Will the real 10 year cost of ObamaCare be over $6 trillion?

[BeAChooser]

When you say "Private Price", you're talking about the national average.
Energy prices throughout the south and the midwest are significantly cheaper than they are in the northeast and southwest. In order to establish that the TVA price is cheaper as a government program than as a private program, that's the wrong metric.
If we compared TN's energy price to, say, West Virginia's, we'd suddenly find the TVA to be completely deficient. Of course, that's unfair too because WV is where all the coal is.

Very good point. Add it to the list.

 

[Lurker]

OK, what is the price of electricity in TN outside the TVA? I am open to counter arguments.

 

[mhaze]

Ok, Lurker, you win.

Health care in a socialized delivery system can be delivered "cheaper".

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2010/02/025676.php

 

[Lurker]

Ok, Lurker, you win.

Health care in a socialized delivery system can be delivered "cheaper".

Excellent. I am glad to hear we are in accord regarding the lower cost of socialized health care versus private health care.

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2010/02/025676.php

Anecdotal evidence noted. I am sure I can find plenty of cases in the US where private medical insurance has refused treatment or cancelled policies. How would you respond to those?

http://www.billshrink.com/blog/5596/health-care/


I don't think anyone is extolling the perfection of a socialized health care system. Nor is the current system we enjoy perfect.

 

[AvalonXQ]

Excellent. I am glad to hear we are in accord regarding the lower cost of socialized health care versus private health care.

Yes, I think we're all in agreement that you can deliver health care more cheaply by reducing its quality and level of service.

 

[Lurker]

Yes, I think we're all in agreement that you can deliver health care more cheaply by reducing its quality and level of service.

Yes, but we can also see from overseas that quality and level of service do not necessairily have to drop and it can still be delivered cheaper.

 

[jimbob]

Excellent. I am glad to hear we are in accord regarding the lower cost of socialized health care versus private health care.



Anecdotal evidence noted. I am sure I can find plenty of cases in the US where private medical insurance has refused treatment or cancelled policies. How would you respond to those?

http://www.billshrink.com/blog/5596/health-care/


I don't think anyone is extolling the perfection of a socialized health care system. Nor is the current system we enjoy perfect.

Let me help you with some examples, and no I don't think an NHS-type solutoon would be appropriate for the US. But some of the insurance-based systems that are more common in Europe possibly would.

Easycruise, any discussion about the problems in the US?


I seem to recall that actually in the US, amongst the uninsured, the dental care is pretty poor to...

I'll try to find figures.

Here's another reason we need some pretty drastic health insurance regulations.

This supplemental memo (pdf) summarizing the findings of the House committee's investigation of rescission reads about like a transcript of Sicko.

It's deplorable that people can dutifully pay their premiums for years, even decades, and then basically be cancelled when they get seriously (expensively) sick.

Some shocking instances covered in the executive summare of the PDF:

Insurance companies rescind coverage even when discrepancies are unintentional or caused by others. In one case reviewed by the Committee, a WellPoint subsidiary rescinded coverage for a patient in Virginia whose insurance agent entered his weight incorrectly on his application and failed to return it to him for review. The company's Associate General Counsel warned that the agent's actions were "not acceptable" and recommended against rescission, but she was overruled.
• Insurance companies rescind coverage for conditions that are unknown to policyholders. In 2004, Fortis Health, now known as Assurant, rescinded coverage for a policyholder with lymphoma, denying him chemotherapy and a life-saving stem cell transplant. The company located a CT scan taken five years earlier that identified silent gall stones and an asymptomatic abdominal aortic aneurysm, but the policyholder's doctor never informed him of these conditions. After direct intervention from the Illinois Attorney General's Office, the individual's policy was reinstated.

Hard to disagree with the summary:

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Last year, the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform initiated an investigation into problems with the individual health insurance market. This year, the Energy and Commerce Committee, and its Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, continued that investigation. This memorandum presents the Committee's findings.

The Committee sent document requests to 50 state insurance commissioners and three health insurance companies that provide individual health insurance policies, Assurant Health, WellPoint, Inc., and UnitedHealth Group. The Committee obtained approximately 116,000 pages of documents and interviewed numerous policyholders who had their coverage terminated,
or "rescinded," after they became ill.

The Committee's investigation demonstrates that the market for individual health insurance in the United States is fundamentally flawed. - -

ETA: and a bit more:

Insurance companies have evaluated employee performance based on the amount of money their employees saved the company through rescissions. The Committee obtained an annual performance evaluation of the Director of Group Underwriting at WellPoint. Under "results achieved" for meeting financial "targets" and improving financial "stability," the review stated that this official obtained "Retro savings of $9,835,564" through rescissions. The official was awarded a perfect "5" for "exceptional
performance."

In written testimony for today's hearing, all three insurance companies stated that the passage of comprehensive health care reform legislation, including a system where coverage is available to everyone and all Americans are required to participate, would eliminate the controversial practices of denying coverage based on preexisting conditions and rescinding policyholders for omissions in their medical records.

