Cato: ObamaCare price tag is $6 trillion

posted at 1:25 pm on November 28, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

The advocates of ObamaCare argue that the overhaul of the American health-care system will cost “only” a trillion dollars in its first decade.  Michael Cannon at the libertarian think tank Cato says that Congress relies on significant budgetary gimmicks to get to that number, and that the true cost of ObamaCare in its first real decade is six times that amount:

One gimmick makes the new entitlement spending appear smaller by not opening the spigot until late in the official 10-year budget window (2010–2019).  Correcting for that gimmick in the Senate version, Sen. Judd Gregg (R-NH) estimates, “When all this new spending occurs” — i.e., from 2014 through 2023 — “this bill will cost $2.5 trillion over that ten-year period.”

Another gimmick pushes much of the legislation’s costs off the federal budget and onto the private sector by requiring individuals and employers to purchase health insurance.  When the bills force somebody to pay $10,000 to the government, the Congressional Budget Office treats that as a tax.  When the government then hands that $10,000 to private insurers, the CBO counts that as government spending.  But when the bills achieve the exact same outcome by forcing somebody to pay $10,000 directly to a private insurance company, it appears nowhere in the official CBO cost estimates — neither as federal revenues nor federal spending.  That’s a sharp departure from how the CBO treated similar mandates in the Clinton health plan.  And it hides maybe 60 percent of the legislation’s total costs.  When I correct for that gimmick, it brings total costs to roughly $2.5 trillion (i.e., $1 trillion/0.4). …

When we correct for both gimmicks, counting both on- and off-budget costs over the first 10 years of implementation, the total cost of ObamaCare reaches — I’m so sorry about this — $6.25 trillion.  That’s not a precise estimate.  It’s just far closer to the truth than President Obama and congressional Democrats want the debate to be.

Consider these unfunded mandates.  The states will have plenty of those under ObamaCare, with the expansion of Medicaid eligibility.  Cannon is right about the unfunded mandates on employers and individuals being part of the cost of the program.  Thus far, no one has really pointed out that costs in this plan are not limited to federal expenditures, but also to the extra costs everyone will pay — for a reform that purports to “bend the cost curve” downward.

Perhaps Senator Gregg can ask the CBO to study that question further in its next analysis.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Cato’s report does not take into account the costs of building and running a prison system for those not buying health insurance.

macncheez on November 28, 2009 at 6:23 PM

Bitsy…Exactly a multi trillion dollar Ponzi scheme. Let’s call it Madoffcare…….with Dr. Mengele death panels!

justonevictory on November 28, 2009 at 6:24 PM

Cloward/Piven at work.

mizflame98 on November 28, 2009 at 6:29 PM

What about the cost of government fighting a revolt and/or civil war?

Daggett on November 28, 2009 at 6:51 PM

Why in God’s name are we doing this?

Only to make the far left happy….

JIMV on November 28, 2009 at 4:22 PM

its so the government has total control of our lives.

right4life on November 28, 2009 at 7:21 PM

If I understand this abomination, if Obamacare passes, we will be taxed immediately for benefits sometime down the road…

So a huge big pile of money will just be sitting around Congress with the ‘best of intentions’ to be spent on ‘health care’ sometime in the future. Kinda like Social Security.

Any bets that when the time comes for ‘health care’, there won’t be a dime available and we will have to be taxed again, ‘for the children’ and the politicians responsible will act like innocent bystanders…?

Seven Percent Solution on November 28, 2009 at 7:22 PM

Just think,the LibToids will have to expand the government
even further,

the “Czar of Creativity Tax Ministry in Order to Try and
Sustain this Unholy Debackle”!!!!!!!!!!!

I wonder if “Illegals” get free drugs and healthcare,and is
probably somewhere in the Liberal HealthCare booklet,that
reqiures an ‘Elecron Microscope’to see it!!(Sarc).

canopfor on November 28, 2009 at 7:59 PM

Crap,its been a spelling snafu the entire week,ugh,should
be Electron,forgot the F*&&^%^&*k’n (t)!

canopfor on November 28, 2009 at 8:33 PM

We must all look like Mrs. Obama.

farright on November 28, 2009 at 1:46 PM

..aside from the obvious intended hhumor, this is a terrifying thought.

