Obama’s campaign to takeover healthcare is on
[Posted by Karl]
This week’s rollout of op-eds by Democratic heavies like Tom Daschle and Ted Kennedy were the dead giveaway. The Republicans are trying to get their own talking points together, too. But the campaign rhetoric obscures the real obstacle to the Left’s ambitions.
The Senate’s newest Democrat, Arlen Specter, said on Meet The Press last Sunday that he opposed establishing a public insurance plan to compete with private insurers (and drive them out of business), which is a key demand of the Left; over 70 House Democrats recently warned that they will not support a bill without the public plan. Sen. Chuck Schumer is trying to lure moderates with a “compromise” that would require that the public plan abide by the same rules and regulations as private plans. The are huge holes in the proposal, not least of which is that the people ultimately running the public plan can decide to change the rules later.
However, the question of whether Specter or “moderate” Republicans want to play ball with the Dems is really a secondary question. The real questions are how much a health care reform bill will cost and who is going to pay for it. Last December, the Congressional Budget Office released two comprehensive papers detailing the policy and financial options for health care reform, both of which make it abundantly clear that the Democratic proposals do not add up, while the measures that would add up are probably no more politically feasible than they were when the Clintons tried to take over healthcare.
Thus, it is no surprise that Senate Finance Committee chairman Max Baucus is already trying to get the CBO to change its estimates. But it will be difficult for the CBO to maintain any shred of credibility if it suddenly flip-flopped on its numbers in the space of a few months. It would be doubly humiliating because the December estimates were rolled out when the CBO was still run by Peter Orszag, who is now Obama’s budget director.
As things stand today, the Democrats envision a health care reform plan and a Medicare physician payment fix that costs $1.75 trillion, but they have only $300 billion in offsetting savings and revenue on the table. The amount of creative accounting required to close that gap cannot pass the laugh test, even with the aid of the lapdog media. And that amount of dishonesty will likely shake public confidence in whatever Obama and the Democratic Congress propose.
–Karl
[…] Cross-posted at Patterico. […]
The Greenroom » Forum Archive » Obama’s campaign to takeover healthcare is on (e2f069) — 5/6/2009 @ 10:22 am” . . .establishing a public insurance plan to compete with private insurers (and drive them out of business)”
Driving Anthem Blue Cross (formerly known as Blue Cross of California) out of business is not government intervention so much as it is karma.
Official Internet Data Office (f36f04) — 5/6/2009 @ 10:25 amGood. About time we tried to move the US healthcare system up from its dismal rank of 19th amongst industrialized nations.
Festivus (567029) — 5/6/2009 @ 10:29 amNot surprisingly, many/most liberals cannot/will not comprehend the difference between HEALTH care and MEDICAL care.
Bubba Maximus (456175) — 5/6/2009 @ 10:38 amIf there were a party of fiscal conservatives, what would they propose to rein in the outrageously high cost of simple medical procedures? The current situation is ridiculous. The populists are going to win this battle.
It is pretty funny how effective Obama is in labeling everything he is not doing as “Bush’s Way”. Obama, and especially Axelrod, respond to how irresponsible the proposals are by saying, “Hey, we tried things Bush’s way and look what happened.” He’ll do this with health care too, however illogical.
Wesson (db1c66) — 5/6/2009 @ 10:43 ampersonally, i hope Ear Leader forces his plan through, and they all get exactly what they think they want. the best lessons are the painful ones.
“If you think health care is expensive now, wait until you see what it costs when it’s free.” -P. J. O’Rourke
redc1c4 (9c4f4a) — 5/6/2009 @ 11:38 amFestivus,
You do realize how fantastically misleading that 19th place showing is, don’t you? How it ignores all sorts of factors regarding demographics, infant mortality, diet, etc.?
Wesson,
You don’t seriously think that people are going to buy the notion that government will do a better job of reigning in costs, do you? Take a look at Massachussetts for an example.
Everyone,
Study up on healthcare reform myths.
Karl (f07e38) — 5/6/2009 @ 11:41 amAll studies have their limitations. If you’ve a better one, link it.
Festivus (567029) — 5/6/2009 @ 11:56 amThe key for the GOP is to not let the Democrats bamboozle people who are mostly satisfied with the ways things are that the Democratic proposals represent an improvement.
Thus, the GOP talking point: for most people(1), this ‘reform'(2) is going to cost them money(3) and make it harder for them to get the care they want when they need it(4).
