Does anybody really believe that adding 50 million people to the public health-care rolls will not cost the government more money? About $1.5 trillion to $2 trillion more? At least.
So let's be serious when evaluating President Obama's goal of universal health care, and the idea that it's a cost-cutter. Can't happen. Won't happen. Costs are going to explode.
Think of it: Can anyone name a federal program that ever cut costs for anything? Let's not forget that the existing Medicare system is roughly $80 trillion in the hole.
And does anybody believe Obama's new "public" health-insurance plan isn't really a bridge to single-payer government-run health care? And does anyone think this plan won't produce a government gatekeeper that will allocate health services and control prices and therefore crowd-out the private-insurance doctor-hospital system?
Federal boards are going to decide what's good for you and me. And what's not good for you and me. These boards will drive a wedge between doctors and patients.
The president, in his New York Times Magazine interview with David Leonhardt, said his elderly mother should not (in theory) have had a hip-replacement operation. Yes, Obama would have fought for that operation for his mother's sake. But a federal board of so-called experts would have told the rest of us, "No way."
And then there's the charade of all those private health providers visiting the White House and promising $2 trillion in savings. Utter nonsense.
And even if you put aside the demerits of a government-run health system, Obama's health-care "funding" plans are completely falling apart. Not only will Obama's health program cost at least twice as much as his $650 billion estimate, but his original plan to fund the program by auctioning off carbon-emissions warrants (through the misbegotten cap-and-trade system) has fallen through. In an attempt to buy off hundreds of energy, industrial and other companies, the White House is now going to give away those carbon-cap-emissions trading warrants. So all those revenues are out the window. Fictitious.
Anyway, the cap-and-tax system won't pass Congress. The science is wrong. The economics are root-canal austerity -- Malthusian limits to growth. And there are too many oil and coal senators who will vote against it.
All of this is why the national-health-care debate is so outrageous. At some point we have to get serious about solving Medicare by limiting middle-class benefits and funding the program properly. There is no other way out. We can grow our way out of the Social Security deficit if we pursue pro-growth policies that maintain low tax and inflation rates. Prospects for that don't look any too good right now, though it could be done. But government health care is nothing but a massive, unfunded, middle-class entitlement problem. (The poor are already in Medicaid.)
Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., proposes to solve health care by limiting employer tax breaks. He's on to something, but he's only got half the story. All the tax breaks for health care should go to individuals and small businesses. Let them shop around for the best health deal wherever they can find it with essentially pre-tax dollars.
Additionally, insurance companies should be permitted to sell their products across state lines. And popular health savings accounts -- which combine investor retirements with proper insurance by removing the smothering red tape -- should be promoted. This approach of consumer choice and market competition will strengthen our private health-care system.
So private enterprise can coexist with public health care and not be crowded out by the heavy-handed overreach of government. But the Obama Democrats are determined to force through a state-run system that will bankrupt the country.
I'm not somebody who obsesses about the national debt or deficit. But I have to admit, today's spending-and-borrowing is blowing my mind. As a share of gross domestic product, we're looking at double-digit deficits as far as the eye can see. Over the next 10 years, the Congressional Budget Office predicts federal debt in the hands of the public will absorb 80 percent of GDP. And that doesn't include the real cost of state-run health care. Other than the temporary financial conditions surrounding World War II, we've never seen anything like this.
The president's grandiose government-takeover-and-control strategies are going to make things worse and worse -- that is, unless members of that tiny band known as the Republican Party can stand on their hind legs and just say no. The Republicans must come up with some pro-competition, private-enterprise alternatives for health, energy, education, taxes and trade that will meet the yearning of voter-taxpayers for a return to private-enterprise American prosperity and opportunity.
Free-market competition will lower costs in health care just as it has every place else. It also will grow the economy. The GOP must return to this basic conservative principle and reject Obama's massive government assault.
#1
Seems to me that in the mid-80's I was paying something like $35 for a decent unhurried doctor's visit. There was one secretary handling the doctor's office. I would submit medical bills every few months to my insurance, and they would pay me back 100%. Done.
Then along came the HMOs as a misdirected overreaction to a bit of fraud here and there. Now everything is legislated up the @$$, there are two or three secretaries running around in every office, half of every doctor's time is taken up by misguided efforts designed to fend off fraud and frivolous lawsuits that is marked by unnecessary paperwork and micromanaging oversight that has turned out to be wildly successful in ballooning costs and shrinking quality and promptness of service.
