Investor's Business Daily finds an "uh-oh" moment in the House's health-care-for-all bill

[cjppjc]

Re: Investor's Business Daily finds an "uh-oh" moment in the House's health-care-for-all bill

That is because this is a "no-brainer", most people get told this so much that they're able to blank it out as "noise". Many of them don't overeat not because they don't know any better, they overeat because its a psychological coping mechanism, they're trying to fill some hole in their life with pleasurable experiences and the easiest way for many is to eat food that tastes good. If you tell them not to do it and why they'll just smile and nod and then go buy a Baconator and 64oz Big Gulp of Coke.


People in other countries have different bad habits is all. They tend to be skinny, but they also tend drink and smoke massively for instance, which is just as bad as Americans tendency to overeat until they're morbidly obese. Lung/throat cancer and cirrhosis of the liver is every bit as deadly and debilitating as the heart disease/diabetes type II from obesity. Half a dozen of one, 6 of the other.

Doing stuff that is bad for you is a human problem not a cultural problem.

And it's worse than that. If you change one thing, another appears.

[mesyn191]

Re: Investor's Business Daily finds an "uh-oh" moment in the House's health-care-for-all bill

Both options suck and are unsustainable.

I'd say given the politics, politicians, and the business people and business culture both options suck right now (with one sucking significantly less than the other), but if any of those things improve significantly than either of them could become much better or even good. If you think both the private and government options for health care are unsustainable then what are we to do then?

How about option 3: Get government out! The cartel will lose its teeth and we'll once again have an affordable, flourishing health care industry.

The businesses wanted the cartel in the first place, you'd have to get rid of the cartel and the businesses and the laws that hold both of those things together, all of which would require massive government involvement. You'd be right back to square one, which is relying on the people you don't trust and/or who are incompetent to fix the problem.

[mesyn191]

Re: Investor's Business Daily finds an "uh-oh" moment in the House's health-care-for-all bill

Can we unwind the cartel??

Unwinding it is easy, putting something better in its place is hard due to various reasons such as entrenched monied interests (ie. drug companies), CYA measures by the doctors, and legal red tape.

Cookie cutter treatment? If it's not stand operating procedure then were not going to do it?

This is already pretty much the case now. Private/for profit insurers go to great lengths to try and deny claims and/or make it difficult to get therapies.

Because there is profit in the system many discoveries and new technology is developed in the U.S. and exported to the world.

For profit enterprises are not inheritly better at doing anything, theoretically they should be cheaper/better than gov. ran institutions, but this is not always true.

I'm not certain but I think the rest of the world is feeding off the u.s. health system's innovation.

International patent law is fairly strong, and has only been getting stronger lately due to intense lobbying by monied interests. Sure, you still see some tech./meds getting pirated by gray market manufacturers in foreign countries, but its not nearly as widespread as it was a few decades ago. These days I'd actually say more innovative stuff is done overseas than in the US, at least as far as finding ways of making the procedures and imaging equipment cheaper.

With the profit motive removed are we going to get new drugs? new procedures?

Why would you think a UHS will remove all profit for drug companies/doctors? Sure, they'll get less money (which is what should happen), but they can still roll it in. The UHS as it is currently written would get rid of for profit insurance companies.

[sn1p3r]

Re: Investor's Business Daily finds an "uh-oh" moment in the House's health-care-for-all bill

From Ron Paul's site and book (highly recommended)

Ron Paul offers the following solution in his book “The Revolution: A Manifesto“:

In the days before Medicare and Medicaid, the poor and elderly were admitted to hospitals at the same rate they are now, and received good care. Before those programs came into existence, every physician understood that he or she had a responsibility towards the less fortunate and free medical care was the norm. Hardly anyone is aware of this today, since it doesn’t fit into the typical, by the script story of government rescuing us from a predatory private sector.

Illegal aliens already receive de-facto free health care. Why can’t poor Americans have the same… not as a right, but as a charitable benefit provided by doctors who feel a personal responsibility for their fellow citizens?

[mesyn191]

Re: Investor's Business Daily finds an "uh-oh" moment in the House's health-care-for-all bill

From Ron Paul's site and book (highly recommended)

The poor/illegals still can get free treatment (obviously not the best by a long shot...) today, helping out the less fortunate is a long standing tradition that is acknowledged by many doctors today and is AFAIK still taught in medical school. The problem is that medical costs are getting so high that even for many of the middle class people/families, much less those who are retired now and on a fixed income, that they're having trouble affording it. At the same time, while massive improvements have been made in various drugs/treatments/imaging equip., the high costs of advanced medicine has threatened the profits of the insurance companies. They can't raise premiums a whole lot more than what they're already at, so now they're resorting to finding ways to deny claims or lobbying to get the laws changed on what they have to pay out and how much they pay out to maintain profits.

