In a meeting with business leaders, Trump stated that he would cut federal regulations by 75% or more. Really? That is impossible; given the shear magnitude of regulations in this country.
We have 75,000 pages of tax code. ObamaCare has spawned 20,000 pages of new healthcare regulations. During the Obama administration, almost 82,000 new pages of regulations were generated across all agencies of government. A record. And, George W. Bush was no slouch either. His administration and Congress generated more than 79,000 pages of regulations during his terms in office.
Here's the reality. The members of Congress call themselves "law makers". That's what they think their job is. Not "law cutters". So, the pile of laws simply keeps piling up. Thus, for Trump to eliminate 75% of regulations, he's going to need a lot of cooperation from the very people who make those laws. I don't see that ever happening. It's just not in their DNA.
References:
Trump tells business leaders he wants to cut regulations by 75% or 'maybe more': http://www.cnbc.com/2017/01/23/trump-tells-business-leaders-he-wants-to-cut-regulations-by-75-percent-or-maybe-more.html
Look at how many pages are in the federal tax code: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/look-at-how-many-pages-are-in-the-federal-tax-code/article/2563032
How Many Pages Is Obamacare? https://robschwab.com/how-many-pages-is-obamacare/
Obama Sets New Record For Regulations – 81,640 Pages In 2016: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-11-17/obama-sets-new-record-regulations-%E2%80%93-81640-pages-2016
Showing posts with label healthcare. Show all posts
Showing posts with label healthcare. Show all posts
Monday, February 27, 2017
Tuesday, August 23, 2016
Forget Healthcare Inflation. College Costs are Double That!
One of the people I most enjoy reading is Mark J. Perry who writes some very interesting articles for the American Enterprise Institute (AEI). Mark is a professor of economics and finance for the University of Michigan at Flint.
In one of his latest offerings, he put together this amazing graph which shows selected costs and how they have risen, and fallen, over the last 20 years:
Not only are college costs double that of healthcare, they are nearly 4 times higher than the Consumer Price Index (CPI), which represents a market basket of items that a normal consumer would buy on a regular basis.
In my opinion, this shows why student loan debt is so high and why the defaults on that debt are rising. As I have said before, as long as colleges and universities stay in the position where they can continue to turn away applicants, they can keep raising tuition; unabated. We need to get to a point where the demand for college entrance falls. Perhaps this will finally happen when it becomes so expensive that no one can afford to attend. But, with proposals from Hillary Clinton to make college "free" by putting the costs on the taxpayer, that "affordability test" will be taken out of the hands of the people, who should be paying the bills, and who could actually change the direction of the rising rate of college tuition.
Reference:
Source of Graph: http://www.aei.org/publication/do-you-hear-that-it-might-be-the-growing-sounds-of-pocketbooks-snapping-shut-and-the-chickens-coming-home/
Making college debt-free and taking on student debt | Hillary for America: https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/college/
In one of his latest offerings, he put together this amazing graph which shows selected costs and how they have risen, and fallen, over the last 20 years:
In my opinion, this shows why student loan debt is so high and why the defaults on that debt are rising. As I have said before, as long as colleges and universities stay in the position where they can continue to turn away applicants, they can keep raising tuition; unabated. We need to get to a point where the demand for college entrance falls. Perhaps this will finally happen when it becomes so expensive that no one can afford to attend. But, with proposals from Hillary Clinton to make college "free" by putting the costs on the taxpayer, that "affordability test" will be taken out of the hands of the people, who should be paying the bills, and who could actually change the direction of the rising rate of college tuition.
Reference:
Source of Graph: http://www.aei.org/publication/do-you-hear-that-it-might-be-the-growing-sounds-of-pocketbooks-snapping-shut-and-the-chickens-coming-home/
Making college debt-free and taking on student debt | Hillary for America: https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/college/
Wednesday, June 8, 2016
To Hillary: ObamaCare's Price Spike Glitches Are Continuing!
Last December, in an ABC-televised debate, Hillary Clinton defended the fact that healthcare premiums have risen 27% in the last 5 years and deductibles were up 62% in the same period by saying: "I would certainly build on the successes of the Affordable Care Act and work to fix some of the glitches". In other words, she's referring to the massive spike in costs as simply "glitches" that will be worked out when she becomes President.
