In case you missed it last week, here are Six Silly Stories from the Right about Universal Health Care.
Continuing the discussion from last week, here are nine more fairy tales from the right about universal health care. They came from Balanced Politics.org. They are just as full of scare tactics as last week's list, and just as short on content. Big insurance companies, pharmaceutical makers, and hospital corporations have been practicing legalized robbery for years, and they do not want to end their ride on the gravy train. Don't buy any of these arguments, or take any wooden nickels, either:
There isn't a single government agency or division that runs efficiently; do we really want an organization that developed the U.S. Tax Code handling something as complex as health care? This argument looks good on the surface, but it ignores the existence of Medicare, which is a single-payer system that runs efficiently and well. Things like the U.S. Tax Code are irrelevant. They became what they are after 100 years of amendments and changes. Insurance companies are also wasteful and inefficient. This is why it costs $100 or more to see a doctor for a routine office visit.
Just because Americans are uninsured doesn't mean they can't receive health care; nonprofits and government-run hospitals provide services to those who don't have insurance, and it is illegal to refuse emergency medical service because of a lack of insurance. But as soon as patients are stable, they can be dumped, and this happens all the time. I live in a city of 120,000 people. We have three hospitals, and not one of them is a charity hospital. When patients who do not have certified indigent status or Medicaid seek treatment at any of these hospitals, they find themselves pursued by bill collectors until they have paid up. In fact, health care industry associations are fighting any requirement that hospitals give charity care to receive nonprofit status.
Government-mandated procedures will likely reduce doctor flexibility and lead to poor patient care. More scary talk: "Government-mandated procedures" Is this somehow different from what your insurance company mandates? Why is it less scary to have someone whose interest is denying you care telling you and your doctor what to do? Of course there will be best practices protocols. They already exist. When you go to a doctor with a pain, he guesses at what is causing your pain, and then tries what works for most people. Usually, that's it. If you come back because the treatment did not work, he tries something else, the thing that works for most people whom the first treatment didn't help.
Healthy people who take care of themselves will have to pay for the burden of those who smoke, are obese, etc. They already do. With universal health care, those people will be picking up the cost for their own care, and they will have access to preventative care and things like smoking cessation treatment.
A long, painful transition will have to take place involving lost insurance industry jobs, business closures, and new patient record creation. Nobody will miss the doctor whose job it is to find ways to deny claims. In fact, that doctor will probably go back into medicine, where she belongs. There will be administrative jobs in any universal health care system. It's funny that when they talk about losing the private, for-profit health insurance industry, they assume that these people will never be able to do anything else. When they talk about medicine for profit, Americans immediately become the can-do people. People displaced by health care reform will continue to be the same wonders of innovation and efficiency in another field.
Loss of private practice options and possible reduced pay may dissuade many would-be doctors from pursuing the profession. Patients are better off when people who want to become doctors do it for some reason other than money. No one has said that private practices will stop. Many doctors can't afford to go into private practice now, and find themselves working for HMOs. There, they are required to see a pre-determined number of patients per hour, and are evaluated based on whether they make their quota or not. If this does not dissuade people from entering the profession, it should. People who want to be doctors so they can be rich should become lawyers instead.
Malpractice lawsuit costs, which are already sky-high, could further explode since universal care may expose the government to legal liability, and the possibility to sue someone with deep pockets usually invites more lawsuits. Please! The United States government is not going to be responsible for your health care. Right now, if a doctor injures a patient through negligence, the patient sues the doctor, not the health insurance company. That will not change. There is no reason for all physicians to become government employees. Most will not. Most will see the pressure to see 25 patients a day go away.
Patient confidentiality is likely to be compromised since centralized health information will likely be maintained by the government. The horse has already left the barn for this one, friends. It is called HIPPA, the Health Insurance Privacy and Portability Act. When doctors started getting patients' social security numbers, they set the mechanism in motion for a mega-database that holds your complete medical record from the very first time you ever gave a doctor that number. The health insurance industry was behind this practice. Your records will not be maintained by the government. What will happen, however, is that your doctor will be able to access your records and know about what other doctors have treated you for and how. This is a good thing.
