« No brakes | Main | Breaking: Barack Obama to get his First Supreme Court Appointment »

A Peek into Obama's Health Care System

Doug Ross links to a piece that gives us a peek into Barack Obama's vision of America's future when it comes to health care. Cutting costs will be the highest priority. According to Obama, the elderly and chronically sick are responsible for approximately 80% of health care costs. To bring down those costs will require dealing with some real moral issues. In order to help people deal with those moral issues, Obama recommends "some independent group that can give you guidance. It's not determinative, but I think has to be able to give you some guidance. And that's part of what I suspect you'll see emerging out of the various health care conversations that are taking place on the Hill right now."

Back in early February we learned about a massive new health care bureaucracy that was hidden in the stimulus bill. Well, what Obama described above sounds a lot like what Betsy McCaughy said was in the stimulus bill:

But the bill goes further. One new bureaucracy, the National Coordinator of Health Information Technology, will monitor treatments to make sure your doctor is doing what the federal government deems appropriate and cost effective. The goal is to reduce costs and "guide" your doctor's decisions (442, 446).

Doug Ross continues:

And where will Barack Obama be in ten years, when the rest of us are struggling with a massive, out-of-control, federalized medical system that doesn't give a damn about individuals and is busy rationing care, denying care to the elderly?

He will be retired as a very young man; a very wealthy young man, who will have imposed his Marxist ideology upon this society and then walked away from it.


TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/35506.

Comments (22)

"One new bureaucracy...will... (Below threshold)
GarandFan:

"One new bureaucracy...will monitor treatments to make sure your doctor is doing what the federal government deems appropriate and cost effective."

So the same 'bureaucracy' that sent a 747 and jet fighters over NYC for a "photo op" are going to decide what my doctor can and cannot do for me?

Hahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!

The Post Office doesn't run... (Below threshold)
JLawson:

The Post Office doesn't run at a profit. AmTrak hasn't ever turned one. There isn't a government agency that turns a profit aside from the IRS, and they're only doing it by snagging it from the people who actually create money here in the US.

So naturally it's time to let the government manage health care. NATURALLY!

What could POSSIBLY go wrong?

1) Is Wizbang linking back ... (Below threshold)
bryanD:

1) Is Wizbang linking back to Wizbang a form of cheating?

2) Betsy McCaughy seems to make sense here, but her association with the Frankenfoods** project aimed at the "third world" via ex-Monsanto/RAND, and her association with the neoconservative-imperialist turd bucket called The Hudson Institute causes me to consider her as only a forward pawn in the partisan struggle, not a disinterested commentator. I.e. B.M. is a BigGov lassie. Maybe a hack, can't find her website.

**Monsanto perfected barren PROPRIETARY seed crop for sale to "third world" nations. Customer buys seed for assigned/spec/export crop. Seed from said crop is barren, requiring more proprietary seed bought from same source/company. Instant customer base ad infinitum, turning farmers into sharecroppers. Think England "trading" opium for tea in China.

neoconservative-imperialist... (Below threshold)
Sue:

neoconservative-imperialist turd bucket

forward pawn

BryanD, you lose. No conservative will listen to anything you say, or even try to find information when you use these kinds of words. You show yourself as a partisan hack instead of someone who is giving information that we should look at. You instantly lose all credibility.

All socialist or State-spon... (Below threshold)
kevino:

All socialist or State-sponsored health care systems are rationing systems. Their job is to distribute a less-than-adequate supply of health care to the population. And this proposed bureaucracy will do the job:

1. The primary goal is to cut costs, and this it will do. Those that are no longer of value to the State will die, and this is far cheaper than giving them medical care. (That is not hyperbole: it is exactly what happens in Europe and the UK. Many old people simply cannot get treatment for very treatable conditions.) The State can do this by simply doing what it does best: delaying. If the people at the Post Office are responsible for your cancer diagnosis, you'd better get your will finished. By the time they authorize your treatment, it will be much too late. (I believe it was P.J. O'Roarke who said, "It's not hard to make health care cheaper: just make it bad.")

2. As social security stops being a source of income and starts becoming a drain on the budget, killing off the old becomes a high priority. State-sponsored health care will make that possible.

3. It will feed the State patronage system so that the powerful and well-connected patrons of Washington, DC (the DNC) will get good health care or will help facilitate access to good health care. If you get ill, knowing a well-connected DNC powerbroker will become a matter of life and death. This will keep them in power, and "Pay to play" will take on a whole new meaning.

4. It will provide the State with a whole new source of income. All that money that is collected by insurance companies and invested in the stock market will go the State instead. (Another huge blow to capital formation in this country, contributing to the continued decline of the economy.)

5. Tapping into health care costs will throw all of the budget numbers out the window. This will make it possible for our new DNC overlords to hide the true nature of the budget deficits that they have inflicted on us.

(I wonder if anything will be left of the US after this administration.)

My advice to everyone: STAY... (Below threshold)
"Technology, will monitor t... (Below threshold)
justpassinthrough:

"Technology, will monitor treatments to make sure your doctor is doing what the federal government deems appropriate and cost effective. The goal is to reduce costs and "guide" your doctor's decisions (442, 446)."

So in a nutshell you have a bureaucrat that can override a medical decision to save money.
So liberals how is this less evil than a current health insurance company?
Do you believe the quality of care will improve stay the same or get worse?

"neoconservative-imperialis... (Below threshold)
bryanD:

"neoconservative-imperialist turd bucket
forward pawn
BryanD, you lose. No conservative will listen to anything you say, or even try to find information when you use these kinds of words."
-sue

(N-I/TB) Hudson Institute is where old draft-dodgers go to drink kool-aid and accept fugazy Expert badges.
(Forward pawn) That was a compliment. It's a real chess term: a pawn which doesn't cover another pawn, but is foremost and covered itself, thus rendered STRONGER than a queen, theoretically. Per the article, B.M. occupies a strong position.