VoyskaPVO on November 28, 2009 at 8:37 PM

If I understand this abomination, if Obamacare passes, we will be taxed immediately for benefits sometime down the road…

So a huge big pile of money will just be sitting around Congress with the ‘best of intentions’ to be spent on ‘health care’ sometime in the future. Kinda like Social Security.

Any bets that when the time comes for ‘health care’, there won’t be a dime available and we will have to be taxed again, ‘for the children’ and the politicians responsible will act like innocent bystanders…?

Seven Percent Solution on November 28, 2009 at 7:22 PM

Exactly! Which is why medicare, and social security are broke. Just another government way of picking our pockets, and spending it on themselves, or their buddies.

capejasmine on November 28, 2009 at 8:41 PM

Its so the government has total control of our lives.right4life on November 28, 2009 at 7:21 PM

Yes, and all we have to give up for this wonderful benefit are higher costs, lousy service, loss of our freedoms and the destruction of the economy.Doesn\’t that SOUND like a bargain?

Juno77 on November 28, 2009 at 8:57 PM

Its so the government has total control of our lives.right4life on November 28, 2009 at 7:21 PM

Yes, and all we have to give up for this wonderful benefit are:
higher costs,
lousy service,
loss of our freedoms

and the destruction of the economy.

Doesn’t that SOUND like a bargain?

Arrgh! formatting.

Juno77 on November 28, 2009 at 8:59 PM

and this is only the SECOND biggest fraud in the history of civilization Obama is pushing. We’re living in a crazy age.

marklmail on November 28, 2009 at 9:15 PM

(1) How is it? – and (2) why is it – that the majority of Congress exhibits little concern for what is contained in $Trillion Legislation and find it irrelevant when said Legislation’s contents are revealed to them as severely damaging to America? (3) And why is it that government health care takeover takes precedence over much more important matters?

Dec. 7th on Meet The Press, Obama said – “When I met with the governors, all of them have projects that are shovel-ready that are going to require us to get the money out the door, but they have already lined up the projects, and they can make them work.”

February 17 in Denver, Vice President Joe Biden vowed that now that the “recovery” bill was enacted the Obama administration would be “working day and night” to create jobs.

Unemployment was 8.1% on Feb. 17th – and the Obama administration has been working night and day since then to create jobs – which were “lined up” – “shovel ready” – “that are going to require us to get the money out the door” – remember?

Well, by Sept. 30th (end of fiscal year) only 22% ($173 Billion) of the money had been spent. BUT!! Only $47 Billion had gone to contracts, grants or loans for projects.

Unemployment hit 10.2% in October, after the administration “working night and day” for 7 months – and WITHHOLDING 78% of the money available for the “lined up” – “shovel ready” jobs for Americans.

The incompetency, gross negligence, and arrogance of this administration borders leaves one at a loss for words.

This Country we love is the HMS Titanic heading straight for the iceberg – and we (the passengers on deck paying attention) are screaming to turn the rudder. Those in the wheelhouse are giving us the finger and telling us that they know what’s best – and they are going full speed ahead – and we are just fear mongers that see mirages in the mist.

The difference in our story is that the Captain and his two first mates are steering the ship – and this time the Captain and all those in the wheelhouse will not go down with the ship – they are the only ones with lifeboats…..

Oopsdaisy on November 28, 2009 at 9:22 PM

Question that I have not heard the answer to….

What, if any, will be the monthly premium for somebody to pay for the ‘public option’?

Follow up question….if there is a premium, how will that person pay for it when they are out of work, with a family of 4 to feed?

tatersalad on November 28, 2009 at 2:03 PM

Why that’s simple! They pay the fine for not paying for their mandated premium. But if they have no income, that’s probably not going to happen SO…off to jail. Where they’ll receive free health care! Problem solved!

