Yet equally important is to lower the cost of health care for all Americans. We are paying double what the other industrialized countries pay. For the same level of care.
I believe in some sort of single payer/public plan supplemented with private insurance.
Or Medicare for all.
“1. Medicare is not the insurer of last resort, but of first resort. Nearly all private insurance plans stop at 65–because they know that Medicare is there.”
True, yet Medicare was enacted because of the uninsurabilty of the elderly. If private plans would have been effective Medicare would be unnecessary. It has become the insurer of first resort because it works so well.
So let’s talk about my situation. And I know many – many who are in the boat.
How do you propose providing me with equal access to insurance. I’m not looking for freebies. Sign me up for the same insurance as Congress and send me the bill.
And you really need to reconsider your position on single payer. though far from perfect it is a proven highly effective method to control costs with little change in the quality of care.
In my travels I have seen it first hand. Australia, Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong, Italy, Germany, France, all have wonderful systems that use a single payer/public plan supplemented with private plans.
“Yet AETNA sold him the policy they knew wasn’t right after denying him a full coverage policy.
And you don’t have a problem with this?”
Where does it say that Aetna denied him a full coverage policy? It appears that the contract house for which Yurdin worked offered a limited benefits plan, and is very clear that this is what they were offering (because it is inexpensive, and a lot of contractors are looking for exactly that). There’s nothing in the article about Aetna refusing Yurdin full coverage.
“I’m not even close to poor is correct.”
My sympathy for the poor is quite strong. For people like us, not so much. And I wouldn’t expect many Americans to sympathize with upper middle class and above sorts whining that health insurance is too expensive.
“I would simply like to have equal access to health insurance for myself and for all Americans. That comes first.”
You have equal access. I think what you want is access to group health insurance as though you worked for a big company. Well, that’s one of the benefits of working for a big company. And as I pointed out in my article, a number of groups–labor unions and insurance companies–are doing their best to prevent any other model, such as Association Health Plans–from making group insurance from being available.
“Yet equally important is to lower the cost of health care for all Americans. We are paying double what the other industrialized countries pay. For the same level of care.”
No. For an extraordinary level of R&D that subsidizes the rest of the industrial world. Yes, there are parts of the current system that are broken and inefficient, because of the uninsured. There are solutions to this, but the Democrats aren’t interested in any solution that doesn’t strengthen labor unions and governmental power.
“In my travels I have seen it first hand. Australia, Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong, Italy, Germany, France, all have wonderful systems that use a single payer/public plan supplemented with private plans.”
You keep using that word. I do not think that word means what you think it means.
Germany is not a single payer system, for one. I have friends that worked there.
Perhaps what you mean is that you want the government to provide insurance for the poor. You will find strong agreement for that. But you won’t find agreement that the government should be the only insurer, which is what single payer is. And to subsidize health care for the rich? The Democrats want that, but the rest of us aren’t persuaded.
No. It was not clear what they were offering. The hospital got it wrong for God’s sake.
“At St. David’s Medical Center in Austin, where he went for two separate heart procedures last year, the hospital’s admitting office looked at Mr. Yurdin’s coverage and talked to Aetna. St. David’s estimated that his share of the payments would be only a few thousand dollars per procedure.
He and the hospital say they were surprised to eventually learn that the $150,000 hospital coverage in the Aetna policy was mainly for room and board. Coverage was capped at $10,000 for “other hospital services,” which turned out to include nearly all routine hospital care — the expenses incurred in the operating room, for example, and the cost of any medication he received.”
“Germany is not a single payer system, for one.”
Correct. But it gets the same results. And I’d be all for a similar system.
If we can get the idiot American’s to stop crying “socialized medicine”, “waiting times”, Obama “want’s to take over the health care industry” and other complete and utter nonsense and actually debate the issues we might be able to get somewhere.
It is exactly what sickens me on the GOP.
Germany.
The German system offers a possible model for those who want to retain the insurance industry but end its ability to profit by pricing out the sick and shifting financial risk onto individuals. The German system’s insurers are 300 or so different “sickness funds” that act both as both payers and purchasers for their members’ care. Originally, each fund covered only a particular region, profession, or company, but now each one has open enrollment. All, however, are heavily regulated, not for profit, and neither fully private nor publicly owned. The funds can’t charge different prices based on age or health status, and they must continue covering members even when the members lose the job or status that got them into the fund in the first place. The equivalent would be if you could retain membership in your company’s health-care plan after leaving the company.