 

[mhaze]

Yes, but we can also see from overseas that quality and level of service do not necessairily have to drop and it can still be delivered cheaper.

So here is your analogy:

Person A is obese, 400 lbs. (USA Government, Social security and medicare).

Person B is not obese, 180 lbs (European, your cherry picked country).


Lurker says to A: You can carry this bag of candies and potato chips around for a month. Don't worry it's not hard to not eat them. Person B can do it.

Yeah right.

 

[jimbob]

So here is your analogy:

Person A is obese, 400 lbs. (USA Government, Social security and medicare).

Person B is not obese, 180 lbs (European, your cherry picked country).


Lurker says to A: You can carry this bag of candies and potato chips around for a month. Don't worry it's not hard to not eat them. Person B can do it.

Yeah right.

That is an odd use of the word "cherrypicked".

Virtually every other OECD country has some form of universal healthcare, and spend a lot less as a proportion of their, usually smaller, per-capita GDP on healthcare.

What is the reason for claiming that the US is uniquely incompetent in this area?

The UK government can achieve pretty major cockups, including in the NHS, but it still works better than the current US system.

 

[joobz]

I'm still waiting for an example of cheap affordable health care from a free market system.

 

[BeAChooser]

I'm still waiting for an example of cheap affordable health care from a free market system.

Let's imagine for a moment what a health care system would look like without a free market. Oh wait. We don't have to imagine that. We need only look at the history of the USSR.

 

[mhaze]

That is an odd use of the word "cherrypicked".

Virtually every other OECD country has some form of universal healthcare, and spend a lot less as a proportion of their, usually smaller, per-capita GDP on healthcare.

What is the reason for claiming that the US is uniquely incompetent in this area?

The UK government can achieve pretty major cockups, including in the NHS, but it still works better than the current US system.

Not according to people I've talked to, but let's leave that aside. That's just a rehash of an earlier part of the thread that incidentally, lead to Lurker's assertions which you comment on.

Do you really need to ask why the US may be uniquely incompetent? "May be" does not mean "certainly is".

Of course it may be uniquely incompetent. That needs to be pointed out when someone like you asserts certainty as to the success of the utopian scheme of the moment's implentation in our country.

 

[jimbob]

Let's imagine for a moment what a health care system would look like without a free market. Oh wait. We don't have to imagine that. We need only look at the history of the USSR.

Why not choose Cuba?

 

[Lurker]

So here is your analogy:

Person A is obese, 400 lbs. (USA Government, Social security and medicare).

Person B is not obese, 180 lbs (European, your cherry picked country).

I do not think the phrase "cherry picked" means what you think it means.

According to the OECD, the US is DEAD LAST in healthcare costs per person (last being most expensive). I am not cherry picking. Choose ANY western European country. Choose any modern country around the world. The USA is DEAD LAST. How does this rise to cherry picking?

 

[Lurker]

Not according to people I've talked to, but let's leave that aside. That's just a rehash of an earlier part of the thread that incidentally, lead to Lurker's assertions which you comment on.

Do you really need to ask why the US may be uniquely incompetent? "May be" does not mean "certainly is".

Of course it may be uniquely incompetent. That needs to be pointed out when someone like you asserts certainty as to the success of the utopian scheme of the moment's implentation in our country.

Again, why is the US last in health care costs? Can we learn anything from foreign countries?

 

[dirtywick]

I do not think the phrase "cherry picked" means what you think it means.

According to the OECD, the US is DEAD LAST in healthcare costs per person (last being most expensive). I am not cherry picking. Choose ANY western European country. Choose any modern country around the world. The USA is DEAD LAST. How does this rise to cherry picking?

I am curious about why this is. Where is the extra cost coming from? But even more importantly can the government eliminate that cost?

I really don't know the answers there, but the reason I say this is because I'm one of the people not insured right now by choice. I can afford it, but not comfortably. The more affordable it is the more likely I am to get it. But if it's going to be mandatory and not noticeably cheaper to me, I'm feel like I'm better off with the current set up.

 

[joobz]

Let's imagine for a moment what a health care system would look like without a free market. Oh wait. We don't have to imagine that. We need only look at the history of the USSR.

So your best argument for a free market system is to say "this other system's worse."

but of course, there isn't just TWO types of systems, USSR vs. free market. We have varying degrees of nationalized systems vs. free market. You have advocated that government regulation results in a worse health care system. If this were true, you should be able to show a correlation between increased free market policies, a decrease in health care cost and increase in quality.

Well, I am simply asking for some evidence. Any evidence to this point.
Why not show that the free market works.


ETA:
From your "Apples and oranges" rant:

For example, do they have the same number of lawyers per capita that we do? No, they have far fewer lawyers.

A result of market forces.

And there more structural differences between the US and other countries. Does the EU and canada have to deal with the same number of illegal aliens? No, they have far fewer illegals. Are they as generous with those illegals as we are ours? No, in some cases they provide them with no care whatsoever that isn't paid for up-front by the illegals themselves.

and what is the motivating factor for "illegals" to enter into the country? Market forces.

