Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Monday, June 22, 2009
Star Parker :: Townhall.com Columnist
The uninsured: A bogus excuse for trillions in new welfare spending
by Star Parker
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
 
Poll
Was the Copenhagen Global Warming Summit Walk-Out a Win for the U.S.?


The Democrats' health care initiative reminds me of the joke about the Boy Scout fighting on a street corner with an old lady.

When a passerby asked what was going on, the scout said, "I'm trying to help her across the street but she refuses to go."

Health insurance, so far, is not mandatory by law, and we've got 16 percent of the population -- 47 million or so -- without it. Auto insurance is mandatory by law, and according to the Insurance Research Council, 14 percent of drivers nationwide still don't buy it.

Government can't make people do what they don't want to do. And it can't change human nature. Political freedom and capitalism work so well because they reflect the truth that human beings have free choice. But this means individuals take personal responsibility.

The left has always been in denial about this, which is why they're endlessly trying to expand government and reduce freedom. They see individuals as hapless victims the state must take care of.

During the presidential campaign, Barack Obama said "The reason people don't have health insurance isn't because they don't want it. It's because they can't afford it."

This is largely not true.

According to a new study from the Employment Policy Institute, authored by two economists from City University of New York (one, June O'Neill, spent four years as head of the Congressional Budget Office), 43 percent of the 47 million can afford insurance and choose not to purchase it.

According to 2007 census data, 20 percent of uninsured households earn over $75,000.

Regarding the remaining 57 percent, the authors call them "involuntarily" uninsured because they can't afford insurance. But "involuntarily" is also a misnomer, because it implies no connection in how they choose to live to the fact that they can't afford insurance.

The study provides the following portrait of this population: About a third are high school dropouts; they are disproportionately young; about a third are immigrants, mostly Hispanic non-citizens; about half are single without children; about 40 percent did not work during the year.

Pulling immigrants out of the equation, we're left with an uninsured population that can't afford insurance that is about a third the size of the widely quoted 47 million. It's a population that is generally poor, young, uneducated, and not working.

We're already set up to deal with these folks. Either through Medicaid or covering their emergency room visits. The operative question is do we want to further institutionalize this reality into a new national health care plan involving trillions in new taxes and programs.

I think the answer is clear: No.

What should we do?

A recent study by consulting firm McKinsey & Company on American education estimates our annual GDP would increase by $500 billion if the educational performance of black and Latino kids is raised to the national average. Otherwise stated, it is costing us $500 billion per year to not do this.

This dwarfs the excessive costs in health care that our president now calls our No. 1 economic problem.

It is simply not credible for Obama to propose taxing Americans trillions to subsidize health care when he refuses to come to grips with why so many are poor.

Open the door to millions of poor kids out of broken families, broken public schools, and the cycle of poverty through school choice. Give them the opportunity to go to church schools.

Rather than perpetuating poverty through further institutionalization of the welfare state, expose poor kids to the values and education necessary to enable them to make the right choices for their lives.

There is no future for a nation of victims, whether we're talking about health care or anything else. But there is a great future for a country of responsible, free people.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Star Parker is the founder and president of CURE, the Coalition for Urban Renewal & Education, a 501c3 think tank which explores and promotes market based public policy to fight poverty, as well as author of White Ghetto: How Middle Class America Reflects Inner City Decay.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
Star
How unrealistic it is to make people free of the government. What would the politicians do with no one to take care of?

Uninsured
Uninsured driver gets in an accident, car is written off, they are out of luck. If they hit someone by accident and don't have insurance, they will get sued and probably lose their house and go bankrupt.

Uninsured health people need surgery, probably lose their house and go bankrupt.

Insured health people need surgery, insurance company doesn't want to pay, they lose their house and go bankrupt.

This is unacceptable.

The conservative myth that universal health care is bad needs to end.

I Bet You Libs...

Are the possibly Philippians that entered Italy with Kennedy bearer bonds that were dated in the 1930s worth over $260bn.

And, that you can sing like Susan Boyles.

And, believe in the spew of Michael Moore.

And, are certain that Martians exist and are walking the Earth.

And, know the words of L'Internationale.

And, believe that neither Progressivism nor the 1960s died.

And, homosexuals can procreate.

Your cancer is killing the patient, America.

Ouck Obama and you.

War Trillions
The left is, aptly so, saying that the right is willing to spend untold trillions killing people in Iraq, but are unwilling to spend trillions on taking care of people at home.

It is a bogus argument, except the people will listen to it.

The arrogant right has never, ever felt compelled to explain why they felt it was ok to spend trillions on Iraq. To bad American Tax payer. Suck it up.

But now with health care, the right is getting all sanctimonious.

Not going to hold water.

The Democrats are going to get their way on this, in part because Republican hubris elevates them above any explanation about the trillions wasted in Iraq.

Vampire's Reflection

Robert Gibbs was unable to name a SINGLE country where government-run health care has succeeded. Not ONE.

And, do NOT call me Ma'am.


Lastly, I am on the record as being opposed to GWB's spending, bailouts, war efforts, etc. Further, I was against many of Daddy Bush's actions.

Replace the blood with a tinfoil hat.

The Party of the "little" people
They are against vouchers.
They support abortion on demand.
They were/are willing to break up poor families (paid "single" mothers).
They support the teacher's unions.
They support trial lawyers.
They support amnesty for illegal immigrants.
They refuse to fix Medicare.
They refuse to fix Medicaid.
They refuse to fix Social Security.
They hate the Military unless there is a base in their district.
They hate corporations (the creators of wealth).
They think Bill Maher is funny.

Church Schools?
OOH, Star...NOW you get to the root of the problem..that God's direction is the missing X in this algebraic equation.
Our Country was established by men of religious character, built by generations of dependance and reliance on God. Since our government, like Communist Russia, forbids even mentioning Jesus, how can God bless America, unless we bless His Name?
May God have mercy on us, and heal our land!
Helen

The government is ENABLING
How do you MAKE a person responsible for their own actions? How can you "teach" and "educate" people who do not wish to learn? (Why should they learn and get a job when they can get what they want without lifting a finger?) Many people are on Medicaid and even though they have "free" health care, they will not go to the doctor for regular checkups or at the first sign of illness. (It takes time to make an appointment). They utilize the emergency room as their "primary" medical care. This adds up to an abuse that costs the welfare system millions if not billions of dollars. Some people CHOOSE to be on welfare. It is much easier to have someone else give them what they want and need than to actually get off their kiesters and work for it. Please understand, that I am not talking about the ones who truly NEED and are frugal with their welfare assistance. I am talking about the ones who make it a lifestyle. If we go to socialized medicine, that particular trend is most likely going to grow.

It always the value system
"Rather than perpetuating poverty through further institutionalization of the welfare state, expose poor kids to the values and education necessary to enable them to make the right choices for their lives."

My poor kids who break the cycle (and there are many who do) do it by adhering to a value system that prioritizes hard work, delaying/forgoing instant gratification, and focusing on education. Given the service climate, which is quick to diagnose and accommodate the destructive behaviors, this is no easy task. Today's social workers have to help people recognize the need to AVOID the various systems and then help them do that.

