The Left wants a Health Care System like Britain’s NHS despite the NHS having Crippling Deficits

Posted by PITHOCRATES - April 19th, 2014

Week in Review

Obamacare is not going well.  The say it is.  But it isn’t.  The White House can all of a sudden give us a number like 8 million enrollees when they said earlier they couldn’t tell until the insurance companies tell them.  And the other big question is this.  Are these enrollees?  Including all people who enrolled whether they paid or not?  Or are these only the people who paid?  Or are most of these people enrolling in Medicaid?  Those who won’t ever pay?  If that 8 million aren’t paying customers Obamacare is doomed.

So the financial foundation of Obamacare is likely very perilous.  Where the sick and poor are probably signing up more than the healthy with money.  And the delay of the employer mandate to sometime after the midterm election takes a bad financial foundation and makes it worse.  For they can’t keep delaying the funding parts until after elections.  Because someone has to pay for all of the subsidies.  As well as the high cost of the old and sick.  Which alone may bankrupt Obamacare (see Labour considers raising national insurance to fix £30bn NHS ‘black hole’ by Toby Helm posted 4/19/2014 on the guardian).

Radical plans to increase national insurance contributions to plug a looming £30bn a year “black hole” in NHS funding and pay the spiralling costs of care for the elderly are being examined by Labour’s policy review.

The Observer has learnt that the idea is among options being considered to ensure NHS and care costs can be met under a future Labour government, without it having to impose crippling cuts on other services in successive budgets.

Senior party figures have confirmed that a scheme advanced by the former Labour minister Frank Field – under which funds from increased NI would be paid into a sealed-off fund for health and care costs – is being examined, though no decisions have been taken.

Recent figures based on data from NHS England and the Nuffield Trust and produced by the Commons library suggest that NHS costs alone will go from £95bn a year now to more than £130bn a year by 2020.

Some have suggested that they designed Obamacare to fail.  So they can get what they really want.  Single-payer.  Or national health care.  Like they have in Britain with their National Health Service (NHS).  Which is running an enormous deficit.  Based on the above numbers it currently is 31.6% (£30bn/£95bn).  Which is just unsustainable.  But this is what an aging population will do.  When you have more people leaving the workforce consuming health care benefits paid for by fewer people entering the workforce.  Which should be a huge warning for the United States.  Because they have an aging population, too.

At the current exchange rate that £30 billion comes to $50.37 billion.  Is this what the US can expect?  No.  Because they have five-times the population Britain has.  So their deficit will be approximately five-times as big.  Or $251.85 billion.  That’s a quarter of a trillion dollar shortfall PER YEAR.  At least.  And $2.52 trillion over a decade.  So unless the Americans can somehow make their people less sick so they won’t consume health care resources the deficit alone for Obamacare will be more than twice the original CBO projection for the total cost over 10 years.  Which means the Americans will have to do what the British must do.  Increase taxes.  Charge for some health care services in addition to these higher taxes.  Or impose crippling cuts to services.  Hello rationing.  And longer wait times.

This is the absolute worst time to impose a single-payer/national health care system.  Just as the baby boom generation fills our health care system in their retirement.  It might have worked if we had kept having babies the way we did before birth control and abortion slashed the birthrate.  But we didn’t.  And now we have a baby bust generation stuck footing the bill for a baby boom generation.  Fewer paying for more.  And the only way to make that work is with confiscatory tax rates.  Or death panels.  Because you have to raise revenue.  Or cut costs.  There is just no other option.  Or people can work longer, pay out of pocket for routine, expected expenses and buy real insurance to protect themselves from catastrophic, unexpected medical expenses.  Which is actually another option.  And probably the only one that will work.


Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Democrats think they can do National Health Care better than Britain despite the Obamacare Website Rollout Disaster

Posted by PITHOCRATES - March 30th, 2014

Week in Review

Those on the left settled for the Affordable Care Act.  It’s not what they wanted.  But they think it can, in time, give them what they want.  Single-payer health care.  Or a true national health care system.  Like they have in Britain.  Oh how the left would love to have a no nonsense National Health Service (NHS) in the United States.  A system totally funded by general taxation.  Because that would be better than Obamacare.  And far better than what Obamacare replaced.  Now those who think that are either lying to the American people.  Or are completely ignorant to what’s going on in the NHS.  For the highly esteemed NHS is on life support (see £10 each can save the NHS by Norman Warner and Jack O’Sullivan posted 3/30/2014 on the guardian).

