« I Call Bull On This One -- Just How Stupid Do They Think You Are? | Main | National Keep-Your-Kids-Out-Of-School-Day »

The Top 5 Lies About Obama's Health Care Reform

Newsweek, still carrying water for Obamacare, details the supposed "top 5 lies about Obama's health care reform" in the forthcoming issue. Not surprisingly they completely ignore the lies spread by Obama himself.

Here, in very abridged form, are some of the whopping lies about health care reform from the President himself.

1) The first lie is that there is an actual Health Care Reform plan from President Obama.

The White House talks about what they're for (and against), but purposely did not submit proposed legislation to Congress. They're relying on Congress to draft legislation that meets their goals. This makes it infinitely easier to discuss specifics of "their plan" that are hard to fact check because there is no plan.

2) "If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan."

Keith Hennessey, upon whom most of the information below relies, shows that's not true, and that even underestimates the possibility that the legislation is designed to eventually destroy the employer provided insurance market via the "public option."

3) "This is not about putting the government in charge of your health insurance".

If it wasn't about putting the government in charge it wouldn't take over 1,000 pages to legislate. Read Keith Hennessey's full health care debate post to see several examples of how the rhetoric from Obama details several ways he's promising that government will be in charge.

4) "And we will do this without adding to our deficit over the next decade. First of all, I said I won't sign a bill that adds to the deficit or the national debt."

Poopeycock...

The CBO shredded that statement when H.R. 3200 was first introduced, and to date no one on Capital Hill has figured out a way to pay for Obamacare. This pledge is from the same man who swore he would accept public financing (and the limits they impose) for his Presidential campaign.

5) "I don't have to explain to you that nearly 46 million Americans don't have health insurance coverage today."

But it would help if you quit lying about that statistic. It is amazing what scant mention the fallacy of the "46 million uninsured" gets in coverage of health care reform. There number of people without health care coverage who may (or may not) need coverage far smaller; it's actually in the 10 to 15 million range.

These are just five quick items I picked out from among the many Newsweek missed. I imagine that our commenters will have their own lists...



TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/36637.

Comments (33)

Please refer to the magazin... (Below threshold)
GarandFan:

Please refer to the magazine by it's correct name, NEWSPEAK.

Libs are all a bunch of hyp... (Below threshold)
GianiD:

Libs are all a bunch of hypocritical, lazy, non self reliant lying mofos.

My biggest concern right no... (Below threshold)
RicardoVerde:

My biggest concern right now is that Obama will come back from vacation and present a much more livable (at least in the short term) health care plan. Any nose under the tent would be seen as victory for "The One". Trumpets will surely blare and confetti will fall. It's possible that they will appear to throw the left enough under the bus to keep O viable and gradually sneak the government control stuff when most voters go back to snoozing.

As I've said before, I'm not so much afraid of the wizard as I am of those guys behind the curtain.

Actually, it appears that O... (Below threshold)
Sabba Hillel:

Actually, it appears that Obama and his people are promoting the case against ObamaCare (or should we now call it KennedyCare?). All we have to do is read what he calims are myths and we see the truth about it.

What Giani said. ww... (Below threshold)
WildWillie:

What Giani said. ww

Here's another lie. Obama ... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:

Here's another lie. Obama claims that shifting resources to prevention will bring down costs in the long run. Studies such as here, here, and here demostrate that the longer a particular demographic lives the higher their lifetime healthcare costs. The least expensive group are obese heavy drinking multiple pack a day smokers. The most expensive group are thin women who like to exercise. It turns out that in the area of keeping healthcare costs low and keeping retirement plans solvent the Russians are way ahead of us.

The only way to spend less on healthcare and spend more on prevention is to spend less on end-of-life care, and the only way to ration such care is by instituting a government death panel, just as Palin warned.

Actually, that 10-15 millio... (Below threshold)

Actually, that 10-15 million is more like 3.5 to 7.5 million. If you read even deeper into what the Census Bureau has to say they indicate that from half to 2/3 of those "without health insurance" are without insurance for less than a full year (that is, between jobs for example).

