With all the plans Obama has for new government programs, entitlement programs have been under a microscope lately. I believe this is a good thing. The folks at the Heritage Foundation have written a great article about the costs of these programs. It is completely out of control. Now, Obama and his liberal friends want to add more. To many Americans, the promises that they are making sound great. But one of the problems with all of these programs (and there are many programs and many problems) is that people don’t look at what it will really cost them. Here’s a great graphic that illustrates this beautifully. (Click to enlarge.)
We must start cutting entitlement programs. (And no, we shouldn’t just abandon the people that are on Social Security.) We simply cannot allow more government entitlement spending.
I am a McCain supporter, but also support a Medicare-for-all system.
Medicare is spending 3.2% of GDP to cover perhaps 20% of our population. If we expanded it to cover the other 80% as well, say, with a Medicare-for-all system, we’d be covering 100% of our people for less than the 16.5% we are currently spending.
Medicare is our most efficient form of providing health care because it eliminates the 31% of insurance industry waste. For more details look at the health care section at: http://moneyedpoliticians.wordpress.com/issues/
The problem is, our insurance industry is a big campaign contributor, not just to the politicians that protect their position in our “free market,” but also to think tanks like the Heritage. If money were not playing a part in our decisions we’d fix this system overnight. But the politicians don’t want it fixed, because that would cost them major contributors.
It never ceases to amaze me, the amount of energy that can go into a project just to avoid doing the right thing. The best, simplest, least costly, most effective thing we could do is expand what has been working so well for years, Medicare. You get sick, you get care, and the caregiver gets paid. Nothing could be simpler.
“America will always do the right thing, but only after everything else fails.” Winston Churchill
MoneyEd,
I took a look at your page, but I’m not seeing a source for your claim of “31% of insurance industry waste”. Its easy to over simplify an agrument (and I do it all the time!), but when we over simplify an argument and then give the solution, it rarely works as one would hope.
Yes, Medicare spending is about 3.2% of GDP. I wonder what percentage of that is due to government waste.
Also, Medicare is not as simple as you claim. Do a simple Google search and you’ll read tons and tons of articles about Doctors (“caregiver” in your statement) who are not going to except Medicare because of all the costs of compliance.
Michael Cox
Mike’s World News
Mike, you can see the sources for the 31% on my resources page at http://moneyedpoliticians.wordpress.com/resources/. The number comes from researchers at Harvard, and include both the waste on the insurance side AND the extra billing and administrative costs needed on the clinic and hospital side. See the other page (Issues) for more.
You are right that part of the 3.2% is Medicare waste (overrutilization and fraud), but both of those problems are even greater on the private health care side because there is rarely jail time for infractions. Thus they were easier.
Having spent 35 years in the health care industry, the last 25 as CEO of an independent lab, and the last 20 as a Medicare provider, I can assure you that most Medicare reimbursements are fair. I was never underpaid and always got paid in 2-3 weeks. And now that I am on Medicare I see the same doctor and go to the same hospital as before.
Yes, some physicians don’t like Medicare because the privates do not have as strong of oversight. I provided a mobile echocardiographic service and charged $300 per test. Medicare reimbursed $400, which was quite fair. The docs were billing the privates up to $1800 per test, and were often getting it. So, yeah, I can see why some were upset with the $400.
But the cost of compliance was easier with Medicare because it was all electronic. And it is because of that that over 59% of physicians now support a Medicare-for-all system.
Jack Lohman
jlohman@execpc.com
I’ll have to take a look at the Harvard study. But the other problem with Universal Health Care (and Medicare, for that matter) is that they are unconstitutional. How is it unconsititutional you ask? The 10th Amendment to the Constitution reads “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”.
Show me in the Constitution or any of her amendments where the Federal Government can setup Universal Health Care for the Citizens. Show me where they have the authority to create any of these massive entitlement programs that are killing our economy. If its not in there, then the Federal Government does not have the authority to do it. If they don’t have the authority to do it, its unconstitutional.
Since John McCain has promised to “Protect and Defend the Constitution” when he became a member of Congress, I’m sure he knows this. It would be nice if he’d follow it once in a while.
Don’t even look at the Harvard study, sue the government. If you are a constitutionalist, nothing will satisfy you, not even US Mail, air flight control, the FCC, SEC, whatever.
I am of the mind that our founders were not good enough to foresee 200 years ahead, and some modifications had to be made. Yes we could do that all through amendments, but that would seriously hamper where we are going.
