Well, My Health Insurance Policy Just Became Illegal
My health insurance policy, which is an actual "insurance" policy that insures me against catastrophic medical costs but leaves me with responsibility for day to day expenses, just became illegal. Over the last couple of years, I have documented my learning curve as, for the first time, I actually had an incentive to shop around for medical care, or to push back on doctors when I thought they are calling for too many tests and procedures. I have learned a lot about saving money, but all of this education is now for naught, as I will now be required to buy a pre-paid medical policy that leaves very little of the decision-making to my family and provides zero incentives for me to be cost conscious. Apparently, the operators of the US Postal Service and US military procurement felt they were better qualified to manage these cost/value trade-offs than I am.
Here, by the way, is my favorite quote from today, from Nancy Pelosi (who else):
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi praised the health care legislation for its ability to "unleash tremendous entrepreneurial power into our economy."
Only if one considers rent-seeking to be entrepreneurship. There will certainly be a mad rush of special interests to Congress to get their pet procedure or drug included in national must-cover rules. I discussed this rent-seeking process, which used to have to proceed inefficiently state by state but now can be achieved single-source, here. Naturopath coverage, anyone? (already required under coverage rules in 4 states). Already a lot of so-called medical research is really just thinly disguised pleas to have a certain procedure in must-cover rules. For example, I wrote about one study:
In other words, the study surveyed a bunch of cosmetic surgeons. They were asked "should an expensive procedure you provide be covered by insurance." They all answered "Hell YES!" Anyone want to bet whether the funding for the study came from the company that makes the laser equipment?
Folks, you've got to learn to reign in your anger. This is yet another awful bill that takes US tax payers closer to full indenture, and a bold step in the wrong direction structurally. However, an unprecedented attempt at enslaving all US citizens it is not.
To put things into perspective some random (as in don't trust the specific numbers but trust that the magnitude is correct) quotes about cost:
Bush Wars - $0,975,000,000,000
Bush Bailout - $8,000,000,000,000
Obama Bailout - $3,270,000,000,000
Obama Healthcare Reform - $0,849,000,000,000
Bottom line - politicians of all parties continue to milk tax payers for their personal agendas and to satisfy the needs of their cronies and have done so for a while.
The amount of money taken from the productive members of society for no structural benefit and with spurious reason in the name of healthcare is in line with other amounts taken from productive members of society for no real benefits and with spurious reasons (although around 30% of Americans apparently firmly believe that we actually found WMDs in Iraq. I am not even going to argue with that, except to point out that the Easter Bunny told me on good authority that was untrue.)
So, in arguing, stick with the specifics - the bill is bad because it doesn't accomplish anything. It doesn't fundamentally improve the complex and inefficient American Healthcare "market". This is a missed opportunity to do much good.
It is also *another* example of rampant and irresponsible spending by our elected representatives, one that is worthy of condemnation - but make damn sure you're honest enough to condemn all of this spending equally. Otherwise you'll end up looking as a hypocrite.
ACTION items: go elect politicians who give a damn and who care about process and self-correcting systems instead of pork and personal gain. And, yes, I know those are hard to find. If your can't find one, please run for office yourself.
so you're claiming "bush's bailout" had a cost of 8 **trillion** bucks?? *10 times* what bambam's (stated)(mendacious) costs for his healthcare abortion will run?
gosh, me, i *DO so* hate to express skepticism and negativity here on the internet, but gonna have to call BS on that one. in fact, i think you've overstated the bush bailout by a factor of 10 or so - thus making me wonder whether your 'innocent' mistake is in fact politically motivated. (the entry for "bush's wars" was telling. the democrat-controlled congress could have sealed the pursestrings and easily shut down "bush's" war in january of 2007. oddly enough, they didn't. maybe because THEY VOTED FOR IT?) you certainly seem happy enough to swallow without question the obama administration's laughably lowball estimate of their healthcare bill cost, which is odd, in light of the fact that history teaches us that when the democrats rammed their medicare through in 1965, (on the strength of the memory of their late martyred serial-adulterer junkie president), their cost estimates for "1990" were *understated* by a factor of about 800% or so. ("by 1990, because of cost savings generated by economies of scale and better buying power, medicare will cost only $12 billion a year!" - the 1966 democrat-controlled 'house ways and means' committee. "actual 1990 medicare cost: *$107 billion*, plus or minus," according to a 1993 'reason' mag article.) by 2003, the cato institute estimated actual (not claimed) medicare costs at $244 billion. this year? who knows? $400 billion? more? if we ask, think we'll get a straight answer? me neither.