In other words - we're doing all this for well under 10 million people (even in the current economic climate). You can't tell me that it makes more sense to tamper with the health care of 290 million than to just provide additional services (such as for those with pre-existing conditions) for 10 million. Well, you can, but I sure as hell won't believe you.

6. Obamcare will not pay fo... (Below threshold)
Jeff Blogworthy:

6. Obamcare will not pay for abortions.

Lie. Amendments to specifically exclude abortion defeated by Democrats.

7. Obamacare will not cover illegal aliens.

Lie. Democrats claim it will not, then reject any enforcement provisions.

8. Obamcare will not cover sex change operations.

Lie. Obamacare is to cover "any service deemed medically necessary or medically appropriate." Can you say "hole big enough to drive a truck through?"

Page 972 of the House version of the bill (H.R. 3200) provides for "standards, as appropriate, for the collection of accurate data on health and health care" based on "sex, sexual orientation [and] gender identity." The Senate draft indicates that the government will "detect and monitor trends in health disparities," requiring the Department of Health and Human Services to "develop standards for the measurement of gender." (i.e., officially recognize subjectively self-determined "transgender" or "transsexual" gender identities). It further mandates "participation in the institutions' programs of individuals and groups from...different genders and sexual orientations." So, does ObamaCare expressly stipulate that taxpayer-funded "sex-change" operations will be provided? No, but neither does it explicitly require coverage for heart bypass surgery. Don't forget; we're talking about what's "medically appropriate" here -- and look who gets to make that subjective determination: Your doctor? No, it's... bureaucrats within the Democratic Party.
I'm SHOCKED! SHOCKED AND A... (Below threshold)
GarandFan:

I'm SHOCKED! SHOCKED AND APPALLED! The very thought, our President LYING to us! Who would ever have believed this! Next thing you'll be telling me is that the President DID NOT sleep through 20 years of sermons by the good Reverend Wright.

Great memo from Hennessey. ... (Below threshold)
Wordygirl:

Great memo from Hennessey. I've been trying to educate myself on this possible legislation (REALLY educate myself, not just listen to a bunch of talking heads), and I would love to find something that succinctly outlines the major debate points (pros and cons) in the proposed legislation. If anyone has any other suggestions, please respond.

Appears to be a dearth of c... (Below threshold)
GarandFan:

Appears to be a dearth of certain people in this thread.

Heard the part in the Healt... (Below threshold)
Madalyn:

Heard the part in the Health care bill about covering illegal immigrants have been taken out. Also heard that the reason is because behind the scenes they are planning amnesty for all illegals which would then make them legal.
Anyone else want to cry FOUL?
We need to be VERY vigilant. These criminals need close monitoring. I don't want their death panel deciding I need a pill instead of a lung, heart, or liver transplant. They have all the health insurance and coverage they could possibly want. Why, oh why does our Mr. Looking for my Manhood hate us peons so? OH, now I remember. I didn't contribute to his coffers, and I had the audacity to speak my piece about what a lying, two-faced, piece of shit he is.
I've stated my opinion.
Madalyn

The lies being spread in th... (Below threshold)

The lies being spread in this and other conservative blogs about health care reform are profoundly dishonest, taking sections of each proposal out of context while ignoring other provisions.

johnrj08.wordpress.com/2009/08/18/what-is-malkins-agenda/

The lies being spr... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:
The lies being spread in this and other conservative blogs about health care reform are profoundly dishonest, taking sections of each proposal out of context while ignoring other provisions.

Nothing at the link you provided counters the lie I exposed in post #6. The lie liberals are propagating is that the current bills are the end of the changes, when history shows that government programs continue to expand. Ultimately, end-of-life care must be rationed in some way to contains costs, and once healthcare is government funded it will be a government bearcat or panel that will decide who gets what care. You only have to listen to what Obama himself was saying before he was President to see where he intends to go with healthcare reform. The current legislation is just the first round.

. . .bureaucrat or p... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:

. . .bureaucrat or panel. . .

Obamacare in 2009 has the s... (Below threshold)
dom youngross:

Obamacare in 2009 has the same ultimate goal as McCaincare had during the 2008 presidential campaign: Tax your employer-provided private medical-dental insurance benefit out of existence and thow you into a vast pay-more/get-less pool.