Medicare is a very decent way of dealing with a very real problem, and it works so well that it should be extended to all US citizens. Yes, if all 300 million of us were of the mind to voluntarily take care of our own, it may not be needed. But you are an idealist and I am a pragmatist.
And while I will be voting for McCain, we have a congress, and they are owned by the corporations. So are the state legislatures. Live with it, or change it.
If, by a constitutionalist, you mean someone who believes that our country should be governed by its founding documents, then yes, I am a constitutionalist.
Let’s see:
US Mail: Article 1, Section 8, Clause 7 allowed Congress it “To establish Post Offices and post Roads”.
Air Flight Control: I’d put that under Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3; Interstate Commerce and Foreign Commerce. Air Travel is between states and foreign countries primarily. There is some intra-state flights, but since they effect the air travel between states and foreign countries, then Commerce clause would apply.
Same thing to a lesser extend with both FCC & SEC.
I believe that God inspired the founders when they were writing the US Constitution and, there, that the Constitution was inspired by God. I also believe God knows the begining and the end. He knew what our world would be like in 2008 and, as a result, the foundation of our country. If there is somethng that we feel strongly that needs to happen or be changed, then the founders, under the inspiration of God, created a way whereby we could amend the Constitution to allow for that. What would happen if Congress would try to pass Amendments authorizing them to pass laws, before actually passing laws that they don’t have Constitutional Authority to pass? Government would slow down. I think that is a good thing,
You claim that Medicare is a “decent way of dealing with a very real problem.” I don’t agree. In terms of dollar amounts, I spend more on Medicare withholdinds than I do on my private health insurance (which I am paying out of pocket for), yet Medicare is not paying for itself. In otherwords, it is being subsidized out of the general fund. How is wealth redistribution a decent or a fair way of taking care of a problem? I work very hard to provide for my family, yet I am forced to pay 2.9% of my gross income to pay for someone else’s health care on top of the 12.4% Social Security and Federal Income tax of between 10-35% and State Sales tax (Clark County, Nevada is 7.75%) and property taxes and gas taxes (69.3 cents a gallon in Nevada) and all the other millions of taxes that government requires us to pay. If I gambled, I’d be willing to bet that over 50% of my gross income goes to the government. Yet you are saying that my taxes should be raised to pay for health insurance for those who choose to pay for other things instead. That is not fair, nor is it right.
If you add in Medicare, Medicaid, SCHIP, and the administrative costs of Health and Human Services, there is no way that we as a people are going to save money. The government isn’t able to do that. As Thomas Paine would say “The government that governs best, governs least.” He also said “Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.” I do not want to give this massive government any more power, anymore authority.
If I had to chose some kind of “universal health care system” for the US; if I had no othe r option, then I would go with something similiar to the Singapore System. I’m not sure if you are familiar with it or not, but check out the always acurate Wikipedia for more information on it at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Health_Care#Singapore.
BTW, I am working on changing Government. The saying that lots of people will say is that they are “voting fo the lesser of two evils.”. Remember, voting fo the lesser of two evils is still voting for evil. I will not vote for evil.
I was totally going to answer back about how having universal Medicare coverage would be universal health-care and would be terrible, but I think Mike handeled it quite well.
One thing, though, that Mike didn’t say, is that I do not want any kind of government mandated system of health care. I really believe the free-market can offer solutions, if allowed to do so. Does the health care system need fixing? Absolutely. Sould it be done by the government? Absolutely not!
Check out this website: http://www.freemarketcure.com/
I think something that was missed with this post is the point about entitlements. Heritage just used these three to show their point, but you could look at any of the massive amount of entitlements in the government and see the same thing.
But, for me, it isn’t just about the financial cost. What about the other costs? People are no longer self-sufficient. More and more they are expecting the government to come in and save them. Look at the welfare system. People are not working, because they can make more by staying at home on welfare. There is no motivation for people to help themselves. Another great example is with the housing situation. People are expecting the government to come in and save their houses. Now, this was something the people did of their own accord. No “evil bank” forced people to sign the mortgages. Our family is one with an ARM loan, but we have a plan for when the interest rate can change. And, if we should loose our home, it would be our own fault. We read every single paper before we signed it. If people didn’t do that, it’s their own fault.
Anyway, the point is, that not only is there no Constitutional basis for these programs, these programs are hurting our families and our society. Perhaps I’ll do another post about it sometime to elaborate.
