polifrog
We were told there was no rationing of health-care in ObamaCare. Politics.
Common sense said otherwise.
When the trust between producer and consumer is broken market distortions occur. Such is the case within the network of laws that is ObamaCare.
Within its pages health-care producers are no longer paid by end users and instead cater to those who do pay them, the more heavily regulated new arm of the government called insurance. The end users who are not required to pay only see free health-care, thus use more of it and use it more frivolously because dollar limitations no longer exist. This stresses supply and drives up costs. Simple and based on human nature.
The only way control way for costs to be controlled when the trust between provider and consumer or end user is broken is to ration the health-care we all receive. Government boards will necessarily do the rationing and when individuals die as a result of their decision not to provide care, then those boards can rightfully be called Death Panels.
A congressman who does not see this does not deserve to be a congressman. GK Butterfield not only joined his party in the denials of Death Panels, but lent his support for them with his vote in favor of ObamaCare. Even based on the most dismal of expectations GK Butterfield has failed to serve North Carolina and should loose his seat in November.
What is it about human nature that so befuddles GK Butterfield? This question alone should mark GK Butterfield as unfit to serve in congress.
out
Showing posts with label Health Care. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Health Care. Show all posts
Friday, October 29, 2010
Thursday, October 28, 2010
Rep Bob Etheridge (NC-2) --- Demonstrating a Lack of Mad Econ Skills...
polifrog
Obama and Bob Etheridge argued that through the miracle of government regulation, taxation, resource allocation and general smartyness of government officials, health-care costs would magically fall, you know, if all those health-care dollars were just passed through the government till.
It would reduce the deficit. It would lessen the costs of heath-care for businesses. It would lessen the burden of health-care costs on all our wallets.
They were wrong.
Thank you, Bob Etheridge, may we have another?
Thank you, Bob Etheridge, may we have another?
Thank you Bob Etheridge, may we have another?
Bob Etheridge is a grade school economist who does not base his support for a bill on the rational, but rather on what feels right at the time. No reading, no understanding. It just, you know, FEELS RIGHT.
Let Bob Etheridge know that hurting America and NC-2 hurts individuals, the same individuals he professes to help and send him back to school to learn some basic ECON.
out
Obama and Bob Etheridge argued that through the miracle of government regulation, taxation, resource allocation and general smartyness of government officials, health-care costs would magically fall, you know, if all those health-care dollars were just passed through the government till.
It would reduce the deficit. It would lessen the costs of heath-care for businesses. It would lessen the burden of health-care costs on all our wallets.
They were wrong.
Edison International said Friday that its first-quarter net income fell as it recorded a charge to reflect the recently enacted federal healthcare overhaul.
Thank you, Bob Etheridge, may we have another?
In a stunning revelation Wednesday, several top U.S. corporations are seriously considering dropping employee health insurance coverage in light of what they see as the inevitable consequence of ObamaCare--skyrocketing costs.
...the companies maintain that ObamaCare will result in a dramatic increase in expenses for providing employee coverage, with added costs skyrocketing to multi-billions of dollars.
Thank you, Bob Etheridge, may we have another?
Massachusetts medical-device companies say they’ll cut back on operational costs - and jobs - after a planned 2.3 percent tax on their products is implemented in 2013, according to a new survey.
The tax - imposed to help pay for the massive health-care industry overhaul and expansion - is “of the greatest concern” to a majority of its members, the survey found.
About 70 percent of the survey respondents said future innovation will be hurt by a new federal “physician sunshine bill.” The bill will require medical-device firms to report their marketing expenditures on physicians, and a recently passed gift-ban law in Massachusetts.
Thank you Bob Etheridge, may we have another?
Internal documents recently reviewed by Fortune, originally requested by Congress, show what the bill's critics predicted, and what its champions dreaded: many large companies are examining a course that was heretofore unthinkable, dumping the health care coverage they provide to their workers in exchange for paying penalty fees to the government.
That would dismantle the employer-based system that has reigned since World War II. It would also seem to contradict President Obama's statements that Americans who like their current plans could keep them. And as we'll see, it would hugely magnify the projected costs for the bill, which controls deficits only by assuming that America's employers would remain the backbone of the nation's health care system.
