Is nationalized health care inevitable?

posted at 7:15 pm on March 9, 2012 by Jazz Shaw

There’s a disturbing question to ponder this evening. We’re not talking about the Lambada of health care questions here, (The “BC” words) but simply general access health coverage. Is the entire freight train of health insurance mixed in with employers, employees and Uncle Sam on a collision course with destiny which will leave us nowhere to go but the route of Canada and the UK?

It just might be, and the spur driving this particular horse may turn out to be something as nifty sounding as a $1,000 genetic map available for anyone. James Joyner explains why this could be the beginning of the end.

I’ve argued for years that the combination of unsustainability high growth in health care costs and the enormous competitive disadvantage that puts on American business means that our current system of quasi-private, insurance-based medicine will collapse of its own weight. Like it or not–and I mostly don’t–Americans will wind up with some sort of government-centric model, likely one that provides basic coverage at a fixed price with some option for private supplemental coverage for those who can afford it…

My guess is that the big driver in forcing change in the US will be from the right, not the left. That is, big business is going to start lobbying hard to get out from under the crushing burden of having to finance health coverage for their employees. Since no other major country operates their healthcare system that way, it’s a major competitive disadvantage.

One of the harbingers here is the aforementioned, affordable genetic mapping technology. Here’s how it breaks down: if the technology is advancing to the point where genetic mapping will let young people know which diseases they are most prone to and which they are unlikely to face, they would obviously shop for tailored plans which only cover them for the high risk areas. This robs the pools of people paying premiums and limits it largely to those who would likely be draining the most benefits out of the risk pool.

Combine that with already extant legislation which forbids American insurance companies from denying coverage or raising rates on those showing such a predisposition to illness, and you’ve got a recipe for insurance companies not being able to afford the costs of group plans. None of this changes the fact that health care costs continue to rise as the ability of people o pay higher premiums out of their wages fails to keep pace. This version of the future holds that the only way to artificially drive down the costs is for the government to essentially take over the industry and dictate what doctors will be paid and what medicines and procedures will cost. Welcome to your new industrial nightmare.

But is that really the only path in the new world of advanced genetics? It seems to me that there was supposed to be another side to this whole Project Genome thing, wasn’t there? I thought that once we’d mapped everyone’s genetic structure we would be identifying flaws and not just predicting what diseases they might get, but also become able to cure them, if not stop the malady from taking hold in the first place.

Wasn’t that the idea?


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

You want health coverage, get a government job.

Worked for Obama.

profitsbeard on March 9, 2012 at 7:18 PM

They offer private insurance companies high risk and low reward. That’s part of the plan. Then, they’re not responsible for eliminating private insurance. It was “suicide.” Now, darn it, we have to step in.

RBMN on March 9, 2012 at 7:20 PM

Yes, unless the country elects Mitt Romney.

Jailbreak on March 9, 2012 at 7:21 PM

Our enlightened voters gave us a Marxist president and a socialist government so the question is totally academic. This poor sick Republic is about to collapse under the weight of its massive debt and incompetent leadership.

rplat on March 9, 2012 at 7:24 PM

Nothing’s inevitable. Just say ‘No’.

trigon on March 9, 2012 at 7:24 PM

Nothing has to be inevitable.

JellyToast on March 9, 2012 at 7:24 PM

Nice mom genes

Ha!
:D

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on March 9, 2012 at 7:25 PM

Actually, yet another loud and incomprehensible Transformers movie may be inevitable.

trigon on March 9, 2012 at 7:26 PM

Why wouldn’t the more likely scenario be that as private insurance becomes more unaffordable, either because of new more expensive treatments or because of ObamaCare mandates, that private businesses start to drop their workers from coverage and not offer that benefit?

I do remember some provisions in ObamaCare an how large businesses are unable to offer minimed or smaller coverage plans, but I don’t remember if some of these mandates were repealed.

redeye on March 9, 2012 at 7:27 PM

That is, big business is going to start lobbying hard to get out from under the crushing burden of having to finance health coverage for their employees. Since no other major country operates their healthcare system that way, it’s a major competitive disadvantage.

There are plenty of things we can do to help make US business more competitive. Look at ‘necessarily’ high energy costs, moonbat environmentalism, greedy unions, labor laws, disability access, the highest corporate tax rate in the World, etc.

We can also do far more to keep down the cost of health insurance, like doing away with all these Fluking mandates and Obamacare itself.

slickwillie2001 on March 9, 2012 at 7:27 PM

When given a choice between paying for something and getting something for “free” the majority will vote for the “free” option.

angryed on March 9, 2012 at 7:28 PM

No. It’s not inevitable. It’s suicide to a free nation. Health care costs are so high because we live in a litigenous society, government mandates, and little responsibility required of the policyholder. Let health insurance be like car insurance and watch the costs come in line. If you can’t afford a cheapo plan, Uncle Sam can step in for the poor and help pay your bill. If people did a cost analysis of what they pay for insurance per year and subtract all the medical bills at full price, for many families, there’d be a nice chunk of change left over. Those that need a bigger, more comprehensive plan could buy that. Just like collision insurance. Or flood insurance. Insurance has driven up the cost of health care, courtesy of the federal government.

redmama on March 9, 2012 at 7:28 PM

Emergency rooms cant just turn people away so we already share the cost of those who visit them with no insurance so I would think that something has to be done. I dont know what, but insanity is doing the same thing and expecting different results.

Politricks on March 9, 2012 at 7:29 PM

I see a massive shortage of doctors and nurses in the near future.A good plumber or electricion will be making double what medicos will.

docflash on March 9, 2012 at 7:30 PM

My guess is that the big driver in forcing change in the US will be from the right, not the left. That is, big business is going to start lobbying hard…

I challenge the premise…there is nothing ‘right wing’ about ‘big business’…ask GE or Hollyweird or Goldman Sachs…Obama is all about ‘big business’…the Dems (and crony capitalism) couldn’t exist without them.

AUINSC on March 9, 2012 at 7:30 PM

Is tyranny inevitable?

disa on March 9, 2012 at 7:31 PM

Yes, unless the country elects Mitt Romney.

Jailbreak on March 9, 2012 at 7:21 PM

Only Romney can undo the mess of socialized healthcare, because he enacted socialized healthcare when he was Governor?

Interesting argument.

Completely without merit, but interesting.

Don’t you think electing a Person who has never enacted socialism, and was never a cheerleader for socialized healthcare be a better person to oversee that ObamaCare is dismantled?

portlandon on March 9, 2012 at 7:31 PM

Terry Gilliam predicted Obamacare in ‘Brazil’.

BHO Jonestown on March 9, 2012 at 7:34 PM

The only reason healthcare cost keep rising is because the government is entrenched in it. In the past four years entitlement spending increased 25%, you can figure most of that is Medicare. And we as a society has doubled down on stupidity, allowing the government to actually destroy the healthcare system we have now through Obamacare. Even if we can stop it’s implementation it’s still doesn’t stop the heathcare collapse we will soon face because of Medicare. The only, only answer we have is to get the government out of it completely. This may take a few decades but it must be done. That’s the is reality, yet it’s still political death for any politician to talk about. We are a truly screwed up culture.

lowandslow on March 9, 2012 at 7:35 PM

Why are the only two choices we’re being given the current dog’s breakfast of private medicine infected by government at every level, and total government control?

What’s wrong with trying to head back toward a free-market system, like the one that delivers so many other excellent goods and services at reasonable prices?

Imagine if medical technology had been operating for the past thirty years under the same competitive market forces and near-unregulated innovation as the rest of the electronics industry.

In fact, remember the history of the human genome project? Private versus public?

tbrosz on March 9, 2012 at 7:36 PM

Emergency rooms cant just turn people away so we already share the cost of those who visit them with no insurance so I would think that something has to be done. I dont know what, but insanity is doing the same thing and expecting different results.

Politricks on March 9, 2012 at 7:29 PM

I remember a New York Times article that reported that the cost of the uninsured that hospitals are forced to burden are less than 1% of their operating costs. That seems like a small amount to destroy our health care system through ObamaCare.

redeye on March 9, 2012 at 7:37 PM

Emergency rooms cant just turn people away so we already share the cost of those who visit them with no insurance so I would think that something has to be done. I dont know what, but insanity is doing the same thing and expecting different results.

Politricks on March 9, 2012 at 7:29 PM

You do realize that it was Ronald Regan of all people who made that mandate, don’t you? And you do realize why Regan created that mandate, don’t you? He did it at the request of thousands of doctors across the country who worked in hospitals, and felt that they were in violation of the Hippocratic Oath by not being allowed to treat people who had serious injuries, but did not have health insurance, so they were turned away.

theoddmanout on March 9, 2012 at 7:38 PM

The only reason healthcare cost keep rising is because the government is entrenched in it.

you could use the same argument on college costs … OT I know … but same premiss ….

conservative tarheel on March 9, 2012 at 7:41 PM

Yes, unless the country elects Mitt Romney.

Jailbreak on March 9, 2012 at 7:21 PM

Only an arsonist can put out a fire. Started drinking at noon today, huh?

angryed on March 9, 2012 at 7:42 PM

I’m okay with ERs being required to treat everyone. The patient should still be required to pay a portion of the bill based on their means if they have no insurance. High health care costs have more to do with people being detached from their bills. It’s “covered” so they don’t care or question. Extra procedures ordered. Tests redone. There is much duplicity that accounts for added expenses too that if a patient were presented a bill like in a restaurant, they’d scream and ask questions.

redmama on March 9, 2012 at 7:42 PM

one that provides basic coverage at a fixed price with some option for private supplemental coverage for those who can afford it…

…but, but, but, that’s not gonna be fair.

Resist We Much on March 9, 2012 at 7:44 PM

you could use the same argument on college costs … OT I know … but same premiss ….

conservative tarheel on March 9, 2012 at 7:41 PM

spot on tarheel. spot on.

redmama on March 9, 2012 at 7:45 PM

you could use the same argument on college costs … OT I know … but same premiss ….

conservative tarheel on March 9, 2012 at 7:41 PM

Let’s not forget that ObamaCare allowed the federal government to take over the student loan industry and away from banks. So it actually is on topic.

redeye on March 9, 2012 at 7:45 PM

Emergency rooms cant just turn people away so we already share the cost of those who visit them with no insurance so I would think that something has to be done. I dont know what, but insanity is doing the same thing and expecting different results.