Try this: http://healthreform.kff.org/SubsidyCalculator.aspx

citrus on November 28, 2009 at 10:38 PM

Oopsdaisy: Nice summary. Maybe other Americans will see the flares being shot off and understand that the emergency is real. We’ll find out next November.

GaltBlvnAtty on November 28, 2009 at 10:39 PM

Maybe other Americans will see the flares being shot off and understand that the emergency is real.
GaltBlvnAtty on November 28, 2009 at 10:39 PM

Somehow – we have to get them “sobered up” and “on deck” to see for themselves. There are none so blind……..

We’ll find out next November.
GaltBlvnAtty on November 28, 2009 at 10:39 PM

May it not be too late!

Oopsdaisy on November 28, 2009 at 10:55 PM

Oopsdaisy on November 28, 2009 at 9:22 PM

Please forgive me but I have to. It’s not the “HMS Titanic” it was the RMS Titanic. HMS is for the military designations.

larvcom on November 28, 2009 at 11:59 PM

We must all look like Mrs. Obama.

farright on November 28, 2009 at 1:46 PM

You mean … Poison Ivy?

Nahh. I like that White Rose from Alaska.

TheAlamos on November 29, 2009 at 8:01 AM

Getting closer to my $7.2 trillion estimate. Not so hard to figure out-virtually all government projects exceed estimates by 800%. Multiply the 900 billion cost estimate by that amount.

This nightmare Health Care program, is not just a costly SNAFU that spells doom for our health care system but it MEANS the end of our democratic way of life as well-far more devastating in its consequences than all the armies of Russia, China, Japan and Germany combined.Like Humpty Dumpty the egg, once this legislation passes (egg broken) all the kings’ horses and men cannot repair the damage.

MaiDee on November 29, 2009 at 10:09 AM

What about the cost of government fighting a revolt and/or civil war?

Daggett on November 28, 2009 at 6:51 PM

That is the inevitable result of the path we’re on, especially given the large majorities who don’t support these policies.

I see two possible triggers for Civil War II, which I don’t think will be neatly fought between states alone, but also between the blighted urban centers (which exist on government entitlements for survival, so dysfunctional they have become) and the less urban areas where the actual production of goods, food, etc, is done.

Scenario A: The government goes bankrupt, cannot any longer float ANY debt because no one will buy it, and even if they did, we can no longer service the debt that exists, much less new debt, no matter WHAT methods of wealth confiscation it tries. The aforementioned cities revolt when the government cheese quits coming.

The countryside, for lack of better term, resists, having had enough of confiscation. The winner, of course, will be the regions of the country that can actually make guns, bullets, and food, which the cities cannot.

Scenario B: Atlas Shruggs. The producers rebel at some point during the escalation of government confiscation of their wealth and labor during the time the government starts confiscating like mad to pay the debt leviathan the welfare dependent demand. Results will be same as above.

All I can say is I hope somewhere we can produce another George Washington, who to my knowledge is the ONLY military figure in history who ever led a successful armed rebellion only to lay down ALL power on it’s conclusion and help form a democratic republic.

wildcat84 on November 29, 2009 at 10:31 AM

We must all look like Mrs. Obama.

farright on November 28, 2009 at 1:46 PM

Negatory. My HOA will not allow me to widen my front door.

mr1216 on November 29, 2009 at 10:43 AM

Outrage! Democrats are out of control and will bankrupt the USA. I hope some of this can be repealed when we vote them out.

TN Mom on November 29, 2009 at 1:32 PM

and this is only the SECOND biggest fraud in the history of civilization Obama is pushing. We’re living in a crazy age.

marklmail on November 28, 2009 at 9:15 PM

Check this out:

‘This isn’t the Britain we fought for,’ say the ‘unknown warriors’ of WWII’

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1229643/This-isnt-Britain-fought-say-unknown-warriors-WWII.html

It is where we are heading, quietly, and almost without a fight.

JIMV on November 29, 2009 at 1:52 PM

It is where we are heading, quietly, and almost without a fight.

