Rising Costs?

[Bob Jenkins]

I have been holding back as this debate is an American issue and as a Canadian, it is really none of my business. However, I just have to say a few things, mainly because I care in that I have a lot of family and friends in the U.S. and because I see a lot of misinformation.

Firstly, I understand the bill recently passed in your congress is some 2700 pages. Sean asked if anyone had read it and frankly, I doubt that most of your congress has read it in full. It is enormously complex and I definitely cannot comment on the precise coverage issues you are facing with that enormous bill. I am a lawyer and I cannot understand why the bill should be so complex. Really!

What I can say is that from what I know of your bill, no one has any ability to take away your choice of any doctor. It is the same up here in our world of socialized medicine. Members of my family have faced and undergone very complex surgery and we have always had the ability to be able to confer with the medics and if we were not comfortable with someone, we have been able to have another surgeon or orthopaedic or whatever brought in. Recently with my oldest son who was facing some rather serious surgery, his specialist had recommended a certain procedure but there were issues. I asked for a second opinion (from a doctor who happened to be a member at my golf club) and there was no issue at all. We switched over to him. We felt more comfortable with the golfing doctor who ended up taking over. In a socialized medical system, we clearly had that choice.

Next, a good friend recently required back surgery. He is in senior management at a large construction company. Not life threatening but serious stuff and no particular urgency. He did not want to wait the 5 months that he was told of by his surgeon so what did he do? Went and had it done at a private clinic in Vancouver and his employer's insurance picked up the additional cost over what our provincial medical plan would pay. He is doing well. So we have that choice as well. I suspect you guys in the U.S. will have that choice as well.

To conclude and make me shut up, the fears about socialized medicine are greatly exaggerated. I understand your bill does not go close to a government run system such as we have but I can speak from much experience about such a system and we are all getting along fairly well, albeit with some problems which have been pointed out. And I am about as far from a socialist as you can get.

I wish all of you well. Please get back to talking about golf course architecture!

Regards,

Bob J

[Jim_Kennedy]

Jud,
We shouldn't be relying on others to feed us information, we should be finding out much of this stuff ourselves, from as many unbiased sources as we can find. How can you really believe that we're turning into Europe if you haven't come to that conclusion by your own research, instead of "defer(ring) to folks more knowledgeable than myself"?

Earlier Jeff Brauer said that Doctors were going to be forced to take less money. Had he spent the time looking into that question before he wrote what he did he would have found out that it was an innaccurate assessment of the situation. I don't think he would have made the post if he knew the truth.

I know that for me it's easier to sit back and listen to the ageeable instead of getting up and searching out the disagreeable, but the truth rarely comes to lazy men.

[Jeff Goldman]

Sooooo.....what do conservatives say when they are off by themselves?  Let's ask the Heritage Foundation, possibly the most conservative think tank around (anybody want to deny that?).

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Testimony/Laying-the-Groundwork-for-Universal-Health-Care-Coverage

Oops.  Individual mandate and subsidies for those who can't afford it.  Hasn't someone been trying to enact that recently.... not sure... must be John Boehner and the Republicans' proposal to counter Obama's commie proposal (supported by those commie traitors Bob Dole and Howard Baker) that is essentially....an individual mandate and subsidies for those that can't afford it.  Amazing.

[Ben Sims]

Jud,

I agree that this will end up costing us more money.  But......how about shutting NASA down.  How about scrapping some of these wasteful military programs.  Do we really need a replacement for the F-18?  Do we really need that Marine Helicpoter/Jet contraption that doesn't work?

Great argument.  Blame the military industrial complex for our spending woes.  No mention of Goldman Sachs?  Simply put Steve, yes, we do need these things.

We are the most powerful military in the history of the planet.  You don't stay that way by passing the buck to the next generation.  Average age of KC-135--our primary aerial refueler? 48 years.  How about that venerable F-18 Hornet of which you speak that pulls 9 G's and hucks itself at mach stink, day in day out?  28 years.  That Marine helicopter/jet contraption--the Air Force owns a few as well--that doesn't work?  First off, it's the CV-22 Osprey.  It hasn't had a class A mishap in a decade, is daily saving the lives of America's soldiers and airmen with increased speed and range, and is generally kicking ass and taking names in the infiltration and exfiltration of special operators throughout Afghanistan.

