Obama and the Power of Words

The Wall Street Journal ^ | February 26, 2008 | STEPHEN F. HAYES

[ThePythonicCow]

...

One Reagan adviser had predicted such a win shortly after Reagan had become the de facto nominee the previous spring. In a memo about the coming general election contest with Jimmy Carter, Richard Whalen wrote Reagan's "secret weapon" was that "Democrats fail to take him very seriously."

Are Republicans making the same mistake with Barack Obama?

...

In just the past week, conservative commentators have accused Mr. Obama of speaking in "Sesame Street platitudes," of giving speeches that are "almost content free," of "saying nothing." He has been likened to Chance the Gardner, the clueless mope in Jerzy Koscinski's "Being There," whose banal utterances are taken as brilliant by a gullible political class.

...

The assumption behind much of this criticism is that because Mr. Obama gives a good speech he cannot do substance. This is wrong. Mr. Obama has done well in most of the Democratic debates because he has consistently shown himself able to think on his feet. Even on health care, a complicated national issue that should be Mrs. Clinton's strength, Mr. Obama has regularly fought her to a draw by displaying a grasp of the details that rivals hers, and talking about it in ways Americans can understand.

[Positive]

There was a young nominee who was physically attractive, charismatic, an excellent orator and not much more...he was elected President in 1960.

This kid is biracial, physically attractive, charismatic, an excellent orator and neither of his parents were bootlegger criminals...all comparative positives.

I think, as Rush said, we need to concentrate on our congressional races.

Barrack (Iraq) Hussein (Hussein) Obama (Osama) , in my opinion, will be elected.

We need to neuter him by electing an opposition Congress, then he, like Carter will be a one termer.

[ThePythonicCow]

Why are drugs so cheap in Mexico?

Good example.

Drugs in Mexico might actually be closer to a capitalist market for drugs than either here or Canada.

What we're seeing with medical services and drugs in this country is the result of decades of government intervention. Beginning with the tax breaks for employer-paid medical insurance after the Second World War, and continuing with many state and federal mandates on medical care and with Medicare and Medicaid, we no longer have anything resembling a healthy economy for medical services.

We see the same thing, by the way, with the costs of higher education.

For example, I had an ingrown toenail fixed, in the doctors office, a few years ago. It took him about 30 minutes, total, and some scissors and bandages and chemicals. He charged me $500, figuring my insurance would pay it. When he saw that I carried a $1000 deductible, and would have to pay the $500 out of pocket, he instantly lowered his fee to $130. The $130 was a fair fee, in my estimation, for what that would have cost, in a competitive and healthy market for such services. He has to charge the $500 when he can get it, to cover the situations in which he gets far less, and he can charge the $500 because the system is corrupt. If my auto mechanic wanted to charge me $500 for 30 minutes work to put on some new tires, I wouldn't even give him my business in the first place. But medical services aren't bought for what the buyer figures is a fair price up front.

This is the essential way that they are selling Universal Health care to us.

First make the healthy capitalist medical system not work, with prices rising constantly faster than inflation.

Then offer to fix (what they broke) it (by breaking it worse.)

Drugs are now priced hundreds or thousands of times the cost of their actual production. This is not needed to research new drugs. Other markets that require enormous R&D, such as the computer, automotive or airplane industries, don't allow for this sort of price distortion. That's because they are still basically healthy capitalist markets.

Unfortunately, we have less chance of getting rid of employee funded health insurance, Medicare, Medicaid and a raft of federal regulations and big pharmaceutical controlled federal agencies than we do getting rid of the Income Tax.

[ari-freedom]

companies exist for profit. They want the same profit so if the price has to be low then they’ll sell less.
Now canadians may be willing to subsidize the cheaper drugs for canadians who need them with tax $. But to pay more taxes to support low drug prices for us? that system would break

[ThePythonicCow]

The bottom line is that the people need to wise up to the MAJOR problem of a federal government that is not operating within the restraints of the federal Constitution,

Don't hold your breath ... I'd hate to see you in need of medical assistance.

[ThePythonicCow]

Now canadians may be willing to subsidize the cheaper drugs

I thought we were talking about Canadian price controls here, not subsidies.

That is, I thought that the Canadian system mandated that the (mostly American) drug companies not charge more than $X for particular drugs, and that the reimportation proposals would let American resellers (pharmacies and hospitals) resell drugs that they purchased in Canada for these capped prices.

I see nothing in that scenario that involved Canadians paying for the drugs Americans use.

I only see a greater proportion of the drug companies sales going into price controlled markets.

[Aria]

Thank you for the helpful and easy to understand explanation.

This reminds me that a friend told me lots of Drs dislike Medicare because of all the paperwork. I was in the construction industry and for any job with federal money the reports and regulations were just nuts and added to the price of the job so we could afford the extra overhead.