JIMV on November 29, 2009 at 1:52 PM

A general dissolution of the principles and manners will more surely overthrow the liberties of America than the whole force of the common enemy…. While the people are virtuous they cannot be subdued; but once they lose their virtue, they will be ready to surrender their liberties to the first external or internal invader…. If virtue and knowledge are diffused among the people, they will never be enslaved. This will be their great security.

-Samuel Adams

batterup on November 29, 2009 at 2:06 PM

All I can say is I hope somewhere we can produce another George Washington, who to my knowledge is the ONLY military figure in history who ever led a successful armed rebellion only to lay down ALL power on it’s conclusion and help form a democratic republic.

wildcat84 on November 29, 2009 at 10:31 AM

This will be the most critical part. IMHO even a definite but determined rebel minority could give the opposition a serious run for their money.

The real danger will be what happens in the aftermath. If too much infrastructure has been destroyed in the rebellion, everything could degenerate into a fight over increasingly scarce manufactured resources and services (electricity, sanitation, etc.) If the victors can’t be convinced to stand down from war mode and the power that flows from a gun barrel, we could end up as a military dictatorship. And if there isn’t enough leadership, national unity might easily fall apart – just look at the days of the Articles of Confederation.

Dark-Star on November 29, 2009 at 2:07 PM

Perhaps we need a place where real Americans can continue to live with the freedoms the founders fought for and another where the socialists can rework society into their gray, grim image.

JIMV on November 29, 2009 at 2:58 PM

ED:

Consider these unfunded mandates. The states will have plenty of those under ObamaCare, with the expansion of Medicaid eligibility. Cannon is right about the unfunded mandates on employers and individuals being part of the cost of the program. Thus far, no one has really pointed out that costs in this plan are not limited to federal expenditures, but also to the extra costs everyone will pay — for a reform that purports to “bend the cost curve” downward.

Ed, it’s not just the unfunded Federally Mandated expansion of Medicaid, but Obamacare cuts FFP (Federal Financial Participation) to DSH (Disproportionate Share Hospitals, aka “county hospitals”) and other medical providers of medical services to the poor. Consider the amount of money areas like Los Angeles, New York, Detroit, New Orleans spend on unreimbursed medical care – it’s near a billion dollars a year of FFP. Once that money is cut off, the services will either be cut off or the cost will go to the State.

The Governors of the States must wake up. This health care bill is going to cripple the States and further empower the Federal Government. The increase in the Medicaid rolls, the loss of FMAP, and the loss of the FFP to the DSH will collapse the state budgets.

Wake up Governors.

batterup on November 29, 2009 at 3:00 PM

JIMV on November 29, 2009 at 2:58 PM

Problem is there’s nowhere left to go, at least nowhere that doesn’t already have a significant indigenous population, any serious amount of land mass, and any real amount of natural resources.

Dark-Star on November 29, 2009 at 3:01 PM

People are already voting with their feet. Conservatives are moving from blue hell holes to red enclaves of semi freedom in pretty big numbers. Population growth in the south and west is not from the lefts grassroots of victim groups but folk who have noted that the taxes are lower and the values better in places where the left does not run things. It has gotten so bad in places like California that even the working left is fleeing (which accounts for Colorado trending left of late). The biggest insult one can throw in the Mountain west is to say someone came from California.

Look what is left in those blue hell holes…victim groups, folk with their hands out and the politicians that pander to them. Their economies are in a death spiral.

JIMV on November 29, 2009 at 3:25 PM

It is not about health care. It is about power.

Dhuka on November 29, 2009 at 5:18 PM

People are already voting with their feet. Conservatives are moving from blue hell holes to red enclaves of semi freedom in pretty big numbers.

Yes. We will go to Texas, if it means showing up with only a backpack of belongings, if things get bad enough.

englishqueen01 on November 29, 2009 at 5:35 PM

Make your plans in advance and find a community in the real world where folk are still free, say hello and know that nothing in life is free. Once you find it, MAKE that move as your life will get a lot better…My taxes dropped over $4K and that’s about 10% of my before tax income in my retirement…It makes a big difference to know the thieves will not be able to kill your retirement without a major fight from your neighbors…

JIMV on November 29, 2009 at 5:45 PM

Why do I get the feeling that after ObamaCare passes, we won’t be able to afford to vote Republican?

