Ouch
And this comes from the New Yorker Magazine of all places.
‘Flagrantly lied’
[youtube]http://youtu.be/Ak9Z0r6yHMo[/youtube]
But wait a second says the head of HHS….no plans are getting cancelled:
House Energy and Commerce Chair Fred Upton (R-MI) pressed Sebelius on why the president had made that statement, given recent reports of individual policies being dropped prior to 2014, which is when the law’s major market reforms take effect.
“Mr. Chairman, there was no change,” Sebelius said. “The regulation involving grandfathered plans, which applied to both the employer market and the individual market, indicated that if a plan was in effect in March of 2010, stayed in effect without unduly burdening the consumer with reducing benefits and adding on huge costs, that plan would stay in effect and never have to comply with any regulations of the Affordable Care Act.”
“That’s what the grandfather clause said. The individual market which affects about 12 million Americans, about 5 percent of the market. People move in and out. They often have coverage for less than a year. A third of them have coverage for about six months. And if a plan was in place in March of 2010 and again did not impose additional burdens on the consumer, they still have it. It’s grandfathered in.”
There was no way any insurance company could keep its “grandfathered” status without completely going bankrupt. Wasn’t going happen, and Obama knew it.
Much derision has been heaped on White House consigliere Valerie Jarrett’s tweet last night claiming that “nothing in #Obamacare forces people out of their health plans. No change is required unless insurance companies change existing plans” (this is a “FACT,” she noted). There’s actually a little truth to this: Technically, individual-market plans that qualify as grandfathered under the ACA are exempt from some of the law’s mandates — but not all of them. As long as a grandfathered plan doesn’t undergo any “material changes” after 2010, it maintains its grandfathered status, so it doesn’t have to comply with all of the law’s strictures as other plans do on January 1. But those material changes are almost inevitable, in large part because of the ACA — meaning the plan will almost certainly be cancelled and replaced with a more expensive, more comprehensive plan, as millions of Americans have learned and continued to learn.
There are two, related liberal objections to the idea that the ACA has caused this disruption: One, from Jarrett and more pointedly from ThinkProgress’s Igor Volsky, is that this is because the evil insurance companies are changing their plans to charge you more, and Obamacare thus has to step in to solve the problem. The related complaint, is that, as Chuck Todd put it on Morning Joe this morning, “the insurance companies are taking advantage of this” to cancel plans, as if the ACA was coincidental to the material changes insurance companies were planning to make anyway. This isn’t true.
Volsky wrote, “If insurers make changes that significantly burden enrollees with lower benefits and increased costs they have to come into compliance with all consumer protections.” Indeed, insurers lose their grandfathered status if the plan has a “material change,” defined as “(1) eliminating or significantly reducing benefits; (2) raising co-insurance or co-payments; (3) raising deductibles; (4) reducing employer contributions; or, (5) adding or increasing an annual limit” (for a more detailed description of these limits, see here). Meanwhile, even these grandfathered plans have to comply with a number of new Obamacare mandates — most important, they have to accept applicants regardless of preexisting conditions and charge them the same premiums, they have to eliminate lifetime-spending caps, and they have to cover dependents under 26 for free (there are other rules that also apply to grandfathered group plans). How, exactly, were health insurers supposed to comply with these new mandates (and other ways the ACA is raising costs) without raising customers’ contributions in the way the law says means losing grandfathered status? Obviously, they could have chosen to raise premiums alone — but then customers who don’t expect to use a lot of health care would switch to plans with higher cost-sharing, which ruins an insurance pool.
In other words, the ACA did make it incredibly hard for insurers to continue plans for the millions of Americans who don’t want comprehensive insurance — financially, insurers almost certainly had to adjust them in such a way that they would lose grandfathered status. This isn’t “normal turnover in the insurance market” (though there is plenty of that in the individual market); there’s a reason why an exceptionally large number of Americans are getting cancellation notices this fall.
Meanwhile Sebelius testifys in Congress which can be best summed out thus:
Republicans questioning Sebelius’s actions while Democrats questioning why Republicans are daring to ask these questions.
What this all comes down to is the simple statement from our President:
Exit video:
[youtube]http://youtu.be/-eY4vC9uIho[/youtube]
See author page
Can the liberal wacho Democrats at least come clean and admit obama lied to America when he said you can keep your health insurance and your doctor??
Remember: the big lie becomes established truth when it is uttered with sufficient frequency, with completely believable testifiers, and with no objections.