Well, this year will be the fourth enrollment in the Exchanges and the "glitches" aren't just happening again but are also nearly out of control with earliest insurance premium requests for 2017 being submitted to the state regulators ranging from a low of 12% in Washington, D.C. to a high of 46% for the State of New York. The reason? Only 25% of insurers operating in the ObamaCare Exchanges were profitable last year.
In addition to the rate increase, many insurers will be bumping up the deductibles to as much as $7,050. To put that number into perspective, a recent poll by the Associated Press found that two-thirds of Americans would have difficulty coming up with just $1,000 in an unexpected emergency.
Lastly, during that same debate, Hillary also stated “I want us to be absolutely clear about making sure the insurance companies in the private employer policy arena, as well as in the Affordable Care exchanges, are properly regulated so that we are not being gamed." How can 75% of insurers losing money not be gaming the system? The reality is that the promised "younger and healthier" enrollees that were supposed to force premiums down just aren't happening because costs are already too high. Instead, the insurers are having to contend with older and sicker enrollees and massive costs to support their healthcare. And, as premiums continue to rise at these high rates, the trend of younger people staying away from ObamaCare will only continue.
Let's face it. ObamaCare isn't working. It is not a success, and for Hillary to say she will build on it's "successes" is sheer idiocy. As rate requests keep coming in high, it will be very difficult for her to talk about ObamaCare during this election cycle.
References:
Clinton Calls Obamacare’s Rising Premiums and Health Care Costs ‘Glitches’: http://freebeacon.com/issues/clinton-calls-obamacares-rising-premiums-and-health-care-costs-glitches/
Obamacare Sticker Shock for 2017: http://www.rpc.senate.gov/policy-papers/obamacare-sticker-shock-for-2017
Young people saying 'no' to Obamacare's high premiums: https://www.pacificresearch.org/article/young-people-saying-no-to-obamacares-high-premiums/
Well, this year will be the fourth enrollment in the Exchanges and the "glitches" aren't just happening again but are also nearly out of control with earliest insurance premium requests for 2017 being submitted to the state regulators ranging from a low of 12% in Washington, D.C. to a high of 46% for the State of New York. The reason? Only 25% of insurers operating in the ObamaCare Exchanges were profitable last year.
In addition to the rate increase, many insurers will be bumping up the deductibles to as much as $7,050. To put that number into perspective, a recent poll by the Associated Press found that two-thirds of Americans would have difficulty coming up with just $1,000 in an unexpected emergency.
Lastly, during that same debate, Hillary also stated “I want us to be absolutely clear about making sure the insurance companies in the private employer policy arena, as well as in the Affordable Care exchanges, are properly regulated so that we are not being gamed." How can 75% of insurers losing money not be gaming the system? The reality is that the promised "younger and healthier" enrollees that were supposed to force premiums down just aren't happening because costs are already too high. Instead, the insurers are having to contend with older and sicker enrollees and massive costs to support their healthcare. And, as premiums continue to rise at these high rates, the trend of younger people staying away from ObamaCare will only continue.
Let's face it. ObamaCare isn't working. It is not a success, and for Hillary to say she will build on it's "successes" is sheer idiocy. As rate requests keep coming in high, it will be very difficult for her to talk about ObamaCare during this election cycle.
References:
Clinton Calls Obamacare’s Rising Premiums and Health Care Costs ‘Glitches’: http://freebeacon.com/issues/clinton-calls-obamacares-rising-premiums-and-health-care-costs-glitches/
Obamacare Sticker Shock for 2017: http://www.rpc.senate.gov/policy-papers/obamacare-sticker-shock-for-2017
Young people saying 'no' to Obamacare's high premiums: https://www.pacificresearch.org/article/young-people-saying-no-to-obamacares-high-premiums/
Tuesday, June 7, 2016
Elkhart, Indiana: Obama Touts His Economic Success
Last week, while giving a speech on the economy in Elkhart, Indiana, President Obama said this:
This is a President who has increasingly presided over one negative economic record after another. And, there is another not included in the above records: The highest number of Americans in poverty -- nearly one in seven -- since Lyndon Johnson declared a "War on Poverty" more than 50 years ago. Also, Obama is slated to have the 4th worst economic record in the history of the country. Only Herbert Hoover, Andrew Johnson, and Teddy Roosevelt were worse.
This President not only thinks, but knows, that most people will believe his lies because they don't understand all the facets and facts that make up the economy, and aren't interested in researching what he says. And, for sure, the liberal media isn't going to do their job and expose his lies.