Brings a whole new meaning ... (Below threshold)
LaMedusa:

Brings a whole new meaning to the words, "Human Resources", doesn't it?

He will be retired as a ... (Below threshold)
Mike G in Corvallis:

He will be retired as a very young man; a very wealthy young man, who will have imposed his Marxist ideology upon this society and then walked away from it.

One way or another, I don't believe that Obama intends to retire and relax.

I wonder if a Colt .45 plac... (Below threshold)
Zelsdorf Ragshaft III:

I wonder if a Colt .45 place carefully against the temple of the individual making the decision as to whether or not to approve a proceedure is a viable options. Probably not, but if ones life is at stake? It does present an interesting option. After all, if you got nothing to lose, you have nothing to lose.

Don't we have a shortage of... (Below threshold)
Heralder:

Don't we have a shortage of physicians right now? How will a federalized Healthcare system help draw physicians? I can't see that it will, which would mean a shortage of physicians, further exacerbating poor treatment and greatly extended wait times for needed procedures.

Seems like a big mistake, this proposed Healthcare.

Just wait until the "Doctor... (Below threshold)
JLawson:

Just wait until the "Doctor Draft", Heralder.

Pay scales will be based on current military pay - after all, who WOULDN'T want to give up a lucrative private practice to work for the government for the equivalent of an O-4's pay?

We can set up medical schools like tech schools during the '60s and '70s, turning out lots and lots of doctors. Of course, their quality will be... variable... but it'll be 'free' healthcare!

Why do I get the feeling that all this 'free' crap is going to cost us considerably more than we ever imagined in our worst speculations?

Heralder -A given ... (Below threshold)
apb:

Heralder -

A given definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over, and expecting different results.

We're now stuck with the smartest socialists ever - now in charge of all three branches of the gummint. The ones that haven't learned from all the failures of socialized policy from the past century. The ones that screwed the financial system through socialist giveaways related to CRA. The ones that enriched themselves by doing so.

What could possibly go wrong?

Well, JL, as a physician wh... (Below threshold)
epador:

Well, JL, as a physician who left private practice in 1997 and joined the military, I can agree not many physicians would voluntarily agree to do so, but I'll bet if health care is Federalized, the smart ones WILL want a commission in a uniformed service OTHER than the USPHS.

The current system puts out doctors who have a huge debt, are trained to trade their compassion for placing their economic gain/security at the top of their to-do list, and encourages them to specialize rather than become Primary Care providers. All encouraged since Federal support to medical school tuition was removed in 1976. By a Democrat-controlled Congress.

Epador -In 23 year... (Below threshold)
JLawson:

Epador -

In 23 years in the AF and AF Reserve, I met doctors who were dedicated and expert, and doctors who were (in my humble layman's opinion) just a few steps above medieval bloodletters. Is it really that hard to interpret an ankle x-ray and see a tendon pulled away from the bone?

But the doctors I saw were all volunteers (pretty much) and I was glad they were there. They were, however, taking care of a medically screened and relatively healthy group - not a random sampling of the population.

So I'm a trifle concerned when the military medical system is held up as a possible model for a universal health care system. It just seems to me like there's far too many ways the system isn't prepared for it, and too few ways for the system to adapt quickly (and economically) to the needs that would be placed on it.

So now would be a good time... (Below threshold)
hyperbolist:

So now would be a good time to suggest to your elected government officials that med school tuition be federally funded again, right epador?

Frankly, Hyper - I see that... (Below threshold)
JLawson:

Frankly, Hyper - I see that as being a MUCH cheaper alternative than what's coming, and much more likely to have the desired results of making more doctors available.

But I'm afraid Obama's in the "Throw money at the problem, and if that doesn't take care of things double the amount thrown" mode, regardless of whether it'll actually take care of the problem or not re medical care...

It's a good point. In Canad... (Below threshold)
hyperbolist:

It's a good point. In Canada, plastic surgery is elective (obviously) and paid for out of pocket, so a lot of the strongest med students take that stream so that they can work fewer hours and earn far more money than an average GP.

I'm not sure what the solution is, but it can't be to accommodate the economic aspirations of those who would rather inject Botox into ladies-who-lunch than treat sick children.

Seems to me that'd be a rat... (Below threshold)
JLawson:

Seems to me that'd be a rather self-limiting branch, Hyper.

However, re-virginizing operations once shari'a law becomes established in Canada might be QUITE profitable...

Har har har. I've said it d... (Below threshold)
hyperbolist:

Har har har. I've said it dozens of times here: Shari'a law was proposed by the Muslim community in liberal Ontario. They wanted a Supreme Court ruling. The Premier simply said (and I paraphrase), "No, that doesn't fit with what we're trying to do here." It died with nary a whimper.

Then, a Conservative candidate for that same job torpedoed his own campaign when he said that since Catholics get their own school boards (and have since the founding of our country), then Jews and Muslims should have the same right. That effectively ended his own career ambitions.

The Great Brown Menace, defanged by common sense pluralistic liberalism!

Here's a link to a Reuters ... (Below threshold)
Boots:

Here's a link to a Reuters story on forced abortions in China:

http://www.reuters.com/article/lifestyleMolt/idUSTRE53T04D20090430?sp=true

If the government is "paying" for all of your wants and needs, the government gets to decide if you can obtain medical care, or even worse, it sends officers to drag you out of your home and perform a medical procedures on you, including a "remedial procedure" (newspeak for abortion).




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy