In all the debates and townhall meetings, public forums and the like it has amazed me that what is occuring is simply discussions of what the eventual health care reform legislation should look like and encompass, and not at all the fundamental violations of American's "right to choose or not choose" whether to be insured, or at what level of care.
There are many religions that prohibit invasive medical treatments in their practices. We do have freedom of religion in this country, and would appear any such legislation mandating that Americans must have health care coverage is an abridgement of quite a few of the Bill of Rights freedoms that our founding fathers fought and died in order to secure.
This legislation is being promoted by the left wing for feel good reasons most of all at least at the citizen level. What is being also missed is the parties and industries involved and who is being consulted, and also the inherent benefits to them in any such legislation. Politically and otherwise.
Although the Democratic Party has always held itself out to be the party of the people, rather than industry - Mr. Obama, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi clearly demonstrated that they are just as much big business political lackeys as those in the Republican Party have historically been.
In fact, two of Mr. Obama's most ardent supporters and campaign contributors are Warren Buffett and Bill Gates. This legislation stands to profit both enornously, since one is a Wall Street guru heavily invested in the health care industry through his Geico Insurance (which provides and gives discounts to government employees), and the other the founder of Microsoft, who stands to also profit handsomely with the National Health Care Database which was included with the stimulus bills (and hidden for the most part from the public) sums for the software to begin this massive unconstitutional undertaking.
Placing the most personal and private information any American has on a federally accessible database would have the founding fathers storming the White House and shouting for the call to arms.
Both are also believers and support foundations that are dedicated to zero population growth, as are many members of the Democratic Party from the 1960's era that were involved in that movement. And the U.N. and WHO are also believers in population control and promote seminars and initiatives dedicated to it.
And interestingly enough, both Mr. Buffett and Mr. Gates have three children (not two, replacement) of their own.
So the hypocrites abound in this legislation, which for all intents in purposes, Hippocrates had nothing to do with. And would end up compromising many ethical doctors Hippocratic oaths also in the process in governmentally determined treatment plans, rathr than physician determined. And it appears neither does the AMA anymore, another announceed supporter for the provisions contained in Mr. Obama's proposed "solution." Using the "corporate" medical community when many within it are vigorously also opposed to any such legislation.
Which is sounding more and more like the "solution" Hitler used in order to determine who was and was not ultimately worth of life, or whose life was worthy for the "greater good" of the Fatherland.
China instituted the "one birth" rule for their population under Communist control long ago. And in the process, infancide rates due to sexual preferences became commonplace.
Lady Liberty had different plans for this nation, and more heart and soul.
It is difficult watching loved ones age and the physical deterioration that goes along with it. It also forces us many times to address our own mortality and untimely end.
In our fast food world now of Twitter and turnaround mastectomies, is life and death now to be determined according to what is more expedient and cost effective for the state (i.e., politicians and their stock portfolios, since all future legislation will be directed toward reducing more and more the "insurers" or health care industries risk and losses if history now serves correctly).
How many elderly people have they spoken to that value each and every day they have left, so long as they are still able to breathe? And while they may be in pain, isn't pain a part of all facets of life be it emotional or physical and simply just makes those painfree moments all the more cherished?
Showing posts with label pharmaceutical industry. Show all posts
Showing posts with label pharmaceutical industry. Show all posts
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
Geithner States Economy Headed Toward Rebound: But For Whom?
In an interview with CNN published several days ago given by Timothy Geithner, Secretary of the Treasury, Mr. Geithner stated that the economy is giving signs that it is headed for an eventual rebound.
But my question is: for whom? And just who has he spoken with recently, or what statistics is he using?
The last several months have seen the amount of foreclosures and also those jobless continue to escalate at unprecedented levels. Recently, Congress just assessed what is potentially going to be the largest increase in taxation in this country since the 16th Amendment with respect to Americans utility bills, which are already off the charts in most areas of the country: The Cap & Trade tax.
Conservative estimates have been that this new scheme for the Wall Street brokers and bankers will most likely increase Americans utility bills the first year alone over $1,400 per PERSON. Not household.
The most massive layoff ever occurred recently in Detroit, one of the cities hardest hit also with the foreclosure mess. Those middle class GM workers I'm sure are much appreciative of the anticipated extention of unemployment benefits they will receive. Most of which are less than half of their former salaries. And that $600 credit isn't going to go very far paying those utility bills either.