Bob Etheridge is a grade school economist who does not base his support for a bill on the rational, but rather on what feels right at the time. No reading, no understanding. It just, you know, FEELS RIGHT.
Let Bob Etheridge know that hurting America and NC-2 hurts individuals, the same individuals he professes to help and send him back to school to learn some basic ECON.
out
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
Rep Brad Miller (NC-13) --- Demonstrating a Lack of Mad Econ Skills...
polifrog
Obama and Brad Miller argued that through the miracle of government regulation, taxation, resource allocation and general smartyness of government officials, health-care costs would magically fall, you know, if all those health-care dollars were just passed through the government till.
It would reduce the deficit. It would lessen the costs of heath-care for businesses. It would lessen the burden of health-care costs on all our wallets.
They were wrong.
Thank you, Brad Miller, may we have another?
Thank you, Brad Miller, may we have another?
Thank you Brad Miller, may we have another?
Brad Miller is a grade school economist who does not base his support for a bill on the rational, but rather on what feels right at the time. No reading, no understanding. It just, you know, FEELS RIGHT.
Let Brad Miller know that hurting America and NC-13 hurts individuals, the same individuals he professes to help and send him back to school to learn some basic ECON.
out
Obama and Brad Miller argued that through the miracle of government regulation, taxation, resource allocation and general smartyness of government officials, health-care costs would magically fall, you know, if all those health-care dollars were just passed through the government till.
It would reduce the deficit. It would lessen the costs of heath-care for businesses. It would lessen the burden of health-care costs on all our wallets.
They were wrong.
Edison International said Friday that its first-quarter net income fell as it recorded a charge to reflect the recently enacted federal healthcare overhaul.
Thank you, Brad Miller, may we have another?
In a stunning revelation Wednesday, several top U.S. corporations are seriously considering dropping employee health insurance coverage in light of what they see as the inevitable consequence of ObamaCare--skyrocketing costs.
...the companies maintain that ObamaCare will result in a dramatic increase in expenses for providing employee coverage, with added costs skyrocketing to multi-billions of dollars.
Thank you, Brad Miller, may we have another?
Massachusetts medical-device companies say they’ll cut back on operational costs - and jobs - after a planned 2.3 percent tax on their products is implemented in 2013, according to a new survey.
The tax - imposed to help pay for the massive health-care industry overhaul and expansion - is “of the greatest concern” to a majority of its members, the survey found.
About 70 percent of the survey respondents said future innovation will be hurt by a new federal “physician sunshine bill.” The bill will require medical-device firms to report their marketing expenditures on physicians, and a recently passed gift-ban law in Massachusetts.
Thank you Brad Miller, may we have another?
Internal documents recently reviewed by Fortune, originally requested by Congress, show what the bill's critics predicted, and what its champions dreaded: many large companies are examining a course that was heretofore unthinkable, dumping the health care coverage they provide to their workers in exchange for paying penalty fees to the government.
That would dismantle the employer-based system that has reigned since World War II. It would also seem to contradict President Obama's statements that Americans who like their current plans could keep them. And as we'll see, it would hugely magnify the projected costs for the bill, which controls deficits only by assuming that America's employers would remain the backbone of the nation's health care system.
Brad Miller is a grade school economist who does not base his support for a bill on the rational, but rather on what feels right at the time. No reading, no understanding. It just, you know, FEELS RIGHT.
Let Brad Miller know that hurting America and NC-13 hurts individuals, the same individuals he professes to help and send him back to school to learn some basic ECON.
out
David Price (NC-4) -- Rationing Health-Care
polifrog
We were told there was no rationing of health-care in ObamaCare. Politics.
Common sense said otherwise.
When the trust between producer and consumer is broken market distortions occur. Such is the case within the network of laws that is ObamaCare.
Within its pages health-care producers are no longer paid by end users and instead cater to those who do pay them, the more heavily regulated new arm of the government called insurance. The end users who are not required to pay only see free health-care, thus use more of it and use it more frivolously because dollar limitations no longer exist. This stresses supply and drives up costs. Simple and based on human nature.
The only way control way for costs to be controlled when the trust between provider and consumer or end user is broken is to ration the health-care we all receive. Government boards will necessarily do the rationing and when individuals die as a result of their decision not to provide care, then those boards can rightfully be called Death Panels.