(1) there are some, like those without insurance, who will benefit, but any improvement for them will come from the pockets of those with insurance. And the GOP CAN NOT hesitate from making this point over and over again, that we are the ones who will have to foot the tab for changes that will not benefit us.
(2) it doesn’t matter the specifics of the Democratic plan, as anything they come up will cost ‘us’ money.
(3) as much as anybody complains about health insurance, the absolutely last thing they want is to pay more (in premiums, co-pays or in taxes), thus beating this point to death is critical to defeat the Democratic proposal.
(4) a corollary of (3), as much as people complain about crowded waiting rooms and lead times to get appointments, the last thing they want is to have things get worse. And the more Democratic proposals involve more government bureaucracy, the better it is for defeating this…. whatever ‘this’ turns out to be.
It is also critical that the GOP offer up some improvements of their own; there’s nothing worse in debates such as this than offering nothing to those dissatisfied with the current system. Offering them something allows them to rally round the idea of tinkering with a system that pretty much works in lieu of blowing it all to bits. An example: eliminating bans on interstate insurance plans and allowing people to purchase scaled down packages (without all the state mandated coverages), both of which ought to lower premiums.
steve sturm (369bc6) — 5/6/2009 @ 12:07 pmKarl,
Study up? You must be joking. The ‘populists’, as Wesson put it, do not possess the capability to study anything. If they did, they couldn’t be populists.
Medical care is free, right now, and that’s a great part of the problem. There’s no rational connection between costs, services and billing. There is no corresponding ‘crisis’ of automobile care in this country, and that is due to the fact that when you need new tires, you must pay for them.
The free market is the only possible solution to any medical care issues, but that presents a problem to the many groups that are in favor of the system as it is now, or would be in favor of government-run health care. In a free market, you cannot run a tremendous amount of money through a narrow gap of ‘overseers’, and that is exactly the scam now, and would be far worse under government allocated system.
Notice that I didn’t say government-run. The Federal Government does not possess the capability to ‘run’ medical care in this country.
It would have to be contracted out to people with experience in medical procedures. No magic, just the funneling of a huge amount of money through the hands of a very few people, who would literally gain the power of life and death through their decisions. Such power would be recognized by those around them, and would command large compensation (if not directly, then in perks).
I cannot think of something that is a greater constitutional violation than the removal of choice of the citizenry as to the timing and standard of their own medical decisions.
And to those fools who believe that there will finally be ‘equal’ medical care for all, I would simply point out that wealthy and political elites would have a different standard of care than is available to the ‘lessors’, who will then have to wait and suffer, as they are no longer part of the equation, but just a statistic.
Apogee (e2dc9b) — 5/6/2009 @ 12:12 pm— And that amount of dishonesty will likely shake public confidence —
cboldt (3d73dd) — 5/6/2009 @ 12:19 pmROTFL. A significant fraction of the pubic is completely gullible, and another significant fraction is unrepentant liar/enablers (there is some overlap between those two sets). GOvernmenmt has nothing to do with “honesty” and everything to do with “votes,” “power” and “money.”
Sad.
That’s all I can say. The government takes over another industry every day, and all the Obamaniacs can say is, Michelle is sure purty!
Patricia (94c68d) — 5/6/2009 @ 12:26 pmWant to fix the cost of medicine? Start with TORT reform and jail the ambulance chasers. That will reduce the cost of malpractice insurance. When it’s more cost effective to hand over a huge check to someone than to fight it out in court when you did nothing wrong, there is a huge problem. Fix TORT.
But that will never happen, so long as we don’t have term limits.
John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 5/6/2009 @ 12:36 pm— And that amount of dishonesty will likely shake public confidence —
cboldt (3d73dd) — 5/6/2009 @ 12:58 pm.
The number of people who are completely gullible and/or “in on the dishonesty” outnumbers those who will have “shaken confidence.” Look at what the politicians have been able to pull off in the last 50 years. The time for opposition is past. Can’t beat ’em, make ’em fork over the handout.
John Hitchcock is right.
tyree (158c98) — 5/6/2009 @ 1:04 pmMy father was a doctor. I had to pay my own way through college. Why? Malpractice insurance. Any government financed health care that does not address tort reform is treating the symptom, not the disease. The Clintons were lawyers, the Obamas are lawyers. When you are a hammer, everything starts to look like a nail.