A care and cash crisis is sending the NHS bust. In its present form, a shortfall of £30bn a year, or more, is expected by 2020. Paying off the nation’s deficit means five more years of further deep public expenditure cuts, whoever is in government. So, over-protecting an outdated, cosseted and unaffordable healthcare system inevitably means starving other vital public services, unless we choke off economic growth and worsen the cost of living with big tax increases. That might be worth contemplating if the NHS was offering brilliant care. But it isn’t.

Just look at the thousands of frail elderly people who get the care they need only by queuing in A&E and spending weeks in hospital – the most expensive and often the worst way to look after them. And let’s not forget that the NHS is sleepwalking through an obesity epidemic.

These are truths hidden from public view. Many politicians and clinicians are scared to tell people that our much-loved 65-year-old NHS no longer meets the country’s needs. Frankly, it is often poor value for money, and the greatest public spending challenge after the general election…

Our specialist hospital services should be concentrated in fewer, safer, better-equipped and more expert centres with 24/7 consultant cover and improved transport links…

A new integrated “National Health and Care Service” would pioneer a “co-producing” health partnership between state and citizen, with annual personal health MOTs agreeing responsibilities over the year for both services and the individual. At the heart of this relationship would be an NHS membership scheme, charging £10 a month (with some exemptions) collected through council tax for local preventative services to help people stay healthy.

This is one of several new funding streams urgently needed to renew impoverished parts of our care system but preserving a mainly tax-funded NHS that is largely free at the point of use. We have to escape the constraints of general taxation if we want a decent system…

Just 3.5% of the annual 500,000 deaths lead to payment of inheritance tax. We must expect the elderly, after their deaths, to contribute more. NHS free entitlements, such as continuing care, could be reduced or means-tested and hotel costs in hospital charged, as in France and Germany.

Britain has an aging population.  Fewer people are entering the workforce to pay the taxes that fund the NHS.  While more people are leaving the workforce and consuming NHS resources.  So less money is going into the NHS while the NHS is spending more and more money on patients.  Leading to a deficit that they can’t pay for without killing the economy.  Or taking money away from other government services.

If the NHS was providing quality health care they could probably justify taking money away from other areas.  But it’s not.  The one argument for passing Obamacare was that it would reduce the burden on emergency rooms.  But it’s not doing that in Britain.  The wait times are so long to see a doctor or get a procedure that people are going to the emergency room (A/E in Britain) and waiting for hours instead of waiting for months.  Further increasing costs and wait times.  And frustrating patients.

So what is the solution to a failing national health care system?  Close hospitals and make people travel further for treatment.  And charge them £10 ($16.64) monthly in addition to some of the highest tax rates they already pay to fund the NHS.  So, to summarize, to make national health care work in Britain they need to close hospitals, make people travel further for care, charge them more money and make them wait longer for treatment.  Which is basically the argument against the Affordable Care Act.  It would lead to rationing.  And longer wait times.  Worse, the quality of care will decline.  As it has in Britain.  As it will in the United States.  For we also have an aging population.  And we have about five-times the people they have in Britain.  Which will make our problems five-times worse than theirs.

What’s happening in the NHS is no secret.  Any proponent of national health care no doubt looks at Britain and their NHS.  So they must be familiar with how it’s failing.  Yet they press on for a similar system in the United States.  Why?  If it won’t improve our health care system why do they want national health care?  This is the question we should be asking the Democrats.  Why?  Of course they will say Britain just isn’t doing national health care right.  After all, they’ve only been doing it for 66 years.  So what do they know about national health care?  While we, the liberal Democrats will say, will get national health care right from the get-go.  Because we are just so much smarter than everyone else in the world.

Of course the British could, and should, fire back with, “Yeah?  How did that Obamacare website rollout go?  You’d think that someone who is so smart that they could do national health care right from the get-go could actually build a sodding website that works.”

But, of course, they didn’t.  And the website was the easiest part of Obamacare.  A one and done thing.  And if they couldn’t do that right do we really want these people anywhere near our health care?  No.  Especially when the British are struggling with national health care after trying it for 66 years.  For national health care is apparently more difficult to do than building a sodding website that works.


Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Some in Canada consider a Parallel Private Health Care System to reduce Wait Times

Posted by PITHOCRATES - March 29th, 2014

Week in Review

People don’t want Obamacare.  And they are getting angry.  Making the Democrats very nervous.  Especially those up for election this fall.  Which is why there is yet another delay in implementing the Affordable Care Act.  To make voters less angry this fall.

