Health Care – yada –yada -yada | Loyal Opposition / LJWorld.com

Posted by George Lippencott June 29, 2009 at 2:19 p.m.

Health Care – yada –yada -yada

Nobody has provided any data that supports that a single payer government owned and operated system will be substantially cheaper then what we have now. How does it do that? It will have administrative costs not dissimilar to existing health insurance only they will present as employees on salary. I challenge one of the proponents to at least ferret out the cost of executive compensation and share holder returns for health insurance executives rather than throw around 31% figures that include administrative costs (see above).

It would be very helpful to resolve the quality of care argument. How does national health care perform compared to our current system in delivering quality care? I suspect that it is more uniform (except where there is parallel fee for service for the wealthy). Are the waits I read about real? Do people no longer seek care they know they will not get? Could we have people without care here (or maybe not)? Medicaid is real. I read heart rendering tales of people not covered and am having trouble understanding the gap. If the problem is really extending care to the uninsured why is an expanded system under Medicaid not appropriate? Medicaid provides coverage that is in some respects better than Medicare.

So many of you argue with such definitiveness yet I can find no creditable data. Have we become so frustrated that anything is presumed better? I would like it to be cheaper too. I would like to have care equivalent to what my Congress Person gets. Maybe even care equivalent to health care insurance executives. I am at the age where this really matters. Probably isn't going to happen despite our desires. It could easily bankrupt us!

Perhaps the real issue is a desire for us all to be equally miserable. I want what you have so to get it I will take from you. The really wealthy escape notice and continue under fee for service (must be nice to have your own physician who follows you around).

So Mr. Obama and company strive for a first step that broadens care and includes some element of government operated insurance broadly available that would give us all a better handle on how that might operate. I can see why the Republicans are afraid of that. It might prove better. It might also be a fraud perpetrated on all of us that hides costs and leads us in the wrong direction.

Will the left torpedo the first step for want of the last step so many on these blogs demand? Will the right torpedo it because it might offer promise and become more difficult to check?

Tune in tomorrow for episode 1045!

Copy and paste the link:

LJWorld.com doesn’t necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.

notajayhawk (anonymous) says…

"Have we become so frustrated that anything is presumed better?"

Have you seen the last election results?
June 30, 2009 at 9 a.m.
mcontrary (anonymous) says…

Yes, I saw the latest election results. Thank goodness a majority of the people finally woke up. Did you see the competition? The predecessors? The economy? Employment which is still on a downslide because of the former administration's "trickle down" and "compassionate conservatism?" The military policies of the previous administration? and so on?
July 3, 2009 at 7:15 p.m.
notajayhawk (anonymous) says…

mcontrary (Anonymous) says…

"Yes, I saw the latest election results. Thank goodness a majority of the people finally woke up. Did you see the competition? The predecessors? The economy? Employment which is still on a downslide because of the former administration's “trickle down” and “compassionate conservatism?” The military policies of the previous administration? and so on?"

And thank you for proving my point.

Your anger at the actions of the previous administration (and your apparently confusion of that administration with all previous Republican administrations) led you to vote for 'change,' without any regard for what that change would be. The same type of moronic logic that brought us Jimmy Carter (which, thankfully, really 'woke up' the country and put us back on track after a single miserable term).

So, um, what, contrary? Obama ended the war? No, he sent more troops to Afghanistan. He fixed the economy? No, it took about a month before he added a *trillion* dollars to the national debt. And his policies have increased unemployment to a point much higher than he prdecited would happen if we didn't accept his 'change.'

People like you that think change for the sake of change are the problem, contrary.
July 4, 2009 at 10:46 a.m.