References:
Obama visits Elkhart to discuss economy: http://www.idsnews.com/article/2016/06/obama-in-elkhart
Chart Source: These Are The 9 Zero Hedge Charts Showing "Obama's Recovery" That Angered The Washington Post: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-03/these-are-9-zero-hedge-charts-showing-obamas-recovery-angered-washington-post
Record 46.7 Million Americans Live In Poverty; Household Income Back to 1989 Levels: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-09-16/record-467-million-americans-live-poverty-median-houshold-income-back-1989-levels
Barack Obama's Sad Record on Economic Growth | RealClearMarkets: http://www.realclearmarkets.com/articles/2016/02/01/barack_obamas_sad_record_on_economic_growth_101987.html
“By almost every economic measure, America is better off than when I came here at the beginning of my presidency. That’s the truth.”The problem with that statement is that it isn't "the truth". The folks at Zero Hedge, a business, stock market, and economics site, presented this series of 9 graphs to refute it:
 |
| Pink Shading Obama's Term in Office...Click on image to enlarge |
This is a President who has increasingly presided over one negative economic record after another. And, there is another not included in the above records: The highest number of Americans in poverty -- nearly one in seven -- since Lyndon Johnson declared a "War on Poverty" more than 50 years ago. Also, Obama is slated to have the 4th worst economic record in the history of the country. Only Herbert Hoover, Andrew Johnson, and Teddy Roosevelt were worse.
This President not only thinks, but knows, that most people will believe his lies because they don't understand all the facets and facts that make up the economy, and aren't interested in researching what he says. And, for sure, the liberal media isn't going to do their job and expose his lies.
References:
Obama visits Elkhart to discuss economy: http://www.idsnews.com/article/2016/06/obama-in-elkhart
Chart Source: These Are The 9 Zero Hedge Charts Showing "Obama's Recovery" That Angered The Washington Post: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-03/these-are-9-zero-hedge-charts-showing-obamas-recovery-angered-washington-post
Record 46.7 Million Americans Live In Poverty; Household Income Back to 1989 Levels: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-09-16/record-467-million-americans-live-poverty-median-houshold-income-back-1989-levels
Barack Obama's Sad Record on Economic Growth | RealClearMarkets: http://www.realclearmarkets.com/articles/2016/02/01/barack_obamas_sad_record_on_economic_growth_101987.html
Saturday, June 28, 2014
Despite Huge Drop in GDP, Economists Still See Better Days. Really?
When it was reported that the economy shrank nearly 3% in the first quarter, most economists -- the same ones who were completely caught off guard by the downward revised 3% number -- seem
to think its still on track to be positive; claiming that the first quarter was a one-off anomaly due to weather, lower healthcare spending, and a decline in exports.
The problem with this thinking is that, just one day after the dismal first quarter GDP was announced, another disappointing number, consumer spending, signaled even more trouble in the 2nd quarter. In May, the second month of the 2nd quarter, consumer spending came in at half of what those same economists were predicting, at an abysmal 0.2% percent growth. This after, April had literally shown no growth. Since consumer spending makes up 70% of the calculated GDP number, its hard to believe that the 2nd quarter GDP will be anything but lackluster or, worst case, another negative number; thus, signalling a recession. If that happens, the weather can't be blamed for the lack of consumers being holed-up in their homes, not buying products or seeing their doctors.
Unless spending comes in like gang busters in June, this economy is showing the clear signs that the consumer has reached a tipping point and incomes have not kept up with inflation. As a result, people may be putting off buying big ticket items, spending less on leisure, entertainment, other discretionary items, or even seeing their doctors less regularly because they are simply so cash-strapped that they can't afford to pay the deductibles. As history has proven time and time again, the lack of consumer spending is a primary reasons for recession.
Therefore, should anyone believe all those "happy times" economists who now seem to think that the first quarter was just a fluke?
References:
Economists brush off dire GDP: ‘This is a blip’: http://thehill.com/policy/finance/210563-economists-brush-off-dire-gdp-this-is-a-blip
Consumer Spending in May Was Disappointingly Weak: http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory/consumer-spending-02-percent-24313555
What is Economic Recession? - Definition, Causes & Effects: http://education-portal.com/academy/lesson/what-is-economic-recession-definition-causes-effects.html#lesson
Cutting Through The Fog: The Economy Shrinks By 2.9%: Recession Is Now A Statistical Possibility: http://cuttingthroughthefog.blogspot.com/2014/06/the-economy-shinks-by-29-recession-is.html
to think its still on track to be positive; claiming that the first quarter was a one-off anomaly due to weather, lower healthcare spending, and a decline in exports.