Also, you'd think the under-30 crowd who know Social Security won't be handing them monthly checks when they hit 62 would similarly catch on to Obama's health-care insurance Ponzi swindle.

When it comes right down to it -- health care or whatever -- anything that is a good deal for you would inevitably cut into their status-quo, spread-da-wealth/keep-what-sticks-to-your-fingers profit margin.

JohnRJ08 will be right back... (Below threshold)
GarandFan:

JohnRJ08 will be right back as soon as Howard Dean supplies him with additional talking points which will have nothing to do with the argument at hand.

The first lie was good to ... (Below threshold)
914:

The first lie was good to go..

Theme : 6 Main Lies Have No... (Below threshold)
hsr0601:

Theme : 6 Main Lies Have Nothing To Do With This Promising Reform / Without reform, Medicare system doomed.

If the findings of CBO over inaction had been released earlier, Ted Kennedy could've seen his lifetime wish come true.

Inaction cost, $9trillion over the next decade, can not be compared to the balance between estimate and outcome in a worst case of scenario, and this balance could be adjusted each year. ((Some of CBO analysis : While the costs of the financial bailouts and economic stimulus bills are staggering, they are only a fraction of the coming costs from Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. Over the next decade, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects that each year Medicaid will expand by 7 percent, Medicare by 6 percent, and Social Security by 5 percent. These programs face a 75-year shortfall of $43 trillion--60 times greater than the gross cost of the $700 billion TARP financial bailout)). Time does not fix endless greed and energy depletion.

When the public health is also one of commodity like a house, we come to a tragic and unthinkable conclusion : As to for-profit business, the more and longer ills patients get, the more profits they make, and it will debilitate the overall economy involving education for the future, not to mention continued bankruptcy of middle class.

Of young adults ages 19 to 29, 13.2 million, or 29 percent, lacked coverage in 2007, and that implies the total of this promising reform will be cheaper than expected, I guess.

In case of an unexpected injury or ill, they might give up their learning or aspiration, in this regard, this reform means liberty, job opportunity, competitiveness for them and future.


1. The contents of savings (below) in this reform 'have nothing to do with' limit to medical access, rationing, tax raise, and deficit etc.

Rather, without wiping out these wastes and roots of bankruptcy for middle class, all fronts are sure to face larger financial ruin than this recession, which leads to more limit to medical access, more rationing, more tax raise, and more deficit etc than today.

$1.042trillion (cost of reform) + $245bn (cost to reflect annual pay raise of docs) = $1.287bn (actual cost of reform).

$583bn (the revenue package) + $80bn (so-called doughnut hole) + $155bn (savings from hospitals) + $167bn (ending the unnecessary subsidies for insurers) + 129bn(mandate-related fine based on shared responsibility) + $277bn (ending medical fraud, a minimum of 3% , the combined Medicare and Medicaid cost of $923.5bn per year, as of July,) = $1.391trillion + the reduced cost of ER visits (Medicare covers some 40% of the total) + the tax code on the wealthiest more reduced than originally proposed = why not ? (except for a magic pill, an outcome-based payment reform & IT effects and so forth).

As lawmakers debate how to pay for an overhaul of the nation's health care system, a new report from The Commonwealth Fund claims that including both private and public insurance choices in a new insurance exchange would save the United States as much as $265 billion in administrative costs from 2010 to 2020.

"Health reform can help pay for itself, but both private and public insurance choices are critically important," said Commonwealth Fund President Karen Davis, who coauthored the new report. "A public insurance plan can help drive new efficiencies in the system that will produce large cost reductions. Without a public plan, much of those potential savings will be lost."

Unlike high fuel price and mortgage rate in recent years as the roots of great recession and bankruptcy of middle class, the severity in the high cost of health premiums has come to light lately. Similarly, in an attempt to hide these deficit-driven corruptions and wastes, the greed allies struggle to turn the savings via removing these wastes into limit to medical access, rationing, tax raise, and deficit etc.

