Why It Makes ECONOMIC Sense....

.....to Pass the Healthcare Reform Bill Now

The Major Objections to the Bill are both economic and political:

(1) Economics: Cost, especially in relation to the National Debt
(2) Politics: Government's Role in Personal Matters

What Are the Deficit-Creating Costs of the Current Healthcare System?
We taxpayers pay for all of the healthcare now. We just do it in a way that we can’t afford.

The Money That the Nation Pays for Healthcare includes insurance payments, government payments, and individual payments. The source of every one of these payments is: the individual. Whether we pay for healthcare in insurance premiums—or in taxes—or in checks to the doctor—we pay for it all.

At the Moment, the Inefficiencies Are Bankrupting the System:

Inefficiencies in the System:
Out of all the dollars the American people pay, too-few go straight to healthcare.

Many Bills Are Paid by Government:
Many dollars pay for those who do not pay for themselves: seniors, the military, the poor. This money goes through government hands, which takes something like 3% in administrative costs.

Many Bills Are Paid by Insurance Companies:
Many dollars go to insurance companies, who pay healthcare, but also take something like 20% out in administrative costs—and in profits.

But All of the Bills Are Paid by All of Us:
The total, national healthcare bill—administrative costs, profits, and actual healthcare—is paid for by the total of us. It’s not really us or government. Because we, the people, are the government.

All of it Is “Our” Money

Every Penny Paid for Healthcare, by Americans, in America, is our money. Any idea that the flow of money between taxpayers and government changes the combined national “net worth” makes no sense. This issue is not an economic one. But it is a political issue.

Political Issues:
For some people, the politics of the situation argue against government involvement in healthcare delivery. Some also argue in terms of individual responsibility versus social responsibility. That's a discussion that we, as a people, need to have.

But Now Is Not the Time for That Discussion. Now, while America is in the greatest financial challenge of the last 80 years, is not the time. Too many Americans have lost their insurance—just because they’ve lost their jobs. And that’s not a lack of individual responsibility. And too many Americans can’t afford to pay for their own insurance—just because of skyrocketing premiums, insurmountable deductibles, low lifetime maximums, preexisting conditions, etc.

The Economics of Reform Are Comparatively Sound:
The economics of the situation—that we all are paying all of the bills—gives all of us the incentive to get those costs under control—as quickly as possible—so that more of our national wealth can go into the capitalist engine of wealth-creation—and balancing the budget.

Health-insurance Reform Makes Economic Sense:
We, the American people, cannot afford to keep wasting our healthcare dollars by diverting so much through insurance companies. The evidence that is does not work for America now is clear. The economic argument is sound.

America Cannot Afford to Wait:
We Must Pass Healthcare Reform for America
Now!

The Republican Medicare Myth

For Pretty Much the Whole Year since the world economy fell apart under the stewardship of former President George W. Bush, the Hot Air Force of Conservative American media combined with congressional and gubernatorial Republicans have taken what pleasure they can find in shooting slings and arrows at current President Barack Obama and the Democrats in Congress.

It's Like Shooting Donkeys in a Barrel, on the one hand.

But on the Other Hand, any self-respecting American elephant with a sincere interest in advancing the American Way of Life would find embarrassment in the economic and political state that those years of Republican Rule skidded America into. Such persons would have worked a bit harder to help put things back in order, and would have shown less relish in trying to foist their own failures onto their political opposition.

Listening to the Likes of the Republican Leadership such as House Minority Leader John Boehner and House Minority Whip Eric Cantor stand up and take partisan potshots at Democrats has been a transparent effort to make fun of Democrats for the mess that the Republicans made and left for the rest of the free world.

The Republicans Have Forgotten that the purpose of politics is not to score points, but to run the country. And sometimes that means putting ideology aside.

Since the Early Days of Medicare back in 1965, the Republicans have led the charges against this program essential for helping to keep senior citizens out of financial ruin in their twilight years.

“Socialized Medicine!” has been the Republican verdict all these years. “It's too expensive!” they have yelled. Even as this “socialist” program has grown to become one of the Nation's most-popular government programs ever.