The Big Lie got us World War I.
The Big Lie got us World War II.
The Big Lie got us anthropogenic global warming.
The Big Lie got us the Alar scare.
The Big Lie got us universal radon testing.
Never underestimate the ability of skilled propagandists to disseminate a big lie.
I think that many liberals are seeing and wondering what…? what…? The ones who comment here are on the payroll, waivers and all, are unsalvageable and will never be returned to sanity but are destined to one day dance the full ceaușescu.
All ObamaCare is is a redistribution program.
It pays to be a Democrat.
If you are a Democrat you might be hired to be a navigator.
If you are a Democrat you will very likely get a subsidy for your own health coverage.
If you are not a Democrat those navigators will lead to into an expensive policy.
You will never get a subsidy.
IF all of the folks who Obama is promising policies costing less than $100/year actually get those policies….who is going to pay the REAL cost of them?
You know who.
Republicans.
It might do well to put a big poster of Obama on your wall.
/off only slightly
http://weaselzippers.us/2013/10/30/sebelius-on-broken-obamacare-exchange-the-website-has-never-crashed/
Can these people do anything but lie to the American people?
@retire05: Nope, the actually believe the lies. And you know Obama won’t fire any of them, not because he doesn’t think they need to be held accountable, but because he is afraid if he does they will sit down with a real reporter and spill the truth about him, his plans and his agenda.
Could anyone have genuinely believed that “If you like your plan, you can keep your plan” was an ironclad guarantee that no private insurer would ever make a decision to discontinue certain products and replace them with others?
If people would only stop and think about this for a moment, they might realize how ridiculous such an assumption actually is.
The situation is that around 10 million people have been carrying health insurance plans that didn’t meet the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act’s minimum standards. Private insurance carriers have decided to discontinue many of those products and replace them with plans that do. In many cases the new products cost more—because they’re not substandard. You generally get what you pay for.
The majority of people who previously had health insurance will keep what they’ve have had all along.
Millions of people who had no insurance before will now be able to get it.
That’s how it works. That’s how people who were paying attention expected it would work.
All the talk of grandfathered plans is beside the point. The President broke his “if you like your plan” commitment the moment he signed the Affordable Care Act in March 2010. But no one will press him on if he knew he was breaking that commitment. No one is asking if he’ll make good on it. The Republican Party is full of chumps.
@Greg: Greg, what did he mean when he said it then? Was he telling the truth or a lie? Was he speaking for private insurance or running to be President and telling the American people a lie? Obama said it, it was a lie, and now the truth is coming out for all Amreica to confirm. BTW how are you coming with proof that Romney cheated on his taxes as Reid stated on the floor of the Senate and you backed it up? Your credibility on this site is almost as bad as o-blamas!!
That same old Greg-orian Chant: Obama…Obama…. our god Obama….. ask not for who the bell tolls…..
@Common Sense, #9:
He was running for president, promoting a program that was part of his agenda. He was expressing his intentions, speaking as any candidate for public office generally does. No one in such a position can speak on behalf of a private sector industry.
@Greg, like the regulations that forbid buying insurance across state lines, I think it was believed by most that somewhere in those 20,000 + pages of regulations created by the ACA was a regulation forbidding insurance companies from arbitrarily dropping customers. The letters going out ARE NOT letters advising of rate increases, they are letters stating coverage will be dropped.
Those of us who have railed against the ACA since the subject first came up knew then as we do now that the government is fully capable of f#CKING up a single car funeral procession, we have known from the beginning that anytime the government gets involved in private enterprise, that business suffers until it dies and is taken over. With complete and now total mis-trust of the federal government, all three branches, but especially the executive branch, how are we supposed to accept a larger intrusion, especially when it is based on and surrounded by lies and deception? Clearly, the Obama regime has an agenda of putting private medical insurance companies out of business and converting the entire country to a single payer system. Well, in order for that to work for the citizens, there must be trust in government; that trust has been torn down, both here and abroad by our allies. Nationalizing private enterprise is nothing but bad for our country, our heritage and our traditions in addition to being outside the realm of the Constitution.
The President was speaking on his behalf, on what he intended to do, not on behalf of the insurance industry. And then he signed a law that made his “if you like your plan” commitment a lie. Some believe politicians shouldn’t lie.
An insurance company is bound by contract to meet the commitments of policies that they sell. If they don’t meet them they are brought to court. But they make no commitment to always sell the same policy. That would be crazy. But he they don’t offer popular policies they go out of business.