Cybergeezer on November 30, 2009 at 8:47 AM

Not to worry .. Nancy promises to pay any shortfall out of her own pocket.

LOL

J_Crater on November 30, 2009 at 10:20 AM

Is this Joe (the financial watchdog) Biden’s idea to save money?

2010 vote them out.

dthorny on November 30, 2009 at 11:45 AM

All I can say is I hope somewhere we can produce another George Washington, who to my knowledge is the ONLY military figure in history who ever led a successful armed rebellion only to lay down ALL power on it’s conclusion and help form a democratic republic.

wildcat84 on November 29, 2009 at 10:31 AM

Read the old testament of the bible regarding Israel’s existance. Both countries, America and Israel, relied on God for deliverance from their enemies and He provided victory.

dthorny on November 30, 2009 at 11:49 AM

I’m sure I’m running counter to majority opinion here, but $6 trillion over a decade to cover all Americans is ONLY $2000 per year each.

The U.S. spends much more on health care than Canada, both on a per-capita basis and as a percentage of GDP.[5] In 2006, per-capita spending for health care in Canada was US$3,678; in the U.S., US$6,714. The U.S. spent 15.3% of GDP on health care in that year; Canada spent 10.0%.[5] In 2006, 70% of health care spending in Canada was financed by government, versus 46% in the United States. source

So right now Americans are paying nearly $7k per person (double the Canadians) in a for-profit system for a similar level of care. Ignore the silly anecdotal horror stories you hear of Canadians coming to the US to get service. There are far worse cases of denial Americans experience by their own system on a much broader scale, that the proponents fail to tell you about since they have a pro-insurance agenda.

People who support the parasitic, for-profit health insurance lobby have absolutely no leg to stand on. Under a universal healthcare system:

1-you’d never get denied coverage for “pre-existing” conditions

2-you don’t have high premiums that keep getting jacked up

3-there’s no middleman between you and your doctor

4-quality of service is high, despite the fear-tactic lies you hear…in fact quality in the Canadian system only dropped when the conservatives cut health-care funding to try to force it to become like the US for-profit system.

5-its not for-profit, so its guaranteed to cost much less.

America is paying the most in the world for health-care and getting the least back from it, while being lied to by their politicians and insurance lobby.

$6 trillion is much cheaper than the $17 trillion you’re currently paying right now (over a decade), so keep things in perspective people.

thinkagain on November 30, 2009 at 12:10 PM

thinkagain on November 30, 2009 at 12:10 PM

excuse my math, I meant the $20 trillion you’re currently paying (over a decade).

thinkagain on November 30, 2009 at 12:16 PM

thinkagain on November 30, 2009 at 12:10 PM

I do not think you are seeing the big picture….the 6 trillion does not include the cost of medical care NOT laundered through government…If your private family plan costs $10K a year through the co-op with a private company, the numbers are not included…The $2K a year is simply the cost of new government efforts, which is on top of the money individuals must spend.

JIMV on November 30, 2009 at 12:19 PM

JIMV on November 30, 2009 at 12:19 PM

I don’t know all the details of Obama’s plan and exactly what its going to cover and not-but as I understand he’s pushing for universal coverage or something close to it.

This figure ($6 trillion) was thrown out for its shock value and it implies that it’ll replace (or compete with) the for-profit system we have currently.

But if the goal is reducing costs while raising quality of service, then if Obama’s plan costs less than the $17 trillion Americans are paying currently, why wouldn’t everyone jump on that bandwagon?

I’d like someone to present a solid case why a for-profit, parasitic system serves Americans better than a universal non-profit health care system.

thinkagain on November 30, 2009 at 12:33 PM

The Obamacrats never said that YOUR costs would be lower…they only said that it would reduce THEIR defecit!!!

Revenue Neutral” means that Congress has pawned the costs off on YOU!!!

landlines on November 30, 2009 at 12:34 PM

thinkagain on November 30, 2009 at 12:33 PM

Not for shock but simply to note that the NEW spending by the government on health care is far more than advertised…folk get confused when they think the cost is all on the government side…the costs CATO listed are all government…the real cost is many times higher as it must include all the private spending nor laundered through government bureaucrats.

The bottom line is that this new scheme will not cut costs in any way but will instead mandate increases.

JIMV on November 30, 2009 at 12:41 PM

A “parasitic, for-profit” model inspires innovation. Risk taken must have a reward at the end of the tunnel. Otherwise, why would someone put up capital and invest in an unproven, but potentially break through technology (such as tomotherapy was) when there is no reward (profit) down the road? Don’t give me this socialistic “work for the common good” crap. That’s not human nature, and why the USSR is no longer around.

search4truth on November 30, 2009 at 1:02 PM

JIMV on November 30, 2009 at 12:41 PM

The whole point of Obama’s health care plan was to make it a universal “single-payer” system, (see this video) but due to political pressure from the right and insurance companies, he’s floated the “public option” so people can choose who they want to go with (government or private insurance).

The government option would of course cover everything and I think that’s the misinformation that’s being spread-the idea that there are huge hidden costs they’re not telling us. I blame Obama and the cowardice of the Dems, they should’ve come clean with the costs and took a firm stand for their position.

But despite their mistakes, they’re still offering us a great deal. Would you rather pay $6 trillion vs close to $20 trillion you’re paying now? Its a bit of a no-brainer. And let’s say their math was faulty, even if you pay $12 trillion you’re still saving a lot of money for BETTER (universal) health care.

An issue like this makes clear what’s wrong with US, Americans on the right and left fail to listen to each other and this is why people keep suffering and the country goes in the wrong direction.

Just as Conservatives are right on bombing Iran and winning the war against Islam (which is today’s Nazism), the Democrats are right about giving Americans a universal health care system.

You’re all being royally raped by the insurance companies yet you’re defending the agenda of the same leeches and parasites that are charging you more than double the cost of other systems.

We all know insurance companies are making record profits while people are losing jobs and why doctors flock to the US, because the current system is a fat cash-cow, based on the backs of the common hardworking people.

I’m usually on the ‘we hate Democrats’ bandwagon because they make so many stupid decisions, but despite their incompetence, they at least have universal health care right.

thinkagain on November 30, 2009 at 1:33 PM

A “parasitic, for-profit” model inspires innovation. Risk taken must have a reward at the end of the tunnel. Otherwise, why would someone put up capital and invest in an unproven, but potentially break through technology (such as tomotherapy was) when there is no reward (profit) down the road? Don’t give me this socialistic “work for the common good” crap. That’s not human nature, and why the USSR is no longer around.

search4truth on November 30, 2009 at 1:02 PM

Some innovation, 50 million Americans not covered and are a burden to the rest, insurance companies denying you your much needed heart-operation due to ‘pre-existing’ conditions, sky-high premiums, double that of other nations, etc, etc.

Trust me I’m no socialist, I’ve ran my own business in the past and loved it. However we need a socioeconomic system that is a decent mix of both capitalism and socialism.

Unbridled capitalism leads to monopolies and eventually fascism, which then lets to revolution and a swing in the opposite direction Communism, which is just as evil.

Why should your need to fix your broken leg be dictated by profit, especially when the cost is coming out of your pocket? The fact that social programs exist at all means the dictates of the market cannot account for all the difficulties people encounter.

So if you can’t pay (and get denied by insurance companies due to a pre-existing condition) for a simple operation you’re expected to be a cripple for the rest of your life or just lay down and die? I’m sure we’ve all heard of people who’ve gotten shot in the head, showing up to a hospital but were denied help since they have no insurance and they later died outside the facility that could’ve saved them. Seriously is this the kind of health care system we want?

Capitalism is good for creating products/services, generating prosperity but it requires checks and balances or it’ll go out of control. We have a police force and military-are they privatized and exist ‘for-profit’? “Pay us more and we’ll give you better protection?” Who wants to live in a country like that. Some parts of Latin America function this way and we know how awful life is there.

Recall the examples of where privatization spectacularly failed, like when a utility was turned over to a private company what happened? Their drive for profits led them to cut costs, the water quality dropped, people got sick and also the water supply became unreliable. There are certain essential services that private industry should never get their grubby hands on, especially when it comes to managing our health, since profit always takes precedence over people.

There is also a question of accountability and transparency, private companies can get away with a lot more than public/government services-which is why the public sector is generally more reliable.

thinkagain on November 30, 2009 at 2:03 PM

You are still not following…the total new costs will not be lower but higher and much of that is in new federal debt…Today folk can skip coverage if they are well, soon those folk will be fined or taxed in a scheme to move money from the young and healthy to the old and ill and even then the plan costs more money than today.

Insurance companies make between 2 and 3%…’record profits’ is a canard. All we do is transfer the money from the evil insurance companies that provide pretty good coverage for most of us to the government which will provide pretty crappy care AND we get to pay for for the privilege…

As the Canadian High Court noted, access to a waiting line is not access to health care. Paying more for poorer care is not a solution to anything except the lefts grab at political power.

JIMV on November 30, 2009 at 2:13 PM

1-you’d never get denied coverage for “pre-existing” conditions

2-you don’t have high premiums that keep getting jacked up

3-there’s no middleman between you and your doctor

4-quality of service is high, despite the fear-tactic lies you hear…in fact quality in the Canadian system only dropped when the conservatives cut health-care funding to try to force it to become like the US for-profit system.

5-its not for-profit, so its guaranteed to cost much less.

Thinkagain, you obviously need to, um, think again.

Back to front: for-profit companies often cost less than not-for-profit industries, especially those run by the government. For-profits have an incentive to run as efficiently as possible; they innovate in business the same way that Apple innovates in technology.

Consider that your grocery store, computer store, car dealership, local Wal-Mart, and kitchen appliance manufacturers are all “for profit” corporations who attempt to maximise profit for their greedy shareholders. The result is that you can inexpensively buy iPods, cell phones, laptops, cars, $4 generic drugs – an endless list – for less and less money every year. Moore’s Law doesn’t apply to the government, dahlin.

4 – proof? Besides, most Americans (like 85%) are thrilled with their health care coverage and believe that the quality of service is high. We pay our doctors hundreds of thousands of dollars a year so that they will go into medicine and not i-banking; we pay them a lot so that they can use their brainpower to heal us.

Oh, yeah, the high quality of pharmaceutical drugs that Canadians get? Thank us – we pay for most of the R&D costs. High quality of medical imaging or diagnostics? Thank us – we pay for the R&D.

Without America as a for-profit health care system, the rest of the world will suffer.

3 – um, the GOVERNMENT will be the middleman between you and your doctor. Some bureaucrat who is too much of a snivelling pansy to get a job in the private sector will decide whether or not you really need care. Don’t like it? Sovereign immunity: you can sue a private insurance company for denial of coverage, but you can’t sue the government. Oh, and if we end up like Britain, you’ll be forbidden, by law, from purchasing private insurance or getting medical care outside of the government plan. How’s that for a middleman?

2 – yes, you will: they are called taxes.

1 – it’s more complicated than the moronic talking points from the left. The denial of preexisting conditions is due to the reality that waiting to buy health care until you get sick is like waiting for an accident before purchasing car insurance. (In fact, letting insurance companies deny preexisting conditions is one of the best ways to keep costs down for everyone, which in turn enables people to buy insurance, even when they aren’t sick. The alternative is the death spiral.)

Besides, if your concern were really denial for preexisting conditions, that would be an easy fix: require insurance companies to cover people who have been continually insured under the same or a substantially similar plan (in terms of benefits) for the duration of the illness. Oddly enough, that doesn’t involve taking over 16% of our economy.

Roxeanne de Luca on November 30, 2009 at 10:49 PM

Comment pages: 1 2