|
What do you think about ObamaCare?
This vote could change the entire country, according to The Wall Street Journal
With the House’s climactic vote on ObamaCare tomorrow, Democrats are on the cusp of a profound and historic mistake, comparable in our view to the Smoot-Hawley tariff and FDR’s National Industrial Recovery Act. Everyone is preoccupied now with the politics, but ultimately at stake on Sunday is the kind of country America will be.
The consequences of this bill will not only be destructive for the health-care system and the country’s fiscal condition, though those will be bad enough. Inextricably bound up in a plan as far-reaching and ambitious as ObamaCare are also larger questions about the role of government, the dynamism of American enterprise and the nature of a free society. Above anything else, this explains why Democrats have had such trouble convincing the public, let alone their own Members.
Once the health-care markets are put through Mr. Obama’s de facto nationalization, costs will further explode. The Congressional Budget Office estimates ObamaCare will cost taxpayers $200 billion per year when fully implemented and grow annually at 8%, even under low-ball assumptions. Soon the public will reach its taxing limit, and then something will have to give on the care side. In short, medicine will be rationed by politics, no doubt with the same subtlety and wisdom as Congress’s final madcap dash toward 216 votes.
As in the Western European and Canadian welfare states, doctors, hospitals and insurance companies will over time become public utilities. Government will set the cost-minded priorities and determine what kinds of treatment options patients are allowed to receive. Medicare’s price controls will be exported to the remnants of the private sector.
Eventually, quality and choice—the best attributes of American medicine in spite of its dysfunctions—will severely decline.
So a vote for ObamaCare is also a vote against the vitality of American capitalism. Business elites have mostly held their tongues, or calculated that they can later dump their health-care liabilities on the government. Yet ObamaCare will lead to much higher levels of taxation across society. The tax wedge—the share of labor costs that never reaches workers but instead goes straight to government—will start flying towards the 50% that prevails today in most of Europe. In America, without the same welfare state obligations, it hovers near 30%.
Let’s see- AHIP doesn’t like it, the WSJ editorial page doesn’t like it- my first reflex is, it must be pretty good.
What upsets me the most is the anti-reform ads I’ve been seeing on TV- paid for by my insurance premiums. C***s****** Aetna m*****f******.
It’s too little. I would much more like to have seen a single-payer system, and overnight, instant elimination of pre-existing condition aspects.
The one question nobody seemed to be able to phrase during this whole thing is rather like this:
If you totaled up every dime spent in the USA for health insurance of every kind, what could those dollars have bought in Universal Health Care?
Given that we pay more than any other country, I believe it could have been converted into the so-called Best HC that the ignorant believe we already have. At zero extra expense.
The details would still have run 2000+ pages though.
.
When I think of Republicans and their concept of healthcare, I can’t help but imagine Louis Armstrong singing the Republican version of “A Wonderful World”.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=JLkOYHYQ2tc
The use of the term “ObamaCare” is a good indicator that the article/poster is so biased that it/he/she is totally worthless when it comes to real information.
Sorry. Forgot to definitively address the headline question.
I would much, much rather have the pejorative “Obamacare” than not have any change at all.
Waiting for Republican “perfection” is its own sort of death spiral.
Oh, and the WSJ article was written by Chicken Little.
While I’m at it… the Republican version of Healthcare:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=a54iqEr1flQ
First it’s not “ObamaCare” – it’s healthcare reform. That term is a Republican attempt to undermine reform altogether and any domestic issues fixed from a democratic president.
Do I want it? Yes. It’s better than the shit we have now and will reduce the deficit – per CBO estimates.
Is it perfect? No.
lets see..
BUSINESS takes your money to pay an Insurance corp..
The insurance corps BIDS down the bills, and pays as little as possible, trying to KEEP as much money as possible.
IF they can not, they can decline you, for a REASON they may have found from your past. Did you break your leg? thats a reason. Also, out of 10 people 1 has NO pre-existing condition.
The Hospital gets its share, then ASKS you for your part of payment. Consider a $10,000 treatment, and the 20% you now OWE. Thats 1 day with a broken leg.
30 years ago, that 20% would have been the WHOLE BILL, at the most.
Hospitals and Doctors have pushed payments Up, as they have to deal with all the paper work, and the MANY insurance companies.. They even have BUSINESS’S that do all the paperwork.
It now costs 2-3 times what it USED to cost to goto a doctor. As they know YOU CANT AFFORD IT, so the cost goes up. They want the insurance corp to pay it all. They KNOW you cant pay the bill 1/2 the time.
So they make it up in OVER charging.
get paid 1/2 what they ASKED
Then go after you for the 20%..
NOW do you really want to talk about DRUGS??
We already have very basic universal health care in the US. Federal law says that hospitals have to provide emergency medical care regardless of legal status, citizenship, or ability to pay. The problem is that the law that created that policy didn’t provide any funding to hospitals providing that care. Today more than 50% of emergency care is unpaid. Hospitals are closing all over the place.
If the basic gist of the health care bill is to force everyone who can to buy health insurance then I don’t see how it could be bad for the quality of the health care system or dramatically increase costs. If anything it should improve the hospital situation and lower health care costs for the typical middle class person.
#34 – Brian
My God, somebody that actually READ the bill and understands what’s in it.
Get off this website immediately!
That’s WSJ article was a complete joke. Looking past the rhetoric, was there ANYTHING about how this new system is different from our current one?
Has the WSJ EVER mentioned the fact that Americans pay TWO TO THREE TIMES MORE per person than every other country, and gets WORSE RESULTS?
My favorite ‘fake argument’: folks that want no money going to abortions, and ALSO want to withhold prenatal medicade funding. Good job, great plan!
