[Cue the sighs, moans, and gasps]
Interesting these numbers. No more than 3-4 years ago the numbers were more like 33-35 million. The highest I have ever seen is 40 million and then suddenly it is 47 million.
I cannot imagine for the life of me who would create a number so high as 47 million (and coming soon - 50 million)? I cannot imagine for the life of me, who would want to promote such a high number - who has a political agenda so attached to the higher number as to become the lifeblood of the cause?
Hmmm.
I think the numbers are important because we are bargaining $1.5 trillion upward of $7 trillion on a health system that would cover 30, 35, 40, or 47 million people, and make no mistakes - with 100% certainty we know the cost will be greater than 3-4 trillion and much closer to 5, that in the end perhaps even $6 trillion. What these foolish and politically driven minions do not say aloud is - once it is in place, no one can disassemble it if the cost goes higher. They will simply say they didn't know, costs being what they are ... and you the foolish electorate will believe them - again.
We, the United States, do not have a health care crisis. We have the best medical system in the world. THEY - that is everyone else, come here when they need serious medical care - if they can afford it (and I addressed this issue in a past post - if you are a foreigner you cannot have our Blue Cross insurance so you would need to pay cash - which is only reasonable and logical.). The issue of prescriptions is incidental and unrelated to the larger issue.
Digression: Canada has cheaper medications because their GOVERNMENT contracts with AMERICAN pharmaceutical companies to buy at a discount. Then the Canadian government underwrites a subsidized cost for Canadians. They buy Imitrex for $40 for 20 pills instead of the $60 for 20 pills, it sells for in the US. Then the Canadian government underwrites 30% and sells it to Canadians for $28, while in the US we buy it for $60 minus whatever our insurance will cover. Canada has up to 70% taxation levels that help pay for this 'cheaper' medication.
Anyone who writes that the US has anything but the best medical system doesn't have a fucking clue (ignorant), is a liar, or is misinforming you of the facts. It is one of the three, and no other options possible. A liar, ignorant, or misinforming you ... which could be a lie or ignorance, depending upon whether they know and why they are misinforming you.
We have the best medical system, and we also have a complicated and convoluted insurance system.
The estimates for the numbers of uninsured in this country range from 30 million up to 47 million people. Some explication of who those 30-47 million people are is important.
45% of those people who are uninsured will be insured within 90 days: 45% ranges from 13.5 million up to 21.15 million.
We need to deduct those numbers before we continue.
We would have anywhere from 16.5 million up to 25.85 million uninsured.
Illegals comprise 10 million of those figures.
That leaves us with between 6.5 million up to 15.9 million uninsured Americans.
Of the total number we started with, 8% make between $50k to $75,000 per year, are either single or married with no children. That number ranges from 520,000 to 3.76 million
Of the total number we started with, 5% are between 18-25, and DO NOT WANT to pay for insurance. Forcing them to do something is not good policy, in large part because they do not cost the system as much as the old people do. Let them remain uninsured until they turn 30 and have a family and realize they need to be responsible and then they will get coverage. That figure ranges from 325,000 to 2.35 million.
Finally, of the total figure we started with (between 30-47 million), the number of children under the age of 18, whose family income is less than $65,000 is 6 million. These children are currently and have been covered under the CHIP program, yet they are also counted in the figure of 30 to 47 million uninsured. Wrongly, falsely, and I believe politically. The figure comes from MSNBC 10/7/07.
Looking at the numbers - if we had 30 million uninsured, we suddenly have 345,000 more insured than were uninsured. So we can dismiss the 30 million as it is simply inconvenient to accept those numbers.
These numbers just will not do, so we need to devise a new way of counting - how about 47 million? That would provide for 3,740,000 uninsured Americans.
The total number of uninsured Americans ranges from 1.25 million who are purportedly uninsured but do not exist up to nearly 4 million who do not have insurance.
If we do the math differently, we come up with 12 million uninsured. How did I reach 12 million. Recalculate the numbers but take the 8% and 5% off of the balance and not the original number. It is more accurate doing it my way, but we do need to create a crisis.
The range then, to be very conservative – from 4 million to 12 million Americans uninsured.
Less than 5% of the population is without insurance.
For this 5%, Democrats want to spend between $1.5 trillion upwards to $7 trillion.
Some estimates suggest several million fetuses are aborted each year – those two million do not count, but 4 million up to 12 million are certainly a political force, and one must wonder why. More than 40% of this country is vehemently opposed to this program Obama has proposed – a lot more than 4 million and still much more than 12 million – yet they are persisting in this cause.
To be clear – 2 million aborted fetuses do not count, 40% of the electorate do not count, but 5% of the population do count.
Is anyone curious about why?
If I were you, I would be.
The highest estimate is 12 million Americans and for 12 million, some people want to spend $1.5 trillion to fix a problem that can be solved without government intrusion, intervention, or political gain – imagine the party that creates the largest (or near largest) federal bureaucracy – imagine the workers who would vote for that party for having created that hiring entity.
Imagine the 12 million voters who would thereafter vote for that political party. Even if it was not 12 million, which it is certainly not – imagine the nearly 4 million voters who would become the constituency of that party in an effort to preserve their own interests (health benefits). Then imagine the employees hired into that bureaucracy – certainly several hundred thousand – all Democratic voters for all time.
The reason behind the push – the force used in propelling this legislation to a vote – entirely political.
Sure, along the way they help a few people and feel good – but it is regardless of the few nice things they will do – political.
Obama is a student of history. He has considered what FDR did to seal the Democratic party as the party of power for four decades – and he intends to ensure Democratic control of the Congress for at least that long or longer.