Equally unsurprising is that many/most liberals cannot/will not comprehend the difference between medical CARE and medical INSURANCE
Steverino (69d941) — 5/6/2009 @ 1:19 pmIf this gets pushed through, I can’t wait to see the whole thing collapse when the bill comes due.
There is NO way there is any logical means to pay for this. None. Obama’s cap-and-screw us scheme is being pushed as the way the bill will be covered, but even the MIT professor that did the math on it said that it “should” only cost $800 per household; given that Obama wants to use the scheme to pay for his voodoo tax credit also, at BEST, each household comes out even–and that’s IF the energy companies don’t pass on the costs to the customers. Even Obama admitted back in January 2008 that the energy companies not passing on the costs to us was unlikely, so already people are going to be in the hole. At worst, it costs each household over $3900 (given how government operates with other people’s money, my guess is it will be even more than that).
How on earth are the middle and lower classes going to stay afloat when their energy bills go through the roof? Do leftists just “assume” that of course, the “rich” will pay for everything like always? Keep dreaming, kids. Even if you took every penny from every person over $250K in this country, you still wouldn’t be able to pay for the all credit card bills Obama is racking up.
Another Chris (2d8013) — 5/6/2009 @ 1:19 pmThe great Thomas Sowell addressed the “health care vs. medical care” issue in a recent column at townhall.com.
http://townhall.com/columnists/ThomasSowell/2009/04/22/words_versus_realities
Sowell has what used to be known as “common sense”. Of course, these days, I think “uncommon sense” is a more accurate term.
Bubba Maximus (456175) — 5/6/2009 @ 1:23 pmThe Senate’s newest Democrat, Arlen Specter, said on Meet The Press last Sunday that he opposed establishing a public insurance plan to compete with private insurers (and drive them out of business),
Of course this same self-centered, egotistical idiot senator had all his treatment for brain cancer paid for by a government healthcare plan in the U.S. Senate, on taxpayer dollars.
Republicans didn’t want him and Democrats can do without him. So too, can Pennsylvania.
DCSCA (9d1bb3) — 5/6/2009 @ 1:42 pmRegardless of what “ranking” studies say, the United States has the finest Health Care System in the world!
AD - RtR/OS! (a1bed2) — 5/6/2009 @ 1:48 pmWhat we do have is not a Health-Care problem, it is a Health-Care Insurance Affordability problem.
No one in this country is denied health-care, which in many cases is provided free-of-cost to the recipient.
The problem is the structure in which health insurance has grown, divorcing the ultimate end-user from the cost mechanism of the system.
If insurance was cancelled tomorrow, and everyone had to reach into their own pocket to pay for the health-care, a great more rationality would be inserted into the system. And, you would find, that no one would be thrown out onto the sidewalk to die due to not having any money – many who need care today have no money, but receive that care regardless. In a worst case situation, the care can always be a charitable deduction by the hospital/clinic/doctor – that is if high-income tax-filers will still be able to deduct their charity?
An increasingly popular bumper sticker around here states
Health Care for People
Not for Profit
That is the mentality behind Obamer’s election win and there isn’t a damn thing that can be done about the oncoming healthcare takeover train except to jump out of the way.
Colin Powell said as much today when he declared that Obamer’s election meant that people wanted more government in their lives, not less.
I am nearing the point when the inevitable conclusion will be to sit back and watch the whole unraveling as a spectator…not a participant. Such a perspective makes it easier to keep laughter in my heart and a smile on my face.
Krull (5a6552) — 5/6/2009 @ 1:53 pmFestivus,
Let’s look at the factoid you cite — which addresses infant mortality — not healthcare generally:
Which is the polite way of saying that factors like high levels of teen pregnancy, drug addiction and bad diet account for much of the difference.
At the link given in my first response, Bruce Kesler notes in part:
Karl (f07e38) — 5/6/2009 @ 1:56 pmThe American System:
Lives are precious and should be saved and nurtured at all costs.
Money is just money, and can always be replaced.
It works in War, and it works in Health-Care.
AD - RtR/OS! (a1bed2) — 5/6/2009 @ 2:01 pmAnd when Arlen Specter needed health care? The sitting US Senator chose Dr. John Glick of the University of Pennsylvania Health System, an oncologist at a private hospital.
Why did he not go to the VA, since he had been in the AF in Korea?
Apogee (e2dc9b) — 5/6/2009 @ 2:17 pmIndeed, Karl, beyond the definitional issue which alone invalidates it as a comparison, WHO has admitted in the past that some countries lie to it about infant mortality – such as Cuba.
