Posted on 06/23/2009 5:47:14 AM PDT by shove_it
It looks like President Obama’s big-bang health-care reform is going down to defeat. This is good. But my question is why do we need it at all? According to a recent ABC News/USA Today/Kaiser Family Foundation survey, 89 percent of Americans are satisfied with their health care. That could mean up to 250 million people are happy. So why is it that we need Obama’s big-bang health-care overhaul in the first place?
There’s more. According the U.S. Census Bureau, we don’t have 47 million folks who are truly uninsured. When you take college kids plus those earning $75,000 or more who chose not to sign up, that removes roughly 20 million people. Then take out about 10 million more who are not U.S. citizens, and 11 million who are eligible for SCHIP and Medicaid but have not signed up for some reason.
So that really leaves only 10 million to 15 million people who are truly long-term uninsured.
Yes, they need help. And yes, I would like to give it to them. But not with mandatory coverage, or new government-backed insurance plans, or massive tax increases. And certainly not with the Canadian-European-style nationalization that has always been the true goal of the Obama administration and congressional Democrats.
Instead, we can give the truly uninsured vouchers or debit cards that will allow for choice and coverage, and even health savings accounts for retirement wealth. According to expert Betsy McCaughey, instead of several trillion dollars and socialized medicine, this voucher approach would cost only about $25 billion a year.
But the Democratic agenda has never really been about just the uninsured. And it certainly hasn’t been about real cost-cutting or true market choice and competition. Nor has it been about tort/trial-lawyer reform. Instead, the Democratic agenda has always been a class-warfare, anti-business attack on private-sector doctors, hospitals, insurance firms, and drug companies. It’s all about control, knocking down their profits, and telling them what to do.
Because government planners know best, right? Wrong. Absolutely wrong.
We don’t need this, but the collective American people want it if they think they can get something out of it for themselves.
I agree for the most part. We DON’T need government healthcare.
But Larry, the estimates for Medicare going forward are a nightmare. The elderly will suck our pockets dry and there are more of them coming on the books every day.
What politician has the guts to cut Medicare spending?
I was at the Mayo Clinic in Scottsdale and almost everyone was elderly. A 90 year old man, on his last legs, received a heart transplant. How did that happen? And why am I paying for it?
Medicare is a good example. I'm now on Medicare. Little did I know years ago that even though they have accumulated my "pool money", I would still be paying premiums to the Feds out of my SS check......AND buying additional insurance.
It's all about control - and power. A government bureaucrat having the power to decide if and when you receive health care? That should scare the hell out of any United States citizen!
It’s another ‘crisis’ coupled with lies and spin just like everything else this crap weasel of a ‘president’ has done.
Interesting analyis by O’Reilly last night on the widely trumpeted NYT “poll” showing Americans “strongly support” health care “reform”, in particular the so-called “public option”. A majority supported raising taxes (on the “rich”) to do this. Among the 500 or so that were polled, 48% were self-reported Obama voters, 26% GOP voters. Skewed? Ya’ think?
We Don’t Need Obama
The NYT “poll” that 70 percent of Americans want socialized med was laughable.
I’ll tell you why. Because of the lawyers. If the doctor doesn’t offer every conceivable treatment to Grandpa and he dies minutes before his time some long lost relative will surface and sue for negligence. Even if the case goes nowhere the doc has to spend money defending himself and his malpractice rates still go up. As a critical care nurse, I’ve seen it happen.
Call everyone in DC and tell them what you think of their wanting the power over your life and death. Yes, it’s that important.
202-225-3121
BTW, Feinstein’s staff is surly, rude, and have an attitude. They were elected to represent the American people. Now, they think they RULE the American people. Vote Them Out.
It is about control.
Your lifestyle affects the costs of society’s medical system - you must stop doing X or start doing Y.
You must wear a helmet and seatbelts, you may not eat in your car or talk on your cellphone. You must drive a certain type of car, otherwise you’re endangering others with your vehicle.
It’s pervasive - EVERY aspect of your life could be controlled via this premise.
And let’s not forget - leftists tend to gravitate towards these state committees.
So, are you going to be more or less likely to speak out against leftist policy when your or your children’s medical care may or may not be approved?
Been to an emergency room lately? That is where we are treating the other 10 million and illegal immigrants.
What would your policy be on heart transplants? Who decides? FYI: Medicare does not pay all the costs for heart transplants. The vast majority of medicare recipients have supplementary insurance to cover the additional costs beyond what Medicare reimburses.
Medicare is one of the only 80/20 traditional health care systems in the country today. You pay for the supplement in order to avoid loss from the additional 20% cost.
A good alternative for you may be a Medicare + program. This program is actually administer red by an Insurance co. and is most similar to a PPO. You still pay your Medicare premium out of your SS, however you have achoice to pay as little as $0 for the Medicare +. This program has a co-pay for Dr. visits and a deductible for procedures, but it features an out of pocket cap that is usually much less than the cost of Medicare Supplement (Medi-gap) insurance premiums alone.
You should call your health/Life insurance agent and see if this is a good alternative for you. It could save you a lot of money.
In 1986, Congress passed a law commonly referred to as EMTALA (Federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act, also known as the Patient Anti-Dumping Law) to address a growing concern that EDs were refusing to treat patients based on their inability to pay. This law requires every ED to provide a minimal level of care to all comers regardless of their ability to pay.
This law and the way hospitals are compensated for this treatment are at the crux of the ‘problem’, IMO. Here is where congress needs to direct its attention.
The ancient solution was the expectation that someone who was unable to pay his debts to another would work as a slave to that person until the debt was paid off...
My Grandpa had White cross Ins. at the time which was better than the gov’t Ins, but he had to sign up for medicare anyway. When you turn 65 these days, there is for all practical purposes no choice now.
I do not believe in government provided universal health insurance. However, I would point out that in one sense we are all paying for health care for those people who are unfortunate enough to become ill.
We all understand that corporate taxes are paid for by consumers, but then, so are the costs of doing business, including the cost of health care for the workers. So in a sense every elderly person is also paying for the younger people.
I have paid enormous amounts of premiums for private health Ins. and I would be rich if I just had back the unused dollars. I don't go around saying why should I have to pay for someone else-I just thank God that I am healthy and can pay my outlandish premiums.
Some young people do decide not to buy health insurance, those who are unlucky enough to get sick wind up in the emergency room and either make payment arrangements or simply ignore the bills. We all pay for that too at an extremely expensive rate.
I do not believe in government rationing health care-everyone should have the right to life, and the right to choose life or death, and that includes the elderly.
My father volunteered for most of his life first as a fireman, and then as a Paramedic,and many other less urgent areas. He risked his life to save others many times for no financial gain. He served his country in World War II.
He paid the with-holdings that everyone else paid. He was forced to retire at 65, but found a part-time job and helped the home-bound elderly with their cleaning and medications until age 79 when he needed bypass surgery.
The doctor's told him he had a 95% chance of surviving at the same quality. He liked those odds and he chose to have the surgery. It bought him 5 more years, and I thanked God everyday for that additional time, and I think he was just as entitled to that care as you are.
That tried and true ancient solution has fallen from favor, unfortunately, which contributes massively to the problem.
Sure was a dissincentive to getting into debt.
Just as 2 Thess 3:10 was a good incentive not to be lazy or a “busybody”. You’d get hungry in a hurry.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.