As for the uninsured, I have never met anyone in 26 years of sw practice who has been denied medical care- not once.

Vampire's Reflection
Your position is nonsensical. I picture a well provided for, ignorant, sputtering college student at the other end of your thoughtless words.

It's a Scam
Medicare and Medicaid were sold to us on the premise that we needed to insure 4 million to keep them from driving up costs. Yes, that's worked wonders.

Tyler, if you want to blame anything on people losing houses, you can blame Government. It's 100% on the backs of medical regulation, Medicare and Medicaid that drove up care costs to the point where it would cause them to lose houses and go bankrupt. More taxing and more entitlements just grows the uninsured.

Liberals didn't Like first Creation

In the beginning God created the Universe and created a man and woman.

This made Liberals very angry and they considered God's creation a 'Bad Move'.

Man and woman found that little on the Earth was suited for their survival and they had to work hard to meet their needs.

This made Liberals even angrier, because everything wasn't given to them.

God told the man and woman to procreate and have children.

Liberals began calling children 'Mistakes', because they didn't like responsibilities and more work, so this made Liberals even angrier and they began exterminating as many babies as possible to soothe their anger.

The man and woman found they were 'Different', in their roles and sexuality, this made Liberals even angrier and they began exchanging roles and called themselves 'Metrosexual' and 'Feminist' instead of man and woman.

God told the man and the woman to bond together and become 'One in Marriage' forsaking all others.

This angered Liberals even more and they began choosing to become Homosexuals and not procreate, so that they wouldn't have the little 'Mistakes' and they exchanged 'Love' for 'Lust'.

Liberals began calling this exchange 'Normal Behavior' and God's plan for men and women 'Abnormal'.

God created mankind equal, with 'Inalienable Rights' and this made Liberals insane with rage.

Liberals began sorting out humans and placing them in classes and categories where some classes of humans were more 'Equal than Others' and determined they would decide 'Rights'.

Liberals began 'Stealing' from the producers and those who worked hard, made good decisions and lived by God's directives and giving those 'Stolen Goods' to the indolent and those who refused to work and make good decisions.

Liberals began calling this stealing for 'Equal Outcomes', Patriotic, and a 'Sacrifice for the Common Good'.

Liberals then looked at what they had created and called it 'Social Justice'.

Misleading statistic
Star Parker says: "According to 2007 census data, 20 percent of uninsured households earn over $75,000." True. Here's the rest of the story: if someone in that uninsured household has a chronic ailment (the majorify of which are given to individuals by God and not by "lifestyle choice"), an ailment like diabetes, congenital heart defect, epilepsy, cancer survivor, asthma, basal cell skin cancer, etc., individual health insurance plans are UNAVAILABLE that would cover that household. Unavailable at any price. The household income is irrelevant; the private health insurance companies will NOT sell a plan to a household that includes an individual with such conditions.

What happens to that family? 60% of all bankruptcies occur because of medical bills.

Reply
oldsocialworker said: "As for the uninsured, I have never met anyone in 26 years of sw practice who has been denied medical care- not once. "

That's because you are in New Jersey. Here in Georgia I have witnessed with my own eyes individuals without insurance being denied medical care. The only requirement here in Georgia is that medical care must be provided if the individual will die within 24 hours without the care. Otherwise, no $$ no care. Approximately 22,000 Americans die every year solely because they lack health insurance and hence lack access to timely care.

Star great column....
This article was one of the clearest descriptions of what is wrong with our current national policies that I have read. Thanks.

Have an ObamaLaugh!

WHEN is we had ENOUGH: ENOUGH ?

NOWHERE in our constitution does it state that everyone has a “RIGHT" to health care or free health care.

And so on.

NO WHERE in our Constitution does it give this self anointed Dictator and his corrupt criminal administration, and the corrupt criminal democrat controlled congress the power or rights to STEAL the assets and powers of the law abiding private sector from the Legal Citizens, Legal Shareholders, Legal Patent holders, Legal Trade Mark holders and squander it to appease the parasites, the leeches, the lawless, the illegal invaders, those who get them elected and then reward the corrupt criminal elected and appointed leaders with unlimited powers over our lives and labors.


We the people have allowed them to take away our rights, liberties, freedom and all rights to self-determination.

SO NOW, WE the people must rise up and reclaim all that has been lost, stolen and deliberately destroyed by the corrupt criminal Federal and State governments.

We must make the sacrifice to educate and lead the movement to reverse the critical damage these enemies of the state have inflicted.

BE there JULY 4th

FIRE UP THE PHONES AND EMAILS

Health Care/Obama Care
Kudos to you Star, Love your clarity of thought on this issue. I work for a healthcare industry and know they offer free/low care for uninsured for medical care, drugs, etc., and constantly see these patients coming into the ER in dire straits because they do not get the meds that are FREE to keep them healthy. These are choices adults are making for themselves. They cannot be forced to take care of themselves. So, they end up costing the system even more because they are so sick when they finally arrive at the ER. These are the folks Obama claims he will "help" with socialized medicine. Bah Humbug

Tyler
Lets take your post to its logical conlusion.
Scenario 1: Person needs surgery..govt bureaucrat says they're too old and its too costly. Patient is paying huge taxes for Obama care and will be comforted to know he will die soon and no longer have to pay.
Scenario 2: Younger person needs surgery, govt bureaucrat puts patient on 2 year waitng list. Patient is rather well-to-do. Patient goes outside system for surgery. Paient and Dr are arrested. Everybody pays 50% (or more) in income taxes to pay for a system that is worse than we have now

Two thoughts:
1. It's not about providing health care; it's about controllong health care--who gets to be in charge.

2. You can't make folks get educated any more than you can make them live a healthy life, including having health care, regular check-ups, etc.

Otherwise, a good column as usual from Star.

Sorry Georgiagal you are wrong
First Ms Parker let me say once again you have written a column that gets the facts right and presents them in cogent way. Now.....

Georgiagal - Star wasn't saying the families making 75K + couldn't be devastated by a catastrophic illness. What she was saying was if they are making 75K (in most areas of the country) they can afford to BUY health insurance so they WOULD NOT be forced into bankruptcy if the worst happens. And in most states they wouldn't even have to buy insurance on the market for their children because they would be
covered for about $15 per month per child by SCHIP.

Now as to your assertion that in Georgia they are only required to provide treatment if the patient is going to die with 24 hours is a bunch of "tripe" (old English word/expression - look it up if you are not familiar with it). They may have to wait a while but they will be seen - at least to determine if there is a problem that needs to be addressed.

GeorgiaGal - Question for you?

GeorgiaGal wrote: "...Approximately 22,000 Americans die every year solely because they lack health insurance and hence lack access to timely care."

I am in the process of assembling 'Facts' about Health Care - would you post a link verifying your statistic, so I can add it to my database?

Thanks.

