We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Saturday, September 26. 2009
I do not think it's so much because people want freedom and choice (altho they do) as it is because people have no confidence in government entitlement programs (which the Dem plans are all about, ultimately). Why?
Social Security - bankrupt
The future tax consequences of the above are daunting to people, and the idea of adding another trillion or so frightens the heck out of people who are thinking about their own well-being, their kids' futures - and also about the nation's.
The sad thing is that most of what people complain about in health care can be easily solved without giant government controls and bureaucracies:
1. Permit interstate competition among insurance companies so people can have a wide range of choices of types of policies including cheap major medical which is what makes sense for most people, and explain the basic fact that medical care has to be paid for, and even saved for, same as car repairs and house repairs and vacations (and legal costs). That is what grown-ups do. You can get major medical for a family for the price of a big-screen TV.
How easy and non-controversial would those changes be? Abundant, high quality, and fairly expensive medical care is one of the great blessings and privileges of a prosperous society, and thus an important economic engine. Why kill it? People want these things.
Do Americans want to be grown-ups, or children? It's our call.
- Take a minute today to email your Congressman and Senators to let them know your views of the Dem healthcare plan. Their email addresses are here. It helps to be calm, polite, reasonable, direct - and brief. A phone call or letter probably is better, but everybody does email these days.
Why The Skepticism About Government Health Care?
This was stolen shamelessly in its entirety from Maggie's Farm. It was too good to just link it. (The only changes made were in formatting and one or two minor spelling error corrections.) I do not think it's so...
Weblog: Weekend Pundit
Tracked: Sep 26, 16:01
Tracked: Sep 27, 13:06
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
As I've often wondered - why can't I pick the coverage (catastrophic, dental, vision...) I want, with the deductable (co-pay) I want, payment schedule I want, and cross shop that with multiple insurers?
Wouldn't that be progressive?
Jess--they are convinced with the faith of the true believer that they (and only they) know what's best for you.
You might add to the list the incompetence of the VA in forwarding GI bill checks. It's not like this is a new program or anything!
We all know that it's nothing but a government power grab, presented as compassion. They always use that excuse.
Anything that has to do with the government is a SNAFU. It is the natural order of things. To expect anything different is to be living in a world with rose colored glasses. This extends to the state and local level. I believe that there is a lab somewhere that specializes in producing government drones specifically for this purpose.
Once upon a time the government had a vast scrap yard in the middle of a desert. Congress said, "someone may steal from it at night.." So they created a night watchman position and hired a person for the job at $18,000 per year..
Then Congress said, "How does the watchman do his job without instruction?" So they created a planning department and hired two people, one person to write the instructions, and one person to do time studies.
Then Congress said, "How will we know the night watchman is doing the tasks correctly?" So they created a Quality Control department and hired two people. One to do the studies and one to write the reports.
Then Congress said, "How are these people going to get paid?" So they created the following positions, a time keeper, and a payroll officer, then hired two people.
Then Congress said, "Who will be accountable for all of these people?" So they created an administrative section and hired three people, an Administrative Officer, Assistant Administrative Officer, and a Legal Secretary.
Then Congress said, "We have had this command in operation for one Year and we are $18,000 over budget, we must cutback overall cost."
So they laid off the night watchman.
NOW slowly. Let it sink in. Quietly, we go like sheep to slaughter.
Does anybody remember the reason given for the establishment of the DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY .... During the Carter Administration? Anybody? Anything?
Didn't think so!
Bottom line. We've spent several hundred billion dollars in support of an agency ... the reason for which not one person who reads this can remember! Anyone??
Ready?? It was very simple ... and, at the time, everybody thought it very appropriate. The Department of Energy was instituted on 8-04-1977. TO LESSEN OUR DEPENDENCE ON FOREIGN OIL.
Hey, pretty efficient, huh???
AND, NOW, IT'S 2009 -- 32 YEARS LATER -- AND THE BUDGET FOR THIS "NECESSARY" DEPARTMENT IS AT $24.2 BILLION A YEAR. THEY HAVE 16,000 FEDERAL EMPLOYEES AND APPROXIMATELY 100,000 CONTRACT
EMPLOYEES; AND, LOOK AT THE JOB THEY HAVE DONE! THIS IS WHERE YOU SLAP YOUR FOREHEAD AND SAY, "WHAT WERE THEY THINKING?"
Ah, yes -- good ole bureaucracy. And, NOW, we are going to turn the banking system, HEALTH CARE and the auto industry over to the same Government? WHAT HAS THE DOE ACCOMPLISHED IN THEIR 32 YEAR EXISTENCE?