Seems to me common sense responses to separating the frivolous lawsuits from the genuine and meaningful punishment for fraud has been completely sidelined here.
Gotta love the legal system that seems to be serving as a replacement for religion and common sense here in the good ol' U.S. of A.
#2
All we need to get our healthcare system costs in line is TORT REFORM and reduc medical malpractice law suits and ambulance chasing.
Here in California getting rearended in bumper thumper is like winning the lottery.
If BO wants to reduce healthcare cost he could do so with a very simple piece of legislation concerning pain and suffering and mental anguish in medical malpractice.
Otherwise, this piece of crap reform will be another payoff/welfare program for lawyers.
Posted by: James Carville ||
05/14/2009 15:40 Comments ||
Top||
#3
I have a relative who lives in southern CA who was second in line at a stop sign. The car ahead of him started to pull away and my relative moved forward to take his place in at the stop sign. Nobody else was at the intersection, but the car ahead of him slammed on the brakes. My relative avoided hitting the car ahead of him. Apparently that was just not acceptable to the car full of illegal immigrants from an unnamed country, so they put it in reverse, nailed my relatives car, and then drove away at high speed. He got a notice in the mail shortly thereafter that he was getting sued by all four occupants of the car that hit him because they all had weeplash.
They won.
First idea: In order to have a free market, the market has to be on a level playing field. Good laws would help.
#6
Health care is already being rationed on an individual basis. I am in the category of people-who-might-really-benefit-from-colon-cancer-screening, but at this point I am not willing to pay for a colonoscopy. My insurance doesn't cover it. I'm not paying my money, and I'm taking my chances.
I estimate the US will default on its debt or drastically debase its currency before it launches a universal health care plan, so this discussion may be moot.
Long before the current financial crisis, nearly two years ago, a little-noticed cloud darkened the horizon for the US government. It was ignored. But now that shadow, in the form of a warning from a top credit rating agency that the nation risked losing its triple A rating if it did not start putting its finances in order, is coming back to haunt us.
That warning from Moody's focused on the exploding healthcare and Social Security costs that threaten to engulf the federal government in debt over coming decades. The facts show we're in even worse shape now, and there are signs that confidence in America's ability to control its finances is eroding.
Prices have risen on credit default insurance on US government bonds, meaning it costs investors more to protect their investment in Treasury bonds against default than before the crisis hit. It even, briefly, cost more to buy protection on US government debt than on debt issued by McDonald's. Another warning sign has come from across the Pacific, where the Chinese premier and the head of the People's Bank of China have expressed concern about America's longer-term credit worthiness and the value of the dollar.
The US, despite the downturn, has the resources, expertise and resilience to restore its economy and meet its obligations. Moreover, many of the trillions of dollars recently funnelled into the financial system will hopefully rescue it and stimulate our economy.
Posted by: Steve White ||
05/14/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Recent research conducted for the Peterson Foundation shows that 90 per cent of Americans want the federal government to put its own financial house in order.
That polled figure makes no sense. In the last election the usual 98% of incumbents won. If Americans want the federal financial house to be put in order, they wouldn't have voted all those idiots back in. And, they voted for Obama!
#2
Lest we fergit, WORLD MIL FORUM [GOOGLE Chinglish transl.] > America's GDP may officially stand at approximately US$14.0Trilyuuhn [r.o.], but its GROSS/TOTE WORLD DEBT is approxi US$587.0Trilyuuhn [also r.o] as far as CHIN is concerned = calculated???
OTOH, TOPIX > RUSSIA WARNS OF WAR WITHIN A DECADE [2019-2020] OVER ARCTIC OIL AND GAS/WESTERN ALLIES DISPUTE [USA, Norway, Canucks] RUSSIA'S CLAIM TO LARGE SECTION OF ARCTIC CONTINENTAL SHELF [Russ sovereignty]. US, NATO EXPANSIONISM near Russ borders also deemed a threat to Russ national security.