In contrast, not to mention a wide range of consumer protection, options across state lines, this promising reform takes initiatives in more primary care docs and improved long-term care. And the bill expands coverage for mental health services, and defines what will be covered. It also prohibits co-payment charges for wellness and preventive medical care. There is no mention of rationing. The use of this term is, again, a gratuitous distraction aimed at feeding fear

2. Greedy insurers with no competitors by consolidation have nothing to do with the law of price, demand & supply.

Under the free market theory and the premise that the public health is also one of commodity like a house, if the demand decreases on a large scale, accordingly the price tends to reflect it, as in the case of house price, and it never happens for the price to spiral up. One step forward, in case the price is spiraling up, to be sure, the remaining clients should withdraw the contract or choose the other options. In practice, runaway premiums with no competitors by consolidation drive the enrollees out, and 4C + 2R (canceling, capping, cherry-picking, cash for special lobby, rationing, rapid premium hike) guarantee multiple times as much profit. Sadly, no way-out other than the prohibitive ER is allowed in America. Therefore, the victims today and tomorrow deserve long overdue protection from non-profit Government.

3. The plans to stem inflation in the House have nothing to do with crowd-out.
With the heartbreaking tears in mind (In no other industrialized country do 20,000 people die each year because they can't afford to see doctor. Nearly 11 Million Cancer Patients Without Health Insurance), private market also needs changes and should join together to complete this reform , as promised, otherwise, the runaway premium only has itself to blame while new firms are filling the void with competitive deals.
And It can be said that fair competition starts with a fair, sustainable market value.

However, the plan in the House is designed to keep people in an employer-based health insurance system, and the public option would be offered to those for whom employer-provided insurance is not available. And job-based coverage (indirect payment), some mandate code, ample capital, the reduced exorbitant ER costs, IT base to streamline the administrative processes and trim the costs might be favorable to the private market. Over time, supposedly, the public plan will concentrate more on basic, primary cares, and the private insurers will provide their clients with differentiated services. And focus should be on the uninsured, the underinsured.

-- Except For The Underinsured, The Uninsured Alone Outnumber The Entire Population In Canada --

In an attempt to avert innovation, moderation, and social responsibility, accusing essential affordability, citing take-over, will be a dirty play.

4. Profit-driven markets have nothing to do with affordable, sustainable public health.

When the public health is also one of commodity like a house, we come to a tragic and unthinkable conclusion : As to for-profit business, the more and longer ill patients get, the more profits they make, and it will debilitate the overall economy involving education for the future (Of young adults ages 19 to 29, 13.2 million, or 29 percent, lacked coverage in 2007).

Under the most wasteful structure on the planet like no coordinated preventive care program waiting until people get ill, about 50% of idle world's best practices, a pay for each and every service reimbursement and frequent readmissions, no e-medical record and deaths, crushing litigations and the more profits via the unnecessary, risk-carrying procedures, and the most inefficient paper billing systems imaginable, overpriced pharmaceuticals, bloated insurance companies, incredible medial fraud, exorbitant costs by the tragic ER visits etc, it might be no wonder with the comprehensive, systematic reform in the pipeline, just one attitude of patient-oriented value in 10 regions has attained 16% of savings in Medicare while their quality scores are well above average.

Aside from the already allocated $583 billion and the savings of this reform package, 16% of $923.5bn (the combined Medicare and Medicaid cost per year, as of July) is around $147.76bn per year and 1.4776trillion over the next decade, and this patient-oriented value alone could be enough to meet the goal.

Please be 'sure' to visit http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/13/opinion/13gawande.html?hp for credible evidences !

Today, another innovative, fundamental change in payment system, or patient's outcome based payment reform that is able to turn the profit-oriented malpractices and volume into the patient-oriented value and quality is waiting for a final decision.

Now that Minnesota spends "20 percent" less per patient than the national average and 31 percent less than in the highest cost state, under a pay for patient's outcome pack, this promising reform could be successful along the way, I believe.

Aside from the already allocated $583 billion and the savings of this reform package, "20%" of $923.5bn (the combined Medicare and Medicaid cost per year, as of July) is around $184.7bn per year and 1.847trillion over the next decade, and this patient-oriented value alone could be sufficient to meet the goal.


5. Inflation-driven greedy allies backed by the insurers have nothing to do with deficit-neutral.

When some part of our body is ailing seriously, we are going to lose competitiveness, equally, when some part of a nation is ailing servery, it is going to loose competitiveness, too. In case somebody in the house gets ill, health will be put over house, in practice.


6. The analyses of CBO have nothing to do with common sense and practice.

Costs of Preventable Chronic Disease account for around 75% of the nation's $2.4 trillion medical care costs. U.S. health care spending is also expected to double in the next 10 years. and they are largely preventable -- 80 percent of the risk factors are behavior-related.

Unlike the analyses of CBO, world-wide outstanding public programs put heavier emphasis on preventive program equally, and preventable swine flu pandemic is expected to cost about $2trillion dollars world-wide for the lack of prepared vaccines. (Genes included in the new swine flu have been circulating undetected in pigs for at least a decade, according to a team led by Rebecca Garten of the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention who have sequenced the genomes of more than 50 samples of the virus).

If CBO asks the profit-driven interests about why they have hindered the budget request for preventive program in Medicare and Medicaid, they will say, " just look at the health Katrina special lobbying has made, the more and longer ills, the more profits, we are professional, and we are obstructing this reform right now, too " .

7. Conclusion : The public health is a fundamental human right.

As I said above, patient-oriented value alone could be enough to meet the goal, and another innovative, fundamental change in payment system, or patient's outcome based payment reform that is able to turn the profit-oriented malpractices and volume into the patient-oriented value and quality is waiting for a final decision.

If At least, some media pay attention to this flower of reform, people will feel empty as the past and current discussion has been time-consuming for sure.


Thank You !


















No amount of cajoling or fa... (Below threshold)

No amount of cajoling or facts will convince those of you who hate this president that health care reform is essential to the physical and fiscal well-being of this country. You willingly accept as fact obvious disinformation while being skeptical of any source which contradicts your view. The most common reaction, of course, is the personal attack on anyone who supports what the president is trying to do. You all should be ashamed of yourselves, but your self-evident bigotry shields you from any such self-examination. There is no reasoning with people who state with ignorant stridency that this president is a "criminal" and that he supports euthanasia to lower health care costs. You are beyond irrational.

One by one."1) The... (Below threshold)
jim:

One by one.

"1) The first lie is that there is an actual Health Care Reform plan from President Obama."

You mean the Executive branch is actually relying on the legislative branch to create the legislation?? Shocking!

What this really means is that everyone who calls this attempt at health care reform "Obamacare" is clearly just opposed to Obama no matter what he does. You haven't even **seen** a plan and you oppose it.

2) "If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. If you like your health care plan, you can keep your health care plan."

So you think Obama is going to force you to change your health care plan? Even though there is nothing he's suggested, let alone anything in the plan which doesn't exist yet, to say this.

Interesting that you believe this. Why is that?

3) "This is not about putting the government in charge of your health insurance".

It takes a lot of pages to create something. Just because there's a lot of pages doesn't mean anything. I mean, come on people.

4) "And we will do this without adding to our deficit over the next decade. First of all, I said I won't sign a bill that adds to the deficit or the national debt."

Poopeycock...

"The CBO shredded that statement when H.R. 3200 was first introduced, and to date no one on Capital Hill has figured out a way to pay for Obamacare. "

Um, completetely totally wrong?

http://energycommerce.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1710%3Acbo-scores-confirms-deficit-neutrality-of-health-reform-bill&catid=122%3Amedia-advisories&Itemid=55

5) "I don't have to explain to you that nearly 46 million Americans don't have health insurance coverage today."

"...it's actually in the 10 to 15 million range."

Except that according to actual expert sources, the farthest it can be whittled down is 36 million...

http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_13173764

...AND the number of uninsured is probably underreported as well.

But let's say it's "only" 36 million-ish.

Gosh! In a country that pays twice as much as other nations for about half the amount of coverage, only 10% of Americans also don't have any coverage at all!! And costs are rising at 4 times the rate of inflation. WHy should we do anything to change that?? Let's just rearrange these deck chairs here.

"6. Obamcare will not pay f... (Below threshold)
jim:

"6. Obamcare will not pay for abortions."

"Lie. Amendments to specifically exclude abortion defeated by Democrats."

Amendments to *force* abortions have also not been included either.

