Dem. Congresswoman Admits Obama’s Health Care Plan Will Destroy Private Insurance, page 3

reply to post by ofhumandescent

---

I do not like insurance companies. They are gambling on our potential misery and looking for ways to squirm out of liability.

But, socialized medicine has failed everywhere it has been implemented, despite what Michael Moore may say.

I have acute personal experience with catastrophic injury, terminal illnesses, and insurance coverage disputes.

However, it does not help the argument to use sympathy and compassion, or to ugnore reality.

The story you linked to complains that the major problems with health insurance are their overhead (advertising) and profits.

1st, every business advertises. It is the cost of doing business in a free enterprise society. We still are basically a free enterprise society, but likely not for much longer.

As for profits, I agree that exorbitant profits indicate a market out of balance. The reality is that it is not true for the health care/managed care industry.

The largest net profit margins of the top 50 industries are in communications equipment (29%), mining and exploration (24%), Pharmaceuticals (16%), Medical products and equipment (15%), and banks (13%).

Health care and managed care (e.g., United Health Group, WellPoint, Aetna, Humana, and Cigna) average 6% profit margins. They rank 28th of the top 50, in the same range as food producers, computers, telecom, and refineries.

This is not thievery or exploitation.

That said, Obama's nationalized health care is not the answer. Personal control and market forces are the real solution.

As for Obama's "socialized medicine," consider how HE describes it in general and as it related to his grandmother's 'end-of-life' healthcare.

This is the same Barack Obama (talking about his grandmother’s hip replacement while suffering from terminal cancer) who described for the NYT last Sunday how under his plan for nationalized health care a ‘group of outsiders’ would have to make the determination about funding expensive care and treatment, especially for “end of life” situations?

Who will ration health care by balancing your value to society against the costs of your care.
www.nytimes.com...

President Obama admitted he wants the government to decide what health care Americans receive. "There's always going to be an asymmetry of information between patient and provider," he said. "And part of what I think government can do effectively is to be an honest broker in assessing and evaluating treatment options."
Obama says the need for third-party brokers "certainly [is] true when the taxpayers are footing the bill and we have an obligation to get those costs under control." That is, considerations of cost come before care, and sometimes rules before reason.
He explained that "the chronically ill and those toward the end of their lives are accounting for potentially 80 percent of the total health care bill out here." For them, he said, "I think that there is going to have to be a conversation that is guided by doctors, scientists, ethicists. And then there is going to have to be a very difficult democratic conversation that takes place. It is very difficult to imagine the country making those decisions just through the normal political channels."
The time to really worry about your health is when a government bureaucrat, not your personal doctor, tells you what treatment you can have. Yet that's exactly the scenario Obama endorses. This necessarily leads to health care rationing. Nobody in the government or in any "political channels" should tell people how to make decisions about "the end of their lives."

www.washingtontimes.com...

This thread is not to defend insurance carriers, but to expose the Obama agenda and suggest that other alternatives than nationaliztion exist and will better serve our families and ourselves.

jw

reply to post by jdub297

---

first off, clearly define 'socialized' medicine.

secondly, please show us some detailed PROOF that 'socialized' medicine has been a failure everywhere implemented, or even most of the places it has been implemented. in doing so PLEASE provide a definition of what the goals you are using to measure the success / failure of these health care systems.

the health care industry may not be making the most money in the usa. however looking at the average per capita cost of health care here in comparison to other nations with so called 'socialized' medicine the usa is defiantly lagging behind. this does not even include the 50 million americans who cant even afford any insurance what so ever.

The Link

# 1 United States: $4,631.00 per capita
# 2 Switzerland: $3,222.00 per capita
# 3 Germany: $2,748.00 per capita
# 4 Iceland: $2,608.00 per capita
# 5 Canada: $2,535.00 per capita
# 6 Denmark: $2,420.00 per capita
# 7 France: $2,349.00 per capita
= 8 Belgium: $2,268.00 per capita
= 8 Norway: $2,268.00 per capita
# 10 Netherlands: $2,246.00 per capita
# 11 Australia: $2,211.00 per capita
# 12 Austria: $2,162.00 per capita
# 13 Italy: $2,032.00 per capita
# 14 Japan: $2,011.00 per capita
# 15 Ireland: $1,953.00 per capita
# 16 United Kingdom: $1,764.00 per capita
# 17 Finland: $1,664.00 per capita
# 18 New Zealand: $1,623.00 per capita
# 19 Spain: $1,556.00 per capita
# 20 Portugal: $1,439.00 per capita
# 21 Greece: $1,399.00 per capita
# 22 Czech Republic: $1,031.00 per capita
# 23 Hungary: $842.00 per capita
# 24 Slovakia: $690.00 per capita
# 25 Mexico: $491.00 per capita

third and finally, imho it is all about Single Payer




[edit on 10-5-2009 by Animal]

reply to post by Animal

---

The thread is not about "socialized medicine." It is about Obama's hidden agenda.

As for money spent per capita, that is more the result of the consumer being left out of the equation. When the payor and the provider serve each other's interest the consumer suffers, regardless of the type of pocket the money comes from.

The object then becomes "gaming the system."

Insurance is really the equivalent of a "single payer" system. No carrier will pay more for X than its competitors.

Even when the government is the payor, the provider adjusts the care provided to maximize its return. That's why Medicare and Medicaid fraud are rampant.

Insurance should be eliminated from the basic health care equation, but not to substitute government in its place.

A transition to consumer oriented-health care, with market-driven prices will not be quick or cheap, but it will be less expensive than the government-run and insurance-oriented programs we live and die with right now.

jw

Originally posted by jdub297
reply to post by Animal

---

The thread is not about "socialized medicine." It is about Obama's hidden agenda.

actually this thread is about how obama's move towards what you and many others choose tot title 'socialized health care' will destroy 'private insurance'.

while i agree it WILL destroy 'private health care, i also take acception to the value and inherent worth of the present 'private health care' system. it is a broken system that is focused more on turning profits than on insuring the HEALTH of the people.

you clearly stated that socialized health care is ALWAYS a failure, something i also take acception with. yet you failed ot even address my request for you to back up that claim.

so while obama's move towards socialized medicine will kill our current industry it is imho for the better of the HEALTH of the people.

[Originally posted by Animal
reply to post by jdub297

third and finally, imho it is all about Single Payer

Perhaps you should tell your President and his Congress:

Democrats especially bristle at the allegation that they hope to create a fully government-run, or "single-payer," health system of the kind seen in Canada and Britain.

In fact, Obama and Democratic leaders have effectively ruled out that option in discussions so far, leading angry left-wing activists to disrupt a Senate hearing on the issue last week.
"We are not Europe. We are not Canada," Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.), who is leading the debate over a health-care plan as chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, said in a recent speech. "We need a uniquely American solution. It has to be a partnership of public and private players."

www.washingtonpost.com.../components


Which 'single-payer'system were you referring to? Obama says it's not his; nor is it Canada's or any European country's!

# 1 United States: $4,631.00 per capita [in health care expenditures.]

Why are you against giving an American family of 4 almost $20,000 tax-free of their own moneyevery year to set aside for basic health care?

Especially if major costs are covered or underwritten by a collective "pool" of catastrophic injury/illness funds (at much less or no cost to the Feds)!

deny ignorance

jw

Originally posted by Animal

you clearly stated that socialized health care is ALWAYS a failure, something i also take acception with. yet you failed ot even address my request for you to back up that claim.

As I type this, the Diane Rehm Show on NPR is broadcasting a program on Obama's plans, single-payer, and other countries' experience with national or socialized health care programs.

Odd, how the EU and UK representatives are so negative and critical of their own systems.

Since all who have tried have failed, it would be very easy for you to find one that works.