ALso, CHINESE MIL FORUM > CHINA ASSERTS BORDER CLAIMS [UNCLOS - Continental Shelf]]. Essens, MAP > OKINAWA, PHILIPPINES, TAIWAN, and BULK OF SE ASIA = INDONES-MALAYSIA can now be ascribed as CHINA'S OFFSHORE "FLORIDA KEYS" = FUTURE CHIN "VACATION ISLANDS", aka CHIN's desired "FIRST ISLAND CHAIN" ["String of Pearls"].
** WORLD MIL FORUM > IIUC AS CHINA'S PLAN IMPROVES, US MIL BASES ON GUAM, HAWAII, AND US WEST COAST MAY SUDDENLY FIND AS JAPAN DID A PLAN SUBMARINE(S) HAD SUCCESSFULLY PENETRATED, SURFACED, AND DEPARTED DESPITE THE BEST US SECURITY SYSTEMS.
#3
Watch the yield on 10 or 20 year Treasuries for signs of the bond market rebelling against the massive expansion of debt. Last week there were signs of dissent as the yield jumped up a bit. The bond market is more powerful than Obama and is the only thing standing in his way.
"When you owe a guy $100,000 he has you by the balls but when you owe him $ 1 billion you have him by the balls." So, if we owe the world $587 Trillion - who and how are they going to collect and what do you think they'll get? Chicago, San Francisco and Boston? Hmmm, we may be able to work something out, know what I mean?
Posted by: Jack is Back! ||
05/14/2009 9:19 Comments ||
Top||
#6
AH, there is an underlying assumption in your comment that I think may be wrong.
You say, "If Americans want the federal financial house to be put in order, they wouldn't have voted all those idiots back in. And, they voted for Obama! "
That is true ONLY if the voters understood the connection between their votes and the problem.
#9
And, they voted for Obama Obama ran as a blank slate that people could fill in with their own hopes (remember he criticized the Bush administration deficits). Enough people voted for hope to get him elected with a 6% margin.
"When you owe a guy $100,000 he has you by the balls but when you owe him $ 1 billion you have him by the balls." There are two problems here. First, the guy who is owed a billion will probably not lend you another billion (also known as "throwing good money after bad"). China is taking steps to grow its economy without relying on massive exports to the U.S. Second, its not necessarily the billion dollar lender that the problem. We owe everyone money. If Brazil, Korea, or some petro state decides not to hold any more dollars then there will be a domino effect on other holders. At the moment central banks are willing to buy short term treasuries because it's cash and there really isn't any other option. Nobody will buy long bonds except the fed. The world is communicating its concerns through the marketplace, but the U.S. does not appear to be listening.
#10
The rubes bought the whole hope-a-dope thing because they thought only "the rich" would be taxed. With roughly half the country not paying any income tax and Oblahblah promising to relieve them of the "payroll tax" (Social Security contributions) we have an entitlement culture that intends to parasitically feed off the shrinking minority who believe in the quaint notions of self-reliance and personal responsibility.
Posted by: regular joe ||
05/14/2009 12:26 Comments ||
Top||
#11
NS, I'm not at all optimistic.
Unfortunately our choices seem to be:
1) abject stupidity; and
2) an entitlement greed, OR;
3) a combination of the two.
This is fertile ground for the corrupt and power mad that the political parties are sown with.
#14
I'm not sure that the understanding is there. I left that without saying. Of course the national deficit in understanding is about equal to the national debt. The poll that was quoted was merely referring to what people "want". Human wants are endless and often have little bearing on reality. That's just common sense.
The only realistic way out is increasing the electorate's understanding so they will start voting differently. I might as well be wishing for a miracle. So many people who have recently lost big in their 401K's never even bothered to inform themselves about the nuts-and-bolts of 401K operations, and they had a real, $-and-sense interest in the outcome. Congress has abdicated. The MSM is pursuing crazy agendas, rather than trying to inform the public. I did some background reading in old NY Times news articles about the big bank crisis of 1933 a few months back. I was amazed at the level of knowledge implied by the articles published and by those who were quoted by the reporters. We have gotten stupider.
Imagine the United States and Indian militaries combating piracy together in the Gulf of Aden, conducting complex exercises in the Pacific with ships of the Japanese Maritime Self Defense Force, sharing information to counter violent extremism, dog-fighting jets in the skies over Nevada, or deploying aboard a hospital ship with half a dozen other nations to provide medical assistance to thousands in need. Such events were inconceivable twenty years ago. Yet, today, we do all this and more on a surprisingly frequent basis.