Even within the US, there is a huge difference in infant mortality among different ethnic groups even when you control for economic status. This makes it very clear that access to health care is not the dominant factor.
SPQR (72771e) — 5/6/2009 @ 2:20 pmComment by Apogee — 5/6/2009 @ 2:17 pm
AD - RtR/OS! (a1bed2) — 5/6/2009 @ 2:21 pm***snark alert***
Any veteran will tell you why you avoid the VA if at all possible.
***end alert***
#18- Regardless of what “ranking” studies say, the United States has the finest Health Care System in the world! This is not true, dittohead. A conservative mind is a terrible thing to waste.
http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-healthcare.htm
And: The World Health Organization’s ranking of the world’s health systems was last produced in 2000, and the WHO no longer produces such a ranking table, because of the complexity of the task. Of the 190 countries ranked, the USA placed 37th.
1 France
DCSCA (9d1bb3) — 5/6/2009 @ 2:45 pm2 Italy
3 San Marino
4 Andorra
5 Malta
6 Singapore
7 Spain
8 Oman
9 Austria
10 Japan
11 Norway
12 Portugal
13 Monaco
14 Greece
15 Iceland
16 Luxembourg
17 Netherlands
18 United Kingdom
19 Ireland
20 Switzerland
21 Belgium
22 Colombia
23 Sweden
24 Cyprus
25 Germany
26 Saudi Arabia
27 United Arab Emirates
28 Israel
29 Morocco
30 Canada
31 Finland
32 Australia
33 Chile
34 Denmark
35 Dominica
36 Costa Rica
37 United States of America
Not merely the “complexity” of the task, but the fact that WHO’s ranking was filled with subjective measures and value judgments unrelated to actual effectiveness.
In other words, it was just more propaganda. Not data.
SPQR (72771e) — 5/6/2009 @ 2:49 pm#26- ‘Denial’ is in Egypt, spork. It’s ranked 63rd.
DCSCA (9d1bb3) — 5/6/2009 @ 2:51 pmAnd, if given the opportunity and choice, leading figures from all of those countries will choose to travel to the good old U.S.ofA. to have critical medical needs addressed.
That a Maroon!
AD - RtR/OS! (a1bed2) — 5/6/2009 @ 2:52 pmI LOL’ed at the UK based on my experience there, but Morocco?
Dominica?
Dominica got it’s first and only CT scan machine in 2002, 2 years after those WHO ratings. The mental wards in Dominica look like Victorian England.
How could anyone seriously believes those rankings, with disease-ridden third-world countries ranking ahead of the US. Where do the wealthy and the political class of Saudi, UAE, Morocco etc. go for their health care???
carlitos (5ab40a) — 5/6/2009 @ 2:56 pmFrance is #1. 10,000+ old people died in Paris in 2003, because it got hot.
carlitos (5ab40a) — 5/6/2009 @ 2:58 pmDCSCA #27, once again you demonstrate your incompetence. Cato’s report goes into detailed discussion of the problems with WHO’s rankings.
I’m not in denial. You just accept whatever propaganda meets your preconceived biases. Which is par for the course for the ignorant like yourself.
SPQR (72771e) — 5/6/2009 @ 2:58 pmHey, look – Dggcrp proves what a good cut and paster he is!
Dmac (1ddf7e) — 5/6/2009 @ 3:01 pmDmac, did you notice that DCSCA does not even realize that WHO put out two different rankings, and that the US is actually 15th on the other?
SPQR (72771e) — 5/6/2009 @ 3:02 pmHey, why don’t we take up a collection and send this character to Morocco for health care?
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 5/6/2009 @ 3:08 pmBogota might be a cheaper boat ticket.
John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 5/6/2009 @ 3:13 pmNot to mention the absurdity of comparing the US with a country such as San Marino (at #3!) – 24 sq. miles of landlocked space, a population of 30,000, and a yearly budget of 650M.
You might as well compare a touch football game in the backyard with the NFL.
Apogee (e2dc9b) — 5/6/2009 @ 3:21 pmApogee, the Cato paper I linked to will give you quite a bit more tidbits about how silly the WHO rankings are.
SPQR (72771e) — 5/6/2009 @ 3:26 pm1+1 does not equal 11 DENIALISTS ! ZOMG, didn’t you see SICKO by Lardo ?!
JD (bc5db9) — 5/6/2009 @ 3:42 pmdid you notice that DCSCA does not even realize that WHO put out two different rankings
Par for the course with this Troll – and I’ve always felt that the WHO is about as anti – American as the UN these days. Anyone who puts Cuba in front of the US for any medical care is immediately disqualified for speciousness – unless we’re talking torture techniques regarding political dissidents. That one Cuba’s got all over us.
Dmac (1ddf7e) — 5/6/2009 @ 3:43 pmAll vets get checked out for disability/med conditions before leaving the service. If it is a service connected disability/condition they qualify for VA care. If not, they don’t qualify.
not talking quality of care – only eligibility for that care
voiceofreason2 (10af7e) — 5/6/2009 @ 3:43 pmAmong the greatest issues in American health care is the perception of many that doctors are often incompetent. I always ask the person who complains if they shopped for a doctor or just kept going to the same doofus. They always kept going to the same doofus or transferred to another doofus in the first doofus’s office. I SHOP for a good doctor. If the doctor makes me wait for more than an hour in this office after my appointment time for anything less than an actual medical emergency, I start looking for a new doctor. Same is true if the doctor doesn’t listen or consistently misses things. Everyone is going to miss something every now and then, you pray it’s the correct diagnosis for your acne. Everyone I know who goes to their home country for medical care does so because their perception is that their doctors are ALL better. They never realize that Mom and Dad did some research and found a good doctor.
If you have a bad doctor, get a new one.
Try doing THAT under universal health care.
Vivian Louise (c0f830) — 5/6/2009 @ 3:44 pmall vets do *not* get checked prior to leaving the service. just ask any Reservist, like me.
/second class citizens, all the way through.
redc1c4 (9c4f4a) — 5/6/2009 @ 4:11 pmDmac, not least because the ranking he purports to cite, the “37th” one, is the one least related to actual health outcomes of the two. So between incompetence and outright dishonesty, it is a dilemma.
SPQR (26be8b) — 5/6/2009 @ 6:07 pm#26- 1 + 1 = 2, not 11, spork.
DCSCA (9d1bb3) — 5/6/2009 @ 6:19 pmDCSCA, in this case, you got caught with your pants down again. WHO’s numbers are propaganda with little relation to the quality of health care you claimed to be comparing.
DCSCA == incompetence.
SPQR (26be8b) — 5/6/2009 @ 6:27 pm#45 SPQR: Methinks thou dost ascribe overly much credit.
The skilz displayed thus far rank far below that.
EW1(SG) (5766f7) — 5/6/2009 @ 6:35 pmRedundancy Alert:
“…DCSCA == incompetence…”
AD - RtR/OS! (a1bed2) — 5/6/2009 @ 6:36 pmZOMG !!!! 1+1=2 not eleventy wingnutz !!!!!!
Its record is skipping again.
JD (bc5db9) — 5/6/2009 @ 6:47 pmEW1(SG) / AD / JD – I know guys. Schooling DCSCA’s butt is getting old. He’s like a Weeble, popping back up oblivious of how he’s been embarrassed, no matter how often he gets creamed.
SPQR (26be8b) — 5/6/2009 @ 6:49 pmLet me save it some time – 12%, Rush is a fat divorced drug addict, Newtie, Faux News, racist hillbillies, something about an ant and the Empire State Building, blah, blah, blah ….
JD (bc5db9) — 5/6/2009 @ 6:50 pmYep, JD, the one thing we’ll never see is any indication that he even understands why its comical that he cites to the WHO ranking. Not a clue that he has even bothered to understand just why the WHO ranking is a joke. Nope, just copy and paste from Michael Moore’s dishonest propaganda.
SPQR (26be8b) — 5/6/2009 @ 6:54 pmHey, DCSCA, I’ll let you in on another fact about your dishonest hero: Michael Moore actually got the interview with Roger Smith.
SPQR (26be8b) — 5/6/2009 @ 6:55 pmIndeed – and his “tour” of the Cuban health system was absolutely hysterical in it’s obtuseness and gullibility. A lot like Pete Seeger’s “tours” of the Soviet Union’s worker’s paradise. Wonder why Mikey didn’t bother to ask anyone why there weren’t any fat people milling around?
Dmac (1ddf7e) — 5/6/2009 @ 7:07 pmDmac, all of Moore’s movies are based on an underlying fraud – starting with the first.