Hey Georgiegirl
Heres the only FACT on this board. You will NEVER EVER put a GOVT program together that will effectively (cost, care etc) take care of EVERYBODY!

NEVER! The Obamaniacs want CONTROL and thought there are SOME cases of people going down the tubes do to med conditions, those people need HELP we do NOT have to literally DESTROY our entire system in order to do this.

This is DEF the most moronic admin in this neations HISTORY! Do YOU want to be part of it??

I don't. T

Excellent article
In addition to the 20% that make in excess of $75,000 there is another almost 20% that make $50,000-$75,000. A good portion of those could probably afford their own insurance if they chose, also. I make less than $20,000 a year and have employer provided insurance. $2000 out of pocket max. For this I pay the exorbitant price of $8 a week. Yet many people I work with complain that they "can't afford" it, even though they can afford fancy cell phones, acrylic nails, and satellite TV.

Ms. Parker
There is an element of health care, which no one has acknowledged. The real "Public Option", rest with the counties. Every county health facility should be incorporated into the President's plan. With half of America's population, at or below the age of 46, prevention should be a point of concentration. This can be addressed by having the young attend county clinics. At these county clinics,they would be screen for all possible diseases. Once per year,they would pay a $100.00 fee for this and other services. There are statistical advantages to this type health infrastructure as well. Many of the tracking methods can applied to this process,giving us a monitor for trends. This is a great chance for America and the WORLD. I "Hope" the time for "Change" is not victimized by ignorance?

STOP STONEWALLING HEALTH CARE REFORM
The main reason for health care reform is that the current system, however convenient for wealthy Americans, is FINANCIALLY UNSUSTAINABLE and is BANKRUPTING the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, and UNDERMINING the health care systems of other countries (e.g., by drawing off specialists from Canada, the UK, Australia, etc.). We need to CAP MALPRACTICE AWARDS, FIND A NEW, FASTER, MORE EFFICIENT WAY TO TEACH SPECIALTY MEDICINE SO IT DOESN'T REQUIRE SUCH COSTLY INVESTMENTS OF STUDENT TIME, AND RE-BRAND THE MEDICAL PROFESSION, so it doesn't attract so many greedy professionals, and CAN THRIVE WITH LOWER PAYOUTS.

CT Tom
I agree with your position that the health care scam is about controlling the people. Furthermore, I think it is about getting rid of Social Security recipients. When there aren't enough doctors or hospitals to go around to all those younger people demanding service, those who have lived out their usefulness and are costing the government lots of money via Social Security and Medicare will, at best, be put last in line for services. I'm greatly concerned that the government will begin to implement "involuntary euthanasia," as was done to Terry Schiavo, for those who can't "carry their own weight," young or old.

I think we're witnessing the rise of the Fourth Reich.

Whistling in the dark
Any person who can read, knows our Constitution does not cover in any way government intervention into health care.

But how could they have possibly concieved how far we would have progressed ?

Drugs created to extend life.
Social security going bankrupt due to increased life expectancy and shortened work life.
Health care experiencing the same crisis.
A little nip N tuck, botox those unsightly lines away. How many billions are spent each year on cosmetic medicine each year ?

Man was not naturally designed to live this long.
In his quest to avoid the inevitable and secure himself. Man is dragging his legacy down with him.

I continually read that government health care will inevitably lead to rationed care.

If mans continual drive to avoid the proverbial bullet continues to lead us down the road of bankruptcy ?

Who else but the person we elect to make hard choices can do just that ? And what other choice do we the people give them ?

In the end, Nobody gets out alive. Question remains, Not who will I take with me, But how many ?

Of course
and none of this is rocket science. Any person with an ounce of common sense could figure this out.

This is why I don't buy the notion that Obama is misguided. A graduate of Harvard knows all of this. Obama does not want a successful and prosperous population in this country. He and the rest of the Democrats want a population that is poor, ignorant and dependant because they are easy to control and will never become a threat to government power.

Pleas and bargaining will not stop the move to totalitarianism in this country. The spirits of Hitler and Stalin are alive and well and living in Washington. We can’t “throw the bums out” as many suggest because the bums have too many on their payroll. It will take another revolution and I’m sorry to say a lot of dead Americans before we reverse the tide.

Info left out
“According to a new study from the Employment Policy Institute, authored by two economists from City University of New York (one, June O'Neill, spent four years as head of the Congressional Budget Office), 43 percent of the 47 million can afford insurance and choose not to purchase it”

I would have to see this study myself. What criteria do the authors use to determine who can and cannot afford health insurance? For those who can afford health insurance-according to their standards- what type of coverage can they afford? Just being able to buy some sort of insurance does not mean that the insurance that’s available is quality coverage. Heck, when I was a teenager I worked at a fast food joint that offered insurance, put the premiums were so out of proportion of what I was making it would have been a waste of time.

Elephant in the room.
Elephant seems an appropriate icon for the GOP in this case.

No one here wants to admit that Republicans spent trillions of dollars on Iraq with no accounting. Heck, they even cut taxes! Wooo hooo!

You think the American people are so stupid that they look at the 10 billion/day we are spending in Iraq and going, "you know, the Republicans were so responsible with spending in Iraq. The had this plan, what was it called again, oh you the New Operation Plan, or NO Plan. You can always trust Republicans to be fiscally responsible and not doing anything irresponsible, like cut taxes and then spend trillions additional money in a time of war, thereby hugely running up the deficit."

You folks really believe in your hearts the American people are that stupid.

Your denials and your dismissals may make you feel self-righteous, but the American people are ready to spend 1 trillion on something they perceive as good for them.

And you have no one to blame but yourselves, the Democrats have to go a LONG LONG LONG way before they beat the irresponsibility of the first president in history to cut taxes in war time.

Why do you think the American people would ever give you folks the time of day on fiscal responsibility? Wall Street executives got billions of free dollars on Bush's watch.

Saying "fiscal responsibility" and "Republican" as in "Republicans are the fiscally responsible party" is a joke of the guffawest order. Then there is the corruption of K street.

Not a single shred of integrity or respectability is left with respect to fiscal conduct by Republicans.

Which means Democrats get to do whatever.

Nice.


Bogus study
“Pulling immigrants out of the equation, we're left with an uninsured population that can't afford insurance that is about a third the size of the widely quoted 47 million”

I gather it is by using the illegal immigrants in conjunction with the Employment Institute study that Mrs. Parker reduces the uninsured to 1/3. However the study needs to be examined more closely to understand what economic criteria the authors use to make a determination about who can and cannot afford health insurance. I looked at this bogus report and from the outset it debunks itself by stating the following:

“Like the poverty threshold, an index of ability to pay for health insurance is bound to differ with the eye of the beholder.” It goes on to say: “We accept some arbitrariness in exchange for simplicity, an important policy consideration”……… “It becomes more of a challenge to distinguish the involuntary from the voluntary when we consider the 23.7million uninsured persons who are in households with incomes between $25,000 and $75,000 who make up 50.5 percent of the uninsured. In this range, it is obviously more difficult to determine a reasonable standard for “ability-to-pay”

The study states that the standards are subjective about who can pay who cannot pay. Yet Mrs. Parker accepts the studies conclusions about who can pay and who cannot pay as if they are unequivocal truth. The authors clearly state that these are their determinations and it should be understood that another research would be able to come up with different conclusions based on the subjectivity of who can pay and who cannot. Here’s the actual study for those who want to see: http://epionline.org/studies/oneill_06-2009.pdf

Holy Cow!! Do I Love This Woman!!!
Star Parker offers, "Rather than perpetuating poverty through further institutionalization of the welfare state, expose poor kids to the values and education necessary to enable them to make the right choices for their lives.