A congressman who does not see this does not deserve to be a congressman. David Price not only joined his party in the denials of Death Panels, but lent his support for them with his vote in favor of ObamaCare. Even based on the most dismal of expectations David Price has failed to serve North Carolina and should loose his seat in November.
What is it about human nature that so befuddles David Price? This question alone should mark David Price as unfit to serve in congress.
out
We were told there was no rationing of health-care in ObamaCare. Politics.
Common sense said otherwise.
When the trust between producer and consumer is broken market distortions occur. Such is the case within the network of laws that is ObamaCare.
Within its pages health-care producers are no longer paid by end users and instead cater to those who do pay them, the more heavily regulated new arm of the government called insurance. The end users who are not required to pay only see free health-care, thus use more of it and use it more frivolously because dollar limitations no longer exist. This stresses supply and drives up costs. Simple and based on human nature.
The only way control way for costs to be controlled when the trust between provider and consumer or end user is broken is to ration the health-care we all receive. Government boards will necessarily do the rationing and when individuals die as a result of their decision not to provide care, then those boards can rightfully be called Death Panels.
A congressman who does not see this does not deserve to be a congressman. David Price not only joined his party in the denials of Death Panels, but lent his support for them with his vote in favor of ObamaCare. Even based on the most dismal of expectations David Price has failed to serve North Carolina and should loose his seat in November.
What is it about human nature that so befuddles David Price? This question alone should mark David Price as unfit to serve in congress.
out
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
Brad Miller NC -- Rationing Health-Care
polifrog
We were told there was no rationing of health-care in ObamaCare. Politics.
Common sense said otherwise.
When the trust between producer and consumer is broken market distortions occur. Such is the case within the network of laws that is ObamaCare.
Within its pages health-care producers are no longer paid by end users and instead cater to those who do pay them, the more heavily regulated new arm of the government called insurance. The end users who are not required to pay only see free health-care, thus use more of it and use it more frivolously because dollar limitations no longer exist. This stresses supply and drives up costs. Simple and based on human nature.
The only way control way for costs to be controlled when the trust between provider and consumer or end user is broken is to ration the health-care we all receive. Government boards will necessarily do the rationing and when individuals die as a result of their decision not to provide care, then those boards can rightfully be called Death Panels.
A congressman who does not see this does not deserve to be a congressman. Brad Miller not only joined his party in the denials of Death Panels, but lent his support for them with his vote in favor of ObamaCare. Even based on the most dismal of expectations Brad Miller has failed to serve North Carolina and should loose his seat in November.
What is it about human nature that so befuddles Brad Miller? This question alone should mark Brad Miller as unfit to serve in congress.
out
We were told there was no rationing of health-care in ObamaCare. Politics.
Common sense said otherwise.
When the trust between producer and consumer is broken market distortions occur. Such is the case within the network of laws that is ObamaCare.
Within its pages health-care producers are no longer paid by end users and instead cater to those who do pay them, the more heavily regulated new arm of the government called insurance. The end users who are not required to pay only see free health-care, thus use more of it and use it more frivolously because dollar limitations no longer exist. This stresses supply and drives up costs. Simple and based on human nature.
The only way control way for costs to be controlled when the trust between provider and consumer or end user is broken is to ration the health-care we all receive. Government boards will necessarily do the rationing and when individuals die as a result of their decision not to provide care, then those boards can rightfully be called Death Panels.
A congressman who does not see this does not deserve to be a congressman. Brad Miller not only joined his party in the denials of Death Panels, but lent his support for them with his vote in favor of ObamaCare. Even based on the most dismal of expectations Brad Miller has failed to serve North Carolina and should loose his seat in November.
What is it about human nature that so befuddles Brad Miller? This question alone should mark Brad Miller as unfit to serve in congress.
out
Rep David Price (NC-4) --- Demonstrating a Lack of Mad Econ Skills...
polifrog
Obama and David Price argued that through the miracle of government regulation, taxation, resource allocation and general smartyness of government officials, health-care costs would magically fall, you know, if all those health-care dollars were just passed through the government till.