Like social security, any government benefit eventually is taken as a "right" by the public, meaning that it's politically near impossible to remove or curtail it later on when costs get out of control. How much more "out of control" can costs get? Let the insurance companies have their way, and you'll see. Social security is a right for those who paid into it. Medical care should be a right. If everyone paid their fair share, it could be.
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 76
Excellent post. Featured in ! Healthcare for EVERYBODY !
Ann, this is a very good article. It is too bad that the people that need to see it the most will criticize you for is. I have lost confidence that the people that need to have the system reformed will not get off their duff and put some pressure on Congress. The insurance companies, AMA, and other are putting on the counter-pressure, but too few people are doing anything.
I am sorry to be a downer here, but I have been fighting this since the 1950's. I thought that it was bad enough this time that people would really scream and yell, jump up and down, and fight like hell, but they are doing what they do so well -- sitting on their hands.
thanks for sharing
Ann: Add Big Pharma. You wrote: "How much more "out of control" can costs get? Let the insurance companies have their way, and you'll see. Social security is a right for those who paid into it. Medical care should be a right. If everyone paid their fair share, it could be."
My dad pays $8000/mo for one pill per day. Great! It keeps him alive. (He has Luekemia.) If not for a private, nfp organization that subsidizes the cost, he would have chosen not to get the meds.
In spite of the help, he still pays an astronomical price for his monthly meds... An outrageous amount, if you ask me. The same meds that he pays over $500/month for, he could obtain in Canada for about $80/month.
Yeah...it's about time. Time for some logic and reason in our big pharma and our med/insurance "coverages."
Wilka
The US system is broken and always was...
I have had to resort to medicines that don't work as well for my migraines because I can't afford the one that keeps them from happening! It is frustrating to me to have to take a narcotic to stop the pain when it hits because I can't afford the medicine that keeps them from happening.
Kathy - just think of how much Big Pharma pays for those millions of tv, billboard and print advertisements! Those commercials go on for at least 20-30 seconds, much longer than an average commercial (have of which is the disclaimer telling you what extremities are going to fall off if you use the drug). And the lobbyists! How much do they spend on lobbying Congress? And how much do they give in campaign financing?
It's a sham - and a crime. And it's absolutely unbelievable that there are Americans willing to not only accept this crime as 'reality', but defend these companies' practices and huge profits. It is simply amazing to me. WHY should healthcare be a for-huge-profit business? So many say that the government will screw it up - well, WE are the government, aren't we? Are we saying that we are simply idiots and incapable of doing something even half-right? And how can any entity screw it up more than the for-profit insurance and pharmeceutical companies have?
Just to toss in some additional numbers here:
1) My father had an annual RX cost under his first insurer of $14,500. Under the Medicare Advantage plan that replaced it, the pharmacy recognized the cost (because of their negotiated prices) at $8,750 for the year. Same panel of meds.
2) Billed doctor visit (aggregate of all charges for 10 minute consultation) -- $342. Insurance paid amount and patient copay together -- $75.
We need to get real about costs. An uninsured person, or someone with a different insurer would pay much more, up to $342 of the #2 item. Why should someone with one insurance have the total paid amount $75 instead? Because of buying power and negotiated rates.
A Single-payer system would cover more people, control prices for all, and have one place to argue if there is a disagreement over standard of care/standard treatments.
If an insurance company wants to continue its business form, it could easily convert to "plastic surgery" or other specialty coverage (there are many that do so quite profitably now).
ust because Americans are uninsured doesn't mean they can't receive health care; nonprofits and government-run hospitals provide services to those who don't have insurance, and it is illegal to refuse emergency medical service because of a lack of insurance.
That is the truth and as far as the bills go they can't send you to collection or wolnt if you consistantly pay them something.
Baloney. The infant mortality rate in Costa Rica is better than ours.
And, where are all these "nonprofits and government run hospitals"? Not anywhere near me, that's for sure. Does that mean it doesn't matter to you if I or one of my loved ones dies due to lack of access to medical care? Most likely not, but spouting half-truths like this one doesn't further your cause.
In a city of 120,000 they are there. You may not know which hospital does it but there is one. Any religious hospital has a charity program for the poor. No one lacks access to medical care they lack money to pay for it and so don't seek it until it is too late or the illness is more severe.