If Mr. Geithner's predictions are based upon the "global" market and Wall Street, then Mr. Geithner, Mr. Obama & those on the Hill have certainly insured its survival with all the legislation since the "bank bailout" fiasco, for an industry that has progressively also escalated their "junk fees" and costs in their "flex loan" offerings for those mortgages they sold to the American public and then resold on the "global" exchange.
While also lobbying for changes in the bankruptcy code precluding Americans from writing off any of their usurous fees and costs should they actually use some of that great credit and have an unexpected large expense arise, such as ballooning property taxes and insurance costs, that makes them unable to pay that double digit interest.
Of course, the Americans lost their homes, while the foreigner iinvestors recouped their investments, enough to even send their highest paid executives to a retreat at one of California's Four Star resorts. California, of course, being the home of the lenders who underwrote most of those bogus loans.
Which then turned around and pleaded bankruptcy, when Silicon Valley must be making money hands over fist due to the continuing war, and the telecom bill that just resulted in many Americans having to ditch their antennae and pay instead for cable subscriptions to "stimulate" the telecom companies profit margins even more.
Mr. Geithner must be polling the financiers who are profiting with his predictions is the only conclusion I could come to after reading the piece since it was truly difficult to pinpoint just what he is using as his crystal ball, of course at the cost of Joe the Plumber for these progressive Wall Street stimuluses, who I am sure doesn't have a lot invested in the stock market other than maybe a college fund for his kids.
Although that also won't tie him over once those "global warming" taxes also kick in, not to mention the health care he most likely will now have to fork over for his journeymen apprentice helpers under the new L. Ron Hubbard/Orwell Universal Health Care Plan.
Tell me, Mr. Geithner, just whom were your consulting for your predictions? And since a great many now are on the breadline, or the homeless shelter, just where is the investment capital going to come from with so many Americans now living hand to mouth as it is, or saving for those "global warming" taxes once they hit?
I know, the "global" community will continue to buy up most of America's industrial base, and its infrastructure at an even faster clip than it already has. I hear the French are now invested in the Grand Canyon and that new platform they just put in, and I'm sure could come up with a down payment on the rest since I do believe they still have some extra cash and some of those dollars of ours which helped during the rebuilding after World War II?
Have you arranged for the realtor and "for sale" sign for the White House yet?
Oh, heads up America. In the article Mr. Geithner did indicate that in order for this recovery to progress and have the desired result, there most likely would have to be some increases in taxes in the form of a VAT or value added tax on manufactured goods which will, of course, raise prices again for the consumers.
And he also spoke of what "success" of the Cash for Clunkers program which was funded at 1 billion and provided for $4,500 for people who traded in their older gas guzzlers for newer, fuel efficient models.
But I question whether the success of this program is as was represented, since with the average automobile now, with all the bells and whistles and computers now involved, well over $20,000 even for the lower end models, in most states that credit wouldn't even pay the license, sales tax and registration fees.
Seems another "stimulus" instead meant for the state and local coffers more than anything.
Certainly not for the auto industry, as stated in the article, since those GM plants in Mexico and China are humming right along and due to the cheap labor and with that Hummer deal thrown in to China to sweeten the deal as our major creditor at this point from the propaganda on the MSM, GM isn't hurting and had one of the fastest bankruptcy restructuring (post bailout) ever for a major U.S. corporation.
And John McCain, of course, was also interviewed. And gave credit somehow also to the "success" of the stimulus.
I wonder if he's been back to Arizona recently, or spoken with many in the Grand Canyon State, one of the top three consistently in home foreclosures? Or visited and walked through some of the wash areas in metro Phoenix or Tucson lately? Or visited the local soup kitchen because there are quite a few Joe the Plumbers there due to the amount of day laborers who have taken many of their jobs as those small businesses and construction trades do seem to be some of the primary employers in most areas of the country right now.
So cheer up, Middle Class America, Mr. Geithner has things well under control....for the "global market economy," which your are subsidizing for what is nothing more than world "economic" socialism.
As Mr. Obama said: We all must make sacrifices.