There is no future for a nation of victims, whether we're talking about health care or anything else. But there is a great future for a country of responsible, free people."

Well said!!!

Star Parker is spot on, simpatico, with my view. Besides, Americans want jobs and freedom first. Get the government off our backs, open the free market to healthcare, drop taxes, drop minimum wages and the economy will blossom with jobs that allow us to afford any healthcare we want.

Single Payer (power) reality
Here is the end result of the inevitable single payer program for health care that Obama desires (but won't admit to). A single entity is responsible for making the desicions of who will receive treatment and how much the providers will be compensated. A PAC composed of surgeons lobbies said entity inspiring them to compensate surgeons at a higher rate than they do for say pediatricians. A wealthy politically connected individual contracts cancer, and is somehow able to avoid the long wait that other cancer patients experience and receive immediate treatment. Politicians with oversight responsibilities over the Healthcare governing board are caught with thousands of dollars stashed in their refrigerator.

School Choice
I agree with this, but church schools are just not going to fly because the feds can't fund a religous school, even indirectly. I disagree with this personally, I'm an atheist but I don't think it's a violation of the establishment clause if parents choose to use some kind of school-choice tax rebate to send their children to Catholic school, homeschool them, or whatever. After all, I could use a rebate like that to send my kids to a secular private school if I wanted.

My next thought was that maybe a school choice plan would fly if it was only for secular private schools, but even then there's a lot of opposition to the idea of encouraging ANY alternative means of education.

I suggest that communities do more to raise money for scholarships to private schools, I think this is a case where we'll need to work around the government.

Americans Want Jobs, Not Healthcare
Vampire's Reflection offers, "No one here wants to admit that Republicans spent trillions of dollars on Iraq with no accounting. Heck, they even cut taxes! Wooo hooo!"

That is just stupid. Everyone knows that war was bi-partisan. Do you really think any one party ever runs Washington? Really? Tell that to Clinton. Tell that to Bush. Heck, even Obama is learning how stupid that thought is.

Wars are not perpetual. Healthcare is. What is spent in war ends with the war. What is spent in healthcare continues forever.

Also, war is part of the constitution, "... to provide common defense ..". It was a fully bi-partisan effort. So far, government sponsored healthcare is strictly a partisan effort for population control through government largesse.

War is not a permanent infringement on our freedoms, healthcare is.

Wars have cost ~800B over ~8years
As of 2009 both wars have cost ~800billion over ~8 years and the democracy in Iraq is aleady paying dividends. (See IRAN)
********
Now compare that to Medicare:
The 2005 Medicare trustees’ report estimates that providing promised Medicare benefits over just the next 10 years could require over $2.7 Trillion.
The Medicare trustees project that providing promised Medicare benefits over the next 75 years would require $29.9 trillion in new tax revenues.
FROM: http://www.heritage.org/Research/HealthCare/wm880.cfm
***********
*************

As far at "preventative" medicine saving untold Billions, its a bunch of crap, and another con job (lie).

New Enlgland Journal of medicine: http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/358/7/661
************

So in summary Every single goverment program has cost much more than stated. And they did not missed it by a little, but by TRILLIONS. So they now expect us to believe they will get right this time, while destroying the system we currently have.


vampire
You won't find very many conservatives that supporte the republican largess. You erroneously identify George W. as a conservative. It is true that conservatives voted for him in two elections as the lesser of two evils,but that doesn't make him a conservative. His actions proved otherwise. What I don't understand is your justification of Obama's stupidity, by saying that Bush was pretty stupid too. If Bush was a failure why do you support Obama for doing even more of the same? He hasn't stopped spending in Iraq, and he has increased spending in Afghanistan. His bailouts and takeover of the Auto and banking industries make Bushes efforts in the same area miniscule by comparison. Bushes prescription medicare program expenditures are nothing compared to the healthcare plans of Obama. You voted for "change" and got an even bigger dose of "more of the same."

Employment Over Hand-outs, Anyday!
Anthony Thomas as to a study that marginalizes the statistic of how many people are without health insurance, "I would have to see this study myself."

You miss the point. Star Parker is simply offering that the often quoted 47 million people without insurance is a straw dog created to inflate shock into buying Obama's dream of public control over the masses. The reality is that of the 47 Million people the Government could possibly cover would be no more than leaving it alone.

Missing the point
You people are so in denial.

First, I'm a Ron Paul libertarian. I was against the Iraq war on both the constitutional and financial front.

Second, the truth pales in comparison to what the American people believe. You think Americans, in their minds, associate the Iraq war spending with Democrats?

Republicans crying wolf over health care fiscal responsibility IS the point.

Denial, Part II
"Political freedom and capitalism work so well because they reflect the truth that human beings have free choice. "

Unh, hunh.

So, why did the bankers on Wall Street get free easy billions? Where is mine is what the American TAX PAYER is saying.

CEOs exercise their free choice when CEO A sits on the board of CEO B's company, CEO B sits on the board of CEO C's company, who sits on the board of CEO A's company. They all vote to raise their salary's year end and year out! And Republicans defend that free choice! Meanwhile during all 8 years of the Bush administrations, the national average salary is pegged to $36,000/year. Oh, yeah, free choice baby.

Capitialism free choice at its finest as excercised by the Fortune 500 CEOs. Vote yourselves money, come profit, loss, merger or bankruptcy! Meanwhile the average work doesn't even get a raise to match inflation!

Wooo hooo! I want my free choice!

Reference
http://www.familiesusa.org/ is a good source for information on the state of healthcare in the USA.

Vampire
Why is it rather than accept a suggestion that it would be wise to study facts, you head off on a tirade about the republicans and Iraq? Screw the parties. Any thinking person would study the facts before approving a massive spending spree. Do you really think Wall Street is a republican deal? I read just this morning that Goldman Sachs is enjoying record profits and huge bonuses and who has control now? And you have the gall to say conservatives are arrogant? Whoopee for the democrats; America still fails.

Everyone knows that war was bi-partisan
Really? Only Republicans seeking to skate away fromthe responsibility for the Iraq War mess believe that "Everyone knows that war was bi-partisan."

Healthcare reform will cost less than the Iraq War, with better longterm benefits to Americans.

GeorgiaGal
"Healthcare reform will cost less than the Iraq War, with better longterm benefits to Americans."