The problem with this thinking is that, just one day after the dismal first quarter GDP was announced, another disappointing number, consumer spending, signaled even more trouble in the 2nd quarter. In May, the second month of the 2nd quarter, consumer spending came in at half of what those same economists were predicting, at an abysmal 0.2% percent growth. This after, April had literally shown no growth. Since consumer spending makes up 70% of the calculated GDP number, its hard to believe that the 2nd quarter GDP will be anything but lackluster or, worst case, another negative number; thus, signalling a recession. If that happens, the weather can't be blamed for the lack of consumers being holed-up in their homes, not buying products or seeing their doctors.
Unless spending comes in like gang busters in June, this economy is showing the clear signs that the consumer has reached a tipping point and incomes have not kept up with inflation. As a result, people may be putting off buying big ticket items, spending less on leisure, entertainment, other discretionary items, or even seeing their doctors less regularly because they are simply so cash-strapped that they can't afford to pay the deductibles. As history has proven time and time again, the lack of consumer spending is a primary reasons for recession.
Therefore, should anyone believe all those "happy times" economists who now seem to think that the first quarter was just a fluke?
References:
Economists brush off dire GDP: ‘This is a blip’: http://thehill.com/policy/finance/210563-economists-brush-off-dire-gdp-this-is-a-blip
Consumer Spending in May Was Disappointingly Weak: http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory/consumer-spending-02-percent-24313555
What is Economic Recession? - Definition, Causes & Effects: http://education-portal.com/academy/lesson/what-is-economic-recession-definition-causes-effects.html#lesson
Cutting Through The Fog: The Economy Shrinks By 2.9%: Recession Is Now A Statistical Possibility: http://cuttingthroughthefog.blogspot.com/2014/06/the-economy-shinks-by-29-recession-is.html
Monday, May 26, 2014
The VA Scandal Shouldn't Be A Surprise And It Portends The Future With ObamaCare
For decades, liberal politicians have pushed for a complete government takeover of this nation's healthcare system. However, the general population of Americans and their representative politicians wanted nothing to do with that. They understood that a government run healthcare system would have all the typical problems -- waste, fraud, abuse, and heavy handedness -- relative to every government run system. But, despite the wishes of most Americans, the Democrats and Barack Obama went ahead and passed ObamaCare into law. In 2010, they were punished for such action with a sweeping defeat that reversed their majority rule in the House of Representatives. Now, in 2014, their control of the Senate is in jeopardy again, thanks to ObamaCare. The botched rollout; the cancellations; and, the fact that people were losing their doctors and hospitals while paying higher prices for their insurance re-emphasized why most Americans dreaded any government involvement in their healthcare.
While still trying to distance themselves from ObamaCare and all its problems, several in-jeopardy Senate Democrats find themselves with another reason for their voters to oust them in the Fall. Again, because of healthcare. This time it's the VA hospital wait-list scandal; proving once more how crass and incompetent a government-run system can be. Our veterans have literally died in the process of waiting, but, this wait-time scandal should not be a surprise. It is a common problem wherever the government is controlling healthcare.
In Britain, they have a fully socialized system called the National Health Service (NHS). The Democrats love to point to the NHS as a perfect example because it is universal and because it has been able to control costs. It has the lowest cost-per-capita of any other industrialized country in the world. But, the penalty for such cost control is long wait times and, in some cases, results in death.
The very charter of the NHS legally guarantees that a patient should be able to get advanced care (access to specialists, surgery, hospitalization, or advanced testing) in no less than 18 weeks (nearly 4-1/2 months) after being referred by a primary care physician; access to which is, in itself, an average wait of about one week. The usual wait time for surgery is 15 weeks or just over 3-1/2 months with over 500 patients at any given time waiting longer than a year. If you're injured, the typical wait is 4 hours in the emergency room. Of course, if you are dying and you just can't wait, the NHS says you can always pay out-of-pocket for private access to any healthcare provider. Maybe these are the reasons that Britain trails the rest of the world in cancer survival rates. Now, despite all these problems, the Brits seem to love their NHS. I don't think most Americans would be so forgiving.
