Karen Oberthaler, a veterinary oncologist, has some interesting insights on the health care reform debate in a recent Newsweek post with a tongue-in-cheek title: "Treat People Like Dogs". She points out that only 3% of pet owners hold pet insurance, although they will routinely pay up to $10K or more to save the lives of dogs. She notes, contrary to American health care, pet owners are much more vested in the decisions of tests and procedures, including cost trade-offs and utilitarian benefits of relevant therapy. She admits differences with the current health care reform kerfuffle; she observes that a considerable proportion of costs occurs during the last 2 years of an older patient's life, with costs primarily paid by insurance and many tests and procedures motivated by physicians and hospitals with defensive medical concerns, e.g., potential lawsuits by grieving family survivors.
There are a few relevant comments I want to make. First, the mention of the low percentage of pet owners purchasing insurance leads one to recall health care insurance was not the traditional payment model, but fee-for-service; health insurance eventually split off from the roots of disability insurance, with the first hospital/medical expense prepaid plans appearing in the 1920's. Second, vesting of the policyholder is necessary to hold down the costs of health care, in particular, questioning the necessity and effectiveness of various tests and procedures. There is no real emphasis from the progressive Democrats on the role or necessity of the policyholder to address costs; in fact, Obama has pushed on increasing certain medical services and tests from the standpoint of preventive medicine (with supposedly long-term savings) while subsidizing the cost of insurance (if not minimizing or eliminating out-of-pocket policyholder costs). Third, with an aging population, and a considerable amount of health care expenses often incurred towards the end of life, there are a couple of major concerns which progressive Democrats, for obvious reasons, dodge--the role of defensive medicine and how, in fact, government can control costs without addressing the 800-lb gorilla of end-of-life medical costs, a point Sarah Palin notoriously raised last year with her pithy "death panel" rhetoric. Conservative principles of cost incentives, transparency of the cost/benefit trade-offs, and consumer actualization are relevant.
Fortune Post: Health Care Going From Broken to Broke
There is a good explanation here of themes I've discussed in broad terms on the "smoke and mirrors" going on with the preposterous progressive Democratic claims that the CBO-scored basis show that their new health care entitlement program will cut the deficit. One major point I described recently is some confusion by the public over the concept of deficits and the debt, something most Americans can't relate to.
Consider the following illustrative example: Suppose grandparents contribute $10,000 a year to a grandchild's college fund. The parents earn $50,000 a year, but spend $55,000 a year. They basically include the $10,000 grandparent contribution to the child's college trust fund as part of the family budget and decide to raid the college fund to pay the outstanding $5000. They are claiming that they are running a family budget surplus, but in fact the household is in debt, because they need to replenish the $5000 they "loaned" themselves from the college fund. The child's college expense requirements have not gone away.
The Democrats are playing games of the sort that could make even former Enron executives blush. The article claims instead of a $118B deficit reduction, in fact the 10-year program (with 6 years of benefits) will result in roughly a $600B increase in debt. For example, businesses and unions will likely react to Cadillac health care plans by downsizing their health care policies to under the Cadillac criterion and shifting those benefit dollars into income, subject to payroll and income taxes relevant at the highest individual bracket. All these taxes (I tend to use the terminology contributions for social security and Medicare taxes) are being considered for the deficit numbers, but the payroll/contribution amounts are really future benefits payable: roughly $165B. A new entitlement lockbox (for the assisted-living) CLASS Act includes $70B in contributions over the decade. Plus the "Doc Fix" (an adjustment for underfunded physician services), considered in separate legislation, not included in the Senate CBO score, is estimated at $371B over the coming decade. The remainder of the Fortune estimate factors in the pro-rated share of interest expenses for the borrowed money to fund the program.
Political Cartoons
Lisa Benson is reminding us that the battle for freedom goes beyond Afghanistan and Iraq... It's being held hostage by corrupt progressive Democrats gambling on the nation's future with their Big Government bubble.
Quote of the Day
Dignity consists not in possessing honors, but in the consciousness that we deserve them.
Aristotle
Musical Interlude: Magic Songs
Lovin' Spoonful, "Do You Believe in Magic?"
Olivia Newton-John, "Magic"
Santana, "Black Magic Woman"
The Cars, "Magic"
