Our health care system
And I use the term loosely, since it really isn't a system in any sense that we understand that word.
"In 2009 Medicare expenditures will exceed $400 billion, representing 13% of the federal budget and about one-fifth of all US expensitures on health care." JAMA, Feb. 11, 2009 citing Medicare: A Primer 2009,
and remember please, it isn't "free" for those of us who use it. Also, the early boomers hit 64 this year. Someone didn't do the math back in 1965. All the years I worked, I paid into Medicare (because I wasn't on Social Security), and now I pay quarterly to use it, plus I have to buy Supplemental to a private company if I really want any coverage that's meaningful. Of course, this can't be sustained, but we also have Medicaid and SCHIP, so don't kid yourself, Obamacare will cost even more. Also keep in mind, that the more successful our Nanny State is at getting people to stop smoking, eat more vegetables and fruits, lose weight, exercise more, and not visit bathhouses to have sex with infected men, the longer people are going to live, which is just going to add to the health costs as 90 and 100 year olds eventually wear out from all that healthy living.
Posts
6 comments:
Do you suppose the gov't getting into the business had anything to do with the increase in costs? $148/person in 1960. "In 1970, total health care spending was about $75 billion, or only $356 per person. In less than 40 years these costs have grown to $2.2 trillion, or $7,421 per person." I think that's where I'd look for the culprit.
Anonymous, the anti-middle class policies that republicans have advocated since the Reagan revolution have certainly been a contributing factor, but it's not all the government's fault.
Consider auto insurance. Suppose there is a tea party condemning the nanny state for requiring all drivers to carry auto insurance, and the government decides to repeal the law.
Now suppose 10% of all drivers drop their coverage since it's no longer legally required. Accidents haven't dropped. These people can't cover all the damages out of pocket so uninsured motorist premiums begin to climb for everyone who still has insurance.
Since auto insurance is now 10% more expensive than it was a short time ago, even more people drop their coverage because they can no longer afford to keep it.
If you take this vicious cycle and fast forward 30 years, throw in a couple of recessions, a declining standard of living, you've got our health care system.
The biggest complaint against the government is that they failed to confront the problem when it was still manageable. And now that it's become a full blown crisis for everyone, the party of "no" (aside from Romney) still refuses to confront the problem.
No wonder republicans are becoming an endangered species.
I'm sure this made sense to you or you wouldn't have taken the time and thought to write it. For me. . . not so much. It could have been a requirement to have basic insurance with competition, just as it is with home and auto, but no the gov't offers us this hodge podge, made more expensive by its interference in the market.
Interestingly enough, I found your article dead on. I like the idea of "free" health care, who doesn't? But if the people are being tricked into it, and they end up paying more than they should, then that's definitely not a good thing at all.
Since you have obviously thought this through, how does a person with a pre-existing condition purchase insurance without the government "interfering" to make sure that they can?
Murray sez:
Trickery is a way of life with our legislators, Imee. They gave us the Prescription Drug Plan under the guise that it would "lower" (that's the trick word) drug costs for individuals. It did lower the costs for some people but the overall cost of drugs actually increased. The drug and insurance companies rejoyced all the way to the bank. Just one more item to hasten the financial failure of Medicare.
Post a Comment