It would reduce the deficit. It would lessen the costs of heath-care for businesses. It would lessen the burden of health-care costs on all our wallets.
They were wrong.
Thank you, David Price, may we have another?
Thank you, David Price, may we have another?
Thank you David Price, may we have another?
David Price is a grade school economist who does not base his support for a bill on the rational, but rather on what feels right at the time. No reading, no understanding. It just, you know, FEELS RIGHT.
LetDavid Price know that hurting America and NC-4 hurts individuals, the same individuals he professes to help and send him back to school to learn some basic ECON.
out
Obama and David Price argued that through the miracle of government regulation, taxation, resource allocation and general smartyness of government officials, health-care costs would magically fall, you know, if all those health-care dollars were just passed through the government till.
It would reduce the deficit. It would lessen the costs of heath-care for businesses. It would lessen the burden of health-care costs on all our wallets.
They were wrong.
Edison International said Friday that its first-quarter net income fell as it recorded a charge to reflect the recently enacted federal healthcare overhaul.
Thank you, David Price, may we have another?
In a stunning revelation Wednesday, several top U.S. corporations are seriously considering dropping employee health insurance coverage in light of what they see as the inevitable consequence of ObamaCare--skyrocketing costs.
...the companies maintain that ObamaCare will result in a dramatic increase in expenses for providing employee coverage, with added costs skyrocketing to multi-billions of dollars.
Thank you, David Price, may we have another?
Massachusetts medical-device companies say they’ll cut back on operational costs - and jobs - after a planned 2.3 percent tax on their products is implemented in 2013, according to a new survey.
The tax - imposed to help pay for the massive health-care industry overhaul and expansion - is “of the greatest concern” to a majority of its members, the survey found.
About 70 percent of the survey respondents said future innovation will be hurt by a new federal “physician sunshine bill.” The bill will require medical-device firms to report their marketing expenditures on physicians, and a recently passed gift-ban law in Massachusetts.
Thank you David Price, may we have another?
Internal documents recently reviewed by Fortune, originally requested by Congress, show what the bill's critics predicted, and what its champions dreaded: many large companies are examining a course that was heretofore unthinkable, dumping the health care coverage they provide to their workers in exchange for paying penalty fees to the government.
That would dismantle the employer-based system that has reigned since World War II. It would also seem to contradict President Obama's statements that Americans who like their current plans could keep them. And as we'll see, it would hugely magnify the projected costs for the bill, which controls deficits only by assuming that America's employers would remain the backbone of the nation's health care system.
David Price is a grade school economist who does not base his support for a bill on the rational, but rather on what feels right at the time. No reading, no understanding. It just, you know, FEELS RIGHT.
LetDavid Price know that hurting America and NC-4 hurts individuals, the same individuals he professes to help and send him back to school to learn some basic ECON.
out
Monday, October 25, 2010
Bob Etheridge (NC-2) ObamaCare increasing the cost of healthcare...
..
Obama attempted to sell Americans on ObamaCare as a way to save money.
1)Cheaper for the individual.
2)Cheaper as a whole due to increased competition.
3)Cheaper due to Government Control.
4)Lowers costs by spreading the costs.
All the above contentions are untrue.
First, I will be among those who are forced to buy more health-care than I would otherwise buy as insurance. I prefer to purchase catastrophic insurance and cover my other health care costs as needed and this plan will increase my costs. I am not alone.
Second. Government competition is not competition. Governments have endlessly deep pockets and private businesses will not be able to compete. This increases costs for the nation as private alternatives are pushed out of the market leaving government as the only alternative. (Will government lament the lack of competition when they are the only provider.)
Third. Government control is another way of saying you will not get the care you want, but rather the care that is offered. Government controls, in the end, increase cost as efficiencies can't be as easily followed as one regulation or another precludes the efficient choices.
Fourth. Spreading the costs actually increase costs as the costs are not immediately born by the end user, but rather the a middleman (government) . The normal mechanism by which costs are controlled is broken by divorcing provider from end user.
The Department of Health and Human Services (RedState)...
Yahoo...
And here..
And Kathleen Sebelius admits she is clueless as to how much the "High Risk Pools" will cost. Estimates are already beyond original expectations.
And lastly...