Instead what's been proposed is to funds. People who want to have abortions covered choose to pay into one. People who don't can choose to pay into another.

And of course if you don't want to do either, you can still pay an insurance company that doesn't cover abortions.

So what's the problem?

"7. Obamacare will not cover illegal aliens.

Lie. Democrats claim it will not, then reject any enforcement provisions."

Does the bill - which doesn't exist yet - say it will cover illegal aliens? Are there any popular proposals to do that which have a chance of making it trhough either the Senate or the House?

Answer: no.

Well then.

"8. Obamcare will not cover sex change operations."

"Lie. Obamacare is to cover "any service deemed medically necessary or medically appropriate." Can you say "hole big enough to drive a truck through?"

And if they were to propose "any of these specific services on this list", you would accuse Obama of a fascist health care takeover.

Meanwhile some private insurance companies can cover sex change operations. Why doesn't that bother you?

And Madalynn, I'm curious t... (Below threshold)
jim:

And Madalynn, I'm curious that you're so vigilant about alleged "death panels" that no one's even proposed - but the REAL and CURRENT death panels that all insurance companies have don't bother you at all.

These are the people in insurance companies who constantly cut off health care funds when they need it most - when they are sick and need treatment.

Why doesn't that bother you?

Dont you think it's wrong for someone to play fair, pay health insurance monthly fees for years and sometimes decades, and then get cut loose when they get sick with something serious that happens to be costly?

I want to know.

You know what I want? A bil... (Below threshold)
JustRuss:

You know what I want? A bill from Obama. Hilary drafted one and got shot down but at least she had the courage to propose what she meant rather than give some outlines, some controversial remarks to shape what he wants to see.

I almost think this is a ploy, let congress go under the bus with overreaching healthcare reform and then save the day by introducing a bill on his own that is less controversial though still progressive.

What I want from healthcare...

1) If we must have one fund for healthcare (I say fund not insurance because insurance is something pay into hoping nothing will happen not something you get after you find out you have cancer.)

One fund that we all pay into and can all dip into to pay for medical services. This fund cannot be put toward anything BUT healthcare, not roads or special projects, nowhere near the general fund. They will not rape this fun like they did social security.

2) Clear statement that only natural born American Citizens, or those who have been citizens for at least 10 years will be eligible for benefits.

That means that even if they pass an amnesty all those illegals will not have instant access to the system.

3) A check that you are indeed a natural born or 10 year citizen. Otherwise you are on a pay as you go program, just as you are now.

4) No interfering with Private insurance at all, get any language referring to forcing you to switch to the public plan out of the bill. The only reason to have this type of language is to slowly force everyone onto the public option.

This also means you can buy supplementary insurance to cover Catostropic Events such as disabling injury or the appearance of terminal type illness (cancer, HIV, etc) which would normally not allow you to get insurance any longer due to pre-existing condition.

The public option WILL end up being forced to ration this type of care especially if you are elderly. By allowing catostrophic insurance you can still recieve care when the govt refuses.

5) No coverage for plastic surgery (unless it is to fix disfigurement from an accident), Sex Change operations (completely elective! pay for it yourself), or abortion unless deemed medically needed for the physical (not mental, emotional or monetary) well being of the mother.

6) An opt-out with a tax rebate for those who do not wish to join the plan. These will NOT be allowed access to the program just like they were illegal/non citizens. However these people can still acquire private insurace.

7) Remove any government health care plan except the public option from every Federal employee except for Military. Everyone from the President on down would have to pay for private insurance or join the public option. No more golden healthcare for public officials paid for by the tax payer. That is just entitlement thinking.

The military has a need for its own medical option being that they deploy to all parts of the world and are often in battle situations where insurance cannot be worried about. Military families could still opt for TriCare rather than the public option.


There are more and more things I could say but I like the start of this. The main point being we set up a public fund but still allow choice and do not force private insurance to do anything.

If the public option taxes are cheaper than private insurance and the care is just as good then people will join of their own accord without any coercion on the govt's part.

As the bill reads now it is too shady and the holes are too big. If taxes cannot pay for it with limited numbers then the idea is not a good one.