if we're going to "stick with specifics", as you claim to desire, shouldn't they be - you know - the RIGHT specifics?
so why the fu..."heck" should we "reign in our anger"? are victims of con men supposed to remain timid and reasonable? is THAT what you're saying?
No, 0, that's not what I am saying.
In fact, I thought I was being rather specific when I pointed out above that those were random numbers pulled from a google query and that I didn't trust them further than as a magnitude estimate. To be explicit - in a base 10 system, that means all of these numbers fall in the same ballpark.
(The comment filter ate the earlier version of the post that contained the actual links, so, yes, it ended up less specific than I'd have liked)
By the problems unavoidable unless some "reigning in [of] anger" happens, I was referring to the exactly the type of trouble I have to take your reply seriously, due to the foam of paranoia that seems to have dripped onto your keyboard when you claim "my 'innocent' mistake" might be "politically motivated".
How you manage to get a political preference out of the statement that "politicians of all parties continue to milk tax payers for their personal agendas" is beyond me and makes me wonder what would have satisfied your ire... "the Republicans are good angels of the Lord and can do no wrong while the demonic Democrats clearly had a monstrously vile hidden agenda when they spent money on the orphans"? Get real.
In closing, the inability to see beyond party lines and support the overburdening of American tax payers by approving of spending when it's done by ones own chosen tribe and acting surprised and demonizing it when anyone else does it is exactly what I objected to.
Hold politicians accountable and reign in spending, especially the ones you support. And don't expect for a second that puerile finger pointing can help here.
I understand Obama's reasons and Pelosi's, but not their followers who derive zero benefit. They are not on the take. I am starting to wonder if liberalism is the disease of the mind. There is no common ground here at all. From where I stand, a small business is supposed to now pay for health insurance for all the employees and their families. Gee, What will I have to do. Just cut the salaries to compensate for the increase in healthcare costs. I will need to of course, put in some hi-definition security cameras to watch my employees to prevent them from stealing due to the cut in their wages. Now that is the free market at work.
Obamacare will be a boon for the Security industries...
Democrats & Republicans really do live in different worlds. Here's the democrat viewpoint on republican agitation against health care -
You didn't get mad when the Supreme Court stopped a legal recount and appointed a President.
You didn't get mad when Cheney allowed Energy company officials to dictate
energy policy.
You didn't get mad when a covert CIA operative got outed.
You didn't get mad when the Patriot Act got passed.
You didn't get mad when we illegally invaded a country that posed no threat to us.
You didn't get mad when we spent over 600 billion(and counting) on said illegal war.
You didn't get mad when over 10 billion dollars just disappeared in Iraq.
You didn't get mad when you found out we were torturing people.
You didn't get mad when the government was illegally wiretapping Americans.
You didn't get mad when we didn't catch Bin Laden.
You didn't get mad when you saw the horrible conditions at Walter Reed.
You didn't get mad when we let a major US city, New Orleans, drown.
You didn't get mad when we gave a 900 billion tax break to the rich.
You didn't get mad when the deficit hit the trillion dollar mark.
You didn't get mad when the president ignored the clear and timely warning that terrorists were going to hijack planes and fly them into the WTCs.
You didn't get mad when the weapons inspectors, who said there were no WMDs, were ignored.
You didn't get mad when hundreds of thousands of people died in Iraq.
You finally got mad when the government decided that people in America deserved the right to see a doctor if they are sick. Yes, illegal wars, lies, corruption, torture, stealing your tax dollars to make the rich richer, are all okay with you, but helping other Americans...oh hell no.