Bob Etheridge's vote for this dishonestly promoted travesty should lead to his replacement.
polifrog
Obama attempted to sell Americans on ObamaCare as a way to save money.
1)Cheaper for the individual.
2)Cheaper as a whole due to increased competition.
3)Cheaper due to Government Control.
4)Lowers costs by spreading the costs.
All the above contentions are untrue.
First, I will be among those who are forced to buy more health-care than I would otherwise buy as insurance. I prefer to purchase catastrophic insurance and cover my other health care costs as needed and this plan will increase my costs. I am not alone.
Second. Government competition is not competition. Governments have endlessly deep pockets and private businesses will not be able to compete. This increases costs for the nation as private alternatives are pushed out of the market leaving government as the only alternative. (Will government lament the lack of competition when they are the only provider.)
Third. Government control is another way of saying you will not get the care you want, but rather the care that is offered. Government controls, in the end, increase cost as efficiencies can't be as easily followed as one regulation or another precludes the efficient choices.
Fourth. Spreading the costs actually increase costs as the costs are not immediately born by the end user, but rather the a middleman (government) . The normal mechanism by which costs are controlled is broken by divorcing provider from end user.
The Department of Health and Human Services (RedState)...
We estimate that overall national health expenditures under the health reform act would increase by a total of $311 billion (0.9 percent) during the calendar years 2010-2019
Although several provisions would help to reduce health care volts growth, their impact would be more than offset through 2019 by the higher health expenditures resulting from coverage expansions.
Yahoo...
President Barack Obama's health care overhaul law is getting a mixed verdict in the first comprehensive look by neutral experts: More Americans will be covered, but costs are also going up.
And here..
As for the actual cost involved, the penalty will be the higher of either $695 or 2.5% of income. Effectively, those earning below $27,800 would pay the flat rate, and after that point would begin paying the percentage. Once a person earns more than $40,000, the penalty will exceed $1,000. At $59,000, it would reach $1,475.
And Kathleen Sebelius admits she is clueless as to how much the "High Risk Pools" will cost. Estimates are already beyond original expectations.
And lastly...
Bob Etheridge's vote for this dishonestly promoted travesty should lead to his replacement.
polifrog
Sunday, October 24, 2010
Rep GK Butterfield (NC-1) --- Demonstrating a Lack of Mad Econ Skills...
polifrog
Obama and GK Butterfield argued that through the miracle of government regulation, taxation, resource allocation and general smartyness of government officials, health-care costs would magically fall, you know, if all those health-care dollars were just passed through the government till.
It would reduce the deficit. It would lessen the costs of heath-care for businesses. It would lessen the burden of health-care costs on all our wallets.
They were wrong.
Thank you, GK Butterfield, may we have another?
Thank you, GK Butterfield, may we have another?
Thank you GK Butterfield, may we have another?
GK Butterfield is a grade school economist who does not base his support for a bill on the rational, but rather on what feels right at the time. No reading, no understanding. It just, you know, FEELS RIGHT.
Let GK Butterfield know that hurting America and NC-1 hurts individuals, the same individuals he professes to help and send him back to school to learn some basic ECON.
out
Obama and GK Butterfield argued that through the miracle of government regulation, taxation, resource allocation and general smartyness of government officials, health-care costs would magically fall, you know, if all those health-care dollars were just passed through the government till.
It would reduce the deficit. It would lessen the costs of heath-care for businesses. It would lessen the burden of health-care costs on all our wallets.
They were wrong.
Edison International said Friday that its first-quarter net income fell as it recorded a charge to reflect the recently enacted federal healthcare overhaul.
Thank you, GK Butterfield, may we have another?
In a stunning revelation Wednesday, several top U.S. corporations are seriously considering dropping employee health insurance coverage in light of what they see as the inevitable consequence of ObamaCare--skyrocketing costs.
...the companies maintain that ObamaCare will result in a dramatic increase in expenses for providing employee coverage, with added costs skyrocketing to multi-billions of dollars.
Thank you, GK Butterfield, may we have another?
Massachusetts medical-device companies say they’ll cut back on operational costs - and jobs - after a planned 2.3 percent tax on their products is implemented in 2013, according to a new survey.