This law was never popular.  The American people never wanted it.  The only reason why we have it is because the Democrats pushed it through when they had control of the House, Senate and White House.  And bought off a few recalcitrant Democrat senators (the Louisiana Purchase, Cornhusker Kickback, Gator Aid, etc.) to garner the 60 votes necessary to force this unpopular law onto the American people.  So the Democrats could put us on a path towards single-payer.  Which President Obama is on the record preferring.  Single-payer.  But accepted the Affordable Care Act as a means to that end.  So we can one day have a health care system like they have in Canada.  Because things are so much better in Canada (see Waiting times cost B.C. patients $155.5 million last year: Fraser Institute study by Bethany Lindsay posted 3/25/2014 on The Vancouver Sun).

Waiting for medically necessary surgeries cost British Columbian patients about $155.5 million in lost time last year, a Fraser Institute economist claims in a new study.

It estimates that the total cost to Canadian patients of waiting for treatment after seeing a specialist was $1.1 billion in 2013, up from $982 million in 2012. Quebec had the highest cost at $267.7 million.

Author Nadeem Esmail said the report explores a consequence of waiting for care that Canadians don’t often consider…

Esmail said that in order to address the problem of long waiting times, he’d like to see Canada allow more private sector participation in the provision of health care, including the development of a parallel private system…

Overall, British Columbians waited a median 10.4 weeks for treatment after their first appointment with a specialist last year, compared to 9.6 weeks across Canada, according to the study.

Imagine that.  The Republicans were right.  A single-payer health care system leads to rationing of health care resources.  And sick people waiting for their turn for fewer, rationed health care resources leads to, of course, longer wait times.  This is what the Democrats want to force on the American people.  Even when some in Canada are suggesting a parallel private health care system to reduce wait times down from 10 weeks or so.  Which is why the Democrats had to be as devious as possible to pass Obamacare into law.  With shady backroom deals like the Louisiana Purchase, Cornhusker Kickback and Gator Aid.  And then lying through their teeth about being able to keep the health insurance and doctors you liked and wanted to keep.  A lie so bold it earned President Obama the Lie of the Year from PolitiFact.

Will this anger boil over this November at the 2014 midterm elections?  Will voters remember how the Democrats lied and made backroom deals to change a health care system we liked and wanted to keep?  Apparently President Obama thinks so.  Which is why he violated the law once again and extended the enrollment period for Obamacare.  Without having Congress rewrite the law.  To make this latest change in the Affordable Care Act (and the 30 or so that preceded it) legal.  But then again, when the media keeps giving the president a pass on his law-breaking activities what incentive does the administration have to act lawful?  It’s kind of like Vladimir Putin taking Crimea.  The way Putin sees it no one is going to do anything when he breaks the law so what incentive does he have to abide by international law?  If anything he’s probably puzzled why President Obama is saying anything at all.  For what’s a little law-breaking between two law breakers?


Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Abysmal Rollout of Obamacare going According to Plan to bring us to National Health Care?

Posted by PITHOCRATES - February 16th, 2014

Week in Review

The roll out of the Affordable Care Act (i.e., Obamacare) has given us a plethora of unintended consequences.  From freezing new hiring.  To pushing full-time workers into part-time.  To people losing the health insurance and doctor they liked and wanted to keep.  To higher insurance premiums. To higher deductibles.  To higher co-pays.  Taking a health care system that the vast majority of people were satisfied with and making it worse.  To accommodate a small percentage of the population who were uninsured.  If that wasn’t bad enough it doesn’t even look like some of the people who signed up for Obamacare are paying their insurance premiums (see Next problem for Obamacare: deadbeat enrollees by Rick Newman posted 2/14/2014 on Yahoo! Finance).

The  New York Times has discovered  that only about 80% of people purchasing health insurance through the federal online marketplace or a similar state-run exchange paid their first month’s premium. There’s no single source of such data, but the Times canvassed insurers participating in the program, such as Aetna (AET), Wellpoint (WLP), Humana (HUM) and Blue Shield of California. All said that the first-month payment rate ranged from 75% to 80% or so, far lower than for typical plans. If enrollees don’t pay the first month’s premium, their insurance never goes into effect.

That doesn’t mean, however, that one-fifth of the people signing up for Obamacare are blatantly refusing to pay. Technical problems with some of the exchange websites may have left people enrolled in an insurance plan without knowing it. Some may never have received a bill or confirmation of their enrollment. Others may have unwittingly signed up for two different policies, while paying for only one.

To make the Affordable Care Act work required a huge health care cost transfer from the old and sick to the young and healthy.  The young and healthy, incidentally, made up a sizeable portion of the uninsured.  Because they were young and healthy and felt invincible.  And invincible people don’t need to buy insurance.  So Obamacare needed the individual mandate to force these people to buy insurance against their will so they could pay for the old and sick.