Politricks on March 9, 2012 at 7:29 PM

I remember a New York Times article that reported that the cost of the uninsured that hospitals are forced to burden are less than 1% of their operating costs. That seems like a small amount to destroy our health care system through ObamaCare.

redeye on March 9, 2012 at 7:37 PM

Around half of the ‘uninsured’ that the democratics weep over are illegal aliens. Trying to make them to buy health insurance via a mandate is as useless as creating gun-free zones around schools. Typical liberal stupidity. Hospitals should be billing the federal government directly for illegal alien healthcare since they are responsible. Seeing that annual bill hit DC every year will illuminate the problem.

slickwillie2001 on March 9, 2012 at 7:46 PM

There’s a HUGE logical flaw in this argument: the assumption that most disease is caused by genetics. While that is one factor, much of the healthcare $$ is also from injury, infection, lifestyle choices etc.

For example, a person with a heart disease heritage that visits the MD, takes meds, exercises etc. may be less likely to have a MI than a “healthy genes” couch-potato smoker.

cs89 on March 9, 2012 at 7:46 PM

This country does a whole lot of can kicking. High time it stopped.

redmama on March 9, 2012 at 7:46 PM

Mark Steyn on the “Fluke Charade”:
http://news.investors.com/Article.aspx?id=603899&p=1&ibdbot=1

onlineanalyst on March 9, 2012 at 7:47 PM

You do realize that it was Ronald Regan of all people who made that mandate, don’t you? And you do realize why Regan created that mandate, don’t you? He did it at the request of thousands of doctors across the country who worked in hospitals, and felt that they were in violation of the Hippocratic Oath by not being allowed to treat people who had serious injuries, but did not have health insurance, so they were turned away.

theoddmanout on March 9, 2012 at 7:38 PM

That was a SCOTUS decision. Had nothing to do with Reagan.

angryed on March 9, 2012 at 7:48 PM

High health care costs have more to do with people being detached from their bills. It’s “covered” so they don’t care or question. Extra procedures ordered. Tests redone. There is much duplicity that accounts for added expenses too that if a patient were presented a bill like in a restaurant, they’d scream and ask questions.

redmama on March 9, 2012 at 7:42 PM

Yes, while people being detached from their bills allows people to be shielded from those costs, I’ve never met any doctor who orders tests just to redo them. I do know a lot of doctors, perhaps all of them I ever met, who do order tests or procedures to cover themselves against lawsuits.

It’s too bad that ObamaCare gave states financial incentives to not pass tort reform.

redeye on March 9, 2012 at 7:48 PM

Is nationalized health care inevitable ?

headline by Jazz Shaw

.
It’s just as inevitable as civil war.
.
And there are multiple ‘meanings’ that can be read into that.

listens2glenn on March 9, 2012 at 7:48 PM

Yes. A majority of Americans recently elected a Communist as President.

Once again the GOP is running a liberal, a more liberal McCain clone…and a Mahmoud Ahmadinejad clone. A Communist can even look good against those two.

Not looking very good…

Karmi on March 9, 2012 at 7:49 PM

Socialism has never been rolled back anywhere it has gained ground. And democracy ensures that, for it is much easier to get votes by promising to spend, than it is to get votes by promising to save.

keep the change on March 9, 2012 at 7:50 PM

Only Romney can undo the mess of socialized healthcare, because he enacted socialized healthcare when he was Governor?

Interesting argument.

Completely without merit, but interesting.

Don’t you think electing a Person who has never enacted socialism, and was never a cheerleader for socialized healthcare be a better person to oversee that ObamaCare is dismantled?

portlandon on March 9, 2012 at 7:31 PM

Only Mitt Romney can stop it because:

1) He can say that he has enacted STATE solution for his STATE. If other STATES had enacted STATE solutions instead of just letting their poor go uninsured, Obama would not have gotten his national Obamacare plan done. Obama wont be able to say the Mitt Romney doesnt care about the uninsured…he actually did something about it.

2) Romney is the only electable republican. Now, I realize that is hard for you to understand but St Palin will not be floating down in a white unicorn during a brokered convention. sorry.

Jailbreak on March 9, 2012 at 7:50 PM

Jailbreak: proof positive that mothers shouldn’t smoke while pregnant

angryed on March 9, 2012 at 7:51 PM

Redeye, I type medical reports all day and I see it routinely. A 3-day hospital stay with 3 CT scans of the same area? Lab tests before breakfast, after breakfast, etc. Often the docs are using the tests to fish for and/or confirm a diagnosis. While often that is necessary and helpful, sometimes, it’s not necessary. If people have to directly pay, then they can have a discussion with the doc and think it through on whether it is necessary. You would’t believe the consults ordered routinely too in the hospital. Again, sometimes necessary, but often not. I typed a report the other day for a 75-year-old woman for a rehab consult for inpatient rehab. Her problem, she broke her arm and needed surgical fixation. She did not need that consult.

redmama on March 9, 2012 at 7:54 PM

Yes, it is inevitable.

In medical care, there are high costs, low costs, and unnecessary costs. High costs are things like open-heart surgery, tumor removal, and newly released prescription drugs. Low costs are things like aspirin, birth control, and regular checkups. Unnecessary costs are things like cosmetic surgery.

Unnecessary costs should be a luxury and left only for the affluent. Few people dispute this.

Low costs should be completely privatized. It doesn’t make sense to need to have insurance companies to pay for low-cost, routine health care because these should be anticipated expenses. The spiraling cost of insurance will make insurance unaffordable and eventually force private insurance to go out of business. Doctors will have to advertise prices, people will look for the best deals when they start to pay for routine care out of pocket, and prices will normalize.