The tax - imposed to help pay for the massive health-care industry overhaul and expansion - is “of the greatest concern” to a majority of its members, the survey found.
About 70 percent of the survey respondents said future innovation will be hurt by a new federal “physician sunshine bill.” The bill will require medical-device firms to report their marketing expenditures on physicians, and a recently passed gift-ban law in Massachusetts.
Thank you GK Butterfield, may we have another?
Internal documents recently reviewed by Fortune, originally requested by Congress, show what the bill's critics predicted, and what its champions dreaded: many large companies are examining a course that was heretofore unthinkable, dumping the health care coverage they provide to their workers in exchange for paying penalty fees to the government.
That would dismantle the employer-based system that has reigned since World War II. It would also seem to contradict President Obama's statements that Americans who like their current plans could keep them. And as we'll see, it would hugely magnify the projected costs for the bill, which controls deficits only by assuming that America's employers would remain the backbone of the nation's health care system.
GK Butterfield is a grade school economist who does not base his support for a bill on the rational, but rather on what feels right at the time. No reading, no understanding. It just, you know, FEELS RIGHT.
Let GK Butterfield know that hurting America and NC-1 hurts individuals, the same individuals he professes to help and send him back to school to learn some basic ECON.
out
Bob Etheridge (NC-2) -- Rationing Health-Care
polifrog
We were told there was no rationing of health-care in ObamaCare. Politics.
Common sense said otherwise.
When the trust between producer and consumer is broken market distortions occur. Such is the case within the network of laws that is ObamaCare.
Within its pages health-care producers are no longer paid by end users and instead cater to those who do pay them, the more heavily regulated new arm of the government called insurance. The end users who are not required to pay only see free health-care, thus use more of it and use it more frivolously because dollar limitations no longer exist. This stresses supply and drives up costs. Simple and based on human nature.
The only way control way for costs to be controlled when the trust between provider and consumer or end user is broken is to ration the health-care we all receive. Government boards will necessarily do the rationing and when individuals die as a result of their decision not to provide care, then those boards can rightfully be called Death Panels.
A congressman who does not see this does not deserve to be a congressman. Bob Etheridge not only joined his party in the denials of Death Panels, but lent his support for them with his vote in favor of ObamaCare. Even based on the most dismal of expectations Bob Etheridge has failed to serve North Carolina and should loose his seat in November.
What is it about human nature that so befuddles Bob Etheridge? This question alone should mark Bob Etheridge as unfit to serve in congress.
out
We were told there was no rationing of health-care in ObamaCare. Politics.
Common sense said otherwise.
When the trust between producer and consumer is broken market distortions occur. Such is the case within the network of laws that is ObamaCare.
Within its pages health-care producers are no longer paid by end users and instead cater to those who do pay them, the more heavily regulated new arm of the government called insurance. The end users who are not required to pay only see free health-care, thus use more of it and use it more frivolously because dollar limitations no longer exist. This stresses supply and drives up costs. Simple and based on human nature.
The only way control way for costs to be controlled when the trust between provider and consumer or end user is broken is to ration the health-care we all receive. Government boards will necessarily do the rationing and when individuals die as a result of their decision not to provide care, then those boards can rightfully be called Death Panels.
A congressman who does not see this does not deserve to be a congressman. Bob Etheridge not only joined his party in the denials of Death Panels, but lent his support for them with his vote in favor of ObamaCare. Even based on the most dismal of expectations Bob Etheridge has failed to serve North Carolina and should loose his seat in November.
What is it about human nature that so befuddles Bob Etheridge? This question alone should mark Bob Etheridge as unfit to serve in congress.
out
Sunday, June 6, 2010
(NC-13) Brad Miller Has a Vision for Health-Care...
polifrog
It is a vision in which the recipients of health-care become a cost and government becomes the customer, a system in which the health-care industry grovels at the feet of the source of its funding - bureaucrats, while the infirmed wait in line for the chance to beg for the health-care they paid recalcitrant bureaucrats for.
Brad Miller's vision of better health-care inserts himself between my doctor and myself through insurance companies.
Eventually, though, the nation will question the existence of the insurance companies and the end result will be the NHS, England's government health-care. Via dailymail.com:
Imagine our need, imagine Brad Miller's influence...