Col. George, in a city of 120,000 there IS NOT ONE! The hospitals keep every visit separate, so they don't collect on your bill at a few dollars a month, they collect on your bills (plural) and harass you until you pay. Oh, yes, and they ruin your credit until 3 years after you pay.
Can I get some of what the colonel is smoking? That might relax me so I don't worry about no health insurance.
Ann, I was told by a collection agency In Texas they can send you to collection but by law they can't take you to court and collect a medical bill. You may want to look that up.
If that is the case all a person has to do is write them a letter and tell them to quit bugging you. If they continue it is in violation of a Federal Law.
I have no idea where that info came from unless it is simply in Texas. The hospitals and doctors can take everything you have but your home and work tools.
I have been taken to court for my medical bills, repeatedly. I have had my checks garnished until that bill was paid, only to have another go for the same thing, Meanwhile, my kids didn't get the glasses they needed because I couldn't afford them, or they couldn't go to the dentist because we didn't have dental insurance, or the money to pay for it. Now, I don't make enough to have anything garnished, but that doesn't stop the harassment, nor will telling them to stop do so, unless you live in Pennsylvania and you have litigation pending, if I am not mistaken. I know there is only one state in the union that actually prevents debt collectors from contacting you but only while you are in litigation. I worked for a country wide collection service for a while, and we had to be very aware of the state we were calling, and the laws that applied, and that wasn't a medical bill.
Spencer, you are right that is supposedly a Texas law.
Lisa, You don't live in Texas either..
As to the glasses your kids need. Contact the Lions Club. They will help.
Col, obviously you have never been sick and without insurance. You have no idea what you are talking about.
Leo when I got sick as a young man I just went to bed and got over it. I never had a serious illness until after I turned 60.
"A long, painful transition will have to take place involving lost insurance industry jobs, business closures, and new patient record creation."
This is also true, with 9.4% unelployment and rising where are all those people going to get a job? The goverment program would not hire all of them.
The beancounters and other specialists will still be needed to count beans, etc. They'd just be doing it for a different employer. And, those who don't stay on can fall into line behind folks whose jobs have been "outsourced" overseas. Where's your sympathy for them?
Of course I do.
I'm not convinced Universal Health run by the government is all that good. It should be seperated from government like Medicare is supposed to be. They should leave Medicare alone and not cut our Medicare by anywhere from 313 billion to 600 billion as they intend to do.
But, Col. George, Medicare is an ENTITLEMENT! Conservatives hate entitlements; they think you should root, hog, or die -- pay your own way and get the government out of what should be private.
You want Medicare for yourself, but don't want me to have anything similar. You're being rather hypocritical, don't you think?
That's right it is an Entitlement. I paid for it and pay for it and I so I am Entitled to receive it.
Medicaid, SSI and those are charity not entitlements. Social Security and Medicare are two things you pay for so you are Entitled to receive both.
But Colonel, no one wants free health care. We simply want everyone to be able to get it. Everyone will pay for it, just as they pay for Medicare. It doesn't have to be run by the government, but it sure as hell shouldn't be run by insurance companies!
Unfortunately it would be run by one or the other.
I received a suggestion the other day. Why not make it like Car Insurance. If you get in a wreck you pay the deductable after your car is fixed and that's it.
I've been thinking that could work for health insurance.
No. This is what the current model is supposed to be. "Insurance" is paying a premium and betting against yourself. You are hoping that you don't get sick, but betting that you will. EVERYONE gets sick eventually. That is why we all need to have coverage. What we do not need, however, is for young healthy people to be able to opt out, and come in later when they need care. Everyone should pay something, even if it is only a dollar. And everyone should get what they need. Medicare is a self-insurance plan. Self-insurance means that the money paid in is the money paid out. You pay your premiums always. They pay your bills when they come. That is what the rest of us need.
That's what All insurance is Ann.
What you suggest is a Singer Payer plan or an extension of Medicare with some positive modifications. It would or could work but Obama has "taken it off the table" In spite of the fact there is a bill to authorize Single Payer in Congress.