Tell me again what is wrong with singapores system.
http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2008/01/singapores_heal.html
“The Singapore government spent only 1.3 percent of GDP on healthcare in 2002, whereas the combined public and private expenditure on healthcare amounted to a low 4.3 percent of GDP. By contrast, the United States spent 14.6 percent of its GDP on healthcare that year”
More details on how Singapore’s system works:
* There are mandatory health savings accounts: “Individuals pre-save for medical expenses through mandatory deductions from their paychecks and employer contributions… Only approved categories of medical treatment can be paid for by deducting one’s Medisave account, for oneself, grandparents, parents, spouse or children: consultations with private practitioners for minor ailments must be paid from out-of-pocket cash…”
* “The private healthcare system competes with the public healthcare, which helps contain prices in both directions. Private medical insurance is also available.”
* Private healthcare providers are required to publish price lists to encourage comparison shopping.
* The government pays for “basic healthcare services… subject to tight expenditure control.” Bottom line: The government pays 80% of “basic public healthcare services.”
* Government plays a big role with contagious disease, and adds some paternalism on top: “Preventing diseases such as HIV/AIDS, malaria, and tobacco-related illnesses by ensuring good health conditions takes a high priority.”
* The government provides optional low-cost catatrophic health insurance, plus a safety net “subject to stringent means-testing.”
Re #63 jharp: “Looks like whitey is a significant cause too. Their rate is nearly twice the Asians.”
“whitey”? What a racist comment.
I truly have enjoyed our debate Clayton. Thank you for hosting it.
Even though I’m pretty much in serious disagreement with your position, and especially some of your tactics, you seem reasonably open to new ideas.
Hopefully you learned something from my posts. I have been studying this for over ten years and though I’m aware I am not always right. I am at the least, well informed.
I truly wish the other side would take the time to learn as well and shut up with their BS slogans, “socialized” “waits” “Obama takeover”, it serves no one other than the current profiteers. Who, I might add, are profiting immensely.
I’m going out to putz around in the yard.
I’ll catch up with you in a couple few/hours.
“No. It was not clear what they were offering. The hospital got it wrong for God’s sake.”
It seems clear that the employer knew what they were offering. Yurdin may not have fully understood it. The hospital seems not to have understood it. (There are a LOT of plans out there, all slightly different.) There’s no evidence that Aetna refused Yurdin full coverage.
““Germany is not a single payer system, for one.”
Correct. But it gets the same results. And I’d be all for a similar system.”
But you keep including it in your list of “single payer” systems when it isn’t. Why?
“If we can get the idiot American’s to stop crying “socialized medicine”, “waiting times”, Obama “want’s to take over the health care industry” and other complete and utter nonsense and actually debate the issues we might be able to get somewhere.”
It would help if Obama’s answer to the question at the press conference wasn’t so obviously dishonest–because it certainly appears that this is his goal. And the Canadian system, which prohibits medical providers from providing services outside of the single payer system is clearly “socialized medicine.” If you don’t want critics complaining about socialized medicine, don’t hold up Canada as an example of what you want.
The waiting times problem is very real. As is the need that Canada has to send patients to the U.S., because they have underbuilt their health system to save money.
“The German system offers a possible model for those who want to retain the insurance industry but end its ability to profit by pricing out the sick and shifting financial risk onto individuals.”
Then discuss that. But endlessly screeching “single payer” when many of these countries are not single payer at all destroys your credibility.
“Tell me again what is wrong with singapores system.”
Take a look at the things that they do–and tell me if any Democrat in Congress would support THIS:
“Government plays a big role with contagious disease, and adds some paternalism on top: “Preventing diseases such as HIV/AIDS, malaria, and tobacco-related illnesses by ensuring good health conditions takes a high priority.””
Homosexuality is still a criminal offense in Singapore. That’s part of how they prevent diseases “such as HIV/AIDS.”
“especially some of your tactics”
Like including un-PC facts about why our infant mortality rate is higher than other industrialized nations. And pointing out that the data may not even be equivalent for other countries.