Do the doctors in these other countries make the same amount as doctors in the US? No, on average they make considerably less.

Why do american doctors get paid more???? hmmm, free market forces?

Second, do those european/canadian governments you admire provide the same healthcare that Americans as a rule enjoy? No.

This is just false.
http://www.pnhp.org/PDF_files/ReviewUSCanadaOpenMedicine.pdf


I could go on... but I think the point is clear. Apples and oranges indeed.

 

[BeAChooser]

Why not choose Cuba?

So you want to model America's health care system after Cuba's? LOL! Then first thing you better do is cut the calorie intact of Americans by a third and force everyone to walk to work. Because we know both calorie input and exercise have a lot to do with longevity … and I'm certain that the reason you picked Cuba is it's high longevity.

Now one way to lower our calorie input and increase exercise might be to let the anti-capitalists who ran/run Cuba run America's economy into the ground like they ran Cuba's. In just two generations, they helped Cuba go from being one of the most prosperous countries to one of the poorest countries in Latin America. Thus forcing the reductions in calorie input and increased exercise that lead to better longevity.

But isn't it ironic that if you lived in Cuba, you probably wouldn't be chatting with us now. You see, in 2009, even further limited access to the WWW for it's citizens (http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/nationworld/sfl-cuba-internet-cutoff-050709,0,4376220.story ). But then maybe you're an elitist who thinks you'd be one of the 2% who do (or did) have access. Although even if you did have access, you might be one of those who now fears to talk truthfully about conditions in Cuba (http://www.docstoc.com/docs/8009114/Another-“Special-Period”-in-Cuba-How-Citizens-View-Their ).

I suspect your rather naive view of Cuba's medical system is the result of their very controlled media and the liberal media in this country. I think accounts like the one's below are much more the reality of Cuban health care:

http://www.therealcuba.com/Page10.htm

http://www.finlay-online.com/tomasromay/darsi7.htm "Cuban Doctor Pays A High Price for Truth"

http://www.nowpublic.com/ouch_visiting_cuban_hospital "Ouch!!!! Visiting a Cuban Hospital"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=25_RgM1jHeo "Cuba Healthcare, the Hospitals Michael Moore won't show 1"

http://www.nationalcenter.org/NPA557_Cuban_Health_Care.html

Why even wikipedia would give you a better picture:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuba#Health

Challenges include low pay of doctors (only 15 dollars a month), poor facilities, poor provision of equipment, and frequent absence of essential drugs.

 

[BeAChooser]

According to the OECD, the US is DEAD LAST in healthcare costs per person (last being most expensive). I am not cherry picking. Choose ANY western European country. Choose any modern country around the world. The USA is DEAD LAST. How does this rise to cherry picking?

How is it any more cherry picking than you continually ignoring any differences between countries and health care that might result in different costs and health care outcomes between countries? For example, you ignore OECD statistics about obesity, which has been strongly linked to life expectancy and health care costs. Here are the OECD's 2008 data on the incidence of obesity as a percentage of the adult population:

http://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=HEALTH#

US 32
Belgium 12.7
France 9.4
Japan 3.0
Luxembourg 17.1
Netherlands 10.9
Sweden 9.8
UK 23.0

As you can see, the US population is decidedly overweight compared to the rest of the developed world.

And here's the impact of obesity on a statistic that you folks are continually citing as proof that Europeans get as good a health care as we do:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/03/090319224823.htm

ScienceDaily (Mar. 20, 2009) — A new analysis of almost one million people from around the world has shown that obesity can trim years off life expectancy.

The Oxford University research found that moderate obesity, which is now common, reduces life expectancy by about 3 years, and that severe obesity, which is still uncommon, can shorten a person’s life by 10 years.

 

[joobz]

So your best argument for a free market system is to say "this other system's worse."

but of course, there isn't just TWO types of systems, USSR vs. free market. We have varying degrees of nationalized systems vs. free market. You have advocated that government regulation results in a worse health care system. If this were true, you should be able to show a correlation between increased free market policies, a decrease in health care cost and increase in quality.

Well, I am simply asking for some evidence. Any evidence to this point.
Why not show that the free market works.

I guess Lurker already provided the evidence.
Free market system results in the MOST EXPENSIVE health care system.

According to the OECD, the US is DEAD LAST in healthcare costs per person (last being most expensive).

I guess BAC doesn't like that answer.

How is it any more cherry picking than you continually ignoring any differences between countries and health care that might result in different costs and health care outcomes between countries?For example, you ignore OECD statistics about obesity, which has been strongly linked to life expectancy and health care costs.

So our health insurance is twice as much as Canada's because we are fatter?
Interesting.

I thought it was because we had the most lawyers (a result of the free market) and the highest paid doctors (a result of the free market).

One would have to start wondering, Why are americans fatter than other countries? In the 50s, why did americans smoke so much?

Say it together now, Unregulated free markets....