Maybe a start would be that all federal employees must also divest themselves of their taxpayer paid health care plans and benefits, and sign up for the new "government" sponsored program to help cut that deficit and be on parity with their constituents in this government initiated economic crisis. And their federal pensions contributions sliced and switched to 401(Ks) heavily invested in U.S. industries, rather than their global investment portfolios.
Isn't it time those on the Hill practiced what they preach and layoff a few of those government workers?
After all, the recently published staff budget for the White House alone is over 32 million with over 400 employees.
I think Adams had less than six, and it wasn't even done yet.
But my question is: for whom? And just who has he spoken with recently, or what statistics is he using?
The last several months have seen the amount of foreclosures and also those jobless continue to escalate at unprecedented levels. Recently, Congress just assessed what is potentially going to be the largest increase in taxation in this country since the 16th Amendment with respect to Americans utility bills, which are already off the charts in most areas of the country: The Cap & Trade tax.
Conservative estimates have been that this new scheme for the Wall Street brokers and bankers will most likely increase Americans utility bills the first year alone over $1,400 per PERSON. Not household.
The most massive layoff ever occurred recently in Detroit, one of the cities hardest hit also with the foreclosure mess. Those middle class GM workers I'm sure are much appreciative of the anticipated extention of unemployment benefits they will receive. Most of which are less than half of their former salaries. And that $600 credit isn't going to go very far paying those utility bills either.
If Mr. Geithner's predictions are based upon the "global" market and Wall Street, then Mr. Geithner, Mr. Obama & those on the Hill have certainly insured its survival with all the legislation since the "bank bailout" fiasco, for an industry that has progressively also escalated their "junk fees" and costs in their "flex loan" offerings for those mortgages they sold to the American public and then resold on the "global" exchange.
While also lobbying for changes in the bankruptcy code precluding Americans from writing off any of their usurous fees and costs should they actually use some of that great credit and have an unexpected large expense arise, such as ballooning property taxes and insurance costs, that makes them unable to pay that double digit interest.
Of course, the Americans lost their homes, while the foreigner iinvestors recouped their investments, enough to even send their highest paid executives to a retreat at one of California's Four Star resorts. California, of course, being the home of the lenders who underwrote most of those bogus loans.
Which then turned around and pleaded bankruptcy, when Silicon Valley must be making money hands over fist due to the continuing war, and the telecom bill that just resulted in many Americans having to ditch their antennae and pay instead for cable subscriptions to "stimulate" the telecom companies profit margins even more.
Mr. Geithner must be polling the financiers who are profiting with his predictions is the only conclusion I could come to after reading the piece since it was truly difficult to pinpoint just what he is using as his crystal ball, of course at the cost of Joe the Plumber for these progressive Wall Street stimuluses, who I am sure doesn't have a lot invested in the stock market other than maybe a college fund for his kids.
Although that also won't tie him over once those "global warming" taxes also kick in, not to mention the health care he most likely will now have to fork over for his journeymen apprentice helpers under the new L. Ron Hubbard/Orwell Universal Health Care Plan.
Tell me, Mr. Geithner, just whom were your consulting for your predictions? And since a great many now are on the breadline, or the homeless shelter, just where is the investment capital going to come from with so many Americans now living hand to mouth as it is, or saving for those "global warming" taxes once they hit?
I know, the "global" community will continue to buy up most of America's industrial base, and its infrastructure at an even faster clip than it already has. I hear the French are now invested in the Grand Canyon and that new platform they just put in, and I'm sure could come up with a down payment on the rest since I do believe they still have some extra cash and some of those dollars of ours which helped during the rebuilding after World War II?
Have you arranged for the realtor and "for sale" sign for the White House yet?
Oh, heads up America. In the article Mr. Geithner did indicate that in order for this recovery to progress and have the desired result, there most likely would have to be some increases in taxes in the form of a VAT or value added tax on manufactured goods which will, of course, raise prices again for the consumers.
And he also spoke of what "success" of the Cash for Clunkers program which was funded at 1 billion and provided for $4,500 for people who traded in their older gas guzzlers for newer, fuel efficient models.
But I question whether the success of this program is as was represented, since with the average automobile now, with all the bells and whistles and computers now involved, well over $20,000 even for the lower end models, in most states that credit wouldn't even pay the license, sales tax and registration fees.
Seems another "stimulus" instead meant for the state and local coffers more than anything.
