Sorry, Obamacare Fans: More Government Not The Cure For Too Much Government
Of course, Obamacare will not cause health care costs to go down. A. Barton Hinkle writes at reason:
As critics warned, the Affordable Care Act will not "bend the cost curve downward" as promised. To the contrary, a June report by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid predicts that national health spending through 2021 will continue to grow at a considerably faster clip than Gross Domestic Product.That growth will not be even. Private health insurance spending will rise about 8 percent. Medicaid spending will grow about 20 percent. In a few years, government will account for 50 cents of every health care dollar spent in America.
...This, naturally, has alarmed many progressives. But don't worry--as always, they have a plan. ...'The only sustainable solution is to control overall growth in health costs.'"
Translation: Set a nationwide cap on all health spending, including private spending. This is the brilliant fix being offered by "responsible...leading thinkers" such as the Center for American Progress' John Podesta and former Obama health-care adviser Ezekiel Emanuel. (Just imagine what the irresponsible, second-rate thinkers would come up with.)
Pause for a second to review how we got here. Although numerous factors have contributed to the explosion of health-care costs--an aging population and expensive technology, for example--a chief driver is government itself. WWII-era wage controls, followed by the tax preference for employer-provided health insurance, combined to create the third-party-payer conundrum vexing us today. Medicare and Medicaid made the cost problem worse. It's the same dynamic driving up college tuitions: Massive government subsidies encourage massive price hikes, which then ostensibly justify yet more government intervention to bring prices down.
A couple of weeks ago, we were worried about doctors not getting paid enough. Which is it, do we want to spend more on doctors (which I would imagine is a large part of healthcare costs) or less?
clinky at August 22, 2012 8:56 AM
Don't worry, clinky: you just won't get the health care you expect. I suspect that The Powers that Be will just want you to take your pain pill and shut up about it.
There won't be enough doctors to cover the uninsured. Obamacare didn't do anything to increase the supply of doctors. And with ever decreasing incomes, we will start seeing a number of current doctors quit their practices and retire, or at least stop accepting Medicare patients.
Of course, the high government officals are exempted from this system. Gee, I can't imagine why they wouldn't want to participate in such a marvelous system??
Wage & price controls: they didn't work in the 70s, and they didn't work in the 40's, what makes people think they'll work now?
I R A Darth Aggie at August 22, 2012 9:47 AM
They won't be giving you pain pills, IRA. They're trying to get them banned completely. We're just going to get some needles stuck in our skin and be sent home to die while waiting to see a specialist.
momof4 at August 22, 2012 9:55 AM
Clinky: "Which is it, do we want to spend more on doctors... or less?"
We don't have to worry about that. Under our wonderful, new health care law the government will appoint a panel of "experts" who will decide for us what and whom we want to collectively spend our money on.
If overall health care costs continue to rise too much, the federal government can do what the State of Massachusetts did when health care expenditures skyrocketed to unsustainable levels after its universal health care law was enacted in 2006 ("Romneycare", which was the model for Obamacare). Massachusetts now has the highest per-capita health care costs in the entire world. About 54% of the entire state budget is spent on health care, compared to 24% ten years ago.
To make health care more affordable in Massachusetts, they recently passed a law that simply limits the amount of money, both state and private, that can be spent on health care, and establishes a panel of state-appointed experts to decide how and on whom money can be spent. Ta-dah! No problemo! Right?
They could also implement a Quality-adjusted life year (QALY) system like they use in the U.K. (look it up; it's very interesting) When an individual needs expensive treatment, the individual and a government-appointed panel of "experts" use a questionnaire to rate the value of that individual's life relative to the cost of the treatment he/she needs. Then the experts decide what he or she will get. Interestingly, the individuals always rate their own value higher than the experts do. So it helps keep health care costs within the politically mandated limits by having the government-appointed experts make the final decisions.
Ken R at August 22, 2012 2:03 PM
A bottom line number is really the only way to control costs in a government health care scheme. It's the way we do it in Canada.
But since dictating the nominal price doesn't really change the true price, people end up paying in time spent waiting for service rather than in money. That's fine for someone on permanent disability, maternity leave, or for a retiree, since their time has no marginal dollar value, but it's pretty frustrating for someone who works.
Millions of hours are wasted in waiting rooms by people who have nothing but time to exchange for supposedly free health care. Unfortunately, those of us with a scarcity of time and a surplus of money are barred from buying back our precious time by paying for care in cash.
Tyler at August 22, 2012 3:36 PM
clinky, we're NOT paying doctors in the government health plan.
We're paying bureaucrats, government officials, whole reams and skeins and multitudes of people who have nothing at all to do with treating you.
Because you don't want to pay. You want someone else to pay. Well, maybe not you, but a bunch of people who vote.
Solved.
Radwaste at August 22, 2012 4:18 PM
Like TSA, this is just welfare disguised. more jobs for the subliterate.
KateC at August 22, 2012 6:37 PM
Mom of4 writes ""They won't be giving you pain pills, IRA. They're trying to get them banned completely. We're just going to get some needles stuck in our skin and be sent home to die while waiting to see a specialist. ""
Spot on. I am sorry that some people may abuse pain pills. I wish they wouldn't but there is a level of human nature to become addicted to things that make you feel good (or escape from reality). So the government to the rescue to ban pain pills (or at least try). Hey, my mom had a hip replaced and to get around and have quality of life, she needs pain medication. I guess to hell with her -- the main thing is to legislate whatever feels good for every human problem that exists.
As far as the bigger issue of Obamacare....some may not like him, some may have a problem with some of his politics, some may wish there was someone better.......but reality is Obamacare is here to stay unless Romney wins (among other things that need to happen). It is an A or B choice.
TW at August 22, 2012 8:27 PM
New government motto
"We have to spend the money before we know what we bought"
lujlp at August 23, 2012 1:08 PM
Leave a comment