If you only have 30million Americans on the program they should be able to pay for the minimal bureaucracy with taxes from those Americans. You CANNOT force the rich to pay for these poor folks in the way that is being suggested. Despite progressive/lefty thinking it is in no way their fault that these people are poor.

I want everyone to have healthcare, and in fact under the current system anyone with a life threatening condition HAS to be seen and taken care of. There are not poor people dying all over the place because they don't have insurance.

While the costs of... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:
While the costs of the financial bailouts and economic stimulus bills are staggering, they are only a fraction of the coming costs from Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. Over the next decade, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects that each year Medicaid will expand by 7 percent, Medicare by 6 percent, and Social Security by 5 percent. These programs face a 75-year shortfall of $43 trillion--60 times greater than the gross cost of the $700 billion TARP financial bailout)). Time does not fix endless greed and energy depletion.

This sample of your screed shows it's fundamental fallacy. Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are government ponzi schemes that are now coming due as the number of old people dramatically increases. Only fools think that replacing Medicare, and Medicaid with another government healthcare system is going to save money without reducing care. The fundamental notion Obama is promoting to save money is easily demonstrated to be a lie (see post #6).

As for Social Security, the federal government has been stealing the trust fund's money for the last 40 years and now that it's coming due it's unjust to change the rules. Furthermore, Democrats including Obama blocked the changes Bush wanted to make just four years ago claiming there was no need. If Democrats now reduce benefits for people 50 and over they're going to be voted out of office permanently.

True healthcare reform starts with tort reform and federalizing the laws that govern the health insurance industry so that a customer in any state can buy insurance from a company in any other state. Another law that requires drug companies to sell their products to all wholesale buyers at the same price would reduce costs for Americans. As and added benefit it would increase costs for Canada and the UK, which would further dispel the myth that single payer systems save money. Ultimately, the only way to contain costs is to ration end-of-life care, and the only fair way to do that is to promote the Russian life style.

6. Yeah..Yeah..and I will p... (Below threshold)
Eneils Bailey:

6. Yeah..Yeah..and I will put it out just before I....

Arguments that wellness pro... (Below threshold)

Arguments that wellness programs wouldn't save money in our health care system are totally scurrilous. Many chronic diseases are preventable, or ameliorated by reasonable lifestyle modifications. The reason that there isn't a lot evidence showing this is because wellness programs have never been a priority for the current health care system. While it's true that the longer people live, the more money will be spent per person on medical care, what is your alternative? End-of-life counseling, which is completely optional under the proposals currently before Congress, would simply help more people avoid the heart-break and financially disastrous experience of utterly useless and frequently painful medical procedures. This is NOT "euthanasia". It's common sense, physically, fiscally, and spiritually. Advising people on the existence of hospice services and the purposes for having a Living Will is the responsible and compassionate thing to do. Who could possibly be opposed to the coverage of this kind of invaluable counseling for our aging population? What you are doing here is shuffling the deck, then dealing from the bottom because you have an obvious problem with handing any kind of political victory to this particular president. You and others will go to any length to sabotage the health care reform process, even though you and your family would probably benefit greatly from it. Politics of self-destruction is usually driven by hate and we all know where that is coming from, don't we.

Obama's health-care promise... (Below threshold)
adt:

Obama's health-care promises are being exposed by the details of the actual legislation, and we WILL see costs rise. Support the goal of covering all individuals through private health insurance! http://www.friendsoftheuschamber.com/issues/index.cfm?ID=300

Arguments that wel... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:
Arguments that wellness programs wouldn't save money in our health care system are totally scurrilous.

I linked to just three of the many studies that demonstrate that wellness programs actually increase lifetime healthcare costs. You're confusing employer paid healthcare costs during people's working lives with total lifetime healthcare costs, which is what any healthcare reform must address. You see everyone dies and if not from some acute illness or disease then from chronic conditions they develop as they age. It's those chronic conditions like stroke, Alzheimer's, arthritis and cancer that cost the most. One of the studies I linked shows that 85 year-olds have one third of their total lifetime healthcare costs still ahead of them.

Obese People who drink and smoke heavily have the lowest lifetime healthcare costs. It's one of those inconvenient facts that's now in the way of another liberal pipedream.