Thanks for my laugh of the day

It will cost $64,000 per person
added to insurance coverage to implement the 'universal' coverage. For an average of about $10,000 per year, you can buy decent coverage for a family -- so why not just pay for policies for those who 'can't afford' them? Why screw up the system we have that delivers good care for the majority -- then market-based reforms can be phased in over a period of years, as necessary.

A dose of reality--
This morning's Dallas Morning News, front page bottom has a column about the lack of primary care doctors since the med. schools are not turning out enough doctors in that area (paraphrasing), try to look this up and read it. If we continue to treat all these illegals and their anchor rats, plus the so called "refugees from these so called 3rd world countries" , then where are enough medical doctors going to come from?
If these dummies want to bring in these "poor mud face refugees" then make them be their sole provider, not the rest of us.
BTW we have medical doctors in our family who just can't believe what is happening.
Excellent column by Star as usual.

This is so simple...
Just copy a system that has been working for decades, take the money employers spend on health care and put it into the program, charge us via our W2, put in sin taxes, cut costs by negotiations and lets get on with it. Everyone else in the industrialized world figured this out ages ago.

Bottom Line here!
The bottom line here is there are people who don't have health care insurance because they don't need it and don't feel the need to pay for something they don't need at this point in life. Illegal Aliens don't deserve to have tax payer paid health care, they are law breakers and shouldn't be here to start with and the people that do need it and can't afford it have already been as Ms. Parker stated have already been taken care of. Last but certianly NOT least we need to learn a lesson from our northern neighbors and our allies across the pond and a lot of other countries that have government sponsered medical care and it DOES NOT WORK. You pay more and more taxes and get less medical treatment............if/when the government lets you have medical treatment. In Canada you have to be approved by the government to see a doctor. So if you want a government offical making the judgement call concerning your need to see a doctor the we all will have a problem. Look what they have done to our economic stiuation, more debt and higher taxes.........................AND NOTHING HAS IMPROVED YET!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Frank
You are from Cali, so we understand you are clueless...

"Just copy a system that has been working for decades, take the money employers spend on health care and put it into the program". Sounds wonderful Frank, except everywhere else this has been tried it is going bankrupt!

"Everyone else in the industrialized world figured this out ages ago. " Where in the world has this been figured out? Oh wait let me qualify my question.. Where in the world has this been figured out that it works to the level of care we already have here and they don't ration care and create tons of suffering due to long waiting periods? Where else in the world have they perfected life saving proceedures? Where else in the world....?

I will help you answer my questions.. Because I know you are from Cali and kinda out of the loop on things.. NO WHERE in the WORLD!

Hey SuperStar
I think the Urban League is going to be very upset with you, when they read your article. This Health Care crap God is pushing is not just bogus, it is an outright Lie like most of the things they do. I think it is worst than than the 400,000 or 180,000 numbers they use.
We just passed the SCHIPPs Program for the Children, but I have been having a real problem trying to determine what children the programs helps. I know none of the single parent households in my family qualify. Perhaps some of the enlightened Liberals on TH could tell me where I could go to find out. If that plan is successful, I would consider becoming a cigarette smoker so I can do my part to support the Health Care for the Children. Or would the Children be covered under ObamaCare and SCHIPPS no longer needed. Liberals.. please Help!!

Frank
Also..

What about those that don't work... Oh wait, medicare and medicaid... Those are sound government programs..

I see comedy in your future..

Some Get Sidetracked Away From Issues
Vampire's Reflection offers, "Second, the truth pales in comparison to what the American people believe. You think Americans, in their minds, associate the Iraq war spending with Democrats?"

Well, if you can't handle the truth, continue to live in dream land, a Ron Paul specialty.

The rest of us, need to live with realities. And, realities are that government run enterprises, void of competitive pressures, tend to stagnate versus free enterprises that continue to evolve due to competitive forces.

BaseballFan
I can see you must be blind because state and federally sponsored health care systems work here and abroad despite your inability to grasp this basic truth due to your disability. If you actually understood this issue and cared about health care you would shut up and listen, perhaps learn. But you prefer to believe in your jingoistic nonsense instead of trying to solve a problem rationally. We do not have the best health care system and our set up costs the most to boot.

Finally wake up and smell the coffee...
To all the slow pony liberals who can't figure out why we had to fight in both Iraq and Iran, the last couple of weeks in Iran have shown you the answer.

You have in the axis of evil the ability to not only control almost 50% of the world's oil but with the nuclear technology of North Korea the nuclear might to provide terrorists with the ability to black mail the world through control of the oil price.

We took out Iraq and Afghanistan so that we would be able to say confidently, yes we have troops on two of Iran's borders and maybe we could help those fighting for freedom in the streets of Iran. Too far fetched? Get a clue. The democrats are not only cowards but the dumbest bunch of woosies I have ever seen. They are no more capable of running anything than they are to be leaders.

Frank
I await your evidence that State and Federally sponsored health care systems work here and abroad..
If you mean as in work, there is some "form" of healthcare, I will agree. But don't let facts get in your way..

Set up costs.. You mean R&D.. In government run healthcare abroad companies can not offset the R&D cost, so the US gets it all. You show your inability to comprehend what you read or hear.

You asked me to listen.. So present your evidence that what you state is fact.

A mixed bag ...
http://andthepointis.wordpress.com/2009/06/15/a-mixed-bag/

Jobs! Not Freebies, Please!
Frank offers, "Just copy a system that has been working for decades, take the money employers spend on health care and put it into the program, charge us via our W2, put in sin taxes, cut costs by negotiations and lets get on with it."

European healthcare system only works by the same method of their national defenses work: The USA covers all risks and innovation!

The USA, a market of competitive players, is the premier innovator of health goods and services. In the USA competitive players vying for Patients' goodwill continue to adapt their efforts, products and services accordingly.

All other countries simply ride on our innovations.

If the USA jumps into the same soup with everyone else, who becomes the attraction of innovation? Trust me, it will not be the patients. Once Government controls healthcare money, any healthcare inventions will be dialed to the Governments benefit, not patients.

Nationalized anything only promises politically correct innovation over citizen correct innovation. Did any of you ever see the Soviet cars after four decades of such thinking? It is as if the world stood still after 1948.

re: Allen
If you carefully read what I wrote you will notice I'm not stating my position.

I'm stating the everyman position. As a Libertarian I'm a capitalist.

But along with freedom of capitalism comes the eternal vigilance. Republicans, who are suppose to be the defenders of freedom and capitalism have conveniently forgotten, the eternal vigilance part. No vigilance and then the nefarious opportunists move in.

For example, as someone who pays attention to such things, I observed that after the Enron debacle, congress passed Sarbanes Oxely. To which Bush gave the almighty finger and promptly cut IN HALF the enforcement staff of the SEC. Half.

Capitalism at its finest has a correct set of minimal regulation. Republicans seem to have lost the "correct" part.

Finally, whatever happened to the Republican party being the party of law enforcement? Without enforcement laws are just pieces of paper.

The rise of socialism is a direct response to Capitalism egress in this country, which in turn is the fault of Republicans who are the champions of the free markets.