Col, you have Medicare and you want others denied healthcare. What would your life be like without Medicare?
Life would be rough Leo but I have Medicare. Something I bought and paid for when I worked and still pay a premium. Everyone who works get Medicare deducted from the old paycheck. When you get to 65 you'll have it too. Just exactly why would you think I would not have something I paid for?
Thanks for taking on all these points of misinformation!
It comes as no surprise that the Right cannot envision anyone changing their lifestyle without the use of force, and cannot envision a government program that could be run efficiently.
I'd love to see any one of them continue their half-truths and lies after a loved one is injured or dies due to an insurance carriers refusal to fund treatment and a hospital's refusal to treat an uninsured condition.
The article was great but don't forget Both Sides of this Argument LIE. It's a matter of descerning which is true and which is not.
lies lies lies...the Boston Globe had an excellent story again this morning...on why the private insurance companies and competing interests and Romney's Massachusetts plan is so bogus...
Featured in the The Triple Name Club
Excellent article!
1) Not everyone who has Medicare agrees with this statement. As one who took care of my elderly parents, I certainly do not.
2) There are free clinics all over the U.S. They're just not always conveniently located and persons have to wait a long time in the waiting rooms for care. Also, depending on where you are, medical care is available. In one town in TX, when one cannot pay a hospital bill, one of the local businesses has a fund that takes care of the entire bill. In another town in TX, there are grants available for persons visiting from other counties needing emergency care. In FL (and many states) there is something called the medically needy program. My ex and son and I were a part of that for a while after my ex had a stroke and could not work again. Based on our income, in any year where we had more than $4,000 in medical bills of any kind, the medically needy program kicked in and paid the rest. There are programs. One has to look for them, but they are there.
I've known medical collectors and they all agreed on one thing. If you 'fess up from the start that you cannot pay, if you PROVE that via showing pay stubs and past tax records, and if you agree to pay what you can afford (which THEY decide based on the information you give them) and you pay on time, they WILL NOT turn you in to the credit bureau or try to sue.
3) Of course it will!!! How can you think otherwise? Not every insurance company is bad, and I'm really tired of hearing that they are. My husband's company insures themselves and uses an insurance company just to do the billings/payments. Many big companies do that. Any fussing is done with personnel at the company. But even for other insurance companies, there are not a lot of problems unless one's doctor is suggesting something new, and I'm certain the government will be just as bad about approving those procedures.
4) No, now persons who work and pay taxes are the ones whose medical bills are high because of the deadbeats who won't pay. With the government program, still those who work and pay taxes will have to pay for those who don't. But now we'll have the government sticking its nose into everything. No thanks.
5) We need a long transition! Have you ever researched how long it took for Canada to finally get socialized health care. Decades. And still they have a flawed program. (I lived in FL for years, and the Canadian snow birds hated their Canadian care and often scheduled surgeries while they were in the U.S. instead of having to wait.)
6) You don't think there will be quotas for doctors by the government?!? Many doctors I've spoken with plan on quitting if this happens. Then we'll be like all other socialized medicine locations - with a shortage of doctors.
7) Again, you're wrong. They will still have quotas. Of course they will. And can you just imagine the amount of paperwork involved once you have the government involved.
8) A good thing to you, perhaps. But since we already know that our government records are not safe (remember the VA records that were breached?), having records available online is a scary proposition.
9) Medical care is not a right nor will it be free. Unless and until everyone who wants this is willing to say, "Yes, I will give up ever having another tax refund, and I understand that my income taxes will probably go up to 50%" I think the whole thing should be scrapped. (And that's 50% of all income - workers, SS, unemployment, whatever. The so-called rich should not have to be paying for yet another program.)
What we really need to do is to educate young people before they get their first jobs about how to budget - for rent/housing, for food, for necessary expenses like health care. Until they can do that, they should stay in their parents's homes. And, until they can pay for health care for their own children, they should not have any.
When I was growing up, I was taught that 10% should always be set aside for savings and another 10% for emergencies. If people did that, we would not be in the problems we are in today.
The Brits set their up all wrong. The Canadians too many years designing their program before implementing it. The only problem that I've seen is that many of their doctors moved to the U.S. so they could gouge the public and print their own money like of the rest of the U.S. doctors.