To pay for healthcare and also help save Social Security the government should tax exercise equipment, fresh fruits and vegetables, promote smoking and drinking and bring back trans-fats. In other words, follow the Russian lifestyle.

Let's just address one aspe... (Below threshold)

Let's just address one aspect of a cost-saving wellness-program. Bone health in seniors is a major cause of extended hospitalizations which often lead to the death of the patient. "I've fallen down and can't get up" has become an iconic phrase in our culture. A wellness program would begin to address this completely preventable problem for the elderly. A healthier population is going age more healthfully and be less likely to develop debilitating problems which require lengthy hospitalizations. There has been no emphasis on genuine wellness or preventative programs, so it's no wonder that there are no studies which indicate savings. But, if you use your common sense, the benefits are fairly obvious to all age groups. The elderly face many more physical issues than just cancer and stroke.

A healthier popula... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:
A healthier population is going age more healthfully and be less likely to develop debilitating problems which require lengthy hospitalizations.

Apparently the fundamental problems with ALL wellness programs is too simple for you to grasp. Everyone dies; think about it. Wellness programs cost money too, and even if you kept people healthy into their nineties there comes a time when they develop chronic age related problems that require expensive medical treatment. It's called end-of-life care and wellness programs only delay the inevitable.

Wellness programs work for employers because all they are worried about is keeping employees healthy during their working lives. That's not what healthcare reform is about, however; it's about lifetime healthcare and the longer a demographic lives the higher their lifetime healthcare cost. Women as a group have a third higher lifetime healthcare cost than men as a group. Women also collect 65 cents of every social security dollar paid out even though they only pay 40 cents of every dollar going in to social security. Longevity is expansive and society needs to recognize that fact and then figure out how to pay for it.

Obama knows this and talked about it before he became President, but after seeing how successful a meaningless message of hope and change was he saw that there was nothing to be gained explained tough facts to voters.

The medical care required b... (Below threshold)

The medical care required by people who are at the end of their life is a fixed element of the debate. It will always be with us. What we can effectively address are many of the conditions which surface, usually in the last 20 years of life, and require lengthy hospitalizations. And, anyway, who would be crass enough to argue against programs that are intended to improve the quality of life of our seniors. Perhaps a junior who only thinks of himself?

The medical care r... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:
The medical care required by people who are at the end of their life is a fixed element of the debate.

All people die, but those who die relatively young die cheaply. Open your mind and look at the studies I linked to in post #6, one of which is from a department of the Federal government. It's just a fact that the longer people live the higher their lifetime healthcare costs are. Sorry reality bothers you.

What we can effectively address are many of the conditions which surface, usually in the last 20 years of life, and require lengthy hospitalizations.

All you can do is delay these conditions, or substituted one set of conditions for a different set of even more expensive to treat conditions. Nothing short of a true fountain of youth can change that principle, and if someone invented that, then we would have new moral issues to contend with on this over populated world.

And, anyway, who would be crass enough to argue against programs that are intended to improve the quality of life of our seniors.

In this case what's good for individuals is not good for society. Most people want to live as long and as healthy a life as possible, but at some point the resources needed to perpetuate life are beyond what any society can provide to everyone. Obama has stated publicly that Medicare is unsustainable and that healthcare reform would take money from Medicare. Think about that.

Before Obama was President he talked about limiting end-of-life care and putting more resources into wellness and you see that's exactly what he's proposing, but he quit talking about limiting end-of-life care because it's a political hot potato.

Palin was right in that, ultimately, Obama's healthcare reform leads to death panels or some other rationing mechanism simply because the laws of economics allow no alternative. I'm not saying Obama is wrong in doing what needs to be done, only that he's lying to people like you who think he's promising unlimited healthcare to everyone.

Obama is promising wellness care to everyone, but when people reach the end of their healthspan they won't get expensive end-of-life care, only what's needed to keep them comfortable. It's a rational tradeoff between the desires of individuals and the needs of society, unless of course, you are an individual who's being denied expensive end-of-life care.

Perhaps a junior who only thinks of himself?

Irrelevant because the facts are the facts regardless of who presents them. Besides, any junior who has looked into this subject knows that they too are going to be old some day if they are lucky enough to live that long.




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:

tips@wizbangblog.com

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