Isnít this just another example of a government supported PONZI SCHEME?????
Some links to info on the DOE
BD hits it right on the head, plain and simple. We should all recognize a power grab when we see one, no matter how packaged. The Obama Admin's power grab is, thank God, causing a great deal of anger and resentment across the USA. They are determined to have their way despite being told "No!", over and over again.
The Opposition is finally galvanized, let's hope it stays that way until this lot is unceremoniously given the boot in 2010 and 2012. However, the damage is being compounded daily, weekly, monthly and we may not have much left to salvage in another 12-15 months, let alone 24.
What have we ever done to deserve these bastards? Is it some kind of sick joke inflicted upon us by the angry Gods in the Heavens? Or, is it just a warning to always observe caveat emptor, to read what is on the label for all to see? They need to be sent packing, and soon, no compromise, no accomodation, no splitting the difference. Outta here!
You remember, punter ... "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time by the blood of patriots and tyrants," as Jefferson said.
Maybe this is our time ...
Indeed MM, and thankfully you Texans seem to be leading the opposition to the biggest, most dangerous bunch of fools ever to descend on Washington. We can't possibly be rid of them soon enough and once gone, we all must take responsibilty to insure they never return again.
"Where have you gone Joe McCarthy, a nation turns it's lonely eyes to you?" When you look at this dreadful lot, you can now understand why take-no-prisoner types like Joe McCarthy are necessary from time-to-time. Even the Kennedy's understood that- Joe The Bootlegger and chip off the old block, Bobby.
"1. Permit interstate competition among insurance companies ..."
I think I know what you mean, why aren't policy types from A available in B, but the problem is not that there is no desire for competing but rather that the regulations vary so widely from State to State, and policy options available in A may actually be illegal in B. With car insurance, the regulations are similar enough that policies can be written to satisfy [almost] all State's regulations.
"2. Portability of insurance - so you own it (that is complicated tho for companies that self-insure)"
The self-insuring employers are in the majority (according to what I read at John Lott's blog site) so that is a major problem. But two other things:
a. You will not get the tax write-off, as your employer does/did/will. That's a lot of money!
b. related, say you are laid off. I think you can, for a while, keep the same coverage (COBRA) , but you will have to pay the full premium. A lot of that was paid by your employer as "benefits" - so your unemployment check is not calculated with that amount as wages/salary...
"3. A law that says you cannot be cancelled if you get sick"
That is actually in the law in many States already. But of course, there is often an "out" for some insurers. E.g. for some time, I had a [fairly cheap] seperate payroll-insurance policy that [among other things] would pay my health insurance policy premiums while I was not working.
"4. State 'pools' for the uninsurable, same as for uninsurable drivers."
Not sure quite what you mean. Pre-existing condition coverage?
Is there a reason that tort reform, to try to bring down the cost of medical malpractice insurance, is not on the list?
I would have thought that The Barrister would have an opinion about this particular issue for health-care reform...
A number of things appearing in the original article are either wrong or misleading.
First, the government includes all political parties. 'Dems' are no more responsible for inappropriate government than Republicans or Independents or whatever. Examine the size of government before and after George Bush and you'll notice government got much bigger, the laws broader and more poorly written, and enforcement agencies paid to sit on their hands and do nothing while billions were being stolen.
Social Security is not bankrupt yet and can be salvaged with intelligent health care reform and modification. It is an example of a very well run program whose flaws are not systematic but structural when it comes to cash flow during bubble population waves.
The Postal Service was not an inefficient agency until recently. It is obsolete therefore no longer feasible - hardly an example of government incompetence.
Welfare as described in this article was a bad program the government ended. Most new businesses fail too but nobody is saying they're against small business because it mostly fails and their employees and taxpayers pay the price of failure.
The rest of the list is equally flawed and concludes with a Stimulus package that, in fact, seems to be working in ending the depression. Yet you choose to dwell on the cost.
But let's address your healthcare "solutions".
Interstate competition is a fine idea assuming that there is a national baseline of quality that's ensured. That means national regulation so that there's not a race to the bottom in terms of cost, coverage, and scope. Healthcare that insures by covering band-aids and aspirin is not a solution. It's a false flag.
Portability? - Great idea. It's called single-payer. look it up here: http://www.pnhp.org/facts/what_is_single_payer.php
A no-cancellation law - Great. But once the disease personally bankrupts your family, how do you pay the premiums?
Pools for the uninsured? That's different from a new tax in what way? That insures that I pay for my healthcare AND get taxed to support uninsured? Shouldn't they pay their fair share?