OpEdNews » Health care and the free market

Support OEN
With Your
Tax-Deductible Donation

Tags for This Article:

Populum Tag Cloud Control Panel
	Fine tune your search to access content

Articles	Links
Diaries	Products
Events	All

All time
Last 6 mos
Last month
Last week
Last 24 hrs

From:
Month Day Year

To:
Month Day Year

Alphabet Popularity	Count ON Count OFF
This Level	Sub-levels

Tag(s): Campaign Contributions; Campaign Finance And Reform; Campaign Finance Reform; Elections And Campaigns; Health; Health Care Benefits; Health Care Costs; Health Care Legislation; Health Care Policy; Health Insurance; (more...) Health Insurance Horror Stories; Healthcare; Medicare Medicaid Failures; Money; Politicians Career (less...)
Add to My Group

November 22, 2007 at 10:42:31

Headlined on 11/22/07:
Health care and the free market

by Jack Lohman Page 1 of 1 page(s)

www.opednews.com

SAVE FAVORITES

VIEW FAVORITES

View Ratings | Rate It

Nobody questions that our health care system is broken, but they argue about how to fix it. Let’s get some things straight.

First, politicians prefer “the free market” even though it is the free market that took over in 1994 that has gotten us into today’s mess. They favor “privatization” because, they argue, it “adds competition and controls costs.”

That’s pure hogwash. It doesn’t.

Politicians prefer privatization for one and only one reason: private companies can give campaign contributions and public entities cannot. Just ask those who pocket the money from the insurance and healthcare industries but never get a penny from Medicare.

Politicians know why they prefer privatization, and you should too. The free market makes them money and Medicare doesn’t.

Health care costs have risen at 5% per year, yet insurance premiums have risen by 87% since 2000. Premiums include not only healthcare costs — which insurers have little control of — but often as much profit as they can add on to help offset losses from Katrina, Rita, Florida, and now, the California fires. It’s another form of cost-shifting to patients’

But in the healthcare market, insurers are unnecessary middlemen that drain nearly one third of our healthcare costs without ever laying hands on the patient. And they are protected by the politicians whose campaigns they help fund.

We don’t need mandated insurance — as Massachusetts has done and some politicians support – we need mandated health care. We must totally eliminate the 31% industry waste that is blocking this reform.

Of course, the best way to protect privatized health care is to criticize “government controlled” medicine as being terrible, even when Medicare is the most efficient and popular public-private venture ever. And to call it a budget-buster even when it is the least costly option, or to call it “socialized medicine” even when the hospitals and physicians are the same ones we are using today.

Call it anything, but conflicted politicians won’t call Medicare-for-all the best solution for the country. They always remember where those campaign funds came from, and they are not from the government folks. That’s the way our political system works.

Medicare isn’t perfect, and it clearly must reign in abuse and overuse. But the private system has even more abuse and overuse because the penalties are far less than those at the federal level. Again we can point to lawmakers who are unwilling to buck the industry and fix the system.

Unfortunately our political system has fallen not to the Republicans or Democrats, but to the corporate interests that fund their elections. And that is not going to change in November.

The only real solution is a complete turnover at the state and national level. We need voter-initiated term limits.

See http://MoneyedPoliticians.net for related articles

Lohman is a retired business owner and is author of "Politicians - Owned and Operated by Corporate America" (www.MoneyedPoliticians.com) and author of http://MoneyedPoliticians.net

	Contact Author
	Contact Editor
	View Other Articles by Author

Bookmark this page: (what's this?)

(More...)

7 comments

i am a former teacher of 30 years with a history and political science major.I started getting politically active when Ronnie Regan ended my social security hopes for teahers
liberalsrocki am a former teacher of 30 years with a history and political science major.I started getting politically active when Ronnie Regan ended my social security hopes for teahers

