Wednesday, June 17, 2009

ObamaCare: Problematic At Best

"The only thing that saves us from the bureaucracy is inefficiency. An efficient bureaucracy is the greatest threat to liberty." ~ Eugene McCarthy

There is a point buried deep within all this debate about America's health care system, and whether it is adequate, horrible, or the best in the world:

There is no health care system in America.

There is, however, a free enterprise system, and that has worked very well since this country's inception.

In this free enterprise system, ideally, people in America are free to avail themselves to any kind of health care they think is best for them. Medical personnel, including not just doctors and nurses, but pharmaceutical companies and all health related occupations, can charge patients with what the market will bear for their products and services.

Somewhere along the way, a few enterprising men (and, presumably, women) saw a need for a business opportunity that would not only provide them with a living, but help Americans afford the rising costs of health care. It's called insurance.

Now, most Americans recognize the need for some kind of health insurance.

We also recognize that all of us have a right to either purchase health insurance or not. Some people buy insurance policies, and, for one reason or another, some don't.

Contrary to Liberal belief, Americans do not have a right to health care. We have the specific rights enumerated in the Constitution.

Health care is not listed among them.

But, unfortunately, most Americans need health insurance in the event of health problems. Also unfortunately, the cost of health insurance rises along with the costs of health care.

Many Americans cannot afford adequate health insurance. If we can't afford health insurance, we surely can't afford health care.

This is the point Obama is continually trying to make.

He wants us to believe that ObamaCare will solve these problems.

But it won't. And it can't.

The only way Obama's health care plan could work right is if he either requires payment for health care, or substantially reduces the costs of health care. And if he charges, who will he charge? If he reduces the costs, how will that effect quality?

I am all in favor of reducing the costs of health care to a point where every American can afford them, but how can he do that without violating the Constitutional right to free enterprise?

Will he force medical personnel and all medical related industries to stop charging fees for their services and products?

I know how to solve the health care crisis (if there is one) in this country:

All health-related personnel and industries must voluntarily offer their services and products for free. Obama can't Constitutionally compel them against their will to work for free. So, it has to be voluntary.

But wait a minute. If all medical personnel and industry start working for free, how are they to make a living? The only thing I can think of is they would all have to get regular jobs, such as Walmart, or McDonald's etc, to earn a living for themselves and their families and do their medical thing in their spare time.

Of course, this brings us back to inefficiency, exactly what ObamaCare will cause.

Impossible? Ridiculous? Unworkable?


But no more unworkable than Obama's naive health care plan.


Most Rev. Gregori said...

It is a huge problem and I am sure that there must be a solution that will satisfy everyone, I just cannot think of what it is.

Krystal said...

Another thing people aren't considering in all the health care debate here is what national health care will do to malpractice. Granted, malpractice suites are WAY out of control and are one of two chief causes of the cost of health care (tort reform and caps would eliminate the problem). However, there ARE legitimate lawsuits. Should the government take over, suing a doctor for LEGITIMATE cause would be akin to a veteran suing a doctor from the V.A. for LEGITIMATE reason.

In other words, there will be no recourse for medical malfeasance.

Now the other chief cause of medical care is the raping of the American public by the pharmaceutical companies. My son's RX is $400/month. The same thing in Canada hovers around $50. Same medication, same manufacturer. The medical supply companies (both types of companies are generally part of larger conglomerates such as Cardinal Health) also charge medical facilities in the U.S. much larger sums of money for the same medical equipment.

Now, should Idiotcare pass, the government will end the tort issue and put serious caps on how much pharmaceutical/medical supply companies can charge. Those measures will dramatically decrease the cost of health. Unfortunately, the savings will be eaten up by people who will run to the doctor for everything simply because it's "free".

The much-needed reforms could easily be done and the health care left free market. Everyone would be able to afford day to day health care and would be able to afford Major Medical. Unfortunately, most of our lawmakers, including both parties in Congress, aren't interested in doing this because they get so much money from lawyers and medical companies. No one is looking out for us. If they were, these KNOWN problems would have been addressed and corrected a decade ago.

Heli gunner Tom said...

I am in full agreement with most of what you say. America is sliding down the slippery slope may not even exist in a year or two! Go figure if we ran our budget and personal check book like obama does!

Just my personal opinion.

Tom S
Jesus is Lord.
Vietnam Veteran: 68-70.

Marshall Art said...

I don't believe in capping anything. As far as tort reform, there have been and will continue to be frivolous lawsuits. Deal with them as they arise and leave legitimate cases to play out as they ought. Awards for BS claims is something that is covered by voting for decent judges. A tough job, but everybody's got to do it. I'd rather a cheat get some coin rather than to deprive a legitimate claim from succeeding.

As far as "Big Pharma" goes, most people don't understand why the cost of drugs is so high. But this, too, can be helped by reviewing gov't regs and 86ing regs that don't make sense and artificially drive up costs. I don't think we can compare costs here and in a more socialist style of gov't as in Canada. Chances are, people are paying through taxation in order to pay less for the drugs when they're needed.

The free market with the fewest gov't regs is the only way to reduce the costs as far as any "system" of health care goes. Just as important but even more overlooked is what each of us does in our own lives to reduce costs. Healthy living reduces costs for each who lives well and impacts the industry's costs when more people take care of themselves.

The worst part about Obama care, and plans like it, is what we see in the public school system. We all pay for the public schools, even when we send our kids to private schools. But as we see, two major problems have arisen:

1. We pay too much to the school system and get too little out of it.

2. You can't force idiots to learn if they don't want to.

#2 really sticks in my craw. If I'm gonna pay, I want results. If I'm gonna pay more taxes for health care, I don't want to see people living unhealthy lifestyles which drive up the costs.

Any aid for the truly needy should be done locally and mostly through charitable organizations. In the end, people should pay for services they use.

Some try to relate this issue to things like roads and civil services. I don't think they're comparable. We all need cops and we all benefit from roads, whether we drive or not. But we don't all need health services and of those who do, to varying degrees.

The less the feds have to do with our lives the better.

Tonto said...

Why can't we do to health insurance what we did with Car Insurance in California?

Everyone HAS to have it and companies were deregulated so we had a flood of competetive companies selling it here and now the costs are WAY low and the quality is OUTSTANDING!

What am I missing?

We should do the same with cable!

Tonto said...

We do have the answers...the people who are in the "know" for whatever reason don't want the system to change.

Tonto said...

Mark - I am with you almost

The cost of healthcare here and prescriptions is allowed to run a mock because of RX lobbyists. THE ONLY GROUP WITH NO LOBBYISTS to protect our interests is US!

And people ARE going bankrupt to pay medical bills and that is just roberry and wrong. So something has to be done but by NO MEANS needs to happen the way Obama wants to...BESIDES we already know it doesn't work anywhere its been I am dumbfounded this idiots are even contemplating it.

Makes no sense.

Mark said...

Tonto, the problem is, the Government has no right to force people to do anything, especially when it involves spending our own money.

If Government wants to force the people to have insurance of any kind whether they want it or not, the Government should provide it for free.

But they will never do that.

They will find a way to make us pay for it, whether by taxes or by exorbitant fees.

The best thing to do is allow the people to decide if they want insurance or not, and let the people be responsible for themselves.

If I make a wrong choice, that's on me. No one else should have to pay for my screw ups, neither by taxes or law.

That's what the Conservative principle of personal responsibility is all about.

Joe said...

Mark, the basic premise, "the Government has no right to force people to do anything," is all we should need to know.

Sadly, neither the government, itself, nor most Americans believe that.