High costs should be socialized. Overutilization is not a problem because people don’t give themselves heart attacks just to have heart surgery (i.e. you don’t need to worry about people hoarding or wasting the resources, as you would with socialized food or clothing or other resources). Keep doctor compensation high to keep supply availability high. Prices will spiral and we will have a Ponzi pyramid, but this isn’t a problem as long as it remains a bottomless Ponzi pyramid. Meaning, if we have a socially liberal society and we have what Greece has where we have 42 grandchildren for every 100 grandparents, then obviously we’d have a major problem. But the primary users of the health care system for catastrophic care will be old people, and if the birth rate is kept high – let’s say, 4 people for every old person – then you essentially have 4 people paying for that 1 old person’s care. It’s affordable. When those 4 people get old, then they have 16 children paying for their care. It remains affordable. This is precisely why Uncle Sam was able to afford Medicare payments for about half a century, because the Baby Boomer generation represented a large number of children paying the health care costs of their parents, and why Medicare is now becoming unaffordable – the Baby Boomers didn’t have enough children, and those children are not willing to take care of their parents (instead sending them off to nursing homes and passing Medicare the bill).

The real question is not whether or not health insurance will eventually socialize, but whether or not American demographics will be ready for it. The answer to that, sadly, is no, because sexual liberation destroyed any meaningful social conservatism that this country had on a national level. Given that the answer is no, the next question becomes whether or not there are states where the individual demographics of that State permit state-level socialized catastrophic health insurance, and what the ramifications would be (people vote with their feet and would start moving to that state, but since the state can’t prevent people from moving to it, how can the state penalize people moving to the state through the tax system in order to discourage a demographic upset that would ruin the system? Is it even possible to do this and prevent that sort of demographic shift, let alone is it even moral?).

As a conservative, I believe first and foremost in the power of personal responsibility. So long as sickness and disease are effectively random, it doesn’t make sense to penalize people for not being personally responsible for something that they couldn’t be personally responsible for.

solatic on March 9, 2012 at 7:55 PM

If the Republicans would have addressed the issue of preexisting conditions and denial of coverage for people with chronic problems (many times due to heredity – yearly kidney stone issues that are expensive to eliminate, for example) then we could have avoided Obamacare.

rickyricardo on March 9, 2012 at 7:58 PM

Around half of the ‘uninsured’ that the democratics weep over are illegal aliens. Trying to make them to buy health insurance via a mandate is as useless as creating gun-free zones around schools. Typical liberal stupidity. Hospitals should be billing the federal government directly for illegal alien healthcare since they are responsible. Seeing that annual bill hit DC every year will illuminate the problem.

slickwillie2001 on March 9, 2012 at 7:46 PM

Already there. Hospitals petition the federal government for reimbursement of money they spent providing illegal aliens with health care. They have a type of fund set aside for just this purpose, which makes hospitals track the immigration status of their patients.

I foresee a day that all the data the federal government is gathering from healthcare will be routinely plundered for opposition research in political campaigns. As in, “Isn’t it true, sir, that your uncle was treated for AIDS. And didn’t you have a niece who had an abortion, and another niece who was pregnant at 15?”

tom on March 9, 2012 at 7:58 PM

Yes, unless the country elects Mitt Romney.

Jailbreak on March 9, 2012 at 7:21 PM

Nice. I literally lol’d.

sammypants on March 9, 2012 at 7:59 PM

As a conservative, I believe first and foremost in the power of personal responsibility. So long as sickness and disease are effectively random, it doesn’t make sense to penalize people for not being personally responsible for something that they couldn’t be personally responsible for.

solatic on March 9, 2012 at 7:55 PM

Couldn’t a person just buy a high deductible low cost catastrophic health care plan?

redeye on March 9, 2012 at 8:01 PM

Health care is in a price bubble like the housing bubble. Current healthcare costs do not reflect the true costs an individual and/or their insurance policy would pay if government got out and let the market correct itself. The existence of insurance itself adds to cost. The cost is falsely inflated by a bloated bureaucracy.

redmama on March 9, 2012 at 8:02 PM

If people have to directly pay, then they can have a discussion with the doc and think it through on whether it is necessary.

redmama on March 9, 2012 at 7:54 PM

Seriously? Real people will just say, “whatever the Doctor thinks is best, that’s what I’m paying him for.” You really think ordinary people know what all these tests are and what they look for?

If you want to argue that people should be able to research their own care and order their own tests and treatment, medical licensing be darned, then I know a lot of doctors who will tell you that 15 minutes on Google does not more than a decade of medical schooling and experience replace.

We already allow people to refuse medical care anyways. And yes, some people refuse medical care because they can’t afford it. Pure privatization won’t decrease demand in any meaningful way in the areas of medicine where people have some unknown condition where we know that they will end up needing expensive treatment (not just expensive diagnostics) to get better.

What we can do is decrease utilization of insurance at the very least for petty health care purchases where either the insurance payout is very low or very (relatively) frequent and predictable.

solatic on March 9, 2012 at 8:04 PM

Why wouldn’t the more likely scenario be that as private insurance becomes more unaffordable, either because of new more expensive treatments or because of ObamaCare mandates, that private businesses start to drop their workers from coverage and not offer that benefit?