Certainly not for the auto industry, as stated in the article, since those GM plants in Mexico and China are humming right along and due to the cheap labor and with that Hummer deal thrown in to China to sweeten the deal as our major creditor at this point from the propaganda on the MSM, GM isn't hurting and had one of the fastest bankruptcy restructuring (post bailout) ever for a major U.S. corporation.
And John McCain, of course, was also interviewed. And gave credit somehow also to the "success" of the stimulus.
I wonder if he's been back to Arizona recently, or spoken with many in the Grand Canyon State, one of the top three consistently in home foreclosures? Or visited and walked through some of the wash areas in metro Phoenix or Tucson lately? Or visited the local soup kitchen because there are quite a few Joe the Plumbers there due to the amount of day laborers who have taken many of their jobs as those small businesses and construction trades do seem to be some of the primary employers in most areas of the country right now.
So cheer up, Middle Class America, Mr. Geithner has things well under control....for the "global market economy," which your are subsidizing for what is nothing more than world "economic" socialism.
As Mr. Obama said: We all must make sacrifices.
Maybe a start would be that all federal employees must also divest themselves of their taxpayer paid health care plans and benefits, and sign up for the new "government" sponsored program to help cut that deficit and be on parity with their constituents in this government initiated economic crisis. And their federal pensions contributions sliced and switched to 401(Ks) heavily invested in U.S. industries, rather than their global investment portfolios.
Isn't it time those on the Hill practiced what they preach and layoff a few of those government workers?
After all, the recently published staff budget for the White House alone is over 32 million with over 400 employees.
I think Adams had less than six, and it wasn't even done yet.
Friday, July 24, 2009
Obamacare: Using Corporate Business Models To Determine Health Care
For Any and All American Constitutional "Conserve"atives:
Last night I listened to part of Obama's new "road trip" and public relations spiel regarding the health care reform he and the Democratic Congress (and their Republican also Global Socialist members) are hatching in Washington.
At the end of the spiel all I could think of was that his health care "reform" is nothing more than "reforming" medicine and health care along the lines of any corporate enterprise. On a cost/benefit business model with an actuary in Washington then determining what types of treatment will be "approved."
In other words, Obama is now creating a new position within his administration whoever the new "health czar" will be.
God.
Or at least that is what the job description should read with the power which will be given over human life and death in this country.
Listen up, America. Do you really want some federally trained lackey in Washington determining whether or not your spouse, child or other family member "deserves" or is worthy of treatment for their health care needs?
And just who are you going to sue or bring charges against if that treatment is denied, anyway? It is you who are paying for that coverage, yet the only recourse that would be available to you would be to file a claim with the same entity that denied you the treatment to begin with.
The federal government.
And what if you have religious beliefs that preclude invasive medical treatments, or also rely more on homeopathic remedies rather than running to the doctors at the first sign of a cold or flu?
Should you be forced to pay for medical treatments and costs that will continue to escalate beyond your ability to pay at some point, as I do believe there will also be differences in the costs to citizens included within that bill according to their age?
And just how can the government "fine" you for not purchasing a government issued "product," or "service" which is what it is, because it is the government and not the health care provider or doctor who will be in charge of your treatment plan?
Do "business models" work for a vital service that all Americans most likely will need at some time or another in their lives? And what about the state plans, will citizens still be paying taxes for those state social service agencies on top of the expansion of DHHS that will be required in order to administer this massive plan?
Or will those state plans be "merged" with the states ceding more of their duties and functions to federal control, with then more state revenue to spend indiscriminantly in not having to come up with those matching sums? Just when will we phase out state government altogether, because that would be a huge tax savings to all Americans at this point since this does appear to be the plan from all appearances?
How much of those health care taxes will then be going into administrative costs for more federal government workers and THEIR salaries and benefits?
Is this the type of "jobs stimulus" Obama was referring to, expanding government to the degree that pretty soon everyone in this country will be somehow working for the U.S. government with Uncle Sam then doling out the spoils?
Isn't that the definition of pure communism?
The health care industry is licking its lips over this one, because it will be "bare bones" coverage and they will then get the opportunity to market those "supplemental" plans that they most likely will never have to pay off on.
Just why DO you think the AARP is involved in these talks? Who do you think has a huge share of the market with respect to their "supplemental" medicare plans at the present time?