In a Recent Posting on Our Companion Blog, Ideology Aside, Gozo Usa analyzes how the apparent failures of Medicare on a fiscally responsible basis result from Republican obstructionism, and not from any flaw inherent in the system. Writes Usa,

[S]ince 1965, for almost 45 years, the Republicans have worked to keep it so that the most-expensive health care that can be paid for, is paid for out of your pocket and mine.....The Republicans have made sure that Medicare is almost-impossible for America to afford.....[They] have worked for almost 45 years to kill Medicare. It’s time to put this destructive Republican ideology aside.

The Problem with Being Reactionary is that you can only do your best work when the other side sticks its neck out and tries new things. Such as Social Security and civil rights and voting rights and Medicare.....AKA “socialized medicine.”

It's Time to Put “Ideology Aside” and include America's low-risk, low-cost population in the high-risk, high-cost health-insurance pool.

In the Long Run, America Eventually Will Join the rest of the developed world, along with the not-so-developed world, and provide universal health care that the whole of the Nation can afford.

In the Mean Time, America Needs a “Public Option.” We don't need to reinvent the wheel of universal healthcare coverage, when so many different plans around the world show us what works and what doesn't. We can pick and choose, learning from the rest of the world's mistakes. We will come up with the world's best universal coverage, combining capitalism's best practices to make healthcare affordable, once and for all. But in the mean time, America needs that “public option.”

Please Read the Entire Post at Ideology Aside:

Democrats Want Health Care That’s Affordable; Republicans Want Medicare to Die

And Then Let Your Elected Officials Know, one way or the other, what you think.

The American Capitalist’s Serenity Prayer

God grant me the serenity
To accept the profitable munificence of privately run companies;
The courage to change for those services that government can best provide;
And the wisdom to know the difference.

–attrib. unknown

How De-Regulating Insurance Across State Lines Would Invite Our Next National Disaster

Free-Market Policies Have Their Place. We are a nation built on the principles of unfettered capitalism that have enabled generations of Americans to reach the shared American dream.

The Ideal of Free Markets—the Rights of All People to Compete Fairly in the Market Place—is a cornerstone of the land of opportunity.

But Free-Market Policies Also Have Their Limits. If we have learned nothing else from the post-Glass Steagall experiment and the resulting mortgage and banking and investment debacle, let us take this lesson with us.

Quality and Price Are the Two Competing Factors of Competition that free-market ambitions often overlook. In relation to products that affect broad national interests—such as mortgage products—such as investment opportunities—such as insurance policies—competitive freedom often works out badly. This situation occurs when the opportunity to buy and sell on price overwhelms the need to protect a product’s underlying quality.

Quality of Healthcare Paid for Under Private Health Insurance Policies exemplifies this situation. It is an example of a situation in which free-market ideals, if followed too-closely, would cause overwhelming damage to our national economic health.

So Why Would De-Regulating Insurance Be Such an Unmitigated Disaster?

A: First, Because of the Abundance of “Small Print” that insurance policies must contain, hundreds of details exist that can be hard to understand, easy to overlook, and almost-impossible to compare. It is in situations where comparisons are ineffective that free-market benefits disappear.

B: When Comparisons Can’t Be Made, cost—price—becomes the predominant measure. When cost is the predominant measure, quality becomes temporarily irrelevant. Quality becomes a cost deferred.

C: When the Lowest-Cost Insurance Is Bought by All, competition can hardly survive. Competitors must lower the quality of their own policies in order to compete with lower rates. Meanwhile, those persons under-insured because of the nature of the deficient policies must continue to rely on public medical services—e.g., unnecessary emergency room visits—or suffer financial ruin despite their efforts to keep themselves adequately insured.

D: Results:
1: A nation in which many people previously lacked insurance now becomes a nation in which all people have inadequate insurance.
2: As in the current economic crisis, the deferred costs of health care inadequately covered by the deficient policies become a tax on the entire nation.

What America Needs Now is improvement in our health care and health insurance. Deregulating the products so that less-reputable insurance companies could offer competing products based solely on price would force countless Americans to spend their limited insurance dollars on dangerously limited insurance products.