@Greg: So then the only conclusion is that he lied!! My point exactly!! Is this your position? Republicans knew it was a lie, they said as much, and yet the wacho liberals including yourself just stuck your head in the sand and voted for him!! Why do you think 2010 was an historic success for Republicans?? Hint, Obamacare!!
His minions swarm like black-flies clogging the mouth with their lies. All of one name wonders need to repent, be Baptized in the name of Jesus and then the truth of God and His Kingdom will be opened unto you through the gift of the Holy Spirit. It is available to all so repent every one of you and be Baptized and you will be set free from the bondage of lies in which you are now entangled. Repent! The man you serve will be revealed for what it really is and you will be eternally enslaved. Repent! Remember these words on the day you die so you cannot say you were this time told a lie. Repent and God’s Truth will set you free!
Here are the guidelines which may disqualify some existing Health Care Plans. Those evil Democrats!!
• Deductible too high
• Co-pays too high
• Out-of-pocket maximum too high
• Plan has yearly or lifetime benefit limits
• Co-insurance isn’t high enough
• Plan has coverage exclusions that are no longer permitted (such as for mental health care)
• Plan doesn’t include prescription medicines, charges too much for them, or has prescription coverage limits
• Plan doesn’t include preventive and well-care doctor visits for no charge
What a laugh!
ObamaCare plans are twice as high for women, three times as high for men.
The out of pocket maximums are much higher.
And, when you speak of coverage ”exclusions,” remember men MUST be covered for pregnancy and birth control; older people MUST be covered for pediatric care; women MUST be covered for prostate care.
Ironically, ObamaCare puts limits on how much prescription care you can get before a ”death” panel weighs in on whether you get more or not.
That diabetic pregnant lady who fainted behind Obama in the Rose Garden goes through her YEARLY $1,500 for diabetes supplies within her 1st three months every year.
So, how long before her ”death” panel decides she has been a drag on the system long enough?
It could happen her 1st year or her 10th.
@This one: Funny how 0blama did NOT mention any of these during his lies about keeping your health insurance and your doctor!! Why not?? Oh yea, he likes to lie more than tell the truth!!
@Greg:
I never did and I said he was lying but liberals called me all sorts of names for that. I also noted that the country began with an alleged 30 million uninsured and will wind up with 30 million uninsured with Obamacare. I also noted that it was impossible to add 30 million insured, most of whom could not pay much, remove pre-conditions and lower costs.
Obamacare would never have passed had Obama told the truth.
And that’s the absolute truth.
@This one:
So why didn’t your tin god liar tell everyone that in the first place?
What part of “You can keep your plan no matter what. Period.” do you not understand?
Barack Obama is a filthy liar. Period
@Common Sense: they never will. the lie was just a tool to get a result .No conscience or remorse
@This one: this one once again before bath time spews nothing
I never cease to be puzzled and amazed by the US approach to healthcare. The US has the best care and facilities in the world (for some) and spends more overall on health as a % of GDP than almost every other nation but still does not have universal coverage for its citizens. The debate about how to get decent coverage for all citizens always seems to be so fragmented and information so distorted it is hard to make sense of what is fiction and what is reality. Is it that the Democrats and the Republicans are so far away from each other’s point of view that they feel lying is the only way to justify their own position? I just don’t get it.
@Tom Phillips: Let me help you Tom, from the oppositions point of view. Historically in our country, the best, most efficient operations in any industry were the operated with absolute minimum government involvement, regulation and intervention. As soon as the government started getting involved in the affairs of private industry, the decline in that industry began. I have seen this across the board, in the medical insurance industry, the medical care industry, the banking industry, the trucking and transportation industry and in the energy industry. I’ll use health insurance as a good example; 35 years ago, the government wasn’t too involved in health insurance. I was self-employed, and covered my family with Blue Cross/Blue Shield/Major Medical. It cost me about $100 month total and there was no such thing as a co-pay. My family and I were covered, even chiropractic care. All that’s way gone now, especially for that price.
What it really boils down to is we have a government we cannot trust to do the right thing, regardless of the circumstances. A government that will not tell the truth to our allies or our own citizens. And I am not just talking about the White House; we don’t have a federal government that can be trusted at any level. So how am I going to justify to myself letting them have control of my health care?
@Scott in Oklahoma: Hi Scott. Thanks for your comments. I can understand where you are coming from and your lack of trust in governments of all kinds.