Unfortunately Republicans want all the benefits of being free market champions, but none of the vigilance or responsibility.

re: Nickel
You are not paying attention.

The Republicans have never given a public accounting as to how they were going to pay for the Iraq War prior to going to war.

Republicans just did it because it was "necessary".

Now the shoe is on the other foot, Democrats are not going to give an accounting for how they are going to pay for health care.


Democrats are going to do it because it is "necessary", where necessary is defined by public opinion polls about health care being broken.

The point being the Republicans crying "fiscal responsibility" given fiscal conduct with respect to the Iraq war is a joke.

Republicans have no credibility or integrity with respect to fiscal responsibility.

Democrats no have a license to do what they want. Because Republicans couldn't hold themselves fiscally accountable, no one is going to pay them any heed when they try and hold Democrats accountable.

That is the point.
P**sing into the wind.


Vampire
I will agree on many points, but to blame one party or another is pointless.. or P**sing into the wind (great metaphor)

The issues in our government come down to the people. Personal responsibility! To many people have given over their responsibility to the government.. Let someone else worry about it, they will fix it and I won't have to do anything. This is where this country is falling apart.

D's and R's have done nothing except promote party politics. It has long since died in America that politicians governed as directed in the Constituion. We as citizens have failed to enforce this.. Thus we reap our own lack of personal responsibility

Apathy is a disease

Breakdown of the groat's stat
of 45-47 million uninsured:
(*) ALWAYS includes (at least) 12 million MALFEASANT ALIENS (who have no business being in US, and are certainly NOT Americans in the sense of being US citizens--and are not legally eligible for insurance), as well as others who are uninsured for reasons.
(*) oft includes shut-ins (who are covered at TAXPAYER EXPENSE), about 1.5 million-2 million.
(*) includes those TEMPORARILY uninsured (due to job change, expiry of COBRA, ...)

Total VALID numbers of uninsured drop rapidly this way to around 9 millions.

Increasing powers of government
Why would we want to give more power to the central government for the sake of a small percentage of citizens who need healthcare insurance? Did we not leave our parents home so that we could make our own decisions? Did we not leave our parents home so that we could have things for ourselves without our parents telling us what to do? I don't believe many liberals understand the idea of why big government is a bad idea. After I graduated high school, my parents threatened to take away the car that THEY bought for me because I wouldn't go to the college that they wanted me to. They attempted to use that power in order to manipulate a decision that I thought was best for me. I don't like the idea of giving my parents power over my life, so why would I give that power over to anyone else? To add to that, my parents love me. Government does not.

Check your figures, Ms. Parker
You're either lying and building straw men arguments or you need to get your facts from a reliable source -- not Fox News. People who earn 75,000 per year or more do not refuse to buy health insurance because they're not in the mood -- often they or someone in their family suffers from an ailment that these b@stard insurance companies won't cover because it cost them money. Don't try to pull that "the poor made the choice to be poor" crap. The health care system in this country is in horrendous shape with a tremendous disparity between what you pay for insurance and the service you receive. It is completely mismanaged due in large part to the former head-up-his a*s president Bush who cared less about the American people than any president since Richard Nixon. There's no stopping the reform - it will happen. There's a lot of mis-information out there but I guarantee you that those who can afford insurance do get it.

And here's an interesting observation I notice while reading posts on this site: When a child is born of an illegal alien, the child is called an "anchor rat." But, if that same women tries to get an abortion, then you deem her a muderer of a precious life that we can't afford to lose. Did someone say Conservative = Hypocrite? Yup, thought I heard that!

re: baseballfan
yeah, well, unfortunately we are stuck with the two party system.

My mother oft said it is easier to get your own house in order than someone else's. To wit, Republicans need to quit fixating on the Democratic navel and fixate on their own navel.
Republican complete abandonment of any pretense to be fiscally responsible cost them the Libertarian wing of the party.

I am against national health care. However, Republicans are to blame for it happening by abandoning any and all notions of fiscal responsibility. At a minimum Republicans in Congress need to go on record stating that reckless war spending in Iraq by THEM is no excuse to for even more reckless spending on health care.

Americans are not listening to conservatives with respect to fiscal constraint. Not after the last eight years.


Right wing media is mostly fixated on lambasting the left, giving a HUGE free pass to the right.

Time for the Republicans to get their fiscal conservative house in order.
That means time to start holding Republicans feet to the fire and letting the Democrats self-destruct.

Jerry NJ
When an anchor parasite rat is born to an illegal invader, they, and the stud, if he can be identified, need to be shown the Mexican border at the point of a gun.

health care systems
The world has many different types of health care systems, ours being a for profit system where care is rationed by money. If any of you care to go to Europe or Canada and see for yourself then perhaps we can have a meaningful discussion before your ideology turns you into a raving lunatic. I have set up businesses in many countries and have lived overseas. Believe me, all of Europe is better than our system. But the very fact that you or anyone else here even disputes this simple fact shows me where you get your information: Fox, Rush and right wing ideologues. Google comparative health care stats, life expectancy, child deaths, costs per person, % of GNP, etc, etc. You will find the answers if you open your eyes.

The insurance game
Even with good insurance and a disability policy you can still get screwed by a catastrophic illness or injury. I had BC/BS PPO w/ a 80-20 coinsurance,when I discovered that I needed surgery on torn knee cartilage.The copayments and 20% coinsurance for MRI,surgery,and physical therapy cost me THOUSANDS of dollars.(but only missed one day of work)
If you don't want this to happen to you...
GO AFLAC!!!

Intent
Your solution is the perfect answer, the left however benefits most when the poor remain poor, the ignorant remain ignorant and dependent become even more so. We could call it neo-slavery, that would be an accurate term.

boogeymen
So I see the new Republican/conservative tactic to derail health care reform is to perform some fancy math to simplify/reduce down the numbers of the uninsured and make some fantastic assumptions (and more simplifications) about the uninsured with regards to cost and affordability. First, if we are talking about individual/family coverage, health insurance costs over 1000$/month on average. This is not the price of a cell phone contract, cable TV, or any of the other expenses you ASSUME people are buying over health coverage. This is on par of a second mortgage or second rent for most families. Hardly an inconsiderable expense that if one simply made sacrifices, they could afford. For some people it means taking a second job, potentially putting stay at home moms in the work force just to pay for health care. Are you really supporting the concept that health insurance should cost as much as a mortgage per month anyway? Let's also examine that many of these "plans" include sky high deductibles and copays. Many of the bankruptcies driven by medical bills are by the INSURED.. for claims the insurance company doesn't cover or won't pay. Let's not even get into the trickery of the insurance companies themselves: refusing to pay covered claims, canceling coverage for spurious and often false reasons, etc.. And Star has neatly skipped around the issue of employer based health coverage and the costs it poses on employers, not to mention how it contributes to making American workers less competitive.

Seems the GOP has no solutions as usual. Same old scare tactics, stat fixing, and of course let's not forget, trot out the illegal alien boogeyman and that will snap all the Cons back into line.