Social security and medicare are a mess and now this could be the fate of our health system? I liked Fred’s ideas on this matter.

[ari-freedom]

well something has to give if the price is artificially low and americans get to go for all their cheap drugs. There won’t be anything left for canadians

[ThePythonicCow]

Fix typo:

getting rid of employee employer funded health insurance

[ThePythonicCow]

I've explained a couple of times why what gives is not the drug supply to Canadians.

Pharmaceuticals are simply not a supply constrained market here or in Canada. Economic models based on free market balancing of limited supply and price sensitive demand simply don't apply in markets that are none of the these.

[ari-freedom]

“Suppose Canadian drug prices are two-thirds the level of U.S. prices. Drug companies would face two choices: They could ship the U.S. supply of their drugs to Canada, reducing their revenue by one-third. Or they could tell Canadian authorities they will no longer sell at discounted Canadian prices, reducing their revenues by less than a tenth—reflecting the smaller market size and lower Canadian prices.

Their choice is obvious, and Canada would have to lift its prices nearly to U.S. levels if it wanted to keep the supply of drugs it needs flowing. Administrators of the perpetually crisis-ridden Canadian health-care system would be very unhappy.”
http://www.aei.org/publications/pubID.15570,filter.all/pub_detail.asp
-

That’s what I want to do; make Canadians unhappy so that they drop their price controls.

[AmericaUnited]

This is really a story about the power of brainless people. People who can not think for themselves. People who are into “expert” worship. My “(insert all-knowing expert here: doctor, stock broker, politician, etc.) will solve all my problems...”

[bruinbirdman]

"You can't take from productive people and give it to nonproductive people and increase a nation's wealth."

How can Hussein promise tax cuts to those who pay no income taxes?

He has promised all low wage earners a $500 to$1000 rebate on the first $1000 of "payroll tax", Social Security. Everyone from paperboy to burger flipper pays Social Security.

These kids, these Obamaniacs have read the Obamanifesto.

They expect to never get Social Security. Obama says they shouldn't have to pay it.

Everyone has talked about the day the younger generation refuses to pay for retirees. Obama says the time has come.

yitbos

[Salvey]

Obama, like FDR, is clueless to the fact that he first needs to rally the people to exercise their Article V powers to amend the Constitution to properly authorize the federal government to address health care issues.

Since he'll have to opportunity to appoint marxists justices to the Supreme Court, his new majority will simply pronounce his legislation as consitutional. Voila! no need to amend the Constitution.

[NoControllingLegalAuthority]

This is really a story about the power of brainless people.

This is really a story about the ultimate flaw in universal suffrage and democracy. People act in their self-interest regardless of the costs. If they can turn their government into a wealth distributor, they will. The poor outnumber the wealthy and they will vote to give themselves the assets of the rich.

It takes too much time to work hard and expand your own wealth. It's a lot easier to go to the polls and simply vote yourself into prosperity by forcefully taking it from those who have worked hard to create their own wealth.

[FreedomPoster]

I’ve been posting the YouTube of that on Obama threads for the last week or so.

Truly the real theme song of that campaign.

Living Colour - Cult of Personality
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RZ5SVDYBNrY

[ThePythonicCow]

Drug companies ... could tell Canadian authorities they will no longer sell at discounted Canadian prices,

That's the key step. Would the drug companies stop selling to Canada, if a substantial portion of their sales to Canada were being reimported to the United States, displaying direct sales within the United States at higher prices.

Clearly, the drug companies want you to believe they would. Clearly, those whom the drug companies essentially control or fund will claim that.

Looking at the articles, books and speeches that John E. Calfee, the author of the article you quote, has produced in the last six years, he clearly speaks from a position favorable to the current interests of the major drug companies. Further he, and the AEI, are partly funded by the drug companies, as stated at http://www.aei.org/publications/filter.all,pubID.26765/pub_detail.asp:

The stakes are always high in such cases, says John E. Calfee, a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, a Washington, D.C.-based think tank that gets part of its funding from the drug industry. Calfee, who also does some consulting work for pharma firms

Here's a list, from the AEI institute, of some of John E. Calfee's recent articles. Examine them yourself, to see if my claims of his bias are fair.

---

Articles and Short Publications by John E. Calfee

Resident Scholar

[View Abstracts]

Patents Pending

Posted: Friday, February 1, 2008

Can Quality-Adjusted Life Year Avoidance Help in Oncology Drug Reimbursement Decisions?