Health-care has to be paid for out of our pockets. Either it goes directly from our pockets to the health-care industry, or it goes in to the hands of governance then to the health-care industry. The question is...is it more efficient for us to give our dollars directly to those who wish to provide us with a service and retain the power we have as a customer over a provider, than to give those dollars and influence to Brad Miller, and be left groveling at his feet when we fear services may be cut.
Brad Miller's vision for health-care increases Brad Miller's influence while decreasing ours, it strengthens government while weakening America. Under Brad Miller's vision Europe's socialist failure will be ours.
out
It is a vision in which the recipients of health-care become a cost and government becomes the customer, a system in which the health-care industry grovels at the feet of the source of its funding - bureaucrats, while the infirmed wait in line for the chance to beg for the health-care they paid recalcitrant bureaucrats for.
Brad Miller's vision of better health-care inserts himself between my doctor and myself through insurance companies.
Eventually, though, the nation will question the existence of the insurance companies and the end result will be the NHS, England's government health-care. Via dailymail.com:
Earlier this year the Government's rationing body said more cuts in medical treatments are planned to save the NHS at least £600million.
Patients could find it harder to get into hospital under plans from the National Institute for health and Clinical Excellence, which advises on drugs and procedures to be funded.Brad Miller's vision for Health-Care in the US is to fully break the bond between health-care customer and health-care provider, so that he, governance embodied, will be the one the infirmed come to when in need. He has no medical degree, has taken no Hippocratic oath, yet his governance will be the source of our health-care.
Imagine our need, imagine Brad Miller's influence...
Health-care has to be paid for out of our pockets. Either it goes directly from our pockets to the health-care industry, or it goes in to the hands of governance then to the health-care industry. The question is...is it more efficient for us to give our dollars directly to those who wish to provide us with a service and retain the power we have as a customer over a provider, than to give those dollars and influence to Brad Miller, and be left groveling at his feet when we fear services may be cut.
Brad Miller's vision for health-care increases Brad Miller's influence while decreasing ours, it strengthens government while weakening America. Under Brad Miller's vision Europe's socialist failure will be ours.
out
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
Brad Miller NC-13 -- Soaring Costs Force Canada to Reassess Health Model
polifrog
Brad Miller's support and subsequent vote that made ObamaCare the law of the land was in part supported by much pointing to Canada's so-called "successful" health-care system.
Reuters:
One wonders where the cost cuts will originate from. Death Panels?
It is clear that the only system is one where end users and health-care providers are directly linked through monetary exchange. Decoupling these two players leads to the rising costs we have seen since the end of WW2 in the US and furthering that division will only exacerbate the problem.
Canada and Europe are just further down the road and hint o the failure that is ObamaCare.
Brad Miller, a grade school economist, is blind to the obvious.
out
Brad Miller's support and subsequent vote that made ObamaCare the law of the land was in part supported by much pointing to Canada's so-called "successful" health-care system.
Reuters:
Pressured by an aging population and the need to rein in budget deficits, Canada's Provinces are taking tough measures to curb healthcare costs, a trend that could erode the principles of the popular state-funded system.
...
And a few provinces are also experimenting with private funding for procedures such as hip, knee and cataract surgery.
...
Healthcare in Canada is delivered through a publicly funded system, which covers all "medically necessary" hospital and physician care and curbs the role of private medicine. It ate up about 40 percent of provincial budgets...
One wonders where the cost cuts will originate from. Death Panels?
It is clear that the only system is one where end users and health-care providers are directly linked through monetary exchange. Decoupling these two players leads to the rising costs we have seen since the end of WW2 in the US and furthering that division will only exacerbate the problem.
Canada and Europe are just further down the road and hint o the failure that is ObamaCare.
Brad Miller, a grade school economist, is blind to the obvious.
out
Friday, May 7, 2010
Brad Miller NC-13 --- Demonstrating a Lack of Mad Econ Skills...
polifrog
Obama and Brad Miller argued that through the miracle of government regulation, taxation, resource allocation and general smartyness of government officials, health-care costs would magically fall, you know, if all those health-care dollars were just passed through the government till.
It would reduce the deficit. It would lessen the costs of heath-care for businesses. It would lessen the burden of health-care costs on all our wallets.