You claim that the mediacre single payer system is a resounding success yet it's going broke, like social security. It would be another ponzi scheme. Government is in charge of teaching our children and the overwhelming failure to do that, while spending twice as much per student than countries that score higher than us, is not only embarrassing, it's a travesty of justice. Only a fool would let those kooks run another industry into the ground....
Medicare is going broke just like Social Security is going broke. The government stole all the money and replaced it with IOUs they never will pay.
Exactly Col. I seriously believe that a health care bill is designed to shore up all the failed programs in terms of funding. If they can get a mandate where everybody has to pay government for health care, all their irresponsibility will be covered up with fresh revenues thru taxes. A new era of government control will make the current mess look like freedom.
Yep...they started stealing it when Johnson was in office and have been doing it ever since. Reagan almost emptied it, Bush Sr. helped, and in 2006 Bush Jr. actually EMPTIED one of the most successful social programs this nation has ever known!
We damn sure know how to fund an ill conceived and poorly thought out war of opportunity, but we just can't seem to figure out how to care for our own citizens!
Those of you who have employer provided health insurance, see if you can find out what plan your employer buys. Then you'll know who is controlling your access to care and just how much of your life they're willing to gamble on.
No matter what you say, Ann...peoples eyes just glaze over when confronted with that which doesn't fit their preconceived ideas. Many of these preconceived ideas were instilled WAY back when the AMA hired actor, Ronald Reagan to do audio recordings on the evils of "socialized" medicine. People were too stupid then to realize they were being fed a line of crap, and they are too stupid today to realize it.
My daughter is a practicing Medical Doctor who is 100% in FAVOR of single payer Universal Health Care!
Spartan, I personally know two practicing physicians who favor universal access. Unfortunately, the AMA, the hospital corporations, big pharma, and the insurance companies have lots of $$$ to spend of keeping us from getting it.
The one tiny ray of hope is that a good many new graduates from Medical Schools ARE in favor of Universal Health Care. They are being taught that it is a BASIC HUMAN RIGHT, and not a commodity to be bought and sold.
Spartan, We are not discussing a Single Payer plan because Obama will not consider it and he has veto power. He wants Socialized Medicine period.
Single Payer similar to Medicare might work but just try to tell Obama that.
Spartan, It may be a basic human right but that does not mean the government must pay for it. That right exists now. Don't look for a free ride there is no such thing.
Col. George writes:
"That right exists now." And then presumptuously suggests, "Don't look for a free ride there is no such thing."
A. No it doesn't. Tell the diabetic with kidney failure how "that right exists now" if they can't prove they have the money UP FRONT so they can get on the kidney transplant list, or tell them "that right exists now" if they can't prove UP FRONT they can afford the $2500 per month they will need for the rest of their LIFE to pay for transplant medications.
B. How presumptuous of you to suggest that I am looking for a "free ride". Right now I pay full insurance coverage for a staff of eleven people! NONE of my employees pay any "copays". My personal insurance skyrocketed this year with my wife's Cancer. She has reached her lifetime maximum benefit! Should her Cancer return, her treatment will be coming out of MY pocket. There is your "free ride" courtesy of Insurance companies, you blow hard!
Thanks for so many good posts on health care! Most people and most doctors want universal health care, and Single Payer is the preferred option, but we are just like little Iranians protesting against a big tyrannical government-private consortium that wants to continue to repress us and pick our pockets!
Y'all are missing the whole idea of this National Healtcare Plan. It's population control. The baby boomers are going to bankrupt the Social Security system in the coming years and with the recession and more people out of work this is only exploding faster. I has less to do with healthcare costs, than it does with the retirees who are coming into the system. The system can't sustain itself and the government needs to control the elderly population through the healthcare system. It will be more deaths of the elderly as they wait for treatments, tests, and even to see their doctors.
NO...the Baby Boomers are going to cause a "spike" that can be easily handled by "temporarily" raising the withholding ceiling and then dropping it back down as we croak.
Excellent, excellent article, Ann.