Now, you don't actually have to go to Britain to see long wait times as a result of government control. In this country we have the literal blueprint of ObamaCare in the state of Massachusetts. It is something that is informally called RomneyCare. Thanks to that healthcare system, a city like Boston has the longest wait times in the country for both seeing a primary care physician or receiving advanced care:
In the very place that Americans railed against government intervention in their lives in what we know today as the Boston Tea Party, Bostonians now wait, on average, 45.4 days to see a primary care physician and another 66 days for advanced care. Thus as a blueprint for ObamaCare, RomneyCare is also the blueprint for what is happening at the VA and in Britain.
The primary reason for long wait times is because the profit incentive is missing. Healthcare service providers in the NHS are all being paid by the government at a set salary for their particular skill level, and they will always be paid the same; no matter how many patients they see or don't see. The same is true in the VA hospital system. Also, in both systems, physicians and hospitals are themselves shielded from malpractice lawsuits because the government is held responsible. Thus, if someone dies as a result of care being delayed, the doctors and administrators have no liability. Now, this is not to say that there aren't caring and dedicated people in both the NHS or the VA, but the healthcare in these government run facilities can't hold a candle to the average non-government system in this country.
References:
Your rights in the NHS: Guide to NHS waiting times: http://www.nhs.uk/choiceintheNHS/Rightsandpledges/Waitingtimes/Pages/Guide%20to%20waiting%20times.aspx
NHS waiting lists are at highest for 6 years with 2.8m waiting for surgery or other hospital procedures: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2607418/NHS-waiting-lists-highest-6-years-2-8m-waiting-surgery-hospital-procedures.html
Patients will wait at least a week to see GP in 2014, it is claimed: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/nhs/10537094/Patients-will-wait-at-least-a-week-to-see-GP-in-2014-it-is-claimed.html
NHS delays operations 'as it waits for patients to die or go private': http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/8668906/NHS-delays-operations-as-it-waits-for-patients-to-die-or-go-private.html
Britain trails in cancer survival rates: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-125860/Britain-trails-cancer-survival-rates.html
In cities, the average doctor wait-time is 18.5 days: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/01/29/in-cities-the-average-doctor-wait-time-is-18-5-days/
Malpractice Payouts to U.S. Veterans Reach 12-Year High: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-09-09/malpractice-payouts-to-u-s-veterans-reach-12-year-high.html
While still trying to distance themselves from ObamaCare and all its problems, several in-jeopardy Senate Democrats find themselves with another reason for their voters to oust them in the Fall. Again, because of healthcare. This time it's the VA hospital wait-list scandal; proving once more how crass and incompetent a government-run system can be. Our veterans have literally died in the process of waiting, but, this wait-time scandal should not be a surprise. It is a common problem wherever the government is controlling healthcare.
In Britain, they have a fully socialized system called the National Health Service (NHS). The Democrats love to point to the NHS as a perfect example because it is universal and because it has been able to control costs. It has the lowest cost-per-capita of any other industrialized country in the world. But, the penalty for such cost control is long wait times and, in some cases, results in death.
The very charter of the NHS legally guarantees that a patient should be able to get advanced care (access to specialists, surgery, hospitalization, or advanced testing) in no less than 18 weeks (nearly 4-1/2 months) after being referred by a primary care physician; access to which is, in itself, an average wait of about one week. The usual wait time for surgery is 15 weeks or just over 3-1/2 months with over 500 patients at any given time waiting longer than a year. If you're injured, the typical wait is 4 hours in the emergency room. Of course, if you are dying and you just can't wait, the NHS says you can always pay out-of-pocket for private access to any healthcare provider. Maybe these are the reasons that Britain trails the rest of the world in cancer survival rates. Now, despite all these problems, the Brits seem to love their NHS. I don't think most Americans would be so forgiving.
Now, you don't actually have to go to Britain to see long wait times as a result of government control. In this country we have the literal blueprint of ObamaCare in the state of Massachusetts. It is something that is informally called RomneyCare. Thanks to that healthcare system, a city like Boston has the longest wait times in the country for both seeing a primary care physician or receiving advanced care:
In the very place that Americans railed against government intervention in their lives in what we know today as the Boston Tea Party, Bostonians now wait, on average, 45.4 days to see a primary care physician and another 66 days for advanced care. Thus as a blueprint for ObamaCare, RomneyCare is also the blueprint for what is happening at the VA and in Britain.