I guess I have what you would call a more socialist approach to healthcare. I feel that morally a nation should treat every citizen that needs health care treatment. It should be a basic right like the right to free speech. I look at the additional costs in the US to administer a private health care system and wonder whether this is the right way. US healthcare is leading edge but this standard of healthcare is denied to so many US citizens. I am not saying the UK system is by any means perfect but there has to be a better way than the US.
Recently the UK government decided that it should charge foreign nationals who visit as alleged “health tourists” and use NHS services. The charges were going to recover around $750 million. The systems that they were proposing to put in place to recover this money would cost around the same and potentially delay treatment for patients as an extra level of administration would have to be put in place. It seems mad that we are spending time and money to deny people treatment.
I appreciate others have different views but from the outside I see the US as having a third world health system for some of its citizens (and a fantastic system for many others). It must be frustrating when you have to live with the consequences of politicians meddling with a system, particularly as there is no consensus between the different parties.
PS My sister and her family have lived in Washington DC for the last few years which is why I take a particular interest.
@Tom Phillips: Well said but I must push back on your point of view. If America determined that all citizens have a right to free healthcare was the correct approach I could agree. The real problem is that due to our lack of control of citizenship this is NOT possible. It is important to remember that we have over 11million illegals in our country, does your socialistic approach include provideing care for them as well??
He GUARANTEED if you like your plan you can keep your plan. Even though yearly they may change a bit to you it’s still the same plan.. I get notices from time to time for auto and homeowner changes to my policy, but I don’t get cancellation notices and I don’t get wild cost swings. The policy number stays the same as well.
He made that promise about keeping your plan multiple times, 24 I believe is the number. Now he wants to blame insurance companies. I believe he is a dishonest person and therefore cannot admit anything he does wrong. His sycophants are the same way.
I know of a business owner who fully supported this law because he wanted to shop for health insurance across state lines to get better prices. Well surprise surprise surprise, he can’t. He followed his ideological beliefs and ignored the fact he didn’t really know what he was supporting.
He lied. GUARANTEED.
@Greg:
You are absolutely the most disingenuous poster I have ever seen.
So in other words, Greg, you are admitting that under no circumstances should anyone ever believe anything a leftist says because they are lying. Are you really so thoroughly dishonest that in spite of the numerous videos of Obama stridently insisting “If you like your plan, you can keep your plan” that we are all supposed to just accept that what he was saying should never have been taken to have been true? So then why did he keep saying it, Greg?
You have, with this posting, revealed again how utterly despicable leftists are. Private insurance carriers “decided” to discontinue millions of insurance policies because the obamacare law REQUIRES them to do so because those plans are now illegal under the law. You, Valerie Jarrett, Sebelius and Obama are pure scum for making the false accusation that the insurance companies are doing this all on their own, and you know it! You cannot possibly think that having men and post-menopausal women be required to pay for maternity and pediatric coverage that they will never use makes an insurance plan “better” for such people. Those 10 million you allege were perfectly happy with the insurance they had before obamacare made their chosen plans illegal. You leftists are heinous scoundrels for what you are doing – while continuing to lie and mislead people about what you are doing. You and those like you are totalitarian thugs for forcing people to pay for things they do not need and will never use. These obamacare plans are not “superior” – they cost more, greatly increase copays and deductibles, double or triple what people had before their previous policies were made illegal.
Your math skills are abyssmal, or you are lying again. The latest estimate is that out of 19 million people who previously had individual health insurance plans, 16 million will have them cancelled by 1 Janurary 2014 due to obamacare mandates. And this is before the employer mandate (which Obama unconstitutionally delayed until after the 2014 elections) kicks in, which will force tens of millions more onto the national socialist exchanges.
Yet again, you arrogant prog, you look down your nose at those of us opposing this national socialist power grab – all while being too ignorant to see how dishonest your false deity has been. You so blithely dismiss his repeated lies as to what he falsely claimed would result from obamacare – because you believe in the same abject evil as all progs do – that whatever is necessary to bring about your totalitarian dystopia is acceptable.
I ask you again, though I know I will get nothing but more leftist evasiveness and misdirection… based on the wasteful incompetency of the obamacare rollout, what on earth makes you think these idiots can handle running an effective healthcare system?
Furthermore – how much has your heath insurance changed since you enrolled in obamacare, Greg? You are such a proponent for it, so I am sure you have already enrolled, right?