Of course when they raised the price of health insurance to cover pre-existing conditions it wasn’t the young and healthy that ran to the Obamacare exchanges.  It was the old and sick.  Adding too many old and sick to the insurance pool.  And not enough of the young and healthy.  Those who would pay without consuming any benefits.  Because they are young and healthy.  Causing the insurers to pay more out in benefits than they receive in premiums.  Forcing them to raise their premiums.  Which will, of course, kick off the death spiral as people drop out because they can’t afford those higher rates.  Which will, in turn, force the insurers to raise their rates again.  Hence the death spiral.   And as bad as all of that was now it looks like about 20-25% of those who ‘signed up’ either didn’t or are simply choosing not to pay.  Making the financial predicament of the insurers far worse.

Of course if your plan was to force single-payer (i.e., national health care) onto the people against their will then everything is going according to plan to destroy the private insurance market.  Leaving only the government to step in and provide single-payer (i.e., national health care).  Which should fill everyone with confidence after seeing how well they rolled out the Affordable Care Act.  And no doubt will impress us even more with the rollout of single-payer (i.e., national health care).


Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Some Canadians leave Canada to pay for Better Health Care

Posted by PITHOCRATES - January 25th, 2014

Week in Review

The American left likes to hold up the Canadian health care system as the ideal system.  It’s what they wanted when they reluctantly accepted Obamacare.  A single-payer health care system.  Or national health care.  Because those on the left believe the quality of a national health care system far exceeds anything a for-profit insurance company will pay for.  As they deny whatever they can to force people into a third-world health care system.  Where only the rich who can afford to pay for the best get the best.  Interestingly, it appears that’s happening in Canada, too.  Where those who can afford to are traveling elsewhere for their health care instead of entering their own Canadian system (see Canadians Leave Their Country For Better Health Care posted 1/22/2014 on Investors).

According to data from the Canadian Institute for Health Information, as many as 41,838 Canadians — out of a population of about 35 million — left the country last year for health care treatment. More than 42,000 left in 2012, while more than 46,000 sought treatment elsewhere the year before.

Destinations, according to a University of Minnesota study that looked at Canadian companies that arrange medical tourism, include Costa Rica, India, Thailand and the U.S. Some companies even send clients to Mexico, Turkey, Poland and the Dominican Republic.

The Fraser Institute of Canada calls the 2013 figure a conservative estimate and, though some will argue otherwise, believes it is a sizable number, one that says something deeply damning about Canadian care…

“One of the unfortunate realities of Canada’s monopolistic health care system is that some people feel they have no choice but to seek the care they need outside the country,” Esmail and Bacchus Barua wrote in an op-ed published last month in a couple of Canadian newspapers. “And who can blame them..?”

Some leave due to Canada’s long and sometimes deadly waiting periods. Others are treated outside the country because there is “a lack of available resources or the fact that some procedures or equipment are not provided in their home jurisdiction,” Esmail and Barua wrote.

If you want to know who has the best health care system just look at the direction of medical tourism.  And people traveling for their health care aren’t going to Canada.  They’re going to Costa Rica, India, Thailand, the United States, Mexico, Turkey, Poland and the Dominican Republic.  But they’re not going to Canada.  Even some Canadians refuse their own health care system.  So do these countries have better health care systems?  Not necessarily.

In an episode of Breaking Bad when Gus went to Mexico to deliver Jesse to the Cartel to cook for them he turned the tables on the cartel.  He poisoned the members of the Cartel with a gift bottle of tequila.  A bottle Gus was the first to drink from.  To prove it was safe to drink.  Of course he took precautions to prevent himself dying from drinking the poisoned tequila.  Including a makeshift emergency room in an abandoned building near the US-Mexican border.  Even stocked with bags of blood matched to the blood types of the three who traveled to Mexico.  They saved Gus from the poison.  And Mike from a near-fatal gunshot wound.

This was quality health care in the middle of nowhere.  Paid for with private money.  Albeit drug money.  But the health care providers were making more there than they could in the regular health care system.  Providing them incentive.  Which all of these medical tourism destinations offer.  Incentive to health care workers to work outside of the regular health care system.  Because they can earn more in a private health care system.  Which is why the best health care talent migrates to private health care systems.  Because when people pay out of pocket there’s more money to pay for the best health care.  And to pay the best health care salaries and wages.  Everyone wins in the private system.  Patients.  And health care providers.  The only losers are those stuck in their own national health care system while they wait for their ‘free’ health care.