These engagements represent an exciting advance in our bi-lateral military relationship that began with the end of the Cold War. They contribute to the maturation of the broader US-India relationship toward a global and strategic partnership. This bodes well for both our nations, the Indian Ocean region, and the world.
Much of the dramatic change in the US-Indian military-to-military (mil-mil) relationship is due to direct interaction between US Pacific Command (USPACOM) forces and Indian Armed Forces. Many times a year members of our armed forces engage in a variety of venues to strengthen this increasingly important relationship. These events include senior-officer visits, bi- and multilateral military exercises, mid-grade officer subject matter expert exchanges, and policy and working group meetings. During our extensive interaction we will learn, share, teach, and train together. In doing so, we develop the personal and professional bonds upon which real trust and true friendship depend.
USPACOM, one of six US Geographic Combatant Commands, oversees all US forces assigned to an area stretching from the west coast of North America to the western border of India. We pursue a strategy of partnership, readiness and presence to enhance US relationships and the capability of our allies and partners to address shared challenges and leverage new opportunities in the Asia-Pacific.
Partnership, readiness, and presence opportunities abound for US and Indian armed forces the second and third largest in the world, respectively. Together, we can be forces that preclude the necessity for combat operations, forces that enhance security and stability, and forces for good. Some common focus areas include enhancing maritime security, countering proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, providing humanitarian assistance and disaster relief, defeating violent extremism and piracy, and deepening defence trade. Each of these presents an opportunity for the US and India to bond in cause and fortify our partnership.
Our current mil-mil relationship is a partnership not thought possible decades ago. This relatively recent and rapid development is rooted in a genuine convergence of national interests. And the time is right. Although two sovereign and independent nations, we are connected in many ways that make strengthening our partnership a wise course of action. Fundamentally, we are connected by our understanding that national strength is rooted in individual worth and the freedom to pursue opportunity. We are united by our commitment to basic democratic freedoms and institutions that we know offer the surest road to development and prosperity. And as countries that have experienced the tragedy of terrorist attacks, we appreciate the importance of working together to defend our precious freedoms and to protect the stability of our crucial region.
We are also bound firmly by economic interdependence. The United States is Indias largest trading partner. International transactions between the US and India last year averaged more than six billion dollars a month. And through our trade bonds we are inextricably linked by our dependence upon freedom of movement and secure access to international commerce routes.
Stronger US-India ties also make sense demographically. India and the US represent two of the most vibrant large countries in the world. Both are relatively young and growing sufficiently to support their own long-term prosperity. Within the next two decades, India will surpass China as the most populous nation while the US will maintain its position as the third most populous.
US-India relations are as strong as they have ever been. Our two nations have a truly remarkable relationship for a variety of diverse and significant reasons. When one considers the interests and causes we share, particularly as they relate to individual freedom and national strength, there is a remarkable convergence that can be the foundation of an even more robust partnership. Given our common traditions, national attributes, and potential as partners, such a partnership benefits all who value the development and prosperity that security and stability enable.
We at United States Pacific Command, on our second visit to this great nation in as many years, understand profoundly what the United States and India can and must accomplish together. We imagine what is possible by 2029, considering what we achieved in the past twenty years. Let us together make the concept a reality.
The writer is the Commander of US. Pacific Command, a US Geographic Combatant Command headquartered in Honolulu, Hawaii.
Posted by: john frum ||
05/14/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
Harold LeClair Ickes (March 15, 1874 February 3, 1952) was a United States administrator and politician. He served as Secretary of the Interior for thirteen years, from 1933 to 1946, the longest tenure of anyone to hold the office. Ickes was responsible for implementing much of President Franklin D. Roosevelt's "New Deal" and is the father of Harold M. Ickes, who was deputy Chief of Staff under President Bill Clinton and was an adviser to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton during her tenure as Senator.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
05/14/2009 14:35 Comments ||
Top||
#4
My vote is Imbeciles just smart enough to appear educated, sorta like a veneer, you know there's plywood behind, but the surface gives the appearance of solid Oak.
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
05/14/2009 14:36 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Yeah, but gotta wonder who the imbeciles really are if they stay in past their current term.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
Does anybody really believe that adding 50 million people to the public health-care rolls will not cost the government more money? About $1.5 trillion to $2 trillion more? At least.
By David Walker