Re #199 jharp: Clayton seems “reasonably open to new ideas”. The question remains (besides why you used the racist term “whitey”) why you’re not open to new ideas?
158.commuter.”His argument fails at the start when he makes it clear in his first comments that he considers any other viewpoint one of ignorance and ends his end of the discussion the same way. No open mind there.”
another senseless casualty of the ‘expectation of outcomes.’ mindset.
Clayton,
“It would help if Obama’s answer to the question at the press conference wasn’t so obviously dishonest–because it certainly appears that this is his goal.”
What are you talking about? I missed this presser.
“And the Canadian system, which prohibits medical providers from providing services outside of the single payer system is clearly “socialized medicine.”
No one is proposing prohibiting medical services outside the public plan. Canada does not have socialized medicine. The doctors and nurses are not employed by the government,
“If you don’t want critics complaining about socialized medicine, don’t hold up Canada as an example of what you want.”
I think Canada’s system sucks. Only ours is worse.
We need to adopt the parts of other successful systems The single payer in Canada is excellent in holding down costs. They need to add some privatization to become world class.
You clearly are majoring in the minors.
Clayton,
“Take a look at the things that they do–and tell me if any Democrat in Congress would support THIS:”
“Government plays a big role with contagious disease, and adds some paternalism on top: “Preventing diseases such as HIV/AIDS, malaria, and tobacco-related illnesses by ensuring good health conditions takes a high priority.””
“Homosexuality is still a criminal offense in Singapore. That’s part of how they prevent diseases “such as HIV/AIDS.””
You are being disingenuous. I have been quite clear that we need to adopt the portions of plans that work. Not copy exactly a system that is contrary to our laws.
I might have to take back the nice things I said as you are behaving like a typical wingnut hack.
“Like including un-PC facts about why our infant mortality rate is higher than other industrialized nations.”
I pointed out to you (with links) that Bermuda has five times the black population of the U.S. and 1/3 of the infant mortality rate.
Your ludicrous claim that the United states suffers a high infant mortality rate because of a high percentage of blacks is, um, ludicrous.
Clayton E. Cramer:
“The German system offers a possible model for those who want to retain the insurance industry but end its ability to profit by pricing out the sick and shifting financial risk onto individuals.”
“Then discuss that. But endlessly screeching “single payer” when many of these countries are not single payer at all destroys your credibility.
What’s the difference between this and a single payer.
The German system’s insurers are 300 or so different “sickness funds” that act both as both payers and purchasers for their members’ care. Each one has open enrollment.
All, however, are heavily regulated, not for profit, and neither fully private nor publicly owned.
The funds can’t charge different prices based on age or health status.
Germany has 300 sickness funds that have the exact same properties as a single payer.
Key points. Not for Profit. Open enrollment. Heavily regulated.
“You are being disingenuous. I have been quite clear that we need to adopt the portions of plans that work. Not copy exactly a system that is contrary to our laws.”
You don’t suppose that Singapore’s rather authoritarian approach to social engineering might be part of how they keep medical costs down? I guarantee you that if we:
1. Stopped all promiscuous sex.
2. Stopped all smoking.
3. Stopped all drinking.
4. Stopped all IV drug abuse.
5. Limited the number of calories people were allowed to eat.
We could make a big difference in our health care costs. (It would be pretty hard to stop some of those activities, of course.)
“No one is proposing prohibiting medical services outside the public plan. Canada does not have socialized medicine. The doctors and nurses are not employed by the government,”
But they can’t treat people outside the single payer system. Somehow, that sounds like they are employees, doesn’t it?
“If you don’t want critics complaining about socialized medicine, don’t hold up Canada as an example of what you want.”
I think Canada’s system sucks. Only ours is worse.”
But you were giving this as one of your many single payer systems (although many aren’t) earlier. Now you admit that it has problems.
“I pointed out to you (with links) that Bermuda has five times the black population of the U.S. and 1/3 of the infant mortality rate.”
And every other country in your “single payer system” list is substantially less black than the U.S.
“Your ludicrous claim that the United states suffers a high infant mortality rate because of a high percentage of blacks is, um, ludicrous.”
