Re: The end is in sight

On Fri, 01 May 2009 08:16:01 -0700, Bob Eld wrote:
"Bob Larter" <bobbylarter@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:gte5ru$o3$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
bill.sloman@xxxxxxxx wrote:
On Apr 29, 12:43 am, James Arthur <bogusabd...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
[...]
"Progressive" Great Society programs drove the financial bubble,
which frankly pales compared to the Social Security and Medicare
fiascoes.

The US social security and medicare systems are fiascos - not because
the ideas are impracticable, since they work fine in other countries -
because American politicians don't understand the social contract
underlying the ideas, and won't implement them in a way that benefits
society as a whole.

Well said. That's exactly the problem. In the real world, it actually
costs more to make sure that the 'undeserving' are excluded than it does
to just pay out & accept that there's going to be some wastage. Per
capita, the USA spends more money on health care than countries with
free universal health care that excludes nobody. I suspect that the same
is also true of the Social Security system.

The US spends 14% of GDP on health care while most countries with universal
care spend about 10% of GNP. The US system is inefficient and very wasteful
plus insurance companies rake profit right off of the top without actually
doing any of the health care.

The whole problem was initiated by the Income Tax <Spit!>.

I guess it's time for a little history lesson:

Instead of offering incentive payments to their employees, which would
essentially end up being confiscated by Da Gubmint, they offered medical
insurance (which wasn't taxed). IOW, employee-provided medical insurance
was self-defense against the income tax.

Over the years, it evolved into an "entitlement".

There was no control on the price of care - you'd just turn the bill over
to the insurance company, who'd rubber-stamp it and pay the bill, without
it affecting you at all.

So the medical industry came up with more and more expensive crap, a
billion tests for the sniffles and so on, and the insurance company
would pick up the tab and raise the cost to your employer.

This lack of Free Market medical care caused prices to skyrocket, since
nobody knew or cared how much it was actually cost them. "Oh, the
insurance will cover it!"

If, when Latisha took little Mobutu to the ER for a skinned knee or so,
If they billed her the three grand or so, she might be motivated to invest
in a first-aid kit and learn how to use it.

As usual, the problem is socialism.

Thanks,
Rich



.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: history repeats itself
    ... Ads in 100 newspapers thunder that reform would mean ... but from the battle over Medicare in the early 1960s. ... that with Social Security, Americans would come to feel "the lash ... to ration health care. ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: The end is in sight
    ... The US social security and medicare systems are fiascos - not because ... free universal health care that excludes nobody. ... to the insurance company, who'd rubber-stamp it and pay the bill, without ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • Re: The end is in sight
    ... which frankly pales compared to the Social Security and Medicare ... free universal health care that excludes nobody. ... There was no control on the price of care - you'd just turn the bill over to the insurance company, who'd rubber-stamp it and pay the bill, without ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • Re: The end is in sight
    ... which frankly pales compared to the Social Security and Medicare ... free universal health care that excludes nobody. ... There was no control on the price of care - you'd just turn the bill over to the insurance company, who'd rubber-stamp it and pay the bill, without ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • Re: The end is in sight
    ... which frankly pales compared to the Social Security and Medicare ... free universal health care that excludes nobody. ... insurance. ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
Loading