Subsidizing bad
Also conspicuously absent from this oversimplification of the health care issue is how the costs of subsidizing the private insurance industry have significantly raised the costs of health care overall. Your premiums, whether paid by you or by your employer, or both, go to subsidize the cost of a huge company and its employees, plus of course their executives and their high pay. The health service charges billed to insurance from doctors and hospitals go to support the costs of hiring and paying billing and insurance specialists present in just about every doctor's office and hospital, necessary for navigating through the myriad policies and coverages, and chasing after insurers to pay their bills. Also, since the private health industry can refuse individual applicants based on pre-existing conditions, when those uninsured end up in the ER and can't pay the bill, the cost of that is passed into the negotiated payment schedules to the insurer.. so you end up paying for them even though the insurance company doesn't. Your premiums and deductibles cover these additional burdens and inefficiencies on the system, and yet, we STILL end up with a system where private insurance employees "ration" your care based on their bottom line.

Medicare
Finally, for those who want to dump Medicare and Medicaid, a few questions:
1) The cost: since these are insurance pools that specifically cover only the elderly and indigent, two groups that typically drive the majority of health care costs and services, how can you compare the costs of these programs to the costs of health plans that cover only the mostly healthy? One thing we do know for sure, the administrative overhead for these plans vs private plans is the cost is much less, approaching 3% for Medicare/Medicaid vs 30% for private plans.

2) OK so let's have it your way. Let's dump Medicare/Medicaid and let gramma and grampa shop for insurance on the private market. what are the odds of them getting coverage..or if by some miracle they can get coverage, what do you expect the size of the premium and it's proportion to retirement fixed income? Since they are retired there is no employer group plan to pick it up so they will be on their own. In fact, for you all advocates of dumping the system, by all means, refuse the coverage and get your own private insurance after you have retired and have no more employer based insurance. Funny that I have never seen a conservative admit that private insurance would "ration" the elderly to death, but yet all share the fear that single payer would. Don't forget, these programs were created specifically to fill in the gap that the private insurers refused to shoulder. The profit makers know full well those billion dollar a year executive pay packages wouldn't exist if they had to bear the insurance costs of the elderly. So, if you look at this way, tax supported Medicare/Medicaid are yet another way we subsidize private insurance to exist and profit.

Personal Responsibility
Finally, on the personal responsibility part. Here's how single payer could work and enforce "personal responsibility". Instead of paying insurance premiums or having your wages include the price of your employer paid insurance, every working person would be subject to a flat tax, let's say 10% of income, similar to social security, medicaid.. (and don't carp about taking your money: your private insurance, employer subsidized or not, is right around that if not more). Therefore, EVERYONE pays.. and deductibles, copays, could be adjusted based on income. Those who make more, pay more deductible. This way, EVERYONE pays for their health insurance, so we can get rid of this silly "i'm not paying for your health care...blah blah blah" argument. Especially since that argument fails to realize that in a group or individual insurance plan, you are already doing just that.

As far as people who use the ER for non emergency visits: They would be subject to a high penalty should the ER determine their issue was not an emergency and could have been addressed by a primary care physician. This would also enforce personal responsibility in using judgment with respects to what an emergency truly is.

Socialism
One more thing, let's drop the "socialized" bad word from the discussion. This is not about socialism vs capitalism. It's about efficiency and reducing costs on society, making American workers and American jobs more competitive, and benefitting from a healthier populace that recieves "wellness" care vs "sick" care. If I have to choose these things over what the Founding Fathers did or did not intend in 1787 (before people lived this long on average, before health care was an industry), then I guess I will go the evil "socialist" route.

socialism 2
But anyways, the "socialist" argument is silly when you get underneath it anyway. For those who support the private health insurance industry, you seem to ignore that the industry itself is "socialist", in that it takes premiums from many in the group, and makes a wager that it will pay out less in costs to members of the group. When members of the coverage group submit a claim, that claim (when it gets paid) is paid out of the premium dollars paid by ALL in the group. Yep, socialism at its finest practiced by "private business". Only here, we also "socialize" the profits of the industry, in that they skim off the cream of the premiums paid to pay for their overhead and profits, and seek to reduce outgoing costs by "rationing" care and treatments. The problem with our "private" socialism is compounded when you add in the sheer number of these coverage groups. More groups means less people in the groups to "spread the wealth" and share in the costs of their members. If we are to keep an insurance model, surely it makes more sense to have a single, large coverage group to maximize incoming capital, at the same time, having more healthy than non to pay into it (especially if we focus on preventative vs sick care). And then we can focus those dollars a lot more on actual health care by reducing the administrative overhead and profit margin required by the current system.


I really cannot see the sense in supporting the current system of private insurance. I defy any person to point out the value added to our health system by private insurance. The only other valid argument is to remove private or public insurance and go back to fee for service, with only having private catastrophic insurance.

Greed Is Good.
Smarti offers, "Instead of paying insurance premiums or having your wages include the price of your employer paid insurance, every working person would be subject to a flat tax, let's say 10% of income, similar to social security, medicaid.."

So what drives innovation, better pricing or patient satisfaction?

If patient's good will (patient pays) is replaced by government's good will (gov't pays), all providers and innovators will naturally adapt to the Government regardless of patient good will. Suppliers, naturally, only adapt to those that pay the bills.

Also, as with Public Schools, Post Office and other such public services, costing is not determined by competition, but by politically correct persuasion. When the gov't says it must raise prices to meet costs or lose services, we are at their mercy ... we have no choice.

In a competitive arena, we have choices.

Without patient centric (patient pays) system, innovation and pricing will no longer adapt to patient needs. Maybe, you actually think someone else knows what's best for you than you.

However, I think I, alone, know what's best for me. Thus, I like a system that makes competitors beg for my good will, not the government's. But, then, I am greedy and see no benefit in having the gov't be the arbiteur of what's good for me.

vampire reflex
the sun is coming up,crawl back in.

smarti Co
you should have ran for congressman,well, maybe not.

If You Enjoy Begging - Gov't Healthcare
Smarti offers, "I really cannot see the sense in supporting the current system of private insurance. I defy any person to point out the value added to our health system by private insurance."

The current system is strangled by government micro-management.

Today, I can buy car insurance, tailored to my personal needs, as cheap as any corporation. Plus, I can shop for better pricing among a gigantic field of insurers. Because of this competitive world, car insurance has not skyrocketed like health insurance.

Because of Gov't regulations, I can not buy health Insurance better than even the smallest company. They get tax breaks, I can't. Plus, health insurance have heavily regulated franchising, that restricts cross country coverage.

In a free market, I should be able to shop my needs among competitive providers, that adapt their coverages, innovations and prices to attract my good will (money), not corporations or, worse, Gov't's.

Today, Europe's, Japan's & Canada's healthcare is a lot like their national defense, it is highly dependent on innovations created in the USA. Without a natural patient-based health care system that begs its funding from individuals, healthcare innovation throughout the world would nearly die on the vine.