No, it’s a fact. The reasons are primarily to do with aspects of black ghetto culture in America that wouldn’t necessarily describe blacks in other places. But it is a fact that the non-black infant mortality rate is definitely quite a bit better than the national average.
I’ve also pointed out that the infant mortality numbers, if not exactly “cooked” aren’t exactly comparable from country to country–which is why Canada is better than the U.S. on this, but much worse than many other industrial nations.
jack.food for thought.
poor children and indoor air pollution.
http://www.ejrc.cau.edu/SummitPolicyExSumm.html
violence:
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/race.htm
preventable diseases:
http://www.cdc.gov/omhd/Topic/MinorityHealth.html
a little ray of sunshine:
“Recent data showed good news for parents of teenagers. The teen birth rate declined by 30 percent over the past decade to a historic low and the rate for black teens was down by more than 40 percent. For young black teens (15 to 17 years) the results were even more striking—the rate was cut in half since 1991. The average age at first birth was 25.1 years in 2002, an all-time high in the United States. Birth rates for women 35–39 (41 births per 1,000 women) and 40–44 (eight per 1,000) were the highest in more than three decades. The rate for women ages 20–24 (104 births per 1,000 women) was on the decline and the rate for those 25–29 was stable, but still the highest of all age groups, at 114 per 1,000 women. In contrast, the rate for teens was 43 per 1,000. In addition, just over one in 10 women smoked during pregnancy in 2002, a decline of 42 percent since 1989″
overall,we are simply too sick of a nation to have the goverment underwrite everyody’s healthcare.too fat,too lazy,too many bad habits.if people were to adjust their lifestyles and live like i do,then i would have less of a problem with it.but that is NEVER going to happen.
Whilst you guys whine and moan about false choices the Democrats who American voted to office in a landslide are doing exactly what most Americans want.
Great work. I am thrilled.
The bill. http://edlabor.house.gov/blog/2009/07/americas-affordable-health-choices-act.shtml
It entails.
* Generous subisides, available to people making up to 400 percent of the poverty line
* Expansion of Medicaid to cover people making less than 133 percent of the poverty line
* Guarantees of solid benefits for everybody, with limits on out-of-pocket spending
* Strong regulation of insurers, including requirements that insurers provide insurance to people with pre-existing conditions without higher rates
* An individual mandate, so that everybody (or what passes for everybody in these discussions) gets into the system and assumes some financial responsibility
* A public plan, one that appears to be strong, although I’ll reserve judgment on that until I hear from the experts
* Choice of public and private plan, at first just for individuals and small businesses, but later for larger businesses and–possibly–eventually for everybody
* Efforts at payment reform, if not necessarily as strong as they could be
* Investment in primary care and prevention, which is not sexy but potentially important for general health.
This is indeed a tired subject.
The only way to ensure good coverage at a good price is to make regulations that allow multiple insurance companies to compete covering patient insured groups that are large enough to cover the really expensive but rather rare health problems. This requires the overly restrictive regulations that prevent multi state and multi industry groups to be formed.
A government run program that is the “backstop” for patients is a red herring. No government program is willing to compete with private companies. It will be subsidized by the private insurers. It will be supported by taxes. It will drive out and bankrupt the private companies. Then it will become just as good as Medicare, Motor Vehicle Departments and Veteran’s Hospitals. Why? Because that is what bureaucrats produce.
And yes Canada is a socialized health care country by the actions they take despite what the labels they call it by. What more can you call it if it is illegal for the doctors to treat anyone except through the govenment health plan.
jharp = racist
“Looks like whitey is a significant cause too. Their rate is nearly twice the Asians.”
All further comments should be seen through that lens. Typical liberal.
“We are all Americans. And we all need an affordable accessible health care system.”
What you fail to understand is, all your ignorant, racist hyperbole aside, that socialized medicine does not give an ‘affordable, accessible health care system’ to all. If you think it does, move to Canada. You’ll be visiting the US for healthcare very quickly.
The left-wing Obamaphiles love pointing out the problems with our system and quoting slanted numbers, but the fact remains that our health care system provides more people more immediate access, provides greater coverage, and does it for lower cost than anywhere else.
“Great work. I am thrilled.”
Of course you are – you’re a statist shill.
* Generous subisides, which will further bankrupt our nation.