Our Great Nation Is Currently Climbing out of a Hole that mortgage and banking deregulation dug for us, with its shovel of free-market theory.

America’s Love Affair with Free-Market Ideals Must Never Waver

But the Essential Countervailing Ideals of Pragmatism also must never be ignored. Nor may free-market idealism be allowed to bring us to the brink of financial ruin ever again.

Vice-Presidential Debate Quiz, Part 2

[Our Series of Occasional Campaign Questions Continues:]

In 2003, Speaking on CNN, Senator McCain said:
“I Am a Deregulator. I Believe in Deregulation.”

Less than Two Weeks Ago on 60 Minutes, Senator McCain Said,
“I think the deregulation was probably helpful to the growth of our economy.”

Yesteryday Congress Voted Our $700 Billion Bailout of that same economy.

Democratic Vice-Presidential Candidate Joe Biden, speaking in last-Thursday’s debate, said that Senator McCain “recently wrote an article in a major magazine saying that he wants to do for the health care industry, deregulate it and let the free market move, like he did for the banking industry.”

QUESTION #3:
Should America Let Senator McCain Do for Health Care what he has done for the banking industry?

□ Yes
□ No
□ Now is not a good time to ask


QUESTION #4:
Would You Like the Arizona Senator to Deregulate Your Health Insurance?

□ Yes
□ No
□ I can’t afford health insurance


QUESTION #5:
If Senator McCain Ever Gets His Hands on Health Care, should the American people be expected to provide another $700 billion bailout?

□ Yes
□ No
□ Yesterday's bailout check hasn't yet cleared the bank



(Transcript source: http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/02/debate.transcript.
Italics in Govrenor Palin's comments are by Channeling Barack Obama™ )

Sarah Palin Disputes John McCain

In Last-Night’s Vice-Presidential Debate, Governor Sarah Palin promised to join John McCain and clean up Washington.

Disputing Senator McCain’s Oft-Repeated Deregulator Claim, Governor Palin said, “Now, as for John McCain's adherence to rules and regulations and pushing for even harder and tougher regulations, that is another thing that he is known for though.”

Senator McCain Disagrees With His Running Mate. Senator McCain maintains that he has always been known as “a deregulator.” (At least until a few weeks ago.)

“I Am a Deregulator. I Believe in Deregulation,” said Senator McCain, speaking on CNN five years ago, on 07/13/2003. And here is Senator McCain, less than two weeks ago, in an interview on 60 Minutes (air date: 09/21/2008):

CBS (Scott Pelley):
“In 1999 you were one of the senators who helped pass deregulation of Wall Street. Do you regret that now?”

McCain:
“No, I think the deregulation was probably helpful to the growth of our economy.”

Vice-Presidential Candidate Joe Biden Disagrees: “So what you had is you had overwhelming ‘deregulation.’ You had actually the belief that Wall Street could self-regulate itself.”

Here Is Senator McCain, Again From 60 Minutes:

CBS:
“McCain has been an advocate of deregulation most of his career, but Thursday he endorsed the biggest bailout in history—a plan for the government to take on the bad debts of financial institutions.”

McCain:
“We’re going to take over these bad loans. We’re going to take over these bad, these bonds and we’re going to keep you alive. And we’re going to have the taxpayer help you out. But when the time comes and the economy recovers, then anything that’s gained back is going to go to the taxpayers first.”

The “We” That Senator McCain Is Talking About is the United States Government, that Senator McCain has served for the past 26 years—"deregulating" and “cleaning up” Washington.

Listening to Senator McCain, it’s clear why his cleanup efforts have been unsuccessful.

In His Earnest Effort to Get Elected, Senator McCain can’t decide whether government regulation is the problem—or the solution.

And So He Promises Both.

Can You “Clean Up Washington” and “Deregulate” at the Same Time? Governor Palin and Senator McCain both say "Yes!" But John McCain's 26 years as a "Maverick" in the United States Congress says no.


Thank You for Your Support