Do I belittle the real issues and the struggle people make to pay their policies or keep the policy they may be losing when they were laid off – no.
First - the issue of illegals. They are 'illegal' and as such should not receive FREE medical care in the United States. If they want free care, let them go home and get it - back to their wonderful country wherever they come from where they can wave their flags and enjoy the freedom and opportunity.
In any event - Canada has a population of about 35 million people. They spend about $50 billion to cover all 35 million people. Surely we could spend $25 billion and cover 16 million – the 12 million American citizens and perhaps another 3-4 million who are in dire straits.
While we are discussing dire straits – the fact is, NO AMERICAN or illegal is unable to get emergency medical care in the United States of America – NONE. No one. Every human being within our borders can get emergency medical care – FREE, if they have no money. If they have some money, they pay SOME. If they own a home, they will pay more. If they are indigent and cannot pay – IT’S FREE. Before you head down to your emergency room – understand it is a service we should not take advantage of – we all end up paying the costs, which I am not opposed to, IF the person getting the care is in dire straits.
So why not spend $25 billion and cover the 12 million people – create an arm of medicare, just for the uninsured. No new bureaucracy, no new constituency – just incorporate a few people into an already existing system. Isn't that what we all hear – the need to care for the uninsured. My plan would cover them. Care taken care of and no new government invasion into the core of our most private of spaces – our bodies.
Alas, that is not what it is all about, or my plan would suffice.
It is about politics, it is about power.
So the issue becomes – oh, but we all pay so much and we don’t want to.
Get the major insurance companies to lower their premiums by 20%. How – agree to let them write off a certain amount of loss in their taxes each year. Would 20% make you all happy? Of course not – which is why it really isn’t about health care nor is it about affordability – it is something more.
Why not allow every American to write off, say $900 per year in health insurance premiums, and send each uninsured person a $900 check payable to ‘Major Insurance Company’ for $900. Secure approval of the company to lower premiums 1-2 months worth if it is all paid up front. The $900 would pay all or very nearly all of an HMO premium for at least 10 months. Allow people who have their own insurance, to write off $900 worth of premiums, and people who receive the government $900 check, must use it or they would not receive a check the next year.
Even if we raised the premium tax deduction to $1200 and sent $1200 checks to all 12 million uninsured (or more likely 5 million people) – it would still be worth it. I could stay with my PPO, you could have an HMO, we would continue as we always have and the government would not have any role, but to ensure the general welfare via a tax deduction. Would it make my life easier each month – not a great deal, but at the end of the year, I would feel better.
If the concern was about our medical needs and health care – my plans would work and no new government bureaucracy would need to be created and the United States would not go into debt another $1.5 – 7 trillion in the next few years. But of course, this is not about health care – it is about power and controlling the people. Who would end up paying for this colossal government invasion of my privacy? Oh, wait, before we answer that, let’s consider a couple options on the table:
Fat tax – just like the cigarette tax, it reduced smoking and has paid for medical care for people who smoke – oops, can’t say that because we need reasons for the national health system and it cannot already be funded or the argument would lose steam, so – the taxes on cigarettes reduced the number of smokers. The plan is to tax fat. Tax sodas and tax candy and tax anything fattening – I assume cookies, cakes, pies, ice cream, crackers, licorice … The estimate is it would raise $500 billion to put toward our health care system. Brilliant, not. Like cigarettes, fewer people will buy fat stuff and the anticipated revenue will decrease, and just like the lotto which was promoted as the source of revenue for schools, it will decrease and state funding would have to increase. You would ban it into non-existence.
What a boring life. Oh but the benefits they will tell you – we would all be healthier, we would enjoy life longer, live longer and … well, if we live to 98, we will be going to the doctor quite a few more times each year, more medications, more surgeries, more …. more costs and the health care system would be overwhelmed as we live longer and the revenue we depended upon from fat, would be gone, with fewer people paying taxes because we have all gotten older … the end of the world as we know it and we’ll feel fine.
Soak the rich tax at 1% - the rich did so well under Bush so now they have to pay up. 1% of their wealth. This would begin for individuals or businesses making $250,000 to $320,000 a year and up. So according to some fools - Garofalo - these rich people would pay up because they feel obliged to pay, and this soak the rich tax would raise billions to fund and pay for our health care system. Isn't that a brilliant plan. Who is the advocate for the rich - no one. So soak them all day every day and no one will say stop because they don't want to be linked with the rich and get soaked along the way. Except, the rich are rich because they are smart - much smarter than a writer for some rinky dink newspaper or magazine. Year 1, the rich will pay, but by year 2, the rich have new ways of hiding their money, thus necessitating you (federal government) to spend billions to collect billions from the rich. In the end, it is a long drawn out process and the billions you were counting on just do not materialize. So the rich devise new ways to be compensated, perhaps through retirement or 401k plans - so you (government) tax those plans, and along the way fail to realize it taxes everyone else as well so the soak the rich plan just became tax everyone plan. That idea will not work. By that time the rich have new lawyers and new accountants and now receive their paychecks in German Deutschmarks, paid into accounts in banks in Jersey (not the state), and you end up, by year 3 with less revenue than you expected and higher health costs because you were planning a little ahead of yourself.
Soaking the rich and the fat people just will not do it. So back to the question - who ends up paying for it?
And I thought you were too stupid to figure out that the poor and middle class would pay more!
(Does this count as fishy? Sure, why not - in the world of Obama and ACORN, it has to be fishy becvause it questions what he and they believe - but not in the United States of America.)
Obama
Obama
Posts