The primary reason for long wait times is because the profit incentive is missing. Healthcare service providers in the NHS are all being paid by the government at a set salary for their particular skill level, and they will always be paid the same; no matter how many patients they see or don't see. The same is true in the VA hospital system. Also, in both systems, physicians and hospitals are themselves shielded from malpractice lawsuits because the government is held responsible. Thus, if someone dies as a result of care being delayed, the doctors and administrators have no liability. Now, this is not to say that there aren't caring and dedicated people in both the NHS or the VA, but the healthcare in these government run facilities can't hold a candle to the average non-government system in this country.
References:
Your rights in the NHS: Guide to NHS waiting times: http://www.nhs.uk/choiceintheNHS/Rightsandpledges/Waitingtimes/Pages/Guide%20to%20waiting%20times.aspx
NHS waiting lists are at highest for 6 years with 2.8m waiting for surgery or other hospital procedures: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2607418/NHS-waiting-lists-highest-6-years-2-8m-waiting-surgery-hospital-procedures.html
Patients will wait at least a week to see GP in 2014, it is claimed: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/nhs/10537094/Patients-will-wait-at-least-a-week-to-see-GP-in-2014-it-is-claimed.html
NHS delays operations 'as it waits for patients to die or go private': http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/8668906/NHS-delays-operations-as-it-waits-for-patients-to-die-or-go-private.html
Britain trails in cancer survival rates: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-125860/Britain-trails-cancer-survival-rates.html
In cities, the average doctor wait-time is 18.5 days: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/01/29/in-cities-the-average-doctor-wait-time-is-18-5-days/
Malpractice Payouts to U.S. Veterans Reach 12-Year High: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-09-09/malpractice-payouts-to-u-s-veterans-reach-12-year-high.html
Saturday, July 28, 2012
London Olympics: A Celebration of Socialized Medicine?
Only an idiot or a far left liberal would have inserted Britain's health care system into the Olympic's Opening Ceremony. But, Danny Boyle, the very liberal producer of that very odd Opening Ceremony, did just that. Britain's system of socialized medicine is nothing to be proud of. It literally takes weeks to see a specialist. Because of that, the death rate for cancer and heart attack victims is the highest in the Western world. Emergency room waits, following an emergency or accident, can take hours.
Maybe the Brits should think about socialized mortuary and burial services with that kind of record.
Lastly, the Olympics should not be some kind of platform for politics. Didn't the world get enough of that when Nazi Germany hosted the Berlin Olympics of 1936?
Sources:
A celebration of free healthcare, the trade union struggle, the battle for women's rights and a fleeting lesbian kiss: the Olympics opening ceremony Friday did not shy away from weighty social issues: http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hK3ZHgHyRLFGgFylJyPxUfH0kOtg?docId=CNG.2249ee77cd214cd016f6cfc488472e87.2a1
UK cancer survival rates 'the worst in the Western world': http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2001248/UK-cancer-survival-rates-worst-Western-world.html
Britain, the sick man of Europe: Heart and cancer survival rates among worst in developed world: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1234276/Britain-sick-man-Europe-Heart-cancer-survival-rates-worst-developed-world.html
NHS waiting lists: how long are patients waiting? New data journalism shows exactly how much worse NHS waiting times have got: http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/jul/11/nhs-waiting-lists-data
Maybe the Brits should think about socialized mortuary and burial services with that kind of record.
Lastly, the Olympics should not be some kind of platform for politics. Didn't the world get enough of that when Nazi Germany hosted the Berlin Olympics of 1936?
Sources:
A celebration of free healthcare, the trade union struggle, the battle for women's rights and a fleeting lesbian kiss: the Olympics opening ceremony Friday did not shy away from weighty social issues: http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hK3ZHgHyRLFGgFylJyPxUfH0kOtg?docId=CNG.2249ee77cd214cd016f6cfc488472e87.2a1
UK cancer survival rates 'the worst in the Western world': http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2001248/UK-cancer-survival-rates-worst-Western-world.html
Britain, the sick man of Europe: Heart and cancer survival rates among worst in developed world: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1234276/Britain-sick-man-Europe-Heart-cancer-survival-rates-worst-developed-world.html
NHS waiting lists: how long are patients waiting? New data journalism shows exactly how much worse NHS waiting times have got: http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/jul/11/nhs-waiting-lists-data
Sunday, May 17, 2009
Heathcare and the High Cost of Perfection
Many say that we Americans have the best healthcare in the world. Certainly, hundreds of wealthy non-Americans travel here to get the care they couldn't get in their own countries like Canada and Britain that have socialized medical care systems. At the same time, our healthcare is admittedly the most expensive in the world.