There are possible ways to fix these issues without doing a UHS (basically find ways to do the same procedures cheaper and improve efficiency in procedures/documentation, which is actually already being done overseas but not in the US partially due to the NIH-factor but also legal issues as well), but I'm much more pessimistic of their success, since you'd have to depend on the assholes who run the current insurance companies to implement them. I realize for various ideological/political reasons some of you may be against a UHS, but as bad as the politicians may be these people are far worse.

[Slimprofits]

Re: Investor's Business Daily finds an "uh-oh" moment in the House's health-care-for-all bill

laughable leadership

http://www.heritage.org/2009/07/21/m...th-house-bill/

With the public’s trust in his handling of health care tanking (50%-44% of Americans disapprove), the White House has launched a new phase of its strategy designed to pass Obamacare: all Obama, all the time. As part of that effort, Obama hosted a conference call with leftist bloggers urging them to pressure Congress to pass his health plan as soon as possible.

During the call, a blogger from Maine said he kept running into an Investors Business Daily article that claimed Section 102 of the House health legislation would outlaw private insurance. He asked: “Is this true? Will people be able to keep their insurance and will insurers be able to write new policies even though H.R. 3200 is passed?” President Obama replied: “You know, I have to say that I am not familiar with the provision you are talking about.” (quote begins at 17:10)

This is a truly disturbing admission by the President, especially considering that later in the call, Obama promises yet again: “If you have health insurance, and you like it, and you have a doctor that you like, then you can keep it. Period.” How can Obama keep making this promise if he is not familiar with the health legislation that is being written in Congress? Details matter.

We are familiar with the passage IBD sites, and as we wrote last week, the House bill does not outright outlaw private individual health insurance, but it does effectively regulate it out of existence. The House bill does allow private insurance to be sold, but only “Exchange-participating health benefits plans.” In order to qualify as an Exchange-participating health benefits plan, all health insurance plans must conform to a slew of new regulations, including community rating and guaranteed issue. These will all send the cost of private individual health insurance skyrocketing. Furthermore, all these new regulations would not apply just to individual insurance plans, but to all insurance plans. So the House bill will also drive up the cost of your existing employer coverage as well. Until, of course, it becomes so expensive that your company makes the perfectly economical decision to dump you into the government plan.

[drumminj]

Re: Investor's Business Daily finds an "uh-oh" moment in the House's health-care-for-all bill

The UHS being proposed will probably suck, but I expect it to suck less than current private health insurance. Politicians are involved so they could definitely really screw it up, but the alternative at this point is just to try and maintain status quo, which is not working at all for most Americans.

Quite a false choice you have there. There are many other options.

As stated above, get gov't out of it. Remove the tax incentive for companies to offer health insurance as part of employment. That will allow for a more open market with more competition, as people will feel empowered to shop around rather than have insurance tied to employment.

Step back and look at how we got to where we are. We should focus on un-doing mistakes made in the past, rather than plowing forward and making new ones.

[jtabeb]

Re: Investor's Business Daily finds an "uh-oh" moment in the House's health-care-for-all bill

We need Canadian-style socialized medicine in America, and the time for it is now! Yes, there will be higher taxes, but over all, the cost of living with socialized medicine will be much lower in America...... Think about it. Think, think, think!

I think everyone in the US should have the ability to afford the same quality of health care that I and my family enjoy (at public expense, I'm in the military, remember?). My wife and I have had three children in the military (C-section no less), two major operations, numerous ER visits, and the peace of mind NOT to be worried about our health care. That's a FREEDOM that I would be proud to fight for.

Go see "SICKO" by Michael Moore.

I sometimes complain about my healthcare BUT AM ALWAYS thankful for it.
I don't think I should be treated better than the people I'm serving.

If you want a real life example of "SOCIALIZED" Medicine, I'd be happy to answer any of your questions. I've been living with (and enjoying) socialized medicine for the last 12 years right here in the good old US of A. I think every american should have the same opportunity. (And if you think it sucks, well, let's just say I HAVE NO HORROR stories about my medical coverage, that's not true of many of my private sector friends that I have talked with.)

Or you could also talk to my buddy who's daughter was born with spinobiffeda. And be sure to ask him how happy he is that his daughter rachel can lead an almost normal life (because of the treatment she had when she was less than 2 years old). Or my buddy who's kids were born with misformed hands, or my friend who's child has autism, etc. etc.

The point is FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE (remember we are talking military here) has TREMENDOUSLY positive health outcomes, responsiveness, and complete coverage. I wish you could all have my coverage for a year, then I think you would have a sound basis for judgment.

Seriously, the military, and gov workers have had this benefit for years, we know how to do this AND IT WORKS! (AND I, LIKE IT)



Just my 2c.

[Master Shake]

Re: Investor's Business Daily finds an "uh-oh" moment in the House's health-care-for-all bill

We need Canadian-style socialized medicine in America, and the time for it is now! Yes, there will be higher taxes, but over all, the cost of living with socialized medicine will be much lower in America...... Think about it. Think, think, think!

