I’d like a supporter of Obama-care to give me ONE example of something over which the government has had control and it was deemed successful…..or it broke even.
I’m telling you, this is a going to be a disaster.
And don’t come back with, “Well, what idea did the Republicans have?” or “We had to do something”.
Our highway system, our national parks, NASA, our military…
Those are just off the top of my head.
APPLAUSE!!!
Very well played, Ben. And kudos.
But do you really believe that the solution to our health care crisis is to be found with the government?
Okay, Ben listed some good things. But, the military gets the lion share of our total budget, and is constantly asking for more. NASA, the national parks, and the highway system are struggling financially. While all of these may very well be really good things, the government hasn’t exactly been able to keep up with them. I am not speaking against any of these things. Look at the track record, though. I think that health care reform could work for a little while, but only for a little while. Then, something else will push it out of the spotlight and it too will be over budget and under staffed and will have to fight for the same budget dollars right along with all of the other “good” programs.
If you need an example, look at the decay of the education system, or the postal system, or Amtrak, or Fannie Mae and Frddie Mac, from when the government first took the reins to where they are now. To completely understate it, these are all struggling financially.
To think that this health care reform will not add to the deficit in the near future, is to ignore history.
Most private industries are also struggling financially right now. What you need to look at is overhead. What does it cost to provide the services?
Our state universities are in trouble because more than 50% of its revenues go towards administration.
The Postal Service is in trouble because they have to provide services at prices where it’s impossible to operate in the black. If it was a private enterprise, they’d have to jack the rates way up or go out of business. (or get bailed out by the government)
Some 20% of revenues for private health insurance goes towards administration including multi-million dollar salaries for their CEOs.
Medicare, on the other hand, operates at about a 3% overhead. That’s pretty efficient. Hopefully, the proposed government health insurance will be as efficient.
The administration cost was a big part of my point. That was a list where Medicare seems to be the exception that proves the rule. I’ll take your word on the accuracy of the figures.
Tony – I’ve yet to see a bill where government would completely run the healthcare system. Also, if a public option came into place, private insurance would still exist – so if it stunk, what’s the problem? Go with private insurance.
Quite frankly, we have to do something. I don’t know how many benefits there’s been from my church, and in our area lately for folks on the verge of disaster from medical bills. We are this great, moral country, who sure doesn’t mind if our neighbors are uninsured – you know, as long as we don’t have long line to wait in!
Yes Brennan private insurance would still exist…for a while.
What you fail to see is that on page 19 of the house bill it is stated:
“Individual health insurance coverage that is not grandfathered health insurance coverage under subsection (a) may only be offered on or after the first day of Y1 as an Exchange-participating health benefits plan.”
The phrase “Exchange-participating health benefits plan” is key as in order to become this “exchange-participating” plan, you have to meet all these new regulations many of which would be impossible for an insurance company to meet without dramatically upping premiums. When these premiums are increased, employers will decide they are just too costly and dump their employees onto the public “option”. So if Congress does not want to prohibit private insurance (mainly for political reasons) they will just regulate them out of existence.
i would be interested in hearing thoughts on how to improve the current health care system from a conservative perspective. i am sure i could do some research on my own, but i would love to hear what your readers have to say.
Brennen, the government doesn’t have to make a profit, the private sector does. So just how would those of us that are content with our insurance, keep it??
My company has a P.O. Box that needed an extra key. We have been waiting since the end of May for one key. The Post Office has faxed the order twice to Washington, changed the entire lock because they don’t make that key anymore, and last check 2 months ago, “the government is out of money and won’t be making any keys until October 15, 2009.” I was told it could take a year to get one key made. This is something the private sector could have done in 5 minutes for $1.50. So, that is how the government works and I’m not looking forward to them running our healthcare.
still hoping for some conservative suggestions on how to improve the current healthcare system. i just admitted a new client into my substance abuse treatment center. she was diagnosed with type I diabetes two months ago, just prior to entering jail. in jail, she was provided with insulin, needles, test strips in order to manage her illness. upon release, she was told that she no longer has insurance because she just turned 21 and her medicaid was cut off. she will die if she does not get insulin, needles, test strips. how do we care for her?
First off, get rid of all the state and federal regulations and red tape placed on insurance companies that require coverage for say pregnancy, life counseling, etc. Allow people to select coverage that works best for them. If you don’t want coverage for pregnancy, you shouldn’t have to have it.
Second, allow people to buy coverage across state lines. This would empower the consumer to have more choices and thus be able to get a better bargain. These two acts alone would lower costs for everyone.
With your situation you just described, I’m not totally against getting her subsidized healthcare for a period of time that would help her until she gets more established. We could do this through revamping the medicare/medicaid system. But there comes a point in time when people have to take personal responsibility for their own lives and not live off the public dole.
i support the idea of the ability to buy coverage over state lines… makes sense. good free market plan. i am wondering what would happen to a woman who opts not to pay for pregnancy coverage, and then becomes pregnant. at that point, would subsidized healthcare kick in? i would think if that were the case, that everyone would just opt out of pregnancy coverage and then take advantage of the subsidized health care??? what do you think? how would this be preventable? in terms of the situation i described, unfortunately for this woman, she will always require subsidized care, if in fact it can be provided to her. she has severe bipolar disorder with psychosis, and is quite unemployable. even if she could hold down some type of job, employers are going to overlook her in this job market because there are more able bodied-able minded people applying for work. so for some people, taking personal responsibility for themselves is not congruent with being able to financially support themselves. not all people are capable of doing this.