Who is the best advocate for your health care? Is it you, the individual, in combination with the physician you choose? Or, are you willing to take what the government is giving out? Is it your choice, your money, your voice, or, your money, no choice, no voice? (I think that would make a great t-shirt, incidentally!)
*The US is 37th in the world for healthcare, but why?
*Canada’s NHS is thriving, isn’t it?
*European countries are ahead of US in innovation, technology, etc…but
*People are denied health care because they cannot pay? True or False?
Government efficient? Can you say Amtrak, USPS, Medicare, SS, VA? Oy.
*Let’s see. The World Health Organization puts the U.S. 37th when it comes to health care. Does anyone question that? Yes, the U.S. does spend more money on health care than any other nation. But the WHO is not comparing like systems, number one. It compares free market or privatized systems to socialistic ones. While it is not a deal breaker, consider that we are ranked 37th because of health care distribution and cost, not quality of care!! They are judging what they deem too be fair “distribution” of health care! At the very least, it’s subjective. Population deviances are not considered. We have 308 million people to serve in the United States. The population of Canada is 33.2 million, Germany, 82.3 million, UK is 60 million and let’s not forget Sweden, Norway respectively at 9 and 4.7 million. All of those populations are considerably smaller and apparently have trouble with quality of care and access.
*Those that believe the Canadian system or even the UK’s National health care are a boon, have not been paying attention. In both places, access is pitiful, as is quality of care. Ask yourself why people come here for surgeries or treatments if where they live has such a wunderbar system? Canada made it impossible for private practice outside of the social system. It drove docs to other countries, but of late it has changed. Now, the best doctors practice privately making them accessible to those who can afford the cost, the rich. The government care is left with the remainder and by it’s own emission on the brink of failure. Daniel Castonguay, the original architect of Canada’s system has himself said, ” “We thought we could resolve the system’s problems by RATIONING SERVICES or INJECTING MASSIVE AMOUNTS OF MONEY into it. We are proposing to give a greater role to the private sector so that people can exercise freedom of choice.”
*What drives developments in technology, medicine, or research? It’s true that Europe is on the forefront of many new surgical techniques and drug innovation, and vaccines. But so is the U.S., right? What drives it? Capitalism? YES!! Primarily, U.S. capitalism. Without our capitalistic market, the risk for investing in these items would be too high (i.e. not enough potential profit to incur the risk associated with the investment of the needed capital). In essence, the world’s investors make choices with their capital. If the potential profit is not in medicine they will shift their investment capital elsewhere, say food, energy, construction, transportation, etc.
If the profit motive is taken out of the medical sector, due to its socialization by the government, the ability to make a profit in the medical sector will be determined by the government. Even if the government decided to leave in a profit margin equal to that currently in place, future profit margins would respond to government forces as opposed to free market forces.
This factor alone would increase the risk of capital investment in the medical sector. In fact, investors would demand higher initial profit margins to make the same investment that they make today because of this added government risk. What happens? Prices would essentially go up in the sector and not down. If government reduced the profit in the medical sector through caps and payment regulation, the risk to investors would also go up. Again, what happens? In this case, the investors would leave the sector and move their capital to another more profitable one. The result would be reduced innovation in medical technology, vaccines and drugs.
Furthermore, the intellectual capital held by physicians, scientists, etc. would choose sectors more profitable than that offered in the medical one. It is even more possible that this intellectual capital would move to another more favorable country.
And what would happen in an even bigger picture? Try to insure all 308 million people and compromise that intellectual capital and voila, get reduced access. With the flight of physicians and no potential replacements, who would study that long, and work for less than what they are worth? Then, of course, the quality of care would also decline.
*EMTALA is the law enacted in 1985 that says no person regardless of ability to pay or legal status will be denied medical care in U.S. emergency rooms. It is nothing more than a safety net for the uninsured and illegal immigrants to receive routine medical care in ER’s. This was the fix because an illegal immigrant crossed the border and sought to deliver her baby in an American ER. They refused to treat her and she died. It was a tragedy that has led us to where we are now. Why?
This law created a safety net for the illegals and Americans who are uninsured to be able to get routine care in the ER’s across the country. In turn, the unpaid bills began to drive up the prices of services. Private insurance companies were forced to raise rates which the fell to the taxpayers that HAVE insurance. As a result of this law, and 20 years, 84 hospitals in Commie, er California have closed. And more are pending. Illegals are getting kidney dialysis for God’s sake on the backs of US taxpayers!! What, I ask you, is right about that?
*The government is not efficient in many of its endeavors. The subsidies afforded to Amtrak to keep it running are staggering. And it’s still running a deficit even with gov’t cash dumps. The USPS revenues keep dropping and according to the GAO, 80% of the costs are because of compensation and benefits. Yeah, there were some years of profit, if only sporadic. The USPS is currently asking for 25 billion in financial relief over 8 years!!
And, finally, we get to Social security, and medicare. How is it funded? Uh, it’s that thing called FICA that you pay and see annotated on your pay stub. SS has a budget that is independent from the Federal Government. By law, any “surplus” collected must be loaned to the Gov’t!! This means that the gov’t backs the loans with interest and will pay it back. Excuse me, while I LMAO. If assets equal liabilities and equity, how will the government pay back that money? It borrows from itself for crying out loud. Those IOU’s are going to be worthless. Maybe you need a picture. If I say I am going to save money each month for a car, but one month, I’m short and I give myself an IOU, and eventually that ‘s all I have are IOU’s, what car dealership will take those IOU’s and give me a car? I’m still laughing. The Social Security site coats it pretty and talks about the “options” being discussed to save the fund BEFORE it goes bankrupt!!
The Treasury Department has reported that America faces a $43 trillion unfunded obligation in Social Security and Medicare benefits with 77 million retiring baby boomers and rising health care costs.
According to the CBO, paying for the promised benefits will eventually force Congress to impose a 63% income tax on the middle class and an 88% tax on the “wealthy.”
Yet, even as we try to figure out how to meet our current obligations, the President wants to create an additional health care entitlement and further increase spending elsewhere in the budget.
The Social Security trust fund will be exhausted by 2037, and the Medicare hospital trust fund will become insolvent by 2017 according to a report by the trustees of the two programs. In fact, next year – 2010 – Social Security’s costs will exceed it’s income.
Medicare has an unfunded liability of $36 trillion over the next 75 years, or about $317,000 per U.S. household, and in just the next 5 years, by 2013, Medicare’s unfunded liability is projected to grow by 33 percent, to $48 trillion – or about $412,402 per household.
When Social Security and Medicare are taken together, the total unfunded liability is $40 trillion, or about $353,000 per household. By 2013, that total will grow to $54 trillion, or $474,077 per household.
Meanwhile, we are bailing out other countries on borrowed money. There have been zero spending cuts as it seems the way to get out debt is to spend more, print more. The ship is sinking and we are all going down with it! Weimar is on the horizon, just watch.