You live in Canada, right? WTF do you mean by "we?"

[Master Shake]

Re: Investor's Business Daily finds an "uh-oh" moment in the House's health-care-for-all bill

Interesting how very few talk about getting fit, staying fit and eating a healthy balanced diet as a way to control health costs.

Even fewer talk about the burden illegal aliens place on health care costs (as well as the cost burden they place on all levels of government). Few talk of how the lumpen proletariat use the emergency room for trivial matters most people would self-treat for, because they know it doesn't cost them anything and they can't be turned away.

[rjwjr]

Re: Investor's Business Daily finds an "uh-oh" moment in the House's health-care-for-all bill

I think everyone in the US should have the ability to afford the same quality of health care that I and my family enjoy (at public expense, I'm in the military, remember?). My wife and I have had three children in the military (C-section no less), two major operations, numerous ER visits, and the peace of mind NOT to be worried about our health care. That's a FREEDOM that I would be proud to fight for.

Go see "SICKO" by Michael Moore.

I sometimes complain about my healthcare BUT AM ALWAYS thankful for it.
I don't think I should be treated better than the people I'm serving.

If you want a real life example of "SOCIALIZED" Medicine, I'd be happy to answer any of your questions. I've been living with (and enjoying) socialized medicine for the last 12 years right here in the good old US of A. I think every american should have the same opportunity. (And if you think it sucks, well, let's just say I HAVE NO HORROR stories about my medical coverage, that's not true of many of my private sector friends that I have talked with.)

Or you could also talk to my buddy who's daughter was born with spinobiffeda. And be sure to ask him how happy he is that his daughter rachel can lead an almost normal life (because of the treatment she had when she was less than 2 years old). Or my buddy who's kids were born with misformed hands, or my friend who's child has autism, etc. etc.

The point is FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE (remember we are talking military here) has TREMENDOUSLY positive health outcomes, responsiveness, and complete coverage. I wish you could all have my coverage for a year, then I think you would have a sound basis for judgment.

Seriously, the military, and gov workers have had this benefit for years, we know how to do this AND IT WORKS! (AND I, LIKE IT)



Just my 2c.

Interesting perspective. Are all of the doctors and health care providers also enlisted personnel? Something tells me the quality of care you receive may have something to do with the discipline, sense of responsibility, and quite possibly, short-term mentality (giving their best in that environment while knowing they'll be in the more lucrative private sector soon) of the care-givers. If this assumption is correct, then your socialized medicine utopia may be nothing like the government (non-military) style care that concerns most of us. Also, how do you explain all the bad press that we read and hear about the VA hospitals and benefits and such?

[flintlock]

Re: Investor's Business Daily finds an "uh-oh" moment in the House's health-care-for-all bill

Interesting how very few talk about getting fit, staying fit and eating a healthy balanced diet as a way to control health costs.

Travel outside our border and one of the first things you realize is how fat Americans are compared to the rest of the world.

When you commute to work tomorrow, look at all the cars in line at McDonalds and Wendy’s, going for their first meal of the day.

That’s the root of the problem – rotten food at a cheap price close to home and available from the front seat of your car.

While a lot of this is true, genetics has a lot more to do with health that what most would have you believe. Our good health care actually makes us weaker as a people genetically speaking. The weak don't die off early in life like they used to. Then the weak go on to reproduce. But nobody wants to think they are innately weak or flawed. Fact is, people in pre 20th century America didn't live anywhere near as long as they do now, and they weren't eating at Wendy's every day. Even our fattest and least healthy lifestyle folks live longer today. People are sicker overall today probably, but I suspect it has just as much to do with genetics and antibiotics as it does with unhealthy living. Most likely a mixture of both factors.

[mesyn191]

Re: Investor's Business Daily finds an "uh-oh" moment in the House's health-care-for-all bill

Quite a false choice you have there. There are many other options.

I think I already addressed this in another post down the page, if you disagree with that than OK but give some reasons, ignoring what I said won't help anyone.

[mesyn191]

Re: Investor's Business Daily finds an "uh-oh" moment in the House's health-care-for-all bill

Even fewer talk about the burden illegal aliens place on health care costs (as well as the cost burden they place on all levels of government). Few talk of how the lumpen proletariat use the emergency room for trivial matters most people would self-treat for, because they know it doesn't cost them anything and they can't be turned away.

I don't what it percentage of it is health care related, but I've read that illegals cost the whole country something like $330 billion a year. That is a lot of money (to put it mildly), but compared to some of the other issues we've got going on right now I'd say its the least of our problems (TARP and various other bailout programs have cost us something like $4.5 trillion right?).

[Slimprofits]

Re: Investor's Business Daily finds an "uh-oh" moment in the House's health-care-for-all bill

http://usmilitary.about.com/cs/healt...edicalcare.htm

jtabeb, does this present a fair treatment/description of the military health care approach?