Posted: Friday, February 1, 2008

Congress's Patent Mistakes

Posted: Monday, October 29, 2007

An Assessment of Direct-to-Consumer Advertising of Prescription Drugs

Posted: Friday, October 5, 2007

Reform without Reason

Posted: Wednesday, September 26, 2007

SCHIP Guidelines: Principles for Health Insurance Coverage for Children and Families

Posted: Tuesday, May 22, 2007

Overdose: How Excessive Government Regulation Stifles Pharmaceutical Innovation

Posted: Friday, October 5, 2007

FDA Steps Backward

Posted: Tuesday, April 24, 2007

Facing Reality on Follow-On Biologics

Posted: Monday, April 23, 2007

The Golden Age of Medical Innovation

Posted: Friday, April 6, 2007

Total Records: 78

[

Next ]

---

So ... if Mr Calfee was funded by the drug companies, what would this mean?

It means we must maintain a healthy skepticism on the key step in his claims, that the drug companies would stop shipping to Canada, if it mean displacing their current sales to the United States, at lower prices.

Essentially, Congress, with these re-importation laws, is trying to import Canadian price controls, without calling it that, because price controls have a bad name (justifiably so.) And essentially the drug companies are saying they wouldn't sell to us at the controlled price, in an effort to break the price controls. And you're hoping that the Canadian price controls, caught in the cross fire, would break down.

That is, you're hoping that we can in the longer run reduce price controls, by, in the short run, importing them from Canada, leading to the drug companies successfully attacking and destroying the Canadian price controls, and by proxy our imported price controls.

I cannot know what would happen in such a scenario; my crystal ball is out for repairs.

However this sounds to me like giving an alcoholic free booze, in hopes he will get such a hangover that he decides to sober up.

My guess is you're being too clever by half; my preference is more direct, and that is to resist further socialization, regulation and government control of our economy and industry, including pharmaceutical. I don't agree to importing Canadian drug price controls in the hope that this will backfire on the controls, eventually loosening them.

Actually, not only would I advise resisting further government encroachment in the medical industry, I would further advise reducing the present intervention substantially. I'm not holding my breath on this one, however.

[iopscusa]

You had it right the first time, it is EMPLOYEE funded health insurance administered for the Gov by the EMPLOYER!
Aka Corporate Facism??
Healthcare is paid by the EMPLOYEES and is part of their compensation that they are not allowed to control.
Just like the Social Security ponzi scheme it is another FDR idea that has become calcified as a FREEBIE in everyone’s mind.

[MaxFlint]

Most Americans are older and pragmatic. They are concerned about pocketbook issues, whether their mutual funds will be enough for retirement. The last thing they want is for the stock market to crash right before they need to take it out.

For every older american who cares about stocks there's at least one who cares more about Social Security and Medicare. The elderly have been bribed away from conservatism.

[LadyNavyVet]

“We underestimate Obama at our own peril.”

Absolutely true. There are a lot of factors this year that work for Obama. The biggest one will be the economy. Houses aren’t selling (and in my neck of the woods there have been more foreclosures than sales since the beginning of the year) and people can’t use their equity as an ATM, gas is approaching $4.00 a gallon, groceries are skyrocketing. When Americans can’t buy stuff they get anxious and upset. Couple all that with an unpopular war and the fact that the Republican party has held the Presidency for eight years, and the incumbent President is not all that popular.

All that points to a Democrat win, unless the Pubbies pull a rabbit out of their hat, and I don’t think McCain can do it. He’s old, not all that likeable, not a good orator, he’s admitted to not knowing much about the economy, which is looking to be THE ISSUE this November, and his campaign seems to be flailing around with misstatements, retractions, apologies, etc.

When people don’t like what they have, they will vote for “change,” however nebulous or undefined. Freepers here laugh at it, but I’m sure the “hope for change, and change your hope” message has been thoroughly researched and focus-grouped as the message the electorate wants to hear this year. All the candidates, including McCain, have used the hope and change mantra this primary season to one degree or another.

The general looks to me like a replay of the nomination, with McCain playing the part of Hillary. He will start out pretty strong, but the more people see of him, the less they’re going to like him. Conservatives vote on principles, but moderates and independents vote on emotion, and barring something unforeseen, Obama will have that vote sewn up.

[ncalburt]

Holland has the highest native immigration rate in Europe.
They are fleeing because of there taxes and arab population influx.
Do they realize that a third of the European and Canadian so called vacationers in the US are actual here to get medical treatment they can’t get overseas ?
Visit the hospitals in Sarasota / Ft Myers area and the hospital/clinic population is a quarter Canadian and Brits !
Do they realize the elites in Europe have private hospitals and clinics to got to get away to ?
I used to handle that foreign health care business for
US company .
The regular people can not get treated over there.
The go it alone stuff media BS is pure left wing media nonsense.
Those phony million of people stats the media uses includes illegals, college students, and people who have healthcare there there spouses !
Are your sister and brother in law ready to become socialists ?
Do they know what Obama ‘s radical agenda including radical wealth redistribution is all about ?
It sad to see the leftist media manipulate people.