Hint: I think Finland has met with public approval, although they face a shortage of providers. However, theirs is more like a 'mandatory insurance' program, with limits on expense reimbursement (just like insurance):

The government social insurance agency (Kansaneläkelaitos, or KELA) provides assistance to residents in paying for healthcare. Reimbursement of medical expenses is available for doctor's fees, dental care costs, examination and treatment charges, and more. Please note however that reimbursement is not calculated on the basis of the actual costs, but a schedule of fixed charges indicating the maximum cost covered.

.www.expat-finland.com...

The basic problem of public-funded, national, health care is the conflict between supply and demand.

Consumers will always take as much of a "free" commodity or service as they can get. Resource, like providers, without a profit incentive, and employees like doctors and nurses, whose incomes will be slashed and capped by "civil-service" type rules, will quickly become scarce.

Canada has a tremendous doctor shortage. The EU and UK have limited availability of diagnostic tools and equipment, creating waits for service.

Moreover, most nationalized health care programs do not effectively address "alternative" health care. Nurse practitioners, homeopathy, chiropractic services, and holistic medicne providers lose out without government recognition.

Why not be able to choose how you spend your own money?

deny ignorance

jw

[edit on 11-5-2009 by jdub297]

reply to post by jdub297

---

What about the 50,000,000 human beings who live in this this country and can not afford ANY coverage?

Sorry, while I am ready to admit there is no perfect solution, the system we are employing is without a doubt more broken than any socialized system you can present.

Sure, ignoring the 50,000,000 people who don't get to see a doctor makes the comparison of ours vrs. theirs a no brainer, but to achieve this you leave out a HUGE variable.

reply to post by Animal

---

Another person blindly blathering that 50 million Americans can't afford health care. A little research might help. Begin by not listening to Michael Moore or Katie Couric and get some actual facts here: 2007 Census. Page 22 has a nice break down.

You'll find the actual starting number is 45 million and
- over 14% of the 45 million make over $50k a year (explain how they cannot afford it?)
- and it also INCLUDES 49% of "people" who aren't actually American citizens. (A Nationalized health care system would probably require you to be an actual citizen of this nation)

Feel free to begin using 18 million which is around 7% of the population.

Originally posted by Animal
reply to post by jdub297

---

What about the 50,000,000 human beings who live in this this country and can not afford ANY coverage?

Are you advocating insurance for them?

Of those 50MM estimated to have no insurance, you are assuming all of them "cannot afford ANY coverage." Really?

How many do not want coverage, or are happy with Medicaid or Medicare? Or are covered under State programs like the Massachusetts boondoggle? (I think this is the same State that gives away cars with all expenses paid (including AAA) to its welfare recipients.)

Many states and counties already offer free or subsidized basic health care! Free childhood vaccinations and pre-school (as early as 2 years old) programs supplement many states' post-natal and early development health programs, usually implemented by county health departments and independent clinical contractors. Similar programs are available for aged and disabled residents. (I know several such contractors in Texas.)

I have no problem with a publicly-funded 'safety net.' Generally, it is already in place.

Sure, ignoring the 50,000,000 people who don't get to see a doctor makes the comparison of ours vrs. theirs a no brainer, but to achieve this you leave out a HUGE variable.

I can't imagine how 50MM are a variable. They are a fact of any society. Some people live their entire lives dependent on public resources. That is a given, not a "variable." That is why every state has a "Public Health" department, "Child Services," and "Social Services" programs.

Of course, under your President's program, those who can't contribute to society will be at the bottom of the list of competing claims for health care resources.

(Have you read his own words about rationing scarce resources? Outside groups making the determination of which services should be provided and which denied based on 'value of life'?)


jw

Originally posted by jjkenobi
reply to post by Animal

---

Another person blindly blathering that 50 million Americans can't afford health care. A little research might help.
...
Feel free to begin using 18 million which is around 7% of the population.

STAR!

You beat me to it! I revised my post anyway.

