You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Economy
We Can't Afford a 'Public' Health Plan
2009-05-14
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.
Posted by:GolfBravoUSMC

#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.
Posted by: Anguper Hupomosing9418   2009-05-14 17:35  

#5  Good laws would help. But who is there to write them? Certainly not the current crop of legislators.
Posted by: Anguper Hupomosing9418   2009-05-14 17:27  

#4  Enough to make you want to get a dash-cam like the cops have Gorb.
Posted by: CrazyFool   2009-05-14 16:15  

#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.
Posted by: gorb   2009-05-14 15:55  

#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   2009-05-14 15:40  

#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.
Posted by: gorb   2009-05-14 15:36  

00:00