I would agree that government slowing down would be a good thing, but that ain’t going to happen. Politicians are paid (by the special interests) to spend money… fast… and that means passing laws and subsidies and everything else. Only when we get public funding of campaigns, paid for by taxpayers, will we see politicians voting on behalf of those taxpayers and against the greedy interests.
Medicare is a ponzi scheme. You pay your dollars today to fund health care for your parents, and someday your kids will fund your healthcare. You are paying 2.9% of the first $104K, roughly $3000 per year. If you are paying less for private insurance my best advice is “don’t get sick!” You have a worthless policy.
Mike, we are all paying for health care for 100% of the people in the US, whether they are here legally or not. We pay in cost shifting, bankruptcy costs, and when employers add their health care premiums to the cost of their product and we reimburse them at the cash register. For the same amount of dollars we are paying today we could provide first-class care to 100% of our population. If you want to talk about fair, what God would want us to do, it would be to provide health care to all.
Singapore is great? Then why did Taiwan, after thoroughly studying every health care system in the world, model their universal system after – drum roll please – our Medicare system. For all of its population, not just one segment.
And Mike, there are a lot of things wrong with our electoral system, but voting for someone without any chance of becoming president is dumb. I voted my conscience one year – for Nader – and you see what happened. The moneyed folks drowned me out.
You might find this description of a book of interest: http://www.epi.org/content.cfm/books_all_together_now
Jack Lohman
http://MoneyedPoliticians.net
Denise, I think there is a misuse of the word “entitlements.” I am absolutely opposed to freebies for people who will not lift a finger to help themselves, but there are certain things that should be part of our social infrastructure. Health care is one of those things that we owe ourselves.
And I absolutely do not like a welfare system that does not demand something in return from the recipient, like community services for food and etc. But I am also reminded that many people dislike any kind of welfare, unless of course it comes in the form of inheritances they didn’t have to work for. Funny how that works.
The housing crisis is also interesting. It is the result of deregulation of the industry. What is it you guys call it: letting the free market play out?
That we had some sales people that were willing to engage in fraud and misrepresentation, and had no rules or oversight to abide by, does not get this monkey off our back. We had some politicians that were willing to be bought off and they lifted the rules. Now it is we voters who have to answer for letting that corrupt politician live in the political system. But that’s as you say, our leaders are “hurting our families and our society,” and we are letting the corruption persist.
Jack Lohman
http://MoneyedPoliticians.net
Jack,
You said ” I think there is a misuse of the word “entitlements.” I am absolutely opposed to freebies for people who will not lift a finger to help themselves, but there are certain things that should be part of our social infrastructure.”
What are entitlements if not something that we believe all are entitled to have by being part of our “social infrastructure”? That is an entitlement. “I am entitled to have health care coverage!” is the demand of one who wants entitlements. Yet, as Denise said, enttitlements and other forms of the dole (welfare) do not motivate people to work.
Since you guys have brought up the housing market, I consider myself about as much of an expect of the housing market as one can be and not be a Real Estate agent, Mortgage broker, or in the construction field, as one can be. I believe that there were 3 causes of the housing “crisis” that we are in right now. First, people were (and are) gready. They saw their friends and family members buying big, beautiful homes and they felt “entitled” (there’s that word again) to buy one. Therefore, they went out and wanted to get one too, even if they couldn’t afford it. The second is that Government was trying to help people who couldn’t afford homes. So when the people (from the first group) lobbied their representatives, laws were passed (for example, the Community Reinvestment Act) that made it harder to deny loans to people. The third group of people at fault were the actual banks and mortage companies. They (the banks/mortage companies) are trying to make a profit, as all businesses in a capitalist society try to do. Some mortgage companies and some banks and some Real Estate professionals were involved in fraud, but I believe that they were few and far between. These companies were following the massive regulations that do and did exist for banks to follow. You claim that these industries were “deregulated”. That is non-sense. They had some regulations removed, prehaps, but they were and are heavily, heavily regulated. However, these corrupt banks won’t have been able to defraud people if people in # 1 didn’t exist. It comes back to the choices that they make. No one forced them to buy a house, especially one they couldn’t afford. And, I don’t believe we should be bailing out people who made stupid decisions.
If someone plays by the rules and gains a sizable estate, they should have every right to pass that on to their children. Hopefully, their children continue that legacy and continue to grow that estate. If not, that is their fault. If they do, great. As I mentioned in my last reply to you, our taxes are too heavy as it is. That is why the inheritance tax / “death tax” makes no sense. Someone pays tax on their income and their capital gains, yet, when they die, the government should get upto 55% of the value of the estate? That is wrong, just as entitlement programs are wrong.