@Tom Phillips:
Your statement is an example of your error. Health care is NOT a right, as rights are determined by the U.S. Constitution. We do have laws that prevent someone being denied emergency medical care but if you want health insurance, which is not a right, you have the right to seek gainful employment and pay for said insurance.
You see, Tom Phillips, what you are saying is that you have a right to the services of others. How does that work? If you are a computer repairman, do those with broken computers have a right to your services, in spite of the fact they can’t pay for them?
I have a right to live. You know, that whole “life, liberty” thing. Yet, although water is a requirement for me to continue to live, I have to pay a water bill every month or bear the cost of digging a well. Food also is a requirement for life. Yet I have to pay for my own groceries. In some areas, home heating, by any source, is a requirement to live through the winter. Yet people are required to purchase their own gas, oil or electricity to provide that heat. Same with clothing.
Yes, your viewpoint is a Socialist one. One that has not served England well. That is why patients are being allowed to die in Great Britain because your government cannot bear the true costs of a socialist medical system.
@Tom…. I wasn’t talking about health care, I was referring to health insurance; that’s what the ACA is all about, the control of the money used for health insurance. That is the deal, it isn’t about care. If you’re sick or injured, and need medical care, you will get it; hospitals cannot deny care for financial reasons. Speaking of that, we have many very fine charity hospitals in this country, the ACA and the government may be the death of them too. Google the Shriners burn Center or St. Jude’s Children’s Hospital…
@retire05:
I did not say it was right. I said I feel it should be a right. I am entitled to an opinion I believe.
I don’t consider the provision of computer repair services in the same league as health care. Clearly you do and I respect that is the value system you live your life by.
No system is perfect, not least the UK NHS system. However I don’t recognise your description of people being allowed to die in the UK. Where do you get this data from or is it anecdotal?
Yes, you are entitled.
To your opinion.
Now,
Put yourself in the shoes of the doctors in a state-mandated guarantee of health care.
Remember the key problem with socialism is that it robs people of their INCENTIVE to do more, better.
In very liberal New York State over 77% of doctors plan to refuse to work as mandated slaves.
Only 23% have any idea what they might get as a WAGE slave of the O-Care system.
Many doctors are planning either to retire YOUNG or change to a better paying, less responsible career inside health care.
Recall, doctors are just as liable, under O-Care, for ”malpractice,” as they were before, but for less money!
See, your ”right,” becomes others’ responsibility.
And none of those others have any incentive to work hard and be excellent.
YIKES!
@Tom Phillips:
You most certainly are entitled to an opinion. Remember, it is us Yanks that have a First Amendment.
It was simply an example of someone demanding the services of others. Don’t like it? How about this one? Do you deny that water is required to sustain life? If I live in an area that does not have a central water system, do I have a right to steal my neighbors water or demand that the well digger provide me with a well for water if I can’t afford to pay him?
Wow! Do you live in some remote village where the press, radio, tv and internet service is unavailable? Obviously not since you are on line.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/9591814/Patients-starve-and-die-of-thirst-on-hospital-wards.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2161869/Top-doctors-chilling-claim-The-NHS-kills-130-000-elderly-patients-year.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2219351/Three-THOUSAND-doctors-putting-patients-death-lists-single-allowed-die.html
http://www.nbcnews.com/health/filth-neglect-british-hospital-fuel-uproar-1B8270352
Want more? You must be one of those British LIVs.
The truth is that you cannot obtain medical care without the services of another. So any demand that medical care be a human right will also require the government demanding others provide that service to you without their ability to refuse to provide it or charge you for it.
@Greg:
And any time someone on the right pointed out that people would not be able to keep their plan, they were called racists tea-baggers.
@Aqua:
And the President continues to lie, saying it is only people in the individual market are losing policies that they like, when he knows the same will happen to people with employer coverage.
@Nan G: Of course what people say is not always what they do. We will see what happens in reality.
In any event I am not an apologist for the Obamacare system.
@retire05:
I am not sure why you want to use an example of someone breaking the law or stealing. Treating all people with respect is not about breaking the law of the land.
Policies like healthcare can only be implemented with support of the majority of citizens. If I was a US citizen I would ask myself why the life expectancy in a great and prosperous nation like the US is lower than that of Puerto Rico. There must be a better way. By the way that doesn’t have to be Obamacare but it certainly is not the status quo.