45,
ALSO,
If all people are to PUT into the system, NOT just the poor. When those RICH people retire/loose/quit their jobs, they STILL get medical..THEY PAID into the system..
tHE rich DONT PAY INTO THE SYSTEM AT THIS TIME.
#29, cursor… beautifully said.
Unfortunately, you are trying to offer logic to a bunch of chattering squirrels who have taken to the trees because every change is perceived as a threat.
To the chattering squirrels… find your nuts.
In word, NO. Rewrite the legislation so it actually favors the group so often bandied about by politicians: the “American people”. Keep the lobbyists out of it. Build a system that isn’t essentially a huge windfall for private industry. At minimum, include a public option so these over-paid, god-playing CEOs really have something to worry about.
#43 – Do you actually trust government estimates? This new “reform” will require nothing short of blind faith. I’m willing to bet that somewhere midway to the 10-year mark they’ll be whining about how much more it’s costing than they expected.
In the same breath the critics say that costs will explode and that the system will become like, among others, Canada’s.
But Canadians pay a fraction of what Americans pay and have ever since a public system was introduced.
Obviously one of the two propositions isn’t true.
Hello-o!
Seems to me that capitalism and the fair distribution of health care just don’t mix very well. Look, when you go to the dentist, say, he must advise you to do things (such as brushing your teeth more) that are going to TAKE BUSINESS AWAY FROM HIM! In other words, a successful dental business needs people to ignore that advice to make money…
I heard that the Chinese used to have a system whereby a person paid a doctor a fee while they were healthy, but if you got sick you STOPPED paying the doctor until he got you well again.
Imagine that…a doctor wants to know big time what your lifestyle is…for example, if you smoke or drink, he’s going to charge you accordingly, otherwise he’s going to risk LOSING revenue. Our Western medical care system might actually (secretly) prefer people who abuse themselves…so they can make a profit from them.
(of course, such a regime wouldn’t be perfect when it comes to those “pre-existing” conditions and whatnot either…but then nothing will ever be perfect).
The tax wedge—the share of labor costs that never reaches workers but instead goes straight to government—will start flying towards the 50%
I have friends in the UK and it is higher than that.
Forget it.
OUR system pays doctors to KEEP you sick/injured.. INSTED of finding a solution, we want you Hurt, as we can get more money..
And the Medical bill, SHOULD be designed to GET up up and OUT and back to work..
It should also, HELP you find work you can do..IF POSSIBLE.
Those that cant Physically do a job, HOOK them up to doing customer service calls.
Those who cant MENTALLY, get them jobs in DOING cargo loading and truck loading stocking and late nite janitorial..
#49 Yes, I’ll accept CBO estimates. Did you have something else in mind or basically complaining of imperfect forecasting methods?
You described good general guidelines but not a plan. Are your guidelines practical or a fantasy?
I’m anxious for government to get something that is practical, estimated to save money and an improvement over what we have now.
The GOP bickering is not about healthcare, it’s about elections. That part I know.
#53 ” I’m anxious for government to get something that is practical, estimated to save money and an improvement over what we have now. ”
Except that it almost NEVER happens.
Its not the federal governments business to provide you health care. Sorry, thats just the way it is. If you are so sure it should be your right for someone else to pay for your healthcare then lobby your state for it. If anything thats where bills like this belong.
If this Obama bribe bill goes through, prepare for half the states in the country to sue, I know you neolibs love the federal government controlling everything, but really, this is not their job.
Then again most of the people who support this bill probably don’t even know what the constitution is, and those that are left just don’t care.
In short, liberty dies with the passage of this bill.
Reading comments from all sides. Are all Americans this crazy? Isn’t there a pragmatic bone in anyone’s body.
qb said,
“Reading comments from all sides. Are all Americans this crazy? Isn’t there a pragmatic bone in anyone’s body.”
.
Pragmatic? No. Fanatic? Yes!
I know what I know and no amount of showing me the facts will change my mind.
The only good thing about this bill is that it will remove Pelosi from our television sets in about seven months, and make Obama a one term disaster, instead of a two term disaster. Don’t these fools look at the polls? The majority of Americans DON’T WANT IT.
NO! I don’t want it. But, we don’t have a choice. Costs are high, unemployment is high, and this is the only way to get medical help when you’re broke. It is a necessary evil.
Let’s see, the guys paying the bills (who think they know more than you do about everything) for your health (which is based in greatest part on your lifestyle) have the power to make law and send people to prison for breaking it.
Can anyone see a problem here?
Bueller? Anyone?
Progressives… I know it’s tough to use the non-emotional side of your brain, but try really really hard and imagine a future where accountants decide that America just can’t afford homosexuality because of its health care costs.
Bob said in #56
“In short, liberty dies with the passage of this bill.”
I don’t believe that, but one thing is for sure:
People die with the failure of this bill.
Bob said,
Its not the federal governments business to provide you health care. Sorry, thats just the way it is.
Why not? The government has been doing it for old people for decades.
In short, liberty dies with the passage of this bill.
So making sure sick people get affordable healthcare is the death of liberty? How does that work?
What happened to all those promises Democrats made about openness and transparency? Has this bill been online for 72 hours before the vote? Before they said that the Rules Committee would be done by 10PM the day before, but they are still working on it. They even had a majority vote in favor of ‘deeming’ the bill passed as part of a larger bill, instead of actually voting on it.
They are also doing gimmicks like raising the Medicare tax, and then not spending the money on Medicare, then changing the name from Medicare tax to Medicare unearned income contribution.
As usual, no suggestions on how to provide health care for the 32 million Americans who do not have it. Just cynicism and criticism.
Oh….and I bet you have health insurance and could care less about those that aren’t as fortunate.
This blog just lost a subscriber, you shouldn’t publish such rubish.