I do remember some provisions in ObamaCare an how large businesses are unable to offer minimed or smaller coverage plans, but I don’t remember if some of these mandates were repealed.

redeye on March 9, 2012 at 7:27 PM

I believe that, under ObamaCare, employers can provide coverage for their employees, or pay a fine. So, yeah, when the cost of insurance skyrockets, employers will opt to pay the fine.

Syzygy on March 9, 2012 at 8:06 PM

Jailbreak on March 9, 2012 at 7:50 PM

I thought you were joking with your first comment. It was a really good joke.

I want Romney to win too, but seriously

sammypants on March 9, 2012 at 8:07 PM

Arent government regulations part of the reason health care costs keep rising in the first place? Perhaps reviewing some of those before going for more government intervention would be a better idea.

Confutus on March 9, 2012 at 8:10 PM

Couldn’t a person just buy a high deductible low cost catastrophic health care plan?

redeye on March 9, 2012 at 8:01 PM

Because those don’t stay cheap as you get older, both in terms of the probability of you getting sick get extremely high when you get old as well as no longer being able to afford the high deductible when you actually do get sick.

Medical care for problems that I cannot personally, responsibly prevent should not leave me with high bills, period, no matter how old I am.

solatic on March 9, 2012 at 8:10 PM

DEMOCRATIC DIALOG

Father, must I go to work?
No, my lucky son.
We’re living now on Easy Street
On dough from Washington

We’ve left it up to Uncle Sam
so don’t get exercised.
Nobody has to give a damn
We’ve all been subsidized.

But if Sam treats us all so well
And feeds us milk and honey,
Please, daddy, tell me what the hell
He’s going to use for money.

Don’t worry, bub, there’s not a hitch
In this here noble plan
He simply soaks the filthy rich
And helps the common man.

But, father, won’t there come a time
When they run out of cash
And we have left them not a dime
When things will go to smash?

My faith in you is shrinking, son,
You nosy little brat;
You do too damn much thinking, son,
To be a Democrat.

Schadenfreude on March 9, 2012 at 8:11 PM

Solatic, I’m not talking about which chemotherapy drug is best…I’m talking about some of the basic things that people should know about the services they are receiving. About families being involved in care. I’m advocating a discussion versus ignorance. Risks versus benefits. You know, personal responsibility. I agree with you that routine health care should be out of pocket.

redmama on March 9, 2012 at 8:11 PM

This just got my weekend off to a depressing start.

Bitter Clinger on March 9, 2012 at 8:12 PM

Medical care for problems that I cannot personally, responsibly prevent should not leave me with high bills, period, no matter how old I am.

solatic on March 9, 2012 at 8:10 PM

why not? There are plenty of circumstances people encounter every day that leave them with high bills they could not prevent. Like filling up my truck. LOL. yikes!

redmama on March 9, 2012 at 8:15 PM

I thought that once we’d mapped everyone’s genetic structure we would be identifying flaws and not just predicting what diseases they might get, but also become able to cure them, if not stop the malady from taking hold in the first place.

Yeah, unfortunately, getting FDA approval for new cures requires massive investment in pharmaceutical research, the costs of which were previously borne by the private US health insurance system. Once America joins the rest of the world in single-payer utopia, drug manufacturers will be driven down to the marginal cost of manufacture here same as they are everywhere else, at which point there will no longer be any return on R&D investment, nor any profits to invest if there were.

There will be two kinds of medicine in the future. The 99% will have to make do with socialized medicine, using generic, off-patent versions of today’s drugs and getting the same mixed results of today’s drugs. The 1% and their most-loyal minions will go overseas to countries like Singapore and Bahrain for advanced private care, where they will receive custom treatments like nanotech cellular repair and retrovirus-delivered gene therapy, tailored to their individual symptoms and genetics. No one will have an incentive to conduct the widespread clinical trials required to bring those exotic treatments to the mass market.

This is by design. It is the desired future for the nomenklatura, because it means they will then enjoy the literal power of life and death.

Fabozz on March 9, 2012 at 8:17 PM

Get the government out…and let the market decide!

KOOLAID2 on March 9, 2012 at 8:19 PM

Medical care for problems that I cannot personally, responsibly prevent should not leave me with high bills, period, no matter how old I am.

solatic on March 9, 2012 at 8:10 PM

This describes the problems with expectations I think. What you describe would be nice and ideal. But we expect the best health care in the world with the highest tech stuff in the world, but expect it for free. It’s like wanting a Mercedes for every person in America.

The daughter of a guy I work with is an interventional radiologist. I believe that’s the longest residency and she is in her mid-30s when she finished. She can reverse the effects of some strokes if she gets to them fast enough. But only a few people with enough training and skill can do it and its only in some places in the US. That’s realistically not going to be free and we can’t expect that’s not going to cost us something.

redeye on March 9, 2012 at 8:19 PM

Inevitable? Yes.

Along with the silencing of those in opposition to President Chavez.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0312/73829.html

First they came for Glenn Beck, I didn’t care because he cried too much and was too scary.

Then they came for the Catholic church to replace them in charge of hospitals and healthcare and I didn’t care because I really didn’t go to Catholic hospitals.

Then they came for Rush Limbaugh and I let that one slide because after all he’s kind of a loudmouth always talking about the same old same old freedom and liberty stuff, eh.