It is truly sad how many people believe what they are told to believe and are indifferent to or apathetic toward the truth and how easy it is to find by thinking for themselves and doing their own research.

Amazing really that so many of these so duped have access to the Internet but cannot distinguish truth from lie, fact from propaganda.

The BHO administration and its dependents are counting on ignorance to prevail and open doors to their social revolution.

jw

Originally posted by jdub297

But, socialized medicine has failed everywhere it has been implemented, despite what Michael Moore may say.

Excuse me? This is an absolutely ridiculous assumption!

Are you aware that publicly funded healthcare plans are being used in every wealthy developed nation besides the U.S.? Source

Would you care to explain how every single wealthy developed nation besides the U.S. has a failed health care system?

Because it's 100% not true.



You can't simply make facts up to enforce your point.

Originally posted by drwizardphd
Excuse me? This is an absolutely ridiculous assumption!

Are you aware that publicly funded healthcare plans are being used in every wealthy developed nation besides the U.S.? Source

Would you care to explain how every single wealthy developed nation besides the U.S. has a failed health care system?

Because it's 100% not true.



You can't simply make facts up to enforce your point.

Absolutely Right…! As an American who was living in the UK for two and a half years, and paid into and received treatment on the NHS, I can without a doubt say that I found it to be far superior to the US healthcare system. To this extent, you ask many Brits their opinion of it, and though they’ll grumble a bit and complain for various reasons, as we Americans do about our hospitals and clinics for various reasons, but they wouldn’t give it up for the world…why? Because it works, because it is effective, because everyone deserves the same standard level of healthcare, not just the people who can afford it…

And I’m sure that most people in countries with Socialized medical systems would agree…in fact, I work with a nurse who is Canadian, married to an American, who decided to give up her Greencard after 12 years, to go back to Canada for the Healthcare system, because it was better than in the States, to have to reapply for a Greencard…

My wife is British, and if we ever had a serious problem, I’d suggest she does the same…unless something changes…big time.

Our Health Insurance Industry is nothing but a con game that, in its application, acts to the detriment of the pursuit of far too many people’s lives, liberty and pursuit of happiness.

reply to post by charlie0

---

As you requested (actually, before you requested) people have spoken out about their care in the UK, Canada and the EU. It stinks.

"Socialized Failure - Dissecting health-care data from Britain, Canada, and Elsewhere"
nrd.nationalreview.com...

"DOES THE UNITED STATES SPEND MORE ON HEALTH CARE THAN OTHER COUNTRIES?" (note to mods: copied as published)
www.ncpa.org...

Michael Moore is wrong and misleading. The facts are there if you care to look.

I don't trust Obama to put anyone's interests ahead of his own.

jw

Originally posted by drwizardphd

Originally posted by jdub297
But, socialized medicine has failed everywhere it has been implemented, despite what Michael Moore may say.

Excuse me? This is an absolutely ridiculous assumption!

Are you aware that publicly funded healthcare plans are being used in every wealthy developed nation besides the U.S.? Would you care to explain how every single wealthy developed nation besides the U.S. has a failed health care system?

Because it's 100% not true.

Yes it is. Canada can't keep doctors. EU patients have to wait for diagnostics and surgery. UK patients are turned away or made to wait.

The U.S. has almost 2X the Dr./patient ratio of every industrialized nation and 40% more diagnositc tools and 2X spending on R&D.

Explanation?

"Socialized Failure - Dissecting health-care data from Britain, Canada, and Elsewhere"
nrd.nationalreview.com...


"Does The United States Spend More On Health Care Than Other Countries?
www.ncpa.org...

You're excused.

jw

[edit on 11-5-2009 by jdub297]

reply to post by madhatr137

---

1st Obama and Congress have explicitly stated that they will not follow the EU, UK or Canadian systems in their plan.

Second, I don't like insurance companies either, but a government-run health care system is not the answer.

