Drudge Retort: Red Meat for Yellow Dogs
Monday, November 30, 2009

If the politicians who are bent on redesigning the medical and medical-insurance industries really wanted only to curb rising prices and help the uninsured get coverage, they would have zeroed in on the previous government interventions that created those problems. Instead, they are pushing grand schemes to turn our medical decision-making over to bureaucrats.

Liberal Blog Advertising Network

Menu

Subscriptions

Author Info

joe

MORE STORIES

Special Features

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in the discussion of this weblog entry should note the site's moderation policy.

Well they sure have done a bang up job with the post office...

Cask for clunkers too...

Oh yea and the bail outs...

The Unemployment rate...

Oh yes and the Trillion dollar deficits...

Anything run by liberals turns into a joke.

Public schools and Universities are a couple of more to add to the list.

Public schools and Universities are a couple of more to add to the list.

Yeah, all those foreign students are flocking to US universities because they suck so bad.

Did you even go to college?

I agree with this article but, like most written on this subject, it focuses on one segment and not the whole picture.

Yes, the govt is the cause for high healthcare costs.....but we don't want to ignore actions taken by insurance companies either.

IMO, it is just as absurd to accept this as being the only reason as it is to reject this as being a reason.

"This has been called a failure of the free market, but that can't be: There is no free market."

Fine, it's a failure of capitalism. Happy now, dumbass?

Even the Single Payer lobby group is fully on board against the govt run health care monstrosity. Liberals should be on board as well if they are for honest reform.

ItsYourTimes.com

#7

Perhaps you could point out where the link you post says what you say it says?

The whole point of the article is govt-sponsored corporatists cannot reform health care. To them only single-payer would take the corporations out of the loop. I watched their spiel on NPR. I need to find another link that spells it out better.

But, but, but, they've done so well with the postal system...

www.dmnews.com

perhaps this is a better stump

Single Payer: The Plan Not on the Table

http://
seminal.firedoglake.com/diary/
16084
The public plan option is a sham. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the premiums will actually be higher than premiums in the private sector, and fewer than 2 percent of Americans will enroll. So the public plan option will be an expensive, tax-funded subsidy to private health insurance, because the public plan option will take the sickest patients off their hands. It won't expand coverage or decrease costs.

The plan is an insurance industry bailout. Most provisions to expand coverage don't even go into effect until 2013, after which it still leaves at least 17 million Americans uninsured.

Private insurers get millions of mandatory new customers and about $600 billion in taxpayer subsidies.

It forgoes over $400 billion annually in potential savings on overhead and bureaucracy in the health system enough to cover all 47 million uninsured.

It makes private health insurance mandatory for middle-income working people, forcing them to buy a defective product. It will become a federal crime to be uninsured, with a penalty of 2.5 percent of income, starting in 2013. Since the plan institutionalizes different levels of benefits and allows for skimpy plans (e.g. "bronze"), the mandated insurance may not even cover their health needs.

We will have a nation of underinsured families and businesses who will be paying money they can hardly afford for health plans that will never meet their needs.

Individuals and families with incomes up to 400 percent of poverty ($73,240 for a family of 3) are eligible for skimpy subsidies to buy coverage through a new "insurance exchange." Families of very modest means (200-400 percent of poverty) are still responsible for paying an unaffordable 8-12 percent of their income towards health insurance premiums.

The plan bans denials of coverage based on pre-existing conditions (starting in 2013) and recissions (retro-active cancellation of coverage) immediately. But insurers are still allowed to deny claims.

Similarly, caps on out-of-pocket expenses (at $5,000 for individuals and $10,000 for families) don't prevent medical bankruptcy because they don't include expenses for uncovered services.

Insurers are supposed to spend 85 percent of premiums on care, but insurers are able to circumvent this rule easily by categorizing administrative expenses as "clinical" or "quality improvement."

The problem with health care 'reform' is that Democrats still think it's 1935 and the government has to run everything.

Big Government socialism is always a failure.

The places where single payer works are places where health care is not used as a political wedgie by the party in power, or expanding coverage for political donors. You already know that in the U.S., if there was enough campaign contribution, something like cosmetic hair transplants would suddenly be covered.

I think Singapore has one of the best approaches. Providers are mostly PRIVATE and compete on quality and price. Everyone is required to buy insurance, and also required to have a Medical Savings Account -- which they use to pay most day-to-day expenses.

MSAs compel people to consider costs, and they ration at the individual level: Do I really need to go to the doctor today?

But a system like that would spoil all the designs of Democrats, who want to be the Lords of Power over everybody, and manipulate the lives of everyone. Singapore doesn't have Death Panels.

the cbo...which libs are quoting on another thread came out with info showing where govt option would cost more in a fairly short period of time..
no surprise there..

but these medicare cuts....the left talks about us all the time and we havent heard much from them about this
AS IN...it wasnt that long ago that a republican congress and white house wanted to make some cuts of around 30 or so million from medicare AND NOW those same people are basing 'savings' on HALF A TRILLION in medicare cuts...

hhhhhhhhhhhmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
mm

Comments are closed for this entry.


Drudge Retort

Home | News | Comments | User Blogs | Nooner | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Copyright 2012 World Readable