single payer health plan

truer words were never spoken.I just went to think progress where this article originated and all the right wing loonies were writing in giving all the right wing lies why a single payer health care system was bad.To set things straight.the odds of getting worse treatment for cancer given by the latest Republican liar to run for dictator are wrong.the odds of recovery between Canada and the Us for cancer recovery are the almost the same.Another lie is other countries don>t have the same progressive machinery like mri"s.another lie spread by the news media.I read an article by someone who checked a news article that ontario had only 1 mri because government run programs don"t want to pay the expense.It turns out they have 17 mri"s in the city.The quality of care in most civilized nations all who have single payer plans is better in most then the United states which ranks 17th in quality of care done by an international health organization.I have talked to several Canadians who say they would not trade their health care system for anything. insurance companies have pre-existing clauses which right now are preventing my brother from getting treatment for a severly injured shoulder.single payer programs run by the government don"t.stop listening to the big business run news media and their lies and start demanding a universal health care programin the US so we can get quality care like the reat of the world is already receiving

by liberalsrock (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 126 comments) on Friday, November 23, 2007 at 12:57:43 PM

Lifelong reader, sometime writer with eclectic tastes and libertarian leanings. Don't hold my semi-notorious Berkeley history against me, I settled down so completely after 40 that I can barely recall my loosy-goosy self. But it sure beats going to the same party every night.
LaudymsLifelong reader, sometime writer with eclectic tastes and libertarian leanings. Don't hold my semi-notorious Berkeley history against me, I settled down so completely after 40 that I can barely recall my loosy-goosy self. But it sure beats going to the same party every night.

rare to see the situation described clearly

And not one 'leading' presidential candidate addresses the issue head on. Why? The corporations who control the process have foreordained who can run and who can win.

Until voter turnout reaches 80+% and we have auditable results, we will continue to be sheep led to slaughter.

by Laudyms (0 articles, 855 quicklinks, 10 diaries, 436 comments) on Friday, November 23, 2007 at 2:23:27 PM

57Yo m I'm a "been there, done that! Bought the tee shirt,to hide the scars!" type of person Ive workedï¿½many jobs fromï¿½a chicken slaughterer to managing a branch of a multinational and many jobs in between.Raised in colonial PNG Left School 16,Grad Hi school 22 Night School, University 36ï¿½ BBus (majored in Psyche and Marketing), Dip Comp prog and project Mmnt.at 50 I've been in 48 different community org ,23 on board with 18 prez or deputy prez.First social campaign at 17 for the aborigine...

to see more of bio, click on member name
Andris57Yo m I'm a "been there, done that! Bought the tee shirt,to hide the scars!" type of person Ive workedï¿½many jobs fromï¿½a chicken slaughterer to managing a branch of a multinational and many jobs in between.Raised in colonial PNG Left School 16,Grad Hi school 22 Night School, University 36ï¿½ BBus (majored in Psyche and Marketing), Dip Comp prog and project Mmnt.at 50 I've been in 48 different community org ,23 on board with 18 prez or deputy prez.First social campaign at 17 for the aborigine...

to see more of bio, click on member name

we have a mix of both

God knows the Australian system isn't perfect either. We have universal 'basic' health care and we have subsidized private health insurance.

Every one has access to medical care at a hospital. The govt offers a scheduled rebate to GPs who can either accept that for 'bulk billing' to the government and get an encouragement to do so; accept bulk billing with a co payment $5 - $20; Or charge what they want. Most GPs 'bulk bill' (no out of pockets for the patients) those that hold heath cards or pension cards.

Everyone has emergency service at hospitals but there are long waiting lists can be weeks or months for 'specialist out patients (non critical)'.The govt encourages everyone who can to take private health insurance. With a 30% tax rebate on premiums and those who delay joining are penalized with higher premiums later on.

A family of 5 would typically pay $1500 par year in premiumsThis gives the patient quicker access to specialists but the co payment can be $100- per visit with prescribed refunds usually 70% of the govt Scheduled fee (the Scheduled fee is not necessarily that which is charged). Private room where available in Hospital and choice of specialist. Medicare Universal system by contrast means you get the specialist who saw you originally over seen by heads of dept. All in all I can't complain.

Part of our system is medication cost is fixed by government. Those on Health cards or Pensions get listed medications for $4.95 per medication the govt pays the rest. Those who aren't on cards pay the govt negotiated price for the medicine which can be a lot more but nothing like what the US pays. There is a govt safely net which kicks in after the patient has on a card more than $500 on meds in any one year all meds are free for the remainder om the year. For the wage earner the net kicks in at $1000.This system use both private suppliers to a universal system....it is anything but socialized medicine.