Thank goodness your family hasn't been disappointed or mistreatewd elsewhere. Many have. Your wife may want to consider working in Canada, as they are short right now.

jw

Originally posted by jdub297

As you requested (actually, before you requested) people have spoken out about their care in the UK, Canada and the EU. It stinks.

That's pretty funny, considering there is a post directly above yours contradicting that claim with personal experience.

Originally posted by jdub297
"Socialized Failure - Dissecting health-care data from Britain, Canada, and Elsewhere"
nrd.nationalreview.com...

Of course if you source right-leaning publications, they are going to say bad things about socialized medicine.

If you look at an unbiased source, such as the World Health Organization, you will see that the United States ranks in at a lowly 37th in overall health system effectiveness, and a staggering 72nd on overall level of health.

That means, that there are 72 nations healthier than us, and 37 of them have better-performing healthcare systems. Canada, Switzerland, the UK, even Cuba beat us on these statistics, and all have socialized healthcare plans.

And what do we get for having such crappy health? The #1 spot for highest cost per capita. That's right, we pay the most in this country, for the 72nd best level of health. If you can't see a problem with that, then I honestly don't know what to say.

Originally posted by jdub297
Michael Moore is wrong and misleading. The facts are there if you care to look.

What the hell does Michael Moore have to do with any of this?

Originally posted by jdub297
I don't trust Obama to put anyone's interests ahead of his own.

I don't want to turn into Dr. Psychology APA here, but usually when people don't trust someone they've never met, its because they are deceitful themselves and project their own inner distrust onto others.

In other words, people with negative intentions often assume others have negative intentions as well.

Originally posted by jdub297
reply to post by madhatr137

---

1st Obama and Congress have explicitly stated that they will not follow the EU, UK or Canadian systems in their plan.

Second, I don't like insurance companies either, but a government-run health care system is not the answer.

Thank goodness your family hasn't been disappointed or mistreatewd elsewhere. Many have. Your wife may want to consider working in Canada, as they are short right now.

jw

If only we could have a system like theirs, only better....as America is supposed to do everything better, right?

And if only my family hasn't been disappointed or mistreated by the health insurance system...my brother's ex-wife got into a severe car accident several years ago...the type where the police on the scene wonder "how in the hell did she survive", despite the fact that she spent 2 weeks in the ICU...his insurance company, he is in the armed services, did what they could to get out of paying as much as they could...and he was left with 10Ks worth of debt that would have forced him into bankruptcy, had my parents not intervened and taken out a loan to pay of the hospital bill...because his credit score wasn't high enough to take out the size loan that he needed...a loan which they are all still paying back today...of course, once she was healed up well enough...she, left him, leaving him with the bill...

Family tragedy, yeah...but one that plays out time after time....

But, anyway, he's remarried now to a much better woman and has a 8-9 year old step daughter and had a son 7 month ago and is happier than ever...

Happy ending to a sad story afterall.

BREAKING rumour: Kim Jong-Un assassinated?
  Posted 0 days ago with 58 member flags

Iran, perceiving threat from West, willing to attack on U.S. soil, U.S. intelligence report finds
  Posted 10 days ago with 41 member flags

Parents furious as 13-year-old girls given contraceptive implants at school without their knowledge
  Posted 2 days ago with 28 member flags

European Parliament Official In Charge Of ACTA Quits, And Denounces The \'Masquerade\' Behind ACTA
  Posted 15 days ago with 26 member flags

Record 1.2 Million People Fall Out Of Labor Force In One Month, Labor Force Participation Rate Tumbl
  Posted 7 days ago with 25 member flags

Romney Reports Income From Funds at Goldman Sachs
  Posted 17 days ago with 23 member flags

Again, Eric Holder Caught Lying Under Oath Regarding F&F!!! He knew about Agent Terry\'s Murder
  Posted 11 days ago with 23 member flags

Catholic Church Strikes back at Obama Administration
  Posted 12 days ago with 23 member flags

Newest topics, updated in real-time:

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time: