In the process, I’ve already looked at minimum wages--the so called "living wage," gun control, government education, and most recently I looked at tax cuts for “working families.” All of these posts attempted to look at the flowery statements made by or on behalf of the candidates and address little annoying things like facts and details which are missing in support of their statements and positions on each issue.
For my next revelation, I have decided to take on what is perhaps the easiest topic, health care in general and specifically, health insurance.
Let me start out with an admission. I currently do not have health insurance, by choice—it’s not George Bush’s fault. I have spent the last four or so years without insurance and my health hasn’t exactly been perfect, but I have gotten by OK. I didn’t lose my insurance as a result of some sinister Republican conspiracy to ruin my finances and end my life, I let it lapse intentionally. I have, however, been continuously insured from the age of 18 until the age of 40 through a combination of programs in college, insurance provided by my employer when I had one, and with self- purchased private health insurance for a period of nearly 11 years that I was self employed. By the way, I also intend to acquire a health insurance policy later this year.
Before I go any further, let’s talk about the idea of insurance for a moment. Health insurance (or any other kind of insurance, for that matter) involves the concept of you gambling that you are going to incur some level of expenses (medical expenses, in the case of health insurance) and the insurance company gambling that you aren’t. You gamble that these expenses are, in theory, greater that the cost of the monthly premiums that you pay to the insurance company.
The insurance company, in turn, gambles that your expenses are actually less than the premiums which they collect from you. If the insurance company is right and your expenses are low, they can keep the excess premiums as profit or at least make enough interest off of the premiums while the hold them to offset the additional costs in any given year or period of years.
Insurance companies create groups (pools) of clients in the same risk category and sell insurance at similar rates of premium cost and payout risk. The idea is to make a profit by averaging the income and costs of all of the clients in the pool. They will pay out more than they take in premiums on some clients and pay out nothing on other clients. Company group insurance is just another form of insurance pool.
Up until the last 50 years, healthcare was a pay as you go business. You didn’t even have to use cash in rural America as evidenced by stories of country doctors making house-calls and extending credit or accepting produce, vegetables, and chickens for payment. Today it could be considered difficult to pay your brain surgeon’s fee or pay for a CAT scan with a bushel basket of corn.
Health insurance was originally sold to cover catastrophic costs over and above the annual checkups and the repair of a few nicks and scrapes that were encountered in the living of everyday life’s events and circumstances. This is exactly what the hated rich, upper class do today. Most people with any substantial net worth purchase major medical and hospitalization insurance policies with large deductibles and save the costs of high premiums by taking a manageable portion of the risk themselves. If you are healthy as a horse, you win…If you suddenly die of cancer, you loose. (You’re dead so it doesn’t matter does it?)
But things have changed greatly. Today there are masses of people out there that somehow believe that they should be able to pay out $50 per month ($600 per year) and in return receive unlimited free doctor’s visits, free emergency room visits, free hospitalization, free OB/GYN care for five children they can’t afford, free family dental care, and free prescription drugs, regardless of the actual total costs. How long could any private company remain financially solvent with that kind of negative cash-flow? The answer is, about 90 days.
So how can we expect the imperial federal government of the US to accomplish this feat? By stealing money from the hated rich upper class, money that they really don’t need say the liberals on behalf of “working families.” Programs like sHrillary Clinton’s “Universal Healthcare” would allow the government to force the doctors and other health providers to donate a portion of their time (read that, their lives) for free or at a reduced cost if they intend to retain that coveted medical license that they all want to continue to practice medicine.
Ironically, the federal government has a real head start in changing the public’s mentality toward health insurance. Historically, the idea of employer provided health insurance goes back to World War II when wage caps were placed by the federal government on employers. In an effort to get around these limitations on compensation and attract the highest quality employees, many companies started offering additional paid benefits like health insurance to their personnel.
The paid benefits idea carried over after the war and by the 1960’s, it was quite common for executive and mid-level positions to include company paid benefits like health and life insurance and retirement plans. Federal tax law further encouraged companies’ provision of health insurance, eventually expanding to include lower level executive and blue-collar employees, by allowing them to write off the cost of insurance premiums and lower their tax burden. In effect, the individual was still actually paying for the insurance. They just did it in before tax dollars.
So if you want to stop reading now, here is the logical, easiest, and most workable solution to the so called “health care crisis.” Extend to the individual the exact same tax break that businesses enjoy today—make the entire health insurance premium tax deductible. Why should only corporations enjoy this benefit? It penalizes small businesses and sole proprietorships at the expense of increasing the ranks of the un- insured. Unfortunately, large numbers of un-insured citizens is exactly what the federal government and the politicians want. How else can they justify taking over an industry that represents over 1/3 of the national economy?
NOW, as to the specifics on each candidates’ election platforms. Please indulge me as I offer my commentary, rebuttal, or outright prove them wrong on a paragraph by paragraph basis:
Here is what John Kerry and John Edwards have to say about health care:
“Affordable, high-quality health care will keep our families healthy, our businesses competitive, and our country strong.”
I’ll buy the first part, high quality health care will help keep families (and individuals) healthy… duhhh! Unfortunately, if you don’t have regular check-ups, and you wake up one day with colon cancer flying out your rear end, you can also spend a billion dollars on surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation and still be DRT (Dead Right There) when your time comes.
Businesses’ competitiveness and a strong country are a bit of a reach (com’ on, John and John) as I could see a healthy bunch of overpaid idiots being a liability, not an asset. There is just not a direct, one-to-one correlation here in what they say:
“Over the last three years, family premiums have increased by more than $2,600 and prescription drug prices have grown four times faster than inflation. These skyrocketing costs have hurt our economy and forced many families into bankruptcy.”
Let me jump in here with both feet and do the math for you. Assuming an equal rate of annual inflation, the $2,600 over three years is $867 per year (a little over $72 per month.) Sounds horrible, but…how do they define “family premiums.” Four, five, or six persons? And regarding drug prices growing four times faster than inflation, are the drug prices included in this statement the latest state-of-the-art products? Most medications go down in price and many go over the counter with a further price reduction. (I’m going to do another whole investigation into prescription drugs and pricing…just be patient.)
Next the Kerry campaign says:
“We deserve a president who understands that in America, regular check-ups shouldn't empty family checkbooks - a president who will put people ahead of insurance and drug companies. “
Again, I’ll do the math for you. The members of a family of four each have an annual medical physical. Let’s assume a cost of one hundred dollars each for the husband and two children, and two hundred fifty dollars for the woman of child bearing age with her God given extra “plumbing”. Total cost, five hundred fifty dollars. This hardly empties the checkbook, does it?
Where in the US Constitution does it say that the president’s job is to favor individuals over privately or publicly owned businesses? The insurance and drug companies all have the right to sell any product they can legally sell to any company or person at any price that the free market will bear. They also have the right to close down and offer nothing in the way of products and services, or to sell them all in Canada, Mexico, or (God forbid) France and Germany.
"John Kerry and John Edwards have a plan to address soaring premiums and cut Americans a break. Their plan will lower family premiums by up to $1,000 a year, cut waste from the system, lower the cost of prescription drugs to provide real relief to seniors, and use targeted tax cuts to extend affordable, high-quality coverage to 95 percent of Americans, including every child. And because John Kerry and John Edwards believe that everyone's health is equally important, they will provide all Americans with access to the same coverage that members of Congress give themselves."
Sooo, premiums will in theory be lowered by “up to $1000 per year.” Usually, “up to” means a sliding scale. And with government, let me guess, the mean old upper middle class will get a $1.98 reduction and the lowest income earners will get a thousand dollar check—regardless of their actual health care expenses. Another “earned income-type credit,” perhaps?
“…and use targeted tax-cuts to extend affordable, high-quality coverage to ninety-five percent of Americans?” Again, let me guess, they probably won’t be targeting me or my friends and family members. Further, the concept will be that the top 5% of the income earners will be raped and pillaged in order to pay for the other 95% of the population’s health care “rights.”
"To make affordable health care a right - not a privilege - for every American, John Kerry and John Edwards will: " (Sorry, but health care is a market commodity, not a government mandate. Show me where in the US Constitution it says “life, liberty, and affordable healthcare” or anything of the sort?)
"Cut Your Premiums--John Kerry and John Edwards will cut family premiums by up to $1,000. That's $1,000 in real savings people can use to buy groceries, pay the bills, and save for their children's future. And that will mean more jobs and more competitive American businesses."