Tags: , , , , , , ,

Obamacare on the Path to making People wait 4 Hours to see a Doctor like in Canada

Posted by PITHOCRATES - January 25th, 2014

Week in Review

Obamacare so far has been a disaster.  The website is a billion dollar embarrassment for the Obama administration.  The lack of enrollees.  Far more old and sick signing up than young and healthy.  Millions of people losing the health insurance they liked and wanted to keep.  People losing their doctors.  People going to doctors thinking they have health insurance only to find out they don’t.  The health insurers are looking at huge losses unless they get a federal bailout.  Even the credit rating agencies have said the entire health insurance industry is in danger of going belly up because of Obamacare.

Still the Obamacare supporters say everything will be fine.  Just give it time.  Sure, there has been a bump or two during the rollout.  But it’s getting better every day.  While there are some who are saying these problems are all due to the insurance companies.  And that we need to cut them out of the loop.  And go with a single-payer system.  Like they have in Canada.  So we can at last have the same high-quality system they have where everyone has everything they need when they need it regardless of cost.  A health care utopia.  Where if you’re sick it doesn’t matter if you’re rich or poor.  You’ll get to wait the same 4 hours to see a doctor as everyone else in Canada has to wait (see Would you pay to not wait in your doctor’s waiting room? This company is betting on it by Erin Anderssen posted 1/22/2014 on The Globe and Mail).

In your hand, you hold the number 52. The nurse shepherding patients through the walk-in clinic just called 12, which means you can expect to be waiting hours.

What’s your time worth? A Montreal-based company is betting you’d be willing to pay less than the equivalent of a grande latte for your “freedom” from the coughing, sniffling and tedium of a doctor’s waiting room. Chronometriq has created a text service – $3 in Quebec (and the expected cost of $4 in Ontario) – that will buzz you on your phone as your number approaches. The company expects the technology, now in place in 24 clinics in Quebec, to expand to 50 walk-in clinics by spring, including some Ontario locations, pending approval from the provincial health ministry.

Its next stop is hospital emergency rooms, where Canadians endure longer waits than citizens of 11 other OECD countries, according to a study released last year.

But it’s also controversial: After all, the program introduces a questionable user-pay element to Canada’s health care system. (The program is optional – you can still save your pennies and linger in the waiting room.)

As Natalie Mehra, executive director of the Ontario Health Coalition, points out, it won’t do anything to reduce actual wait times in ERs, where according to the international study 31 per cent of Canadian wa[i]ted more than four hours to be seen by a doctor in 2010. (The average among all countries included was 12 per cent.) “It is not improving access to care at all,” Mehra says. “The issue is people waiting too long to get in the door.”

That’s the point, argues Louis Parent, Chronometriq vice-president. “How many years have government said they will tackle wait times. And nothing has changed. We have to face facts.”

Critics of national health care say it will lead to rationing and longer wait times.  As it has in Canada.  Why?  Because government can’t do anything well.  The huge bureaucracy adds costs by adding layers of people between doctors and patients.  To determine what treatment a doctor may provide for his or her patient.  More and more health care dollars pay for the bureaucracy instead of actually treating patients.  While at the same time an aging population is reducing the number of taxpayers while increasing the number of people consuming taxpayer-funded health care services.  Which means health care providers have to do more with less.  They have to carefully ration what they have.  Which leads to longer waiting times as patients wait their turn for those limited health care services.

This is where the left wants to take the American health care system to.  Even as countries around the world are having the same problems Canada has.  Many of which are privatizing parts of their national health care.  Even Canada.  Who is now charging some patients for the privilege of receiving a text to tell them when their 4 hours of waiting are nearly up.  Of course the Canadians are having these problems because they are not as smart as the American left.  Who after never doing it before will know how to do national health care right.  Just look at how well they rolled out Obamacare.


Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Ontario Health Care has Long Wait Times and Rationing despite it being 973% More Costly than Obamacare

Posted by PITHOCRATES - December 21st, 2013

Week in Review

To pass the Affordable Care Act (aka Obamacare) into law the Democrats submitted numbers to the CBO that crunched the cost to less than $1 trillion over 10 years.  No more than the cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.  So it would be a wash.  As if they never decried the spending for those wars as wasteful.  Or simply unaffordable.  But now that spending was not wasteful or unaffordable.  If it paid for Obamacare.