* Expansion of Medicaid, a completely broken system that helps drive the high costs of health care.
* Guarantees of solid benefits for everybody, which we can’t afford.
* Strong regulation of insurers, which will make insurers stop doing business because of lack of profit, just like every other step the Obama administration has taken.
* An individual mandate, which is a meaningless statement.
* A public plan, which will be overburdened as all private plans are canceled because nobody wants to pay when there’s a ‘free’ option.
* Choice of public and private plan, which is a bunch of smoke and mirrors that everyone knows won’t last.
* Efforts at payment reform, which are only necessary due to government intervention and pointless litigation driving up costs.
* Investment in primary care and prevention, which is just another way for the government to control our lives.
It. Will. Never. Pass.
Get ready for your beloved administration’s irrelevance.
I can see the morons here still don’t even know what socialized medicine.
And George Bush and the republican controlled congress did so much to improve the health care system. Remind me again what they did.
About as good a performance as the Iraq War, Katrina, and financial regulation. In other words, total and complete failure.
Rest easy, friends. History does repeat.
As usual the Democrats will fix the republican failures. Though I must admit, Bush was so bad that it’s gonna take a little longer this time around.
Oh, and the most important thing of all, above all others, the absolute deal breaker if not part of any legislation. The Congress, President, Supreme Court and all federal workers must be under EXACTLY the same system as all the other people of this country. Period. No exceptions.
‘Whilst you guys whine and moan about false choices the Democrats who American voted to office in a landslide are doing exactly what most Americans want.’
You lose all credibility using this statement to somehow discredit the opposing views.
1: It was not a landslide. Check the figures for Obama and McCain again and how they relate to numbers of eligible voters.
2: This is a republic, not a tyranny by the majority of people who bother to vote.
3: The fact that a majority of Americans see some form of controlling health care costs as desirable does not translate to wanting socialization of health care.
4: Most Americans most assuredly do not want a tax supported government bureaucracy involved in the solution. Those polls are prominent right now and the reason why the democrats have retreated on the issue for the summer.
One thing jharp misses. It’s important and blows both his arguments and his claims of expertise out of the water. Quality of care.
Quality of care is the reason why the US system is heads above the rest of the world. Everyone getting acute care on the government dime drives a lot of statistics held up to show the superiority of socialized medicine. In the US, everyone gets acute care as well, insured or not. The law demands it. And the quality of acute is as good as or better than socialized systems.
Then there’s chronic care.
Quality of care takes on new meaning when you have to wait months in socialized medicine countries for maintenance and diagnostic attention for chronic problems.
221. Michael:
“Oh, and the most important thing of all, above all others, the absolute deal breaker if not part of any legislation. The Congress, President, Supreme Court and all federal workers must be under EXACTLY the same system as all the other people of this country. Period. No exceptions.”
LOL! Don’t ya wish? We can’t even get the elitist mofos out of perpetual political careers with all the bennies…!
Commuter:
“2: This is a republic, not a tyranny by the majority of people who bother to vote.”
Hmmmm. So all this talk from the republicans about an up or down vote isn’t true?
Is that what you’re saying?
Prop 8 in California? That too? It doesn’t matter what the majority votes for?
Interesting.
It would help me to be more informed, if Obama laid out his “insurance’, “medical plan” in a way that I could understand what is going on. Will it be socialized, like England or Germany? What model, to make this work, is he using? or is it on the fly?
So far all I have heard from the adm., is generalities. He’s talking in circles, with no real answers. Perhaps they havene’t made them up yet. it’s an idea they’re throwing at the wall and the part that sticks…
I agree with #221, Michael. If they are on a different plan, we need to have it shut down, and they get to enjoy what we have…what ever that will be. I would like to add the sole licking press to the list .
Obama did win the election, but I do believe enough Americans have awakened to do some good in 2010. I just want someone in the adm to explain the whole mess, without the prompted answers etc.
jharp is clearly an ignorant troll. Not worth debating with – just worthy of scorn.
SusieQ!:
“It would help me to be more informed, if Obama laid out his “insurance’, “medical plan” in a way that I could understand what is going on. Will it be socialized, like England or Germany? What model, to make this work, is he using?”