The system does have two major advantagesin the US context; everyone even the poorest can get medical attention the idea of !5% of the population not being covered would be the stuff of revolution well, change of government here. Secondly the system of meds for the pension is the opposite to yours which gives them an allowance and if they exceed it any year they have to wait until the next. God only know what the consequences in break in medication might mean. Additionally the idea that pensioner should be paying $100's of dollars one load of meds to my mind it outrageous on so many levels. As described ours works the opposite way.

It seems to me that the campaign support aside there are some services that are mandatory for a population and don't fit will with the 'for profit' objective. The test should be do the services in question in question have natural competition? Are they essential to the well being maintenance of a society? Are the services discretionary, could the people live without them? Can the public bear the full cost of providing the service ? Finally could the public cope reduction in this service ‘for efficiency reasons’ without any significant ill effects? If the answer is no then it should remain the responsibility of the govt.

What do you think?

by Andris (4 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 531 comments) on Friday, November 23, 2007 at 2:30:32 PM

Lohman is a retired business owner and is author of "Politicians - Owned and Operated by Corporate America" (www.MoneyedPoliticians.com) and author of http://MoneyedPoliticians.net
Jack LohmanLohman is a retired business owner and is author of "Politicians - Owned and Operated by Corporate America" (www.MoneyedPoliticians.com) and author of http://MoneyedPoliticians.net

Thanks Andris....

Thanks for the Austrailian take on health care, Andris.

My preference is a rather simple system ---- you get sick, you get care, and the caregiver gets paid. A Medicare-for-all system would do it (which Taiwan has recently adopted). Overutilization is an issue, but 80% of that is over-ordering by the physician who makes money on the tests and 20% is by the over-worried patient. Co-pays might help reduce that, but they can also backfire by keeping patients away from the doctor until deseases are more costly to treat or become untreatable.

Were it not for our politicians getting money from the insurance industry, we'd have Medicare-for-all tomorrow. We could provide first class care to 100% of our people for the same 16% of GDP we are spending today, but we'd have to quit paying profits to the middleman insurance industry and spend it on patient care insead. But that's a no-no politically.

And yes, the public could bear the full cost. We are already paying when the corporations add the cost of their health care premiums to the price of their product and we reimburse them at the cash register. So a fully taxpayer-supported system is not only doable but it would make the US more competitive with countries whose manufactures are not burdened with healthcare costs. More jobs would remain in the states and the economy would thrive, but insurance executives wouldn't like it a bit.

But within our population are a percentage of folks with no incentive to contribute to society, and many of us object to giving them a free ride (myself included). I believe if they are to get welfare or free health care, they must pay back society by contributing time to working at community services. But our ACLU doesn't buy that....

See http://tinyurl.com/2gy4m4

by Jack Lohman (6 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 17 comments) on Friday, November 23, 2007 at 3:23:16 PM

I am a 65 year old widowed grandmother who just got health insurance after more than two decades without it which is difficult with Diabetes, asthma and hypertension. One of my sons is severely developmentally disabled by autism due to lead paint poisoning. I have spent much of my life caring for ill and disabled family members and advocating on their behalf.
Pat WilliamsI am a 65 year old widowed grandmother who just got health insurance after more than two decades without it which is difficult with Diabetes, asthma and hypertension. One of my sons is severely developmentally disabled by autism due to lead paint poisoning. I have spent much of my life caring for ill and disabled family members and advocating on their behalf.

Free Ride?

People need health care. They should get health care. Period. This idea that there are a plethora of welfare queens and lazy hypochondriacs taking advantange of social services was and is a crock.

by Pat Williams (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 82 comments) on Friday, November 23, 2007 at 10:59:16 PM

I disagree....

To say there are none is a bit naive. There are some and they should be dealt with. Not by cutting care but by requiring those who are unemployed to spend time doing some community work. Is that too much to ask? Or do you prefer a welfare state?

by Jack Lohman (6 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 17 comments) on Friday, November 23, 2007 at 11:39:51 PM