Then one day they came for me, and they took my keyboard away, took my hard drive and carried me off to a re-education “opportunity” because of “hate speech crimes against the state”.

……and there was no one left to hear my cry as the doors shut on the oven door.

PappyD61 on March 9, 2012 at 8:28 PM

doors, oven door.

Great prose ruined by another interruption from a yung un. :-)

PappyD61 on March 9, 2012 at 8:29 PM

inevitable? duh.

Sorry, people…the long march has been very long. Take Ted Kennedy. Nixon had some scheme that he offered…but it wasn’t up to Teddy’s standards (plus the wrong party). Carter offered something up…but Teddy blocked it. FDR to Obama.

The end product will be that h/c money will come out of the general fund and Drs. et al. will be on the government payroll

r keller on March 9, 2012 at 8:33 PM

It seems to me that there was supposed to be another side to this whole Project Genome thing, wasn’t there? I thought that once we’d mapped everyone’s genetic structure we would be identifying flaws and not just predicting what diseases they might get, but also become able to cure them, if not stop the malady from taking hold in the first place.

Wasn’t that the idea?

We’ll get there, but not anytime soon. Determining that a problem exists is a good first step, but that’s still a far cry from being able to cure every illness that could be detected by genetic tests.

Mr. Prodigy on March 9, 2012 at 8:37 PM

The we are Equality 7-2521.

AshleyTKing on March 9, 2012 at 8:38 PM

While I do not want it, I am worried that government insurance may happen because of economic realities.

Do you think employers can forever pay the ever increasing health care cost? At what point will the say they cannot afford the present employment based health insurance?

And do you think that private insurance companies are bottomless wells? If health care cost continues to increase at the rate they have, and with the enormous number of baby boomers getting into the age groups that ate up most of the health care dollars, health insurance companies could well fail or just abandon the money losing fields.

I have many questions, I do not know the solution.

galtani on March 9, 2012 at 8:38 PM

……and there was no one left to hear my cry as the doors shut on the oven.

PappyD61 on March 9, 2012 at 8:28 PM

Yep, and there are millions of proggies out there that would shut that door on us as they cackle and dance maniacally. Many of them are truly the worst humanity offers.

slickwillie2001 on March 9, 2012 at 8:41 PM

We have to cut back. If we start now, we can cut back a little.
We can raise asset/income limits for Medicare or require more affluent people to pay their own premiums.
We can increase copays.
We can start to limit services, as Oregon does.
We can repeal Obamacare so that insurance companies can sell health insurance that has high deductables and has coverage that is more limited-less preventive care, no contraceptives, no experimental care, no plastic surgery, etc.

The longer we wait, the bigger the cuts will be.
Another 4 years of Obama and we may have to pay out of pocket for an emergency appendectomy in a teenager.

talkingpoints on March 9, 2012 at 8:56 PM

Healthcare of the government, by the government, and for the government, so help us God.

Babsy on March 9, 2012 at 9:10 PM

galtani on March 9, 2012 at 8:38 PM

Add:
I do not think centralized government health care is the solution either. A major portion of the government’s budget in Canada and the UK is taken up by health care cost. Yet, despite high taxes in those countries, their governments are running up huge deficits. And the health care they provided are poor.

galtani on March 9, 2012 at 9:25 PM

Let’s go back to basics. But first learn what INSURANCE is all about. That’s currently 99% of the problem.

GarandFan on March 9, 2012 at 9:25 PM

Why not ask if Socialism is inevitable? If present cultural trends don’t change, yes, it’s inevitable.

rickv404 on March 9, 2012 at 9:29 PM

Inevitable where?

Sad to say.. this is not the last place on earth to live.

If liberal commies and and that whole creepy family that they have been breeding since the 50′s want this rock which 500.000 thousand of us have died for.. take it!!!!

I go with the rest of my conservative buddies to another place where where we call it…. what did Ayn Rand call it?

I’m there.

amend2 on March 9, 2012 at 10:45 PM

I see civil..

discourse

demonstrations

I see that obama and bell have RE- Started our worst war.

amend2 on March 9, 2012 at 10:48 PM

Is tyranny inevitable?

disa on March 9, 2012 at 7:31 PM

Yes. Deep down inside, we are all a bunch of wild animals. The U.S. was bound to fall at some point… nice while it lasted…

Myron Falwell on March 9, 2012 at 10:58 PM

I just saw this movie, it had Uma Thurman and Ethan Hawke called Gattica…and that was in 1997.

Watch that and Equilibrium with Christian Bale..like 2003 I think.

The problem is regulations, tort, and worst of all people thinking they need medical care for a damn sneeze or high blood pressure, not to mention the automatic prescriptions given EVERY SINGLE TIME. Bottom line, it’s indulgence, like everything else in our society. I’ve only been to a non-eye doctor zero times in the past 16 years, though admittedly I should have for my ankle and shoulder (both are pretty bad), but again I’m still here and kicken. Suck it up people.

John Kettlewell on March 9, 2012 at 11:30 PM

Yes. Deep down inside, we are all a bunch of wild animals. The U.S. was bound to fall at some point… nice while it lasted…

Myron Falwell on March 9, 2012 at 10:58 PM

Liberals believe we are all just a bunch of wild animals. America was founded by people who believed that among all of creation, humans are special. A people with no existential certainty is easy to control.

gryphon202 on March 9, 2012 at 11:35 PM

Let’s go back to basics. But first learn what INSURANCE is all about. That’s currently 99% of the problem.