Sorry to get snippy, but it really pisses me off when folks even consider speaking of military spending as some sort of whipping boy for government waste.

[Jud_T]

My comment about becoming more like Europe goes beyond health care.  Big government, tax disincentive to big business and high earners, anti-free market regulation etc.  Makes my desire to retire to St. Andrews a no brainer!

[Jim_Kennedy]

My comment about becoming more like Europe goes beyond health care.  Big government, tax disincentive to big business and high earners, anti-free market regulation etc.  Makes my desire to retire to St. Andrews a no brainer!

I thought you didn't like Europe? Moving to St Andrews for the golf is a fine idea, but you will pay higher taxes on your personal income and you'll have be content with an 80 year old system of public healthcare.  

This is kinda' like a reverse of '60s America, where you had the 'rednecks' of the era telling the 'hippies' to either 'love it or leave it'  

[Jim_Kennedy]

Dave,
Tell it to Newt....

Or tell it to that other socialist Orrin Hatch, who along with 20 other socialist republican senators supported a 1993 GOP bill requiring an individual mandate. He's still in the Senate, and so are his three of his buddies who backed the mandate idea back then when it served them politically to do so. They are the socialists Grassley of Iowa, R. Bennett of Utah and Chris Bond of Missouri. By the way, the socialist president, George Bush Sr., was behind the idea.
 
Or tell it to the recent socialist republican majority head of the senate, Bill Frist who said:
"I believe in limited government and individual responsibility, cherish the freedom to choose, and generally oppose individual mandates—except where markets fail, individuals suffer, and society pays a hefty price. Let's face it, in a country as productive and advanced as ours, every American deserves affordable access to healthcare delivered at the right time. And they don't have it today. It is time for an individual health insurance mandate for a minimum level of health coverage."

As for arguing the legal footing, well, not being a lawyer would put me at a disadvantage, but after reading the opinions from unbiased, non-political constitutional scholars I am inclined to believe that because the mandate has been set up like a tax, and the federal government has taxing powers, the cases for repeal will be lost.   

[Cliff Hamm]

Here's where your tax dollars go (2008):



Here's where a Canadian's tax dollar goes (2004):



Notice one big difference?  Yes, defense spending.

Countries like Canad can afford "European socialism" because the US spends so much on defending them. They take care of their citizens and indirectly we are subsidizing them. I for one would rather spend money on US citizens and their welfare rather then defense.

p.s. Congratulations to all for keeping this discussion civil

[Brent Hutto]

Sadly, as one congressman related he was approached by a democratic congressman who felt federal funding for abortions was key to containing healthcare costs because abortions would mean fewer people to drain the healthcare system.

I thought them death panels was the key to containing costs. Hmmm, can't keep track of the boogey-men without a scorecard nowadays.

[Jud_T]

I give Obama credit for having the stones to go for it.  Can't wait to see what we ca tax and spend on next!

[Michael Blake]

Jud,

Wasn't he elected by a pretty large majority based on (among other things) his platform of doing exactly what he just did?

[Jim_Kennedy]

Sadly, as one congressman related he was approached by a democratic congressman who felt federal funding for abortions was key to containing healthcare costs because abortions would mean fewer people to drain the healthcare system. This type of pervasive attitude in the Democratic party is the main reason I left it. Killing the most innocent among us is beyond reprehensible and I think a travisty equal to the holocaust.

Not picking on you Kelly, but this is a perfect example of just how easily situations can get ginned up. Some people hear that remark and never ask the obvious questions, like "What supposedly democratic congressman thinks abortion would benefit healthcare" and "What supposedly republican congressman was told this".

Do you have the answers to those questions? Did you just hear or read this without asking those questions yourself? Are you content to believe that statement without finding out whether it's true or not ? If you asked republican congressman to provide the name of the supposed democrat and he wouldn't, saying that you'll just have to take his word, would you still believe him?