SPQR (26be8b) — 5/6/2009 @ 7:12 pmI was active duty. If the Reserves have different rules I am not familiar with them. Not sure what your second class citizen remark is about though. No matter how crappy a deal you may get on bennies the service of vets puts them in first class category all the way. I put in 25+ years and drew 0 disability rating. Just thankful my health was still good — much rather see our fellow vets coming back without limbs or seriously life shortening illnesses get those ratings and benefits.
voiceofreason2 (59e128) — 5/6/2009 @ 7:21 pmIf it passes,I bet I can find another country whee I can work.
Corwin (495bd9) — 5/6/2009 @ 7:54 pmASPCA – Nichael Moore had his liposuction done in Cuba and we can all see how well that turned out.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 5/6/2009 @ 8:00 pmMichael
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 5/6/2009 @ 8:00 pmHealth Care for People
Not for Profit
Comment by Krull — 5/6/2009 @ 1:53 pm
I find it interesting that an industry dominated by people of the left, referring to the colleges and universities throughout America, have been notorious for charging tuition — for charging an increasingly absurd high level of tuition — that has consistently exceeded the rate of inflation for quite awhile now.
I think it only fair and proper that both the salaries and taxes of the millions of limousine liberals occupying academia and other cushy professions be adjusted to reflect the sentiments (and policies) of tax-crazed and anti-profit/kum-bah-wah-charitable leftism.
Mark (411533) — 5/6/2009 @ 8:03 pm#46- Repeat after me, spork: “1 + 1 = 2, not 11.” Now run along and go practice denying global warming exists.
DCSCA (9d1bb3) — 5/6/2009 @ 8:47 pmIt is becoming increasingly incoherent. I am starting to wonder whether there is something specific about this blog that attracts these crazies.
carlitos (1ec03c) — 5/6/2009 @ 9:10 pmHey, carlitos, check out CSPT 😛
John Hitchcock (fb941d) — 5/6/2009 @ 9:43 pmsuppose we phrase the argument like this…..nationalized health care means you and your child (the majority of you)will not be allowed to have any say in your health care. The government will decide if you get health care (depends on your value). So say your child is sick, right now you can call the doctor and get help and medicine, that will not happen with obama’s healthcare. The majority of people in this country (I believe they have health insurance)will not be able to avail themselves of the services that are now available….do we really want that? Wait 18 months for tests to find out if we have cancer? Wait another year to receive treatment….that is, if we are deemed valuable enough to the state?
J (a5837e) — 5/7/2009 @ 5:28 amCSPT?
CSPT?
Help a brother out–you piqued my interest 🙂
carlitos (027922) — 5/7/2009 @ 7:02 amDCSCA, #61, we know you’ve realized just how you got schooled again in your incompetence. You know now that Moore got the interview with Roger Smith after all. It was only the first of his frauds.
SPQR (26be8b) — 5/7/2009 @ 7:19 amI have been interested in the systemic problems of health care (not medical care) for years. That’s why I went back to school at Dartmouth after I retired from practice. I have a series of posts on my idea for reform which is to adopt something like the French system. It is fee-for-service with complete free choice of physician and hospitals. Lots of French hospitals are private and some are even for-profit.
The big differences are that there is a national fee schedule and the funds pay only for scientifically proven (if possible) treatment. The fee schedule is voluntary (doctors can charge more) but the fee schedule determines what the funds pay. There is also private insurance that acts like the “Medigap” insurance for Medicare. The funds are controlled by members and payroll deductions are most of the source of funds. The medical associations are actually doctors’ unions that negotiate fees with the plan board.
The doctors’ fees tend to be lower than ours but medical school is free. Most US doctors start out with $250,000 in loans and take 20 years to pay them off. Malpractice insurance does not seem to be a problem but I don’t know much about that issue.
Interestingly, there are thousands of British ex-patriates living in France and one problem the French system is having is that the British don’t want to go home for treatment. They are applying for the French welfare health plan and straining the system. A recent survey reported that NHS members are not happy with the system and 56% say it is so bad it should be scrapped and start over.
I fear that Obama will give us something like the NHS or Canada, both of which are much worse than what we have. Canada bans private practice and is heavily weighted to the “worried well” so doctor office visits are paid for but CAT scans are rationed. The most talented Canadian physicians left 20 years ago. The French system is the best in the world.
My analysis of the French system is here and goes on for about five posts.