They were wrong.
Thank you, Brad Miller, may we have another?
Thank you, Brad Miller, may we have another?
Thank you Brad Miller, may we have another?
Brad Miller is a grade school economist who does not base his support for a bill on the rational, but rather on what feels right at the time. No reading, no understanding. It just, you know, FEELS RIGHT.
Let Brad Miller know that hurting America and NC-13 hurts individuals, the same individuals he professes to help and send him back to school to learn some basic ECON.
out
Obama and Brad Miller argued that through the miracle of government regulation, taxation, resource allocation and general smartyness of government officials, health-care costs would magically fall, you know, if all those health-care dollars were just passed through the government till.
It would reduce the deficit. It would lessen the costs of heath-care for businesses. It would lessen the burden of health-care costs on all our wallets.
They were wrong.
Edison International said Friday that its first-quarter net income fell as it recorded a charge to reflect the recently enacted federal healthcare overhaul.
Thank you, Brad Miller, may we have another?
In a stunning revelation Wednesday, several top U.S. corporations are seriously considering dropping employee health insurance coverage in light of what they see as the inevitable consequence of ObamaCare--skyrocketing costs.
...the companies maintain that ObamaCare will result in a dramatic increase in expenses for providing employee coverage, with added costs skyrocketing to multi-billions of dollars.
Thank you, Brad Miller, may we have another?
Massachusetts medical-device companies say they’ll cut back on operational costs - and jobs - after a planned 2.3 percent tax on their products is implemented in 2013, according to a new survey.
The tax - imposed to help pay for the massive health-care industry overhaul and expansion - is “of the greatest concern” to a majority of its members, the survey found.
About 70 percent of the survey respondents said future innovation will be hurt by a new federal “physician sunshine bill.” The bill will require medical-device firms to report their marketing expenditures on physicians, and a recently passed gift-ban law in Massachusetts.
Thank you Brad Miller, may we have another?
Internal documents recently reviewed by Fortune, originally requested by Congress, show what the bill's critics predicted, and what its champions dreaded: many large companies are examining a course that was heretofore unthinkable, dumping the health care coverage they provide to their workers in exchange for paying penalty fees to the government.
That would dismantle the employer-based system that has reigned since World War II. It would also seem to contradict President Obama's statements that Americans who like their current plans could keep them. And as we'll see, it would hugely magnify the projected costs for the bill, which controls deficits only by assuming that America's employers would remain the backbone of the nation's health care system.
Brad Miller is a grade school economist who does not base his support for a bill on the rational, but rather on what feels right at the time. No reading, no understanding. It just, you know, FEELS RIGHT.
Let Brad Miller know that hurting America and NC-13 hurts individuals, the same individuals he professes to help and send him back to school to learn some basic ECON.
out
Thursday, May 6, 2010
Brad Miller NC-13 -- Wrong again...Keeping your insurance is not your choice
polifrog
We were told we would be able to keep our insurance if we wanted to and that costs would go down. Opponents said the incentives would obviously lead to company's dropping corporate health care options. The opponents were correct.
The reality does not fit Obama and Brad Miller's misdirection during the ObamaCare debte, in fact...
Brad Miller, simply wrong.
out
We were told we would be able to keep our insurance if we wanted to and that costs would go down. Opponents said the incentives would obviously lead to company's dropping corporate health care options. The opponents were correct.
In a stunning revelation Wednesday, several top U.S. corporations are seriously considering dropping employee health insurance coverage in light of what they see as the inevitable consequence of ObamaCare--skyrocketing costs.
The reality does not fit Obama and Brad Miller's misdirection during the ObamaCare debte, in fact...
The companies state that after their legal experts poured over the thousands of pages in the new law, it will cost them less to pay the fines for not providing healthcare coverage for employees than continuing to provide employer-paid health insurance benefits.
...
The report points to internal documents from AT&T, Verizon, John Deere, and several other large corporations which show that executives are, in fact, looking at the option of dropping healthcare coverage for employees due to what they are sure will be unsustainable increases in costs. These costs will be so prohibitive that it would benefit the corporations to pay the government fines instead:
Brad Miller, simply wrong.
out
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