Years ago, I attended a company-sponsored seminar on the concept of quality. The primary thing that I took away from that seminar was that, with every increased level of perfection, costs will go up dramatically. In other words, to build the absolutely perfect anything, the cost would be so high that only the richest in our society could afford to buy it. The other thing that I took from that seminar was that true quality is matching people's expectations of a product's performance and not trying to exceed that expectation.
In large part, our healthcare system is being forced by constant litigation to meet perfection; and, with that perfection, comes a very high cost. For this, I blame the medical malpractice lawyers. A doctor, hospital, medical or drug company may have saved thousands of lives without a hitch. But if they injure or kill a single person, the cost of that one mistake can be extremely significant. Lawyers don't care about how many times you get it right. When they are in the process of suing a doctor or a hospital, they only look for the missteps or the imperfections that occurred in the treatment of a patient. Then, they magnify any imperfection to make a jury believe that the doctor or hospital was totally negligent. The result could be damages that are awarded in the millions of dollars.
As a result, all doctors, hospitals and all medical related corporations have been "conditioned" by our legal system towards perfection. Costs are rising faster than inflation because nobody in the industry wants to be wrong or make a mistake that could injure or kill someone and suffer the high costs of being sued. Also, the rates for malpractice insurance, especially in some specialties like OB/GYN, are rising twice as fast as the overall healthcare costs in America; which might give you a hint as to where the true high cost of healthcare lies . No longer is a simple sore throat a simple sore throat. The doctor, as a result of widespread litigation, must now look at every patient as possibly having the widest ranges of illnesses when he/she walks into their office; even including the rarest of diseases. To insure that the doctor doesn't screw up by missing something, they will, at the very least, order up a wide range of expensive diagnostic tests. Those tests may even include extremely expensive MRI's or CAT scans. Further, he or she will probably refer their patient to a specialist to make sure they aren't missing something else and, in effect, give that patient a second opinion that they never asked for. In essence, the doctor has developed a "CYA" mentality; and, with this, costs are skyrocketing.
The same applies to drug companies. When a lawyer sues a drug company or medical equipment manufacturer, they come after the company as if they expected that company to have tested for every conceivable human variance and/or combinations of human conditions before a drug or piece of medical equipment was put on the market. But, those companies can't do that because it would be just too costly for them to develop a supposedly perfect and totally safe drug or piece of equipment. In reality, the lawyers know this and take full advantage of this limitation. So, whenever a drug company decides to manufacture and sell a product, they do cost/benefit analysis and, as a result, they price in any anticipated law suits. That's why new, lifesaving drugs are so extremely expensive. Sometimes the drugs that could save many lives never come to market because the market is too small and the risk of lawsuits are too high and the product can't be priced low enough to make it marketable. When that happens, the sick and dying with rare diseases are the ultimate losers.
Obama's healthcare program completely ignores the primary driver for high healthcare costs in this country - those lawsuits that are forcing medical perfection. Instead, he appears to be going the route of withholding expensive forms of medical care in order to avoid high costs. All indications are that the Federal Government will ultimately play God and decide what care Americans are able to get; especially for the elderly. Remember, it is the elderly who cost the government the most amount of money because they are the ones receiving social security, prescription drug coverage, and Medicare assistance. That means that some people will unnecessarily die when they didn't have to because the government might view them as a financial liability.
Obama, as a lawyer himself, doesn't want to upset all those lawyers who helped get him into office. Don't forget, we have half of the world's attorneys with only 5 percent of the world's population. Most of those lawyers probably voted for Obama and contributed to his Presidential campaign. Their intention in doing so was to absolutely insure that they could happily litigate over medical malpractice and continue to reap very high settlements and, subsequently, their high and getting higher incomes; settlements that are now doubling in the amount of damages at a rate of every 5 to 7 years.