Hi Susie,
Congress, not the President is writing the bill though clearly with Obama’s influence. And just today the House published their version. Here it is. http://edlabor.house.gov/blog/2009/07/americas-affordable-health-choices-act.shtml
And it is not “socialized”, though I’m sure the posters here who don’t know what socialized is will be calling it that.
And Germany does not have socialized medicine. The U.K. does and as far as I know they are the only ones who do.
“I can see the morons here”
Ad hominem attack. First resort of a losing debater.
“And George Bush and the republican controlled congress”
Backwards, irrelevant finger-pointing – second resort of a losing debater.
“About as good a performance as the Iraq War, Katrina, and financial regulation”
Bringing up the war the Dems said we could never win (after hawking it for ten years and then voting for it enthusiastically, of course), which we won, using the strategy the Dems said would fail; a natural disaster that reflected more poorly on local government than national; and ‘financial regulation’ which is liberal-speak for “the expected result of left-wing meddling with the free market” – simple, straightforward delusion, as the losing debater realizes how foolish he looks.
You’re wrong on every single point, sir, from how American medical care rates in the world to how much the public DOES NOT WANT socialized medicine.
It’s okay. Eventually you’ll mature and become a Conservative. Hope your Democrats don’t succeed in destroying the country first.
AtheistConservative:
“the war… … which we won”
Really? What’d we win?
Another $2 trillion in debt for nothing/
Or was it the 4,600 dead soldiers?
Or is the 30,000 maimed and disfigured that we’ll be taking care of at taxpayer expense for another generation?
And I guess since “we won” we can bring the 140,000 troops home that are costing us $12 billion a month.
Right?
““2: This is a republic, not a tyranny by the majority of people who bother to vote.”
Hmmmm. So all this talk from the republicans about an up or down vote isn’t true?
Is that what you’re saying?”
I think it’s meaning in context is immediately apparent to the casual observer given the bullet just before it. I don’t know why someone as smart as you continually tell us you are missed it.
What is means is capturing the vote of somewhere in the neighborhood of 30% of eligible voters does not give the winning party carte blanche rights to social engineering.
“Prop 8 in California? That too? It doesn’t matter what the majority votes for?”
Please. You call out your oppostion as morons and then toss out this apples to rocks comparison? Prop 8 was an initiative voted on by the public. You are talking about socialized medicine being shoved down the throats of a public that does not want it by politicians.
Care to speculate on the outcome were your trillion dollar social engineering project put to an up/down public vote like the Prop 8 vote?
“Care to speculate on the outcome were your trillion dollar social engineering project put to an up/down public vote like the Prop 8 vote?”
No need to speculate. Here are the polling results.http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/21/health/policy/21poll.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss
The national telephone survey, which was conducted from June 12 to 16, found that 72 percent of those questioned supported a government-administered insurance plan — something like Medicare for those under 65 — that would compete for customers with private insurers. Twenty percent said they were opposed.
In all the discussion about government involvement in health care I haven’t heard the role of the states. The whole US concept of government is that the *states* do most of things; the federal government only can do a few that are strictly enumerated in the Constitution (as reinforced by the 9th and 10th amendments).
Is that less efficient, having 50+ forms of government involvement instead of one? Perhaps, but it allows *competition*. Should cochlear implants be covered (my son’s was US$80k)? Should infertility treatments such as GIFT / IVF / etc.? What would constitute experimental medical procedures? What drugs would be included and at what rates?
Honest people disagree on the above and many, many other issues. And coverage in the wilds of Alaska will obviously vary from coverage in downtown Manhattan. That’s why the states can make their own decisions and, having each other as examples, observe and fine tune the results. Guaranteed freedom of location between them ensures that the system can iterate to more optimized solution sets than one without an objective feedback mechanism – which most federal systems tend to be (their feedback has no reliable reference signal).
If a federal plan is more desirable than a state or local plan – why not declare a NAFTA plan or a UN world wide one? If those are crazy to propose, why is a federal one not?
Is the lack of available funds at the state level the reason? For pity’s sake, the federal goverenment is trillions in the hole and digging fast – it makes the states look like paragons of economic virtue (yes, even (blush) California). If the states can’t afford it, how can the bankrupt federal government?
Re-read Jefferson.
By the way, thank you, Clayton and others, for a terrific discussion!