Of course that original cost of $1 trillion over 10 years was very suspect.  In time that number was revised up.  For it was impossible to provide health insurance to everyone without spending a lot more.  As we can see if we look to our neighbors to the north.  Canada (see Ontario not receiving expected health transfer funds by The Canadian Press posted 12/17/2013 on CBC News).

The federal Conservatives have betrayed Canada’s most populous province by breaking their promise over health-care funding, Ontario Health Minister Deb Matthews charged Tuesday.

The Harper Tories promised all provinces a six per cent increase in health transfers, but they’re only giving Ontario 3.4 per cent in 2014-15, she said…

The $300 million that Ottawa is shortchanging Ontario is more than the province’s increase in home care and other services for seniors this year, she said.

“It’s less money to reduce wait times, it’s less money to hire nurses, it’s less time to provide Ontario families and particularly Ontario seniors with the care that they need,” Matthews said…

Flaherty was unavailable for comment Tuesday, but a spokeswoman said health transfers are rising…

“In fact, in 2014-15 Ontario will receive over $12 billion in health transfers, almost a 60 per cent increase from under the previous federal Liberal government.”

The province’s share of federal health dollars will increase from $11.9 billion this year to $12.3 billion next year.

Ontario allocates about $49 billion a year on health care, the highest area of spending in its $127.6-billion budget…

Ontario, which is facing a nearly $12-billion deficit, is the only province that will see fewer federal dollars next year, with total transfer payments shrinking by $641 million to $19.1 billion.

Canada’s single-payer system (actually one system per province subsidized by the federal government) has long been an object of affection to those on the American left.  Who kept pointing to it.  Saying, “See?  That’s what we should be doing.”  Rational people said doing so would increase wait time and cause rationing.  “Uh-uh,” they said.  “Providing more health care to more people will NOT lead to increased wait times or rationing.”  Proving their ignorance of the most basic arithmetic.  So let’s use some arithmetic to show why they are so wrong.

First of all despite the utopia of Canada’s single-payer system they apparently have long wait times and rationing.  Or else they wouldn’t say that the reduction in health transfers would hurt their ability to reduce those very things.  Ontario has a population of 13,472,400.  Which means they’re spending $3,637.07 per person ($49 million/13,472,400) on health care.  Or about $3,418.84 per person in US dollars.  The US population is about 313,914,040.  So if we spend what Ontario is spending that comes to about $1.07 trillion per year.  About $10.7 trillion over 10 years.  Or about 973% more than the Democrats said it would cost.

Obviously the government is not going to have this kind of money available.  So there will be longer wait times.  And rationing.  Which is why people won’t be able to keep their health insurance, doctors and medicine they liked and wanted to keep.  And why President Obama and his fellow Democrats lied to pass the bill.  Because things are going to get that bad.  They’re just hoping by the time people realize just how bad it will get Obamacare will be so entrenched that it will be impossible to repeal.  Because if it’s not the people will demand we repeal it and replace it with something better.  Like what we had before the Affordable Care Act.


Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Medicaid, Medicare and Frivolous Lawsuits make the Best Health Care System in the World more Expensive

Posted by PITHOCRATES - November 23rd, 2013

Week in Review

The American left loves Canada.  In particular their single-payer health care system.  This is what they wanted in the US.  Not Obamacare.  But they settled for Obamacare.  Until they get what Canada has one day.  Because it’s better.  At least, according to a chart.  That shows how wonderful Canadian health care is and how horrible American health care is (see The U.S. Health Care System Is Terrible, In 1 Enraging Chart by Mark Gongloff posted 11/22/2013 on the Huffington Post).

Yes, among this group of big countries, the U.S. spends far and away more on health care than any other. And yet it has among the lowest life expectancies of any developed country. People live longer in pretty much every country in Europe, including Greece, where the economy has been wracked by austerity for years…

Why is our system so terrible? Largely because it is built for profit. Unlike many other countries, the government has no role in either providing care or setting prices, and so prices skyrocket. It’s also too complex, which is one reason the Affordable Care Act, President Obama’s signature reform law, has gotten off to such a bad start.

The health care law is supposed to help with the cost problem somewhat. But it is built on the existing privatized system, which means it will probably not make a significant difference. A public option, also known as a “single payer” plan, would help. But that still seems like a pipe dream — although maybe Obamacare’s clumsy rollout will bring it closer to reality.

First of all it should be noted that Canada has one of the finest private health care networks in the world.  Outside of their single-payer system.  Which is something they share with all nations that have some form of national health care.  A private health care network for those who want and can pay for it.  And why is Canada’s private health care network the best in the world?  Perhaps you can guess why when you hear the name of it.  The Untied States health care system.  Just south of the border.