Some People Just Need A Nanny
Frank offers, "The world has many different types of health care systems, ours being a for profit system where care is rationed by money."

All systems are rationed by money. All of them.

Now, who is best at rationing your money? Me? Your neighbor? The government? Or, you?

If you picked anybody other than you, you deserve the gov't healthcare. Heck, give them all of your money and just sit wait for the nanny.

An excellent article.
Particularly telling was the comparison to automobile insurance. While I knew it was compulsory, I had no idea so MANY people were without it--while owning and driving a vehicle. But, I should not have been.

i

Yeah smarti
Elegantly explained, I completely agree.

The new meme from the right that really annoys me is the "people who make over $75,000/year and choose not to buy health insurance". Choose? Choose? Those are the people who are excluded from the individual health insurance plans because they have pre-existing medical conditions, the majority of such conditions having been given to the individual by God. As a learning exercise, I recommend that readers who buy the Republican "personal responsibility" is the key to health insurance call a few plans and see what is available on the individual insurance market if there is a pre-existing medical condition (premature infant, congenital heart defect, diabetes, etc.) that would be included on the plan. It will be an eye-opening experience.

health care
Ms. Parker, You failed to mention the uninsured that want health care but can't get it because of pre- existing conditions, or the ones who can but are charged outrages rates. Yes we have Medicaid, but you have to have nothing to qualify. I don't government health care, but I will take it if insurance companies, can't change the way they do things.

re: Mac Moore
Mac, I'm not sure if we can correlate different private insurance providers as driving innovation in medical treatments or patient satisfaction. I would say innovations in medical treatments is driven by research, typically done in university hospital settings. Yes, money does drive innovation, but I don't think this would decrease without private insurance as the main payer of services. Don't forget, research is often paid for by public NIH grants, universities and other sources. I don't feel single payer would take money out of the equation to the health provider either: in fact just the opposite. My feeling is that private health insurance companies siphon health care dollars out of the system to pay for their own administrative overhead. What if that money was instead directed back into the system for health care to the providers, since single payer would have a much smaller overhead. Practitioners and hospitals would also be able to direct more of the money towards innovation and their own profits, by removing their end of the administrative overhead that is currently needed to navigate private insurance billing.

re: Mac Moore
The issue with the car insurance comparison is that it is not really an apples to apples comparison with health insurance. First, cars are not people : ) Cars can be totalled, and replaced and repaired. Not so much with humans. Plus, car insurance is almost a 100% behavior driven model, based on driving history and actuarial tables that rate risk based on age, marriage and other "static" facts. If I am a careless driver that has caused lots of claims due to accidents at fault, I can expect to pay a higher premium. Health is not 100% behavior driven, or even 50%. Genetics and contracted diseases play a role, and sometimes bad luck. Pricing and refusing coverage for factors out of a person's control is not the same as refusing auto coverage for a known bad driver, who honestly has the "choice" of being a bad driver or not.

re: Mac Moore
Secondly, car insurance is heavily government micro-managed. I can attest to this fact as I actually work for a major auto insurer (in their IT dept). Each state has it's own rules and regulations for insurance that each provider must abide by. It affects the pricing and rules of the game in each state and can change at any time. Yet, car insurance still does not even begin to approach the price of health insurance. As I mentioned in a previous post, the costs of a standard policy for a family of 3 will cost over 1000$/month, which is close to a second mortgage for many families. An income of $75,000 may sound like a lot, but what about housing costs, potential student loan repayments for college educations needed for a good job, car (insurance), etc.. It's not a king's sum and the conservative expectation that if a family just dropped the cable TV or cell phone that they could magically fit in the price of a second mortgage to pay for health insurance is unrealistic. The fact of the matter is that car insurance companies don't control and dictate mechanic shops and car manufacturers. Health insurance does.

re: Mac Moore
Car insurance doesn't siphon money from mechanics and manufacturers in the manner that health insurance does from actual care providers. Car insurance doesn't require that mechanics maintain a full time billing specialist on hand to manage car insurance claims and billing. If my car insurance company doesn't play ball and play a claim they should pay or refuses coverage, the worst that happens is I lose a car or have to buy a new one. Chances are that I won't go bankrupt paying for car repairs. If they refuse to pay because I caused the accident or damage, well than that is my fault. If health insurance refuses to pay a bill or refuses coverage, lives are at stake. Many people in middle class situations go bankrupt from medical bills through no fault of their own, and this is after they have paid premiums to the insurance company for the privilege of still not having coverage when it's needed. Finally, I an have the choice of not having a car and manage life, depending on my situation and what other options are available. I cannot live without good health. I can go on, but I think you see my point.

re: Mac Moore
Finally, you seem to be confusing "choice" with choice of insurace provider vs. choice of provider. Under a single payer system, you will have choice of any provider as they will all be paid by the same single insurer. We don't have that choice under the vast majority of insurance plans. Insurance also controls the "choice" of treatment between doctor and patient, under single payer there will also be that control, but it will not be made by an insurance company seeking to protect their bottom line at the expense of your choice.

re: GeorgiaGal
Thank you. It angers me to read columns like this that seek to manipulate people's emotions by oversimplifying major points, while managing to ignore just about every single serious issue about the current system. If anyone has been paying attention, this is not just about covering the uninsured. It's about the spiraling costs and abuses driven by private insurance. No more and no less.

innovation
one last point : ) As far as private health insurance driving innovation, one of the more popular reasons for insurance to deny treatments is that they are "experimental" (whether that's true or not). How exactly does this practice drive innovation, by refusing to pay for innovation? Health care providers know this, and may steer their treatment options to ones they know the insurance company will cover, which may actually stifle innovation since new treatments have a lesser likelihood of getting covered and paid for, even if they may turn out to be more effective.

Perhaps private health insurance can still exist in a single payer world. It does in France. The wealthy and those who want to can pay for "supplemental" insurance and maybe they can go into the business of providing insurance coverage for cosmetic or other non-life threatening procedures and treatments.

Spammer's Paradise / Idiiots Galore
The current unfunded liabilities of Medicare and Social Security is over $100 trillion.

Unsustainable. Gotta go. Unaffordability is not a myth...an insurance company getting away with not paying "because it doesn't want to" is.

Unacceptable? Laughable might be one commenter's opinion of the opinions of those in favor of "universal health care," if it wasn't just so sad to face the fact that people who can actually read and write somehow believe there is truly pie in the sky.

Single Insurer Is Not A Choice!
Smarti offers, "Under a single payer system, you will have choice of any provider as they will all be paid by the same single insurer."

That makes absolutely no sense at all.

A single insurer is no choice. Get it?

Remove the Government as insurer or supplier. An entity that has the ability to control costs by fiat or tax has no motivation to serve individual Consumers.

Instead, allow, even encourage, multiple private insurers and suppliers. Private enterprises exist by attracting and keeping Consumers at a profit. Competition drives prices down and spurs innovation.

Monopolies, such as Government, are not motivated by Consumer good will, but by Political good will. No thank you.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.