You know, you claim you our a McCain supporter and, if you are and if your beliefs our a fair representation of McCain supporters, then God help us if either Obama or McCain win. I am a registed Republican. Yet, I am voting for Chuck Baldwin this year. I will not vote for the lesser of two evils, or the lessor of two socialists.
Michael Cox
Mike’s World News
Jack,
I missed your earlier reply to me, so I wanted to add a few more thoughts.
I completely agree that Medicare is a ponzi scheme. I do not expect anyone to pay for me or my families needs. I pay 100% of the health premiums for my family. No one else does. Not my employeer, for I am self-employeed, not the government, no one.
I pay a lot more than $3,000 a year for my healt insurance, but that is because it covers my entire family. If I would to only be paying for myself, it would be right about $3,000 a year. Yet, I am forced to pay 2.9% of my GROSS wages so that someone else who will not or can not pay for themself to have insurance, which means that my family has to do without something that we’d like, need, or want.
Why, if our private health insurance so horrible, do people with the means come to the US and pay OUT OF POCKET for procedures that would be covered back in their home country at no direct cost (just the cost of their exteremly high taxes)?
I ask you again, albeit in a slightly different way, where did the notion that health insurance is a right of the people?
Michael Cox
Mike’s World News
Ike, I think there were more than three culprits in the housing crisis, but I doubt that “people lobbying their representatives for an easier path” was one of them. Perhaps the brokers lobbying, however. Nd Bush’s massive tax break that converted a $300 billion surplus to a $600 billion deficit that trashed the value of the dollar and drove home prices down was at the top of the list.
On health care, there is no insurance worth its salt for $3000 per year. We spend $7000 per year for health care now, and insurers can do the math. If you followed the link above, you are clearly a YOYO and I’m a WITT. But there is no “constitutional right” to health care, but Medicare is the right thing to do. We disagree.
And only the very rich come to the US for health care, but some companies and insurers are now sending people to India for surgeries because of lower cost and high satisfaction rates. Their doctors are now just as good as ours, but their costs 1/10th ours. And oh yes, they don’t have free market health care.
And yes, the Ponzi scheme can continue as long as the people are sufficiently taxed to offset population growth, and ultimately, as cures are found, these costs will come down. But Medicare has problems that must be fixed too. See http://tinyurl.com/2hzj65
I don’t know what the costs of insurance where you live, but I can tell you with 100% certainity what I pay for health insurnace here in Nevada. I use Health Plan of Nevada, which is part of Sierra Health Services, just recently purchased by United Healthcare.
For my family of 4, I pay $760.18 a month, for health, vision, and dental. My two children are $153.87 a month, each. That is $307.74 for my cildren. For my wife & I, that is $398.44 a month. Because of maternity coverage, my wife’s coverage is more than mine. However, for simple math, I’ll just divide the number in half. That would be $199.22 a month. That would be $2,390.64 per year for my health insurance. This is a very good health care insurance plan. They have better coverage, but basically the difference is that the higher insurance coverage includes a lower deductiable and a lower co-pay.
Another problem with Medicare is that since the 2.9% gross tax that we are paying isn’t enough to cover an individual on Medicare, we have unfunded liability in the millions. Right now, it takes 3.9 workers to cover one retiree. (page 64 of http://www.cms.hhs.gov/ReportsTrustFunds/downloads/tr2006.pdf). When the baby boomers retire, there will be fewer and fewer paying into the system. Oh, and the cap of $104,000 a year? That was removed in 1994. Medicare is charged at 2.9% per person on their total gross income. The only way to keep Medicare solvent right now is to increase taxes, reduce benefits, and/or raise retirement age. None of those are popular, and so, nothing happens.
Oh, and since you talked about It is estimated that in 2006, there was $60 billion worth of fraud in the Medicare system (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22184921/).
We do disagree. Medicare isn’t a constitutional right. The Constitution is, in a sense, a contract between We, The People, and the government. The Government is not living up to their end of the Contract.
Michael Cox
Mike’s World News
And Mike, here’s something on the morality of national health care:
“So I just think if we’re concerned about 18,000 deaths each year from lack of health insurance, we’re actually obligated from a moral point of view to go with something that’s proven, which would be some form of nonprofit national health insurance. ”
http://www.bioethics.gov/transcripts/june08/session3.html