That’s right, for those with the means don’t wait in line for less than the best of health care.  They spend their own money to go to the front of the line to get the best health care available.  In the United States.  Often administered by Canadians.  Because the US pays the best doctors and nurses more than they can get in Canada.  So Canadian doctors and nurses, too, travel south across the border.

The US is one of the only countries where their poor suffer from obesity.  Because of generous food assistance programs.  Also, because we are a for-profit nation our food industry has figured out to give us more food for less.  Our beverage sizes have gotten so big giving us so much value for the money that Mayor Bloomberg tried to limit the size of beverages in New York.  And all American restaurants give us free refills.  Because they can.  While some European countries will charge extra for a package of ketchup.  All of this more food for less has led to our obesity problem.  Giving Americans heart disease and diabetes.  Shortening life expectancies.

US doctors are dropping out of Medicaid.  And Medicare.  More so now that the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) is rolling out.  Why?  Because the government pays for these nonprofit programs.  And they are constantly trying to reduce their reimbursements.  Because the aging population is straining the Medicaid and Medicare programs.  And the government has addressed this problem by ‘discounting’ Medicaid and Medicare billings.  For years doctors and hospitals have tried to recover these shortfalls by charging more.  Especially insurance companies.  Greatly increasing the cost of health care and health insurance.  But the discounting grew so great that many health care providers just dropped these programs.  Because they couldn’t pay their people, their lab costs, their overhead, etc.  Especially since Obamacare has taken money from Medicare.  And ‘forced’ states to expand their Medicaid rolls.  But these discounted reimbursements aren’t the only thing raising health care costs.

While most of Europe has loser-pay laws to curtail frivolous lawsuits the United States doesn’t.  Because of the trial lawyers.  Who get quite wealthy suing doctors, hospitals and pharmaceuticals.  Exploding the cost of malpractice and liability insurance.  Which increase the cost of doctors, hospitals and pharmaceuticals.  Forcing them to raise their prices to recover these costs.  Making American health care more costly.

These are the reasons why the US spends more per capita on health care than all other nations.  Because they have the best health care system in the world.  And the best costs more.  While the government forcing health care providers to work below costs (Medicare and Medicaid) and the cost of frivolous lawsuits raise these costs even more.

The American health-care system is not terrible.  Single-payer systems are.  Because they all have a private health care network.  Which they wouldn’t have if single-payer systems were the best systems.  Just ask the Canadians who use their private network.  The US health care system.  Who will probably be the second greatest losers under the Affordable Care Act.  After the Americans.


Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

King George, President Nixon and President Obama

Posted by PITHOCRATES - November 7th, 2013

Politics 101

As far as Countries went in 1775 there were None Better than Great Britain

As late as 1775 the American colonists were still seeking reconciliation with Great Britain.  For they were proud to be British.  Citizens of the greatest empire in the world.  The British Empire.  Where there was representative government.  The rule of law.  Free market capitalism.  And no taxation without representation.  As far as countries went in 1775 there were none better.

The problem the colonists had wasn’t with the British Empire.  Or their king.  It was with the people who worked for the king.  And Parliament.  Who were denying them the rights every other British subject enjoyed in the greatest empire in the world.  With things taking a turn for the worse with the Townshend Acts.  The Tea Act.  The Stamp Act.  The Intolerable Acts (Boston Port Act, Massachusetts Government Act, Administration of Justice Act, Quartering Act and Quebec Act). 

The colonists pleaded to King George.  Who they affirmed their loyalty to.  But expressed their frustration with the king’s representatives and Parliament.  Their great incompetence.  And corruption.  Requesting relief from the king.  Wishing the king would see things their way.  And fix things.  Maybe even fire some of his people who were responsible for causing all the trouble they found themselves in.  But kings don’t fire people by request.  For kings are very intolerant.  Especially when their subjects dare to defy them.  Which is why the colonists last attempt at reconciliation, the Olive Branch Petition, was met with scorn from King George.  While the Americans were still debating whether to declare their independence King George saved them the trouble.  And declared that they were in open rebellion.  Hired Hessian mercenaries.  And waged war on his own subjects.

Nixon did not order nor was he aware of the Watergate Break-in but faced Impeachment over the Cover-up

Andy Reid is the most successful coach in the history of the Philadelphia Eagles.  Or, was.  For after going 4-12 in the 2012 season they fired him.  Because the team owner thought he was doing a poor job.  A fate many other head coaches face when they don’t deliver a winning season.  If they aren’t great in their job that’s it.  Owners fire them.  And start looking for someone who will be great.  For the owners have a large investment in their teams.  Money they won’t get back if people stop buying tickets.  Which they will do if they don’t start winning games.