“By the way, thank you, Clayton and others, for a terrific discussion!”
Thank you.
Though trying at times, I feel some got the message.
It should only get better as now there is an actual proposal on the table.
@ 151. jharp:
I meant a $10k deductible. It’s actually only $6k. I checked on it today.
@ 164. jharp:
“Maybe so. And if so he’s so far out in left field he’s invisible.
I’ve had a similar plan and the premiums were $1,000 a month. Family of four and the deductible was per person.”
You’re gonna have to explain that one. The deductible is actually just $6k and it is for my entire family. The deductible on the individual plan is $3k. It’s a great plan for my employer because I don’t run up their insurance costs by presenting a claim every time I visit the doctor with a sinus infection, runny nose, etc. It’s basically catastrophic coverage which is all most, not all, people really need. Imagine vehicle insurance policy that covered oil changes. Stupid.
“Should cochlear implants be covered (my son’s was US$80k)?”
Sorry I missed this.
A terrific question. Hearing aids are not covered under any insurance that I am aware of. Or at least the weren’t when I was buying them. And many kids do without as a result. And in addition to not hearing their speech is affected as well. To me, a disgrace to the greatest country in the world.
I believe they should be and not just because my daughter needed one.
Throughout our journey of my daughters hearing loss I saw many many children in a similar circumstance.
And the poor and the uninsured went without. Had we been in a similar circumstance I am sure my daughter would have as well.
Because we were a family of means and fought like hell we got the implant.
The result is my daughter has excellent speech, excels in school (A’s), babysits and tutors my neighbors autistic child, has worked in a day for 3 years, teaches horse back riding to a neighbors 34 year old daughter, and is due to graduate from high school in 9 months and head to college.
I have no doubt as to the value to all Americans of my daughters ability to hear. I am certain she will become a productive taxpaying citizen that contributes to the well being of all.
correction”teaches horse back riding to a neighbors 34 year old (retarded) daughter”
And it melts my heart to see their relationship. The 34 year old is distraught over my 17 year old daughter leaving for college next year.
jack.”I can see the morons here still don’t even know what socialized medicine”
no need to comment on that one…..it speaks for it’s self.
“And I guess since “we won” we can bring the 140,000 troops home that are costing us $12 billion a month.
Right?”
it costs twice as much to equip a soldier in afganistan as it does in iraq,how many soldiers in a-stan again?do the math.all obama.a BTW next to iraq,afganistan is an untenable situation with very little chance of success.again all obama.do i have to remind you of what he said about these countries during the campain?how about his words on pakistan and iran?
stick to the subjects you know something about and please link correctly if you want the articles read.
Bill,
You posted. “The HSA plan offers several combinations of deductible and premium. Sign up for a $10k premium and family coverage is only $57/month and Walmart funds the HSA up to $2400.”
And. “I meant a $10k deductible. It’s actually only $6k. I checked on it today.”
That is one hell of a deal you are getting.
$57/month with a $6K deductible for a family?
Wow. And Wal Mart funds the HSA up to $2,400?
That cannot possibly be true.
‘No need to speculate. Here are the polling results.http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/21/health/policy/21poll.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss‘
You are a babe in the woods when it comes to understanding polls. I suggest you look at polls of how likely voters respond when asked to consider the costs. The costs and how to pay for them were addressed in your link to the plan that came out of the House leadership and committee. If you buy into even one notion the plan lays out for paying for itself, you are incredibly naive compared to the average likely voter asked the question.
Commuter:
“I suggest you look at polls of how likely voters respond when asked to consider the costs.”
I’d be happy to look.
Link?
Meanwhile….today….
Senate HELP Committee Passes Health Reform Bill
“What concerns me about Wal-Mart’s endorsement of a plan that requires employers to provide “affordable” health insurance coverage is that it will do something that Wal-Mart would never directly admit to doing. It will drive their smaller, less efficient competitors out of business. There are a lot of mom and pop operations — and some that are their own small, regional chain stores — that are struggling to stay afloat right now. This new requirement will cause at least some of them to throw in the towel.”
You know how silly this statement sounds?.
The new healthcare plan will make healthcare affordable for the employees of mom and pop stores. And NO, there isn’t anything sinsister plan about wiping out the competition with national health insurance.