Without wanting to be rude to you, in my opinion if you rely primarily on the UK’s Daily Mail as a reliable source of information then you will be disappointed. Facts are not their strong point. If you would like some data from the Daily Mail (and from other more reliable sources) you will find that the average life expectancy in the UK is 80.2 years whereas the US is 78.5 years.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2240855/How-does-nation-rank-world-map-life-expectancy.html
So if the UK healthcare system is killing its citizens they are still living longer than those in the US.
One key issue in the UK has been discussions on the Liverpool Care Pathway. This is a now discredited approach to try and manage terminally ill people with dignity. The sensationalism of junk newspaper headlines do not really add anything to the debate.
We can all find examples of healthcare failure to support a view. I do believe that US doctors have the highest level of claims in the world for malpractice, certainly based on the insurance fees they have to pay. That does not at all mean that US doctors are the worst in the world.
@Nan G: “And, when you speak of coverage ”exclusions,” remember men MUST be covered for pregnancy and birth control; older people MUST be covered for pediatric care; women MUST be covered for prostate care.”
What part on ‘insurance’ do you not understand?
People, people, people….don’t be stupid….Those with plans which can’t be kept are junk plans which don’t cover certain illnesses and even hospital visits. So you’d rather we continue to pay for this with our taxes and continue to drain our economy? Or you’d prefer your own health care plans continue to rise 15-20% a year as it has been? Or maybe you’d like insurance companies to be able to drop you or a family member and let them die or sell houses to pay for expenses?
Think people. Stop the silly screeching. This was out there for a few years. I don’t know why you’re finding it a big surprise now except that Fox News is telling you to get enraged. You think they’re really looking out for average Americans?
@This one: someone who is immensely stupid calling others stupid …….
@Pete: bingo that said it all ,allen colmes…. i mean greg is trying his best to spin a turd
@Scott in Oklahoma: And when your call this guy a liar because he is, the wacho liberals will scream racist!! Amazing mindless blind mice!!
@Tom Phillips:
I believe the Mail was not the only source I quoted.
Well now, I see the plan. So what if a few blokes were allowed to die due to a disaster of a medical system, at least the government allowed them to live longer than the average Yank.
Got it.
@retire05:
I doubt that many people would be convinced when an argument, that health care for all is unaffordable, is supported by a conspiracy theory that the UK government is deliberately killing its citizens to save on medical costs.
@Scott in Oklahoma: Hi Scott. Thanks for taking the time to explain. I see it slightly differently because I believe that a health system should be directly funded not from individual insurance premiums but out of general taxation. This allows a level of administration costs in the overall health system to be taken away as everyone is entitled to treatment (there is no need for insurance company profits or the need for systems to check entitlement to healthcare). The extra resources freed up can be put to more effective use. Of course the general taxation could include a health insurance element to recover the cost.
I will watch with interest the developments in the US. Despite the current downturn in Obama’s ratings I would not be surprised if his healthcare reforms are a long term vote winner. Mind you I am often surprised by US politics!
Good morning Tom. I know our system needs work, but letting a corrupt government is worse in my opinion than letting private enterprise do it’s job. I don’t recall seeing any huge breakthroughs coming out of socialist systems in the past 30 years, although there may have been. A large part of our medical cost problem is due to government regulations strangling innovation, tort reform and other issues.
You say you think Obama’s reforms might be good historically, we’ll consider the start… Over half a billion dollars to build a website that could have been done for two million in six months instead of three+ years. Where did the profits from that go? It all goes back to trust, and there isn’t any trust left in this regime.
Off to work now, the oil field awaits….
@Scott in Oklahoma: Hi Scott. It’s a huge problem when trust in government breaks down and I can understand your view. I am not in any way promoting Obamacare as the perfect solution. I just think that from a political point of view when the major problems have been ironed out – in about 5 years if it gets that long – many voters will feel differently about it. A UK politician would just not get elected if he threatened the NHS service. Time will tell as they say.
You are totally right about what governments do well and what they do badly. I think private enterprise can innovate so much faster in a large number of areas. If it’s any consolation the UK government have just written off $15 billion because of a failed centralised health IT system. Most people see this more as a massive mistake and ineptness than a conspiracy to defraud. My view is – don’t ever let government near IT projects. Fortunately the people who run the health service (as opposed to those who have grand ideas and meddle with it) are career professionals who know what they are doing.
A look at the % of GDP spent on health by nation does reveal some differences (these figures from the World Bank).
US – 17.9%
France – 11.6%
Germany – 11.1%
UK – 9.3%
So there are socialist biased nations out there that do spend less to get the same or more, France in particular.
Have enjoyed our rational discussion. Have a good weekend.