For years, the Republicans have been trying to effect tort reforms to try and stall the rising costs of healthcare. But, at every turn, the Democrats and their cozy relationship with the lawyers in this country have blocked every attempt. Now, again, with Obama in charge and with complete control over Congress, we will be instituting a government healthcare system in America that protects the lawyers and limits that amount of care that we can get; especially in our later years.
Years ago, I attended a company-sponsored seminar on the concept of quality. The primary thing that I took away from that seminar was that, with every increased level of perfection, costs will go up dramatically. In other words, to build the absolutely perfect anything, the cost would be so high that only the richest in our society could afford to buy it. The other thing that I took from that seminar was that true quality is matching people's expectations of a product's performance and not trying to exceed that expectation.
In large part, our healthcare system is being forced by constant litigation to meet perfection; and, with that perfection, comes a very high cost. For this, I blame the medical malpractice lawyers. A doctor, hospital, medical or drug company may have saved thousands of lives without a hitch. But if they injure or kill a single person, the cost of that one mistake can be extremely significant. Lawyers don't care about how many times you get it right. When they are in the process of suing a doctor or a hospital, they only look for the missteps or the imperfections that occurred in the treatment of a patient. Then, they magnify any imperfection to make a jury believe that the doctor or hospital was totally negligent. The result could be damages that are awarded in the millions of dollars.
As a result, all doctors, hospitals and all medical related corporations have been "conditioned" by our legal system towards perfection. Costs are rising faster than inflation because nobody in the industry wants to be wrong or make a mistake that could injure or kill someone and suffer the high costs of being sued. Also, the rates for malpractice insurance, especially in some specialties like OB/GYN, are rising twice as fast as the overall healthcare costs in America; which might give you a hint as to where the true high cost of healthcare lies . No longer is a simple sore throat a simple sore throat. The doctor, as a result of widespread litigation, must now look at every patient as possibly having the widest ranges of illnesses when he/she walks into their office; even including the rarest of diseases. To insure that the doctor doesn't screw up by missing something, they will, at the very least, order up a wide range of expensive diagnostic tests. Those tests may even include extremely expensive MRI's or CAT scans. Further, he or she will probably refer their patient to a specialist to make sure they aren't missing something else and, in effect, give that patient a second opinion that they never asked for. In essence, the doctor has developed a "CYA" mentality; and, with this, costs are skyrocketing.
The same applies to drug companies. When a lawyer sues a drug company or medical equipment manufacturer, they come after the company as if they expected that company to have tested for every conceivable human variance and/or combinations of human conditions before a drug or piece of medical equipment was put on the market. But, those companies can't do that because it would be just too costly for them to develop a supposedly perfect and totally safe drug or piece of equipment. In reality, the lawyers know this and take full advantage of this limitation. So, whenever a drug company decides to manufacture and sell a product, they do cost/benefit analysis and, as a result, they price in any anticipated law suits. That's why new, lifesaving drugs are so extremely expensive. Sometimes the drugs that could save many lives never come to market because the market is too small and the risk of lawsuits are too high and the product can't be priced low enough to make it marketable. When that happens, the sick and dying with rare diseases are the ultimate losers.
Obama's healthcare program completely ignores the primary driver for high healthcare costs in this country - those lawsuits that are forcing medical perfection. Instead, he appears to be going the route of withholding expensive forms of medical care in order to avoid high costs. All indications are that the Federal Government will ultimately play God and decide what care Americans are able to get; especially for the elderly. Remember, it is the elderly who cost the government the most amount of money because they are the ones receiving social security, prescription drug coverage, and Medicare assistance. That means that some people will unnecessarily die when they didn't have to because the government might view them as a financial liability.
Obama, as a lawyer himself, doesn't want to upset all those lawyers who helped get him into office. Don't forget, we have half of the world's attorneys with only 5 percent of the world's population. Most of those lawyers probably voted for Obama and contributed to his Presidential campaign. Their intention in doing so was to absolutely insure that they could happily litigate over medical malpractice and continue to reap very high settlements and, subsequently, their high and getting higher incomes; settlements that are now doubling in the amount of damages at a rate of every 5 to 7 years.
For years, the Republicans have been trying to effect tort reforms to try and stall the rising costs of healthcare. But, at every turn, the Democrats and their cozy relationship with the lawyers in this country have blocked every attempt. Now, again, with Obama in charge and with complete control over Congress, we will be instituting a government healthcare system in America that protects the lawyers and limits that amount of care that we can get; especially in our later years.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