Large corporations are ready to embrace this healthcare bill because they FEAR UNIONIZATION will make them go bankrupt. Greedy HMO’s love 10-year health insurance contracts so they can raise them every year like a boa constrictor squeezing out businesses profits to their death..
jack.”Senate HELP Committee Passes Health Reform Bill”
http://www.fdalawblog.net/files/help-cmte-fob-amend.pdf
http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSN13231081
“A minimum of 12 years of data exclusivity establishes a fair and reasonable period to ensure continued biomedical innovation and provide the benefits of competition,” said Jim Greenwood, president of the Biotechnology Industry Organization, which represents brand-name biotech drugmakers.
“The committee rejected a shorter period of seven years, the time the White House says strikes an appropriate balance between promoting innovation and providing competition. Seniors lobbying group AARP also backed seven years”
“I’d be happy to look.
Link?”
So look.
The house plan is nothing more than another step on the path to a socialist America. More wealth re-distribution giving us lowest common denominator health care. The house plan in part talks about savings assuming changes in the spending habits of entrenched bureaucracies. That will never happen. Entrenched bureaucracies never give up money willingly. Force them to, and they’ll just reduce their services throwing more people into the ‘uninsured’ health care mix. Not even a zero sum game.
The house talks about taxing the favorite boogie man of democrat fairy tales, the top 1 or 2% ‘wealthy’ Americans to snatch the rest of the money. That will never happen. Those are the very people best able to work the tax system. The payment plan is a fantasy. The middle class will end up picking up the tab.
The majority realizes this using simple common sense. You seem unable to. Citing polls and studies saying that people want changes in the health car system is not the same as saying that they want the government directly involved.
You talk about your expertise in understanding the health care issues, but you are completely oblivious to the difference between acute and chronic care. Chronic care is the over riding concern driving people to want changes in the system. And chronic care is the where the other countries whose health care systems you love fail miserably.
And just think, folks, members of Congress are probably reading threads like this to figure out what to do next…because they are pushing an industry-shattering, irreversible, decades-long tax burden through Congress and IT’S AN EMERGENCY!!!!! It HAS to be done in 4 weeks or the whole world will fall apart.
Like the ballerina said, “Never let a good crisis go to waste.” And they are gifted at creating crises.
Basically, they just look at their next domestic/national target and say, “Hey! That looks like a crisis to me! You? Yup. I thought so! Let’s go, boys! Today at 2. The Oval Office. Next Thursday at 9:00–Congress passes the bill. Signing ceremony on Friday.”
None of the details matter. They are destroying every segment of our economy. The forest is burning, but you just go on trimming your little tree now.
The foundational problem is not health care, or the auto industry, or the banking industry, or the housing industry, or the stimulus plan. These are the field where the game of “How long will it take to destroy America?” is being played. Nothing else.
If Col. obama fails in getting his “health care” plan through, he’ll just use that failure as an argument for Stimulus 3. (Yes, I mean 3)
In order for our country to reach a pure profit status we need to have national healthcare.
Insurance premiums continue to rise because more and more people drop out, and those that can no longer afford insurance are placed on an anchor for the system. This system is doomed to fail.
When GM settled contracts with the unions on a healthcare program it was feasible in the begining, but over time the cost increased 200% and made it completely unaffordable and caused part of their ruin.
Capitalism is being brought down by high overhead costs. And if you don’t think everyone deserves healthcare, the healthcare industry will not survive.
Let me make this clear….in order for capitalism to survive we need national healthcare.
You know it is crap when the Congress expempts itself from this wonderful healthcare.
Actually, congress lives on this healthcare and thinks it should be for ever citizen.
If Republicans deny healthcare to the nation, just think of how unpopular you guys will be! Then there is a special elite interst group-the drug companies, the doctors, and HMO’s; all corporate, all greedy.
I’m trying to remember where all the money is going to come from to pay for this….
Oh, yeah…our children and grandchildren will pay for it! Nothing like saddling future generations with insupportable debt. And in the mean time Obama can just keep printing more greenbacks…
Good Lord, what a fiasco.
I just like the valuable information you provide on your articles. I will bookmark your blog and test once more right here regularly. I am moderately certain I will be told a lot of new stuff proper here! Good luck for the next!