Jacques Nasser was CEO of the Ford Motor Company from 1998 to 2001.  When he took office Ford was the most profitable of all automakers.  During his tenure he tried to change Ford.  To make it even more profitable.  And make Ford more than just a car company.  Sort of what Jack Welch was doing over at GE.  He acquired some other auto companies.  Dabbled in ecommerce.  And other auto businesses down the food chain from new car sales.  Including repair shops.  And even junkyards.  While he was doing all of this Firestone tires were disintegrating on the Ford Explorer.  Suffice it to say that Ford wasn’t as strong financially as it was when Nasser became CEO.  And when you do that there is but one thing to do.  Submit your resignation.  Which he did.

On June 17, 1972, a security guard caught five ‘burglars’ inside the Democratic National Committee’s headquarters at the Watergate Complex.  One of the reasons they were there was to place illegal listening devices.  To hear things that would help President Nixon’s reelection chances.  Nixon did not order this nor was he aware of it.  But names on the burglars led to the White House Plumbers.  Whose job was to stop security leaks.  Something the president did not want made public.  Which led to President Nixon’s involvement as he ordered the cover-up.  A crime so heinous he ultimately had to resign to avoid impeachment.

History shows President Nixon and King George were better Heads of State than President Obama

Scandals have plagued the Obama administration.  Fast and Furious (sending guns to Mexico so they could be ‘found’ after they were used in gun crimes to advance the gun control agenda).  Benghazi (ignoring the security risk in Benghazi and then blaming the murder of 4 Americans by terrorists on a YouTube video to help the president’s reelection chances).  Monitoring phone calls and emails of the Associated Press and Fox’s James Rosen (trying to find the source of security leaks like Nixon’s White House Plumbers).  IRS-gate (using the IRS to target political enemies of the Obama administration to suppress the opposition vote, especially the Tea Party).  And Obamacare. 

The president said if you like your insurance you can keep your insurance.  If you like your doctor you can keep your doctor.  Statements that weren’t true.  As they specifically wrote the new health care law to make sure we would lose our policies and lose our doctors.  Because we had to.  For if they didn’t get these people (the young and healthy with inexpensive ‘crappy’ policies) into their health exchanges Obamacare would be underfunded.  And if these people don’t pay for the old and sick who would?  Besides, the ultimate goal of Obamacare is to get America to a single-payer system.  What the people don’t want.  So the Affordable Care Act has to destroy the private health insurance industry first to force single-payer on the people.  Which will be easier to do when they have no other alternative.

Watergate forced a president to resign and sent some 43 people to jail.  All because of the cover-up.  Which was worse than the crime.  The Obama administration scandals are all worse than a bungled burglary.  And some of the cover-ups have been whoppers of a lie (such as the Benghazi YouTube video).  Yet no one was fired.  No one resigned.  Not even with the debacle of the Obamacare rollout.  (Such a failure would result in firings/resignations in the private sector.)  Any requests for such actions are met with scorn by the Obama administration.  Just like King George did with the American colonists.  For President Obama acts like an imperial president.  Who will lie and deceive to get what he wants (e.g., Obamacare, reelection, etc.).  For he knows what’s best for us.  Gets annoyed when we don’t see his wisdom.  And fumes with rage when his subjects dare defy him.  So President Obama shares some of the worst of President Nixon and King George.  But, sadly, he shares none of their greatness.  For history shows that they were both better heads of state than President Obama.  And that’s with all of their faults.


Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

People who think Obamacare will make Health Care Better need to Understand how things are in the NHS

Posted by PITHOCRATES - November 3rd, 2013

Week in Review

The left wanted single-payer.  But they didn’t get it.  Because people in the United States do NOT want any form of national health care.  So they settled for the Affordable Care Act.  Believing it was the pathway to single-payer/national health care.

Why do they want this so much?  So they can provide high quality yet affordable health care to everyone?  No.  They just want the power national health care gives those in power.  Even if it destroys the health care system we have.  As it has done in Britain.  The National Health Service (NHS) is the very model the left would like to have in the United States.  Despite the NHS making health care for the average Briton horrible.  Don’t think so?  Well, read Pills, bills and bellyaches: a peek behind the scenes at a GP surgery by Stephen Moss posted 11/3/2013 on The Guardian and you will see just how bad national health care is.  And what we have to look forward to as Obamacare transfers more of our health care system to government control.


Tags: , , , ,

« Previous Entries