GarandFan on March 9, 2012 at 9:25 PM

+1,000,000,000….

Does anyone in Washington even know what an insurable event is?

Just Sayin on March 9, 2012 at 11:35 PM

Does anyone in Washington even know what an insurable event is?

Just Sayin on March 9, 2012 at 11:35 PM

If they do, they’re evil. If not, they’re dumb. Either way they don’t deserve to be in any kind of position of authority.

gryphon202 on March 9, 2012 at 11:43 PM

As soon as there is nationalized US health care, there will be a brain drain of existing and future provider expertise into other professions. The wages, benefits and early retirement will be better teaching kindergarten a couple months a year…

droofus on March 10, 2012 at 12:06 AM

Health care reform is inevitable and necessary – the rising costs ARE a crisis, it’s just that ObamaCare doesn’t address most of the problems, and makes most of those it does address worse.

But I am comforted by the knowledge Joyner sees socialized medicine as inevitable, just judging by his track record.

Free market reforms can be a big start on their own. Medical Savings Accounts were a great idea, and eliminating the arcane state-by-state limitations on insurance sales would increase competition.

We just have to end the tax preference for employer-provided insurance. It’s a valuable compensation and has to be subject to taxes.

In general, we need to end the concept of the third-party payer, which gives patients no incentive at all to use judgement and insist on cost effective treatments. Insurance is necessary, but patients should be paying a portion of everything – if we ever want to control costs through the market.

Adjoran on March 10, 2012 at 3:08 AM

If the Republicans would have addressed the issue of preexisting conditions and denial of coverage for people with chronic problems (many times due to heredity – yearly kidney stone issues that are expensive to eliminate, for example) then we could have avoided Obamacare.

rickyricardo on March 9, 2012 at 7:58 PM

If you think the purpose of ØbamaCare was to provide health care, you don’t know the Democrats very well. Its ultimate purpose was to enslave people into a cycle of dependence on government. Providing health care was just a means to an end. That’s why there are death panels.

Odysseus on March 10, 2012 at 7:03 AM

If they do, they’re evil. If not, they’re dumb. Either way they don’t deserve to be in any kind of position of authority.

gryphon202 on March 9, 2012 at 11:43 PM

Well said.

Just Sayin on March 10, 2012 at 8:01 AM

This post brought to you by the cowardly GOPe, which wants desperately for all this angst over socialist healthcare to go away, and pronto.

Yes, unless the country elects Mitt Romney.

Jailbreak on March 9, 2012 at 7:21 PM

You’d better hope Romneycare includes coverage for psychosis.

james23 on March 10, 2012 at 8:17 AM

Trending now, later? That’s up to us.

Speakup on March 10, 2012 at 11:37 AM

That’s why there are death panels.

Odysseus on March 10, 2012 at 7:03 AM

Yeah! They just built some down the street from me. Big faux-stone castle, fog generators, organ music, the whole nine yards.

MelonCollie on March 10, 2012 at 11:41 AM

No.

J.E. Dyer on March 10, 2012 at 11:58 AM

And as for the ‘question’ that the article poses…

Unless it’s opponents can get their act together, YES.

MelonCollie on March 10, 2012 at 12:00 PM

It is the collapse of government healthcare which is inevitable.

You just can’t get effective, individually-tailored results from a government DMV-like bureaucracy which quits caring whether you’re in need of services promptly at 4:30PM (and hangs up if you’re in the middle of a call at that time).

Want proof? Check with a Canadian who has had a serious health problem.

Want more proof? Call the Medicare number (1-800-MEDICARE) and time how long it takes you to reach a live human who can answer a real question. If you are concerned about possibly getting sick after hours, try this same experiment at night. See how much of the “Golden Hour” which determines the effectiveness of critical emergency care is consumed by the government phone system!!!

landlines on March 10, 2012 at 2:14 PM

In general, we need to end the concept of the third-party payer, which gives patients no incentive at all to use judgement and insist on cost effective treatments. Insurance is necessary, but patients should be paying a portion of everything – if we ever want to control costs through the market.

Adjoran on March 10, 2012 at 3:08 AM

Absolutely!!!

When the patient is “out of the loop,” there can be no effective cost control. We must return to a system where a medical customer has at least as much knowledge of the cost and benefits of every purchase as a WalMart shopper does!

landlines on March 10, 2012 at 2:23 PM

If we don’t get rid of the federal electronic medical records database codified by the Stimulus bill, it is. Romney will keep it for Romneycare as the states need to rely on such data for cost benefit analysis (and Obamacare since he wont repeal it). This is where the death panels get their dataset for decisions. And simply because you don’t have the federal panel in place, don’t think there aren’t a million workarounds for all those tentacles of government utopian agencies to have cause for such data, and who do so now. Did you know that? Shh. Furthermore, Newt Gingrich supports it. Evil.

Again, what is the first lesson of Fight Club?

S.R. Hadden: First rule in government spending: why build one when you can have two at twice the price? Only, this one can be kept secret. Controlled by Americans, built by the Japanese subcontractors. Who, also, happen to be, recently acquired, wholly-owned subsidiaries….

Ellie Arroway: [speaks for Hadden] …. of Hadden industries.