Mike K (2cf494) — 5/7/2009 @ 1:25 pm#67- Excellent posting. Some friends in France swear by their health care system as have some Americans stricken during travel there. The British model is pretty fair as well but then all systems are in need of tweaking. Regardless of party or conviction, the system in the United States is broken and as long as profit and politics inhibit reform, it’s only going to get worse.
DCSCA (9d1bb3) — 5/7/2009 @ 8:06 pmDCSCA said:
The British model is pretty fair as well but then all systems are in need of tweaking.
I don’t want a health care system that is “fair.” I want one that treats people in need of care. I certainly don’t want one that needs “tweaking.”
And you say that the U.S. system is “broken.” I may agree with you, but other than the “profit” and “politics” inhibition, exactly how?
No one is denied treatment in the United States, despite what anyone says.
Is it expensive to receive treatment? Yes. But why? There are a myriad of answers, but most involve government.
Do you know why health care in the United States is expensive? I have a fairly good idea, but you may be able to enlighten me further.
Ag80 (b683da) — 5/7/2009 @ 8:30 pm#69- Greed. When a single Tylanol costs $22 in an ER, it’s difficult to blame that on government.
DCSCA (9d1bb3) — 5/8/2009 @ 1:38 amGreed, simple greed. As predictable as the sun rising.
JD (c15e00) — 5/8/2009 @ 5:29 am“the WHO no longer produces such a ranking table, because of the complexity of the task. Of the 190 countries ranked, the USA placed 37th.”
That must explain why so many wealthy people from throughout the world travel to #35. Dominica
PaulD (6fabca) — 5/8/2009 @ 7:36 amand #36 Costa Rica when they need the best that medicine has to offer
No, PaulD, Dominica has the best health care in the world. They have one CT Scan machine, no hyperbaric chamber to treat divers, and they evacuate all serious cases to Martinique or the US. That’s why they are ranked higher than the US by the WHO.
By the way, if you want health care in Dominica, you pay cash in advance.
carlitos (027922) — 5/8/2009 @ 7:44 am[…] Pres. Obama has staked quite a bit of his administration on making a “downpayment” on a government takeover of the healthcare system. However, even laugh-inspiring amounts of creative accounting fail to pay for Obama’s health scheme. […]
The Greenroom » Forum Archive » How will Democrats pay for their takeover of healthcare? (e2f069) — 5/8/2009 @ 9:16 amDCSCA blames “greed” but that just shows further how ignorant he is of the topic on which he so boldly cuts and pastes from Michael Moore propaganda.
The British Medical Journal a few years back published a study that compared their own NHS to Kaiser Permanente. It concluded that Kaiser provided better care for about the same cost as NHS.
SPQR (72771e) — 5/8/2009 @ 10:26 am[…] Pres. Obama has staked quite a bit of his administration on making a “downpayment” on a government takeover of the healthcare system. However, even laugh-inspiring amounts of creative accounting fail to pay for Obama’s health scheme. […]
How will Democrats pay for their takeover of healthcare? | Money and Politics (318f0a) — 5/10/2009 @ 7:25 am[…] moderate Democrats seems like a dumb way to advance a government takeover of healthcare that is already unaffordable. The Obama administration has deliberately left its plan vague, on the theory that Clintoncare […]
The Greenroom » Forum Archive » Government Heatlhcare Takeover: State of Play (e2f069) — 5/12/2009 @ 5:47 am[…] moderate Democrats seems like a dumb way to advance a government takeover of healthcare that is already unaffordable. The Obama administration has deliberately left its plan vague, on the theory that Clintoncare […]
The Greenroom » Forum Archive » Government Heatlhcare Takeover: State of Play (e2f069) — 5/12/2009 @ 5:47 amHmmmmm.
Kassandrae (b5f3e7) — 5/27/2009 @ 9:14 pmWhat’s next?? What will happen to the administrations and the administrators of the care facilities that we now have. More layoff and job suspensions as I see it. So what will the government try to take over next??
[…] hate to say I told you so, but I told you so. By the way, Cohn also reported that the Senate Finance Committee has postponed […]
The Greenroom » Forum Archive » Dialing 911 for Obamacare (e2f069) — 6/19/2009 @ 6:13 am[…] Laszewski (who reminded me of how important the CBO would be in this debate back in May) recently summed up this debate as “the coming convergence on Capitol Hill of three […]
The Greenroom » Forum Archive » ObamaCare: The General Situation (e2f069) — 10/15/2009 @ 9:49 pm