So let me get this straight, if the US government hands “families” a $1000 annual savings in health insurance premiums, they will run right out and spend the money on groceries, “bills”, or save it for their children’s future. These “bills” just wouldn’t happen to include cigarettes, fish bait, and beer, or the down payment on a $4,800 annual lease on new Ford Mustang?
Or will these families take their $1000 health insurance cost savings, place an employment ad in the newspaper, start a new company, and hire two or three new employees? On receipt of their $1000 check, will they spontaneously increase their own productivity at their jobs in order to yield “more competitive American businesses?” Crappola Alert, Crappola Alert!!!
"Cover All Americans With Quality Care: The Kerry-Edwards plan will give every American access to the range of high-quality, affordable plans available to members of Congress and extend coverage to 95 percent of Americans, including every American child. Their plan will also fight to erase the health disparities that persist along racial and economic lines, ensure that people with HIV and AIDS have the care they need, end discrimination against Americans with disabilities and mental illnesses, and ensure equal treatment for mental illness in our health system.
Here's a couple more of my Politically Incorrect Factoids (PIF's): There is not one single child in this country that cannot receive reduced cost or free health care if the parent will deliver them to the appropriate existing medical facility. The only time proper care is not delivered is in the case that the parent is either an idiot, some kind of a religious zealot, a drunk, or a crackhead. Children are not, to my knowledge, dying on the side of the road in this country from lack of proper medical care.
The "health disparities" that exist along racial and economic lines are primarily culturally induced or caused by individual lifestyle choices. Dietary CHOICES, being chronically overweight, smoking, alcohol and drug consumption--these are all issuses that affect a person's health and currently only they themselves make the decisions to control these behaviors. Is Mr Kerry suggesting that the government should step in and save them from themselves?
The US government already spends a disproportate amount of research money on HIV/AIDS, exceeding the funding on a per case basis of research funds spent for pulminary and cancer deaths--illnesses that are the source of over 50% of the annual deaths due to chronic illness each year in the United States: http://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/overview.htm.
President Bush recently proposed a record spending level of $17.1 billion for fiscal 2005 (a 27% increase since 2001) http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/hivaids/ in HIV/Aids research. What the hell else do they want us to do, and what other research programs are they willing to potentially underfund in support of this politically correct cause celeb?
Provide Affordable Prescriptions: The Kerry-Edwards plan will reduce prescription drug prices by allowing the re-importation of safe prescription drugs from Canada, overhauling the Medicare drug plan, ensuring low-cost drugs, and ending artificial barriers to generic drug competition."
Blaa Blaa Blaaa, Bla Bla Bla Blaaaaaaah! What did they just say? The Kerry-Edwards plan is going to “reduce prescription drug prices by allowing the re-importation of safe prescription drugs from Canada....” How does sending drugs to the US consumers through Canada or Mexico automatically lower prescription prices?
Well isn’t that special…last time I checked, it was the imperial Federal Government that was directly responsible for EACH AND EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THE PROPORTED PROBLEMS with prescription drugs that they are trying to change.
And what exactly does “ensuring low-cost drugs” mean? Perhaps holding a government gun to the head of a manufacturer to keep prices down? Why don't they try getting the FDA “voodoo scientists” off the drug manufacturers backs, thereby shortening the time to market for new drugs? It is all to easy to solve pricing problems by spending higher income taxpayers’ hard earned money to subsidize drug prices? No new news here.
"Cut Waste and Inefficiency: Today, approximately 25 percent of health care costs are wasted on paperwork and administrative processing. The Kerry-Edwards plan harnesses American ingenuity to cut waste, save billions, and take new steps to ensure patient privacy."
Well, sorry folks, but the Kerry/Edwards health care plan just took themselves and the federal government out of the picture with their own words. Based on prior experience with Medicare, Medicaid, and the Veteran’s Administration Hospitals, there is absolutely no way that further government involvement in our nation’s (actually our citizen's) healthcare could possibly “cut waste and inefficiency.”
In summary...are the citizens of this country just plain stupid and the politicians know it?
I have to stop writing now before my head explodes. Bah Humbug….
No comments:
Post a Comment