Couple of comments:
I ran the HIPAA implementation at a major insurance company when I was working there. I understand the regulations and you are absolutely correct. In fact, going to an integrated electronic management system was a part of that initial plan, but was scrapped due to expense. Electronic tracking of health data is actually much more safe in this day and age than having paper files scattered throughout millions of offices and hospitals - on many, many levels.
I listened to McCain speaking about the GOP plan for healthcare reform on c-Span this morning. He is still harping on this $5,000 tax rebate idea of his. A woman called up and said that between her employer and herself, the cost of her family plan is $20k/yr, so how is $5k going to help her? And the premium costs are going up 15-20% each year on these plans, while the employer is trying to switch to a cheaper plan each yr.
I thought about this $5k rebate idea. So, McCain believes that he is doing everyone a favor by:
1) taxing them;
2) then giving them a tax credit for $5k (essentially giving back their own money);
3) which in turn they would use to pay PART of their healthcare premiums.
So, HOW is this NOT a government subsidy (albeit a very sneaky, roundabout way) for the health insurance companies?
having lived in Canada for nearly a decade, y'all just have NO clue as to HOW MUCH BETTER IT REALLY IS THERE, despite what they say about the waits......
Kathryn - I have a fairly decent healthcare plan, where I get to choose my doctors. I still have to wait months for a doctor's appointment - and that's for family doctor as well as specialists. Don't let anybody tell you there are not wait times for everything in the US. Scheduling tests such as mammagrams and colonoscopies are even a longer wait. The usual answer is that they have a slot open in 6 months.
Fine article. It's scary how little most people seem to know about how health care really works in this country. I think if people were better informed about it they'd be immune to the scare tactics and disinformation that businesses are using to try to preserve the status quo.
Kudos to Ann for this article and for keeping the discussion going.
"There isn't a single government agency or division that runs efficiently;"
Well, there is one: The United States Postal Service.
Another would be the Social Security Administration; which, despite the griping of many people, has provided an effective financial safety net to millions and millions of disabled, retired and elderly Americans.
It's a real shame that charity hospitals have gone the way of the dodo bird, but I understand that the allure of their foundational coffers was just to strong to keep the capitalists at bay.
In the richest and supposedly "best" country in the world, a person would think that health care for all would be desirable. After all, it already is attainable.
Bill, both the U.S. Postal service and Social Security are run independant of government. Medicare is supposed to be the same.
Not to mention the USPS is insolvent too and has been for a while.
According to the U.S. Government Accounting Office:
"Mail volume declined by a record 9.5 billion pieces (4.5 percent) in fiscal year 2008, leading to a loss of $2.8 billion--the second largest since 1971. According to USPS, this was largely due to declines in the economy, especially in the financial and housing sectors, as well as shifts in transactions, messages, and advertising from mail to electronic alternatives. Declining mail volume flattened revenues despite rate increases, while USPS's cost-cutting efforts were insufficient to offset the impact of declining mail volume and rising costs in fuel and cost-of-living allowances for postal employees. USPS's initial fiscal year 2009 budget expected that the turmoil in the economy would result in more mail volume decline and a loss of $3.0 billion."
So, is it worth noting that the fiscal problems of USPS have come from the downturn in our economies, and not from poor management of USPS by government?
Very well written article and very timely. The World Health Organization ranked about 191 countries for health care and the USA was 37th even though we spend a higher portion of our GDP than any of the surveyed courtries. If we spend the most in terms of GDP then we should rank 1st or at least in the top five but we aren't- something is wrong with that picture. We are being over charged and under served. Over pricing and underserving can be summed up as ripped off.
read the report
Amen
The main concern of hard-hearted ignorant naysayers is that they might have to lose a dime.
There is more truth in what you say than anyone cares to admit, Leo!
The time is right. All those who've been profiting from illness and war are losing their footing,since the sands of changing times are slippery going for the greedy graspers.
Buckle your seatbelts - we are going to do far better for ourselves as a whole, in very good whole ways, and we're going to be doing far better really soon.
You do make a lot of valid points. I just haven't made up my mind on the issue yet.
It can't be explained more simply or thoroughly ann, good for you1
But, there will still be the 'boo/hiss' people who just don't like it because it is a Democratic idea!