I'd like to know who said such a thing, just so I wouldn't ever find myself voting for him. 

[Jim_Kennedy]

Kelly,
Perhaps this is what you're talking about.

Stupak made the abortion/dollars/life comment and later had to clarify it because what he was saying was his perception, not the actual words of another democrat.

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MzU0MDYxMWEyOTdiNGU1OGU3ZjYzYmE3Y2ZlZDQ5NTY=




 

[Bob Jenkins]

Cliff Hamm,

The numbers and pie you show are interesting but only tell a part of the story. On the Canadian side, it shows the amount of federal transfer payments for health to the provincial governments who themselves spend a significant amount on health. I suspect there is some similar procedure in the U.S. but I have no idea what it would be.

[RJ_Daley]

The presidential order banning funding of abortions is a gimmick, the executive order is a weak tool, and clearly Stupak caved under the cover of the executive order, but I predict as the healthcare legislation unfolds we will be paying for the killing of babies, but the privilaged life of lawmakers will go on.

["It is therefore that the older I grow the more apt I am to doubt my own Judgment and to pay more Respect to the Judgment of others." BF/quote]

Somehow KBM, I don't see the sentiments of those two quotes ever coming together for you in your future.  I hope I'm wrong. 

A few things to consider:  Given the subject matter and relentless and persistent monitoring of the 'right to life' absolutists, it is hard to believe that Obama or anyone else would actually believe that 'a gimmick' could ever get a pass and somehow melt into the background.  As Stupak held out for months on the 'right to life' principle, he was the darling of the followers of that moral and religious principle, yet in your 'judgement' "he clearly caved" on the principle that he has been a life long advocate for, as much so as anyone.  Even an organization representing 'the judgement' of 59000 Catholic nuns supported the bill in the wake of the executive order. Yet, your prediction must be a product of your 'judgement'.  Which leaves me with wondering in context of your tag line; how old you will have to be and what proof you will have to see to actually doubt your judgement and perhaps respect the judgement of others, like say for instance, Stupak's?

[Jeff Goldman]

Shivas,

Read Scalia's opinion.  Almost, but not quite, as hilarious as the conservative opninions in Bush v Gore.  If a liberal had written it, every Republican in the Senate would call for his impeachment as the new William O Douglas.

Jeff

[Jim_Kennedy]

Kelly,
No congressman actually said that to Stupak, it was his misinterpretation of a conversation.

Executive orders aren't a 'joke', look at their history and you will see that thousands have been created by our presidents, and from both parties.

We're already subsidizing abortion because we buy health insurance from companies who include it in their policies. It doesn't matter if you never use it, don't want it in your policy, etc., the company still provides it to someone. We're all a part of the cycle unless we seek out an insurance carrier who doesn't provide any form of abortion insurance whatsoever.

Dave,
I don't know what the outcome will be, but in one sense no one is being forced to buy anything. Yes,there is a fine, but no one is going to be arrested or go to jail for not buying insurance. I think the socialist republicans Grassley, Hatch, Bennett, Bond, 20 or 30 more of their colleagues, and let's not forget our socialist republican president, George H.W. Bush, all had the right idea. Too bad they all gave it up, conveniently, when Obama became president and the mandate was again proposed in the health care bill that is now the law of the land.

Hypocrites.   

[Matthew Hunt]

So much for Health Care Reform....What this really is is Health Care Expansion to the tune of $930 Billion.  Anyone who really believes that this will actually reduce the deficit, I'll have a double of whatever you're drinking....

Americia spends around double per person on heath than the UK and is still less healthy.

[Jim_Kennedy]

I think it's on days like today, World Autism Awareness Day, that the the plusses of our new health care outshine any negative aspects, and it's not liike the negative aspect can't be corrected if the need arises.
 
http://www.autismvotes.org/site/apps/nlnet/content2.aspx?c=frKNI3PCImE&b=3930723&ct=8146949

It also illustrates that our new health care bill is about life, and the quality of it.