S.R. Hadden: They still want an American to go, Doctor. Wanna take a ride?
-Contact (1997)

The U.K. has tried to build electronic records but their level of national dysfunction has won out. It still marches on, though. But the Australians have picked up the mantle a few years ago and the progressives have every expectation it will be realized. Do keep in mind that while we may not participate in such centralized command and control mechanisms, masterminds are carrying forth this blanket (and others) in Western countries to unfold and knit together as a patchwork Marxist quilt, so it is in our best interest this “Joshua” program remains off our shores, and thus, harder for American implementation.

A tall order given that even Sarah Palin sees the impossible in stopping the expansion of government with her “Newt is just right” porridge, diluting the conservative cause to collude with establishment Republicans to retain the Mitt “inevitable” Romney bionic campaign and status quo policy course so once in office regardless of campaign promises. Ameritopia on both sides of the isle. If you thought it was difficult for the disabled or our wounded warriors to get a job now or in the past, just you wait Henry Higgins.

FeFe on March 10, 2012 at 6:30 PM

Of course, I would be remiss in not stressing that everything the Obama administration and corporatists are doing now is in furtherance of Obamacare. Period. The attack on Rush Limbaugh could have happened now or next week would have been just as good a time as any for them, and don’t expect there wont be another such faux outrage between now and the election, or, indeed, several. This opportune moment of Sandra “Leave Brittney alone!!!!” Fluke hysteria coincided with Mitt Romney’s 2009 Op-ed in USA Today calling for Obama to take Romneycare to the nation. Remember that? Who’s talking about that anymore? Damaging Obamacare disclosure engineered out of the headlines by corporatists.

Consider but one such vocal Rush critic, a high profile corporatist who lives off insider government regulation:

Mr. David Friend is Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer at Carbonite, Inc., a Trustee-Emeritus at New England Conservatory of Music, a Trustee-Emeritus at Berklee College of Music, and a Trustee-Emeritus at The Brookings Institution. He is on the Board of Directors at Sixenos, Inc., HealthGate Data Corp., CyraCom International, Inc., Marketplace Technologies, Inc., and DealDash Oy.

– HealthGate is a company who supplies death panel datasets now.
– CyraCom provides translator services for healthcare providers across the nation, based in Tucson, AZ, and the only interpretation and translation solutions exclusively endorsed by the American Hospital Association.

The level of money Obamacare will bring to the Corporatist is vast but when you connect the patchwork Marxist quilt of statist healthcare, the global power is vast beyond all measure. American R&D, Big Pharma, services distribution and access, certification, etc. all harmonized via intergovernmental masterminds dancing with insider Corporatist regulation. Evil.

FeFe on March 10, 2012 at 6:31 PM

The depth of the hatred toward Santorum is not over social positions Obama himself holds but knowing this monstrous centralization of power in Obamacare will not stand. The “inevitability” the opposition craves is not in Mitt Romney as the nominee but enshrining health care as a “right.” Mr. I *heart* Romneycare will repeal Obamacare? More fool us.

In fact, can the Romney enacted Mass. Cap & Trade be far behind? His big donors think so. Recall, “There will be no carbon tax under the government I lead.” No sooner spoken than forgotten by another moderate leader, Julia Gillard, once in office and now Australia winds the behemoth coil of state tighter, and connects one patch of the UN quilt.

So, while some of the HotAir community crave more posts of poll results because the reverse Humpbot traffic drive feels so good, and sneer at Ms. Korbe for posting a wholesome (shocking, I know, but true) campaign video, others will take that Santorum call to arms — Game on! — that energizes a fully informed segment of the conservative grassroots base that finds virtue, to build upon for generations to come fighting statists, in a candidate who has never been for an individual mandate. Unlike Newt Gingrich who supported the individual mandate for 20 years, and along with Mitt Romney supports a cap and trade tax on carbon dioxide, and the Wall St. bailouts socializing losses and privatizing profits. Evil.

Teach your children well, dear patriots, to unwind our behemoth coil of state and wean entitlements. Me must exhaust all administrative remedies to repeal Obamacare. To borrow from Daniel Hannan:

Newt Gingrich, with that Wilsonian authority born of long banquets and long Beltway summits, claims conservatives can’t walk away from his debate style to win the day against Obama. No, Mr Speaker. There’s a better reason to walk away: To preserve our republic, to secure state’s competitive advantages and our individual sovereignty, to keep fast the freedoms that we inherited from our parents, and to pass them on intact to our children.

The TEA Party is told we must submit to working within the Republican party to gain influence. By the same reasoning, if we can’t have influence, surely we must stop submitting to their rules. “Don’t look at the polls. . . Don’t pay attention to what the national media are saying, what the pundits are saying. Listen to your heart. Lead. Don’t follow.” –Rick Santorum

FeFe on March 10, 2012 at 6:32 PM

FeFe on March 10, 2012 at 6:32 PM

Best comment I have read on HA in about 5 years.

Go Rick!

tom daschle concerned on March 10, 2012 at 9:15 PM

… the route of Canada and the UK? …

Let’s see, Canadians come to the US for serious treatments, when they can, and the Brits have SPLIT their system into private and govt sections.

The socialists want to turn the US into the failure that was the USSR. Socialized medicine has been a world wide failure everywhere it is IMPOSED!

Freddy on March 10, 2012 at 10:29 PM