Ann, I agree.
As for the comments on S.S. from some if they would look it up they would find that when it was first put in place there was a fund from which money would be drawn and paid. That was in 1935 then in 1939 those who had opposed S.S. were able to change it to a pay as you go so that all the moneys collected would be paid out as it was collected. The fund that had been set up from which the money would have been drawn from was abolished and no more money placed in it to be allowed to grow over the years as had first been planned.
Can you guess who those people were who killed the original program were?
:O\
I'm always FOR anything that the big money lobbyists are AGAINST.
It's called, "watching out for MY own interests."
And regarding the inefficiency of Gov't, if the United States Postal Service were run the same way the health care industry currently is, it would take 2 months to deliver a first class letter, and the cost of a first class postage stamp would be $5.00. But there would be plenty of CEOs and other people at the top who would be making billions of dollars a year.
Just remember that the biggest advocate against nationalized health care is a person who has milked the existing commercial system out of billions in fraud. We certainly would want to listen to a criminal who is telling us what would be in our best interests - NOT!
If Medicare runs so "efficiently and well," then why is it going bankrupt?
If you had ever bothered to take some time to learn a little bit about economics, you might have come to understand that it's precisely such centrally-planned government-administered schemes such as Medicare, Medicaid, et al (not to mention the myriad interventionist, market-distorting schemes that have brought us such goodies as HMO's) that are the cause of skyrocketing healthcare costs and an environment where costs are dictated arbitrarily by HMO's instead of by market forces.
"Government-mandated procedures" Is this somehow different from what your insurance company mandates?"
Yes, it is. Very much so. You see, your insurance company cannot "tell your doctor what to do." Insurance companies, operating on the market, stipulate what they will, or will not, cover. They haven't the authority, and do not (on their own power) presume to have the authority, to use coercive force to interfere with the otherwise completely mutually-voluntary affairs of you and your doctor.
No; only the government presumes to have such authority.
Look, the bottom line is this: There are people who seek to hire healthcare professionals to serve them via market exchange. There are people who would like to provide healthcare services as a profession. These two groups should be permitted to come to completely voluntary terms of exchange agreement with each other, without the meddlesome interference of some presumptuous, despotic third-party dictating to them.
Insurance -- when it is a free market phenomenon, as opposed to the government-manipulated Frankenstein that its become today -- is about two things: (1) the pooling of resources among groups of people as a means of diffusing risk among the individuals; and (2) the accurate pricing of risk. Things that are entirely predictable are not legitimately "insurable" in terms of actual, honest free market insurance. Otherwise, the incentive structure gets all thrown out of whack, and you end with with something called "moral hazard." There is a difference between healthcare, and genuine health insurance.
You will know that the healthcare system has truly been reformed, when you have to deal with your health insurance provider about as often as you have to deal with your car insurance provider.
Finally; I think the biggest "fairy tale myth" of all, is the one that assumes that government-run healthcare is not what the established big-shot health insurance companies want. And why wouldn't they? Big Business has always loved the idea of having government effect compulsory transactions for them; or outlawing competition for them; or generally putting them in the position of "private" bureaucracy. Do you really think that the insurance companies are going to end up in any sort of a financially not-as-well-off position by any of this? Wake up! You know, the Morgan's and Rockefeller's and Kuhn-Loeb's put alot of energy into convincing the public that they were firmly against the legislation that was eventually to bring us the Federal Reserve System; as if a state-sanctioned central bank was somehow antithema to them. In reality, they were the one's who wrote the damn legislation... literally. Do you really think this situation is going to have played out any differently, with the insurance companies?
I have asked on several forums to people who are against single payer/public option health care:
What is YOUR plan to fix the health care system?
BTW - One of the reasons Medicare is going broke beacuse of part D: taking away the government's right to negociate presecription price with the drug companies.
once again I ask the right: "What is YOUR answer to healthcare?"
One more thing: If the single payer/public option is such a bad idea - why are the Health insurance companies spending 1.4 million dollars a day to lobby against it and putting out "horror stories" that the Fox Propoganda channel is eating up like Skittles?
Republicans have been offering solutions for years, but Democrats want only one thing - to control the health care of all Americans.