And just why is it that this is being tailored to meet the needs of the industries which are raping the American people for their health care costs now as it is?
Obama and this Congress and Administration are getting scarier by the moment.
This is Soylent Green & Hitler wrapped into one, yet being marketed as a "solution," to a government created situation to begin with in not performing its governmental function in regulating some of those industries sufficiently but rather getting into bed with them for politicians personal political careers.
Warren Buffett must be making plans to buy Africa as a real estate investment in order to shelter some of that windfall profit he will be making, since included within the bill are measures which require the public to use "approved" health care providers for the cut rate plans.
Maybe that is also part of the plan, installing owner/CEOs in the various third world countries funded by their corporate holdings (of course funded also by the public in their public offerings, which market is then manipulated by the European bankster/owners) in the industrialized West and Far East so that the G-20 conferences are in truth of fact nothing more than corporate Board of Directors' meetings for Earth, Inc. of the principal owners with the world's population at that point nothing more than disinterested shareholder/members working for the planet's "corporate" greater good. Robot workers, in other words, at the mercy of the planet/state.
Did L. Ron Hubbard or Orwell write this script?
After all, Obama and this Congress and Administration are big believers in "science" based technology. Even predicting the planet's demise thousands of years down the road is within their grasp (although not tomorrow's ice storm or path of the next hurricane).
Maybe they left a word out. "Science fiction" based technology, perhaps?
And the little workers bees worth in the event of downtime then determined according to actuarial tables configured according to job position and risk/benefit losses at time of injury or their life expectancy.
At this point, all those on the Hill need to have a mental health check and/or check in to the nearest psychiatric ward.
After all, WE'VE paid for their coverage for years.
Last night I listened to part of Obama's new "road trip" and public relations spiel regarding the health care reform he and the Democratic Congress (and their Republican also Global Socialist members) are hatching in Washington.
At the end of the spiel all I could think of was that his health care "reform" is nothing more than "reforming" medicine and health care along the lines of any corporate enterprise. On a cost/benefit business model with an actuary in Washington then determining what types of treatment will be "approved."
In other words, Obama is now creating a new position within his administration whoever the new "health czar" will be.
God.
Or at least that is what the job description should read with the power which will be given over human life and death in this country.
Listen up, America. Do you really want some federally trained lackey in Washington determining whether or not your spouse, child or other family member "deserves" or is worthy of treatment for their health care needs?
And just who are you going to sue or bring charges against if that treatment is denied, anyway? It is you who are paying for that coverage, yet the only recourse that would be available to you would be to file a claim with the same entity that denied you the treatment to begin with.
The federal government.
And what if you have religious beliefs that preclude invasive medical treatments, or also rely more on homeopathic remedies rather than running to the doctors at the first sign of a cold or flu?
Should you be forced to pay for medical treatments and costs that will continue to escalate beyond your ability to pay at some point, as I do believe there will also be differences in the costs to citizens included within that bill according to their age?
And just how can the government "fine" you for not purchasing a government issued "product," or "service" which is what it is, because it is the government and not the health care provider or doctor who will be in charge of your treatment plan?
Do "business models" work for a vital service that all Americans most likely will need at some time or another in their lives? And what about the state plans, will citizens still be paying taxes for those state social service agencies on top of the expansion of DHHS that will be required in order to administer this massive plan?
Or will those state plans be "merged" with the states ceding more of their duties and functions to federal control, with then more state revenue to spend indiscriminantly in not having to come up with those matching sums? Just when will we phase out state government altogether, because that would be a huge tax savings to all Americans at this point since this does appear to be the plan from all appearances?
How much of those health care taxes will then be going into administrative costs for more federal government workers and THEIR salaries and benefits?
Is this the type of "jobs stimulus" Obama was referring to, expanding government to the degree that pretty soon everyone in this country will be somehow working for the U.S. government with Uncle Sam then doling out the spoils?
Isn't that the definition of pure communism?
The health care industry is licking its lips over this one, because it will be "bare bones" coverage and they will then get the opportunity to market those "supplemental" plans that they most likely will never have to pay off on.
Just why DO you think the AARP is involved in these talks? Who do you think has a huge share of the market with respect to their "supplemental" medicare plans at the present time?
And just why is it that this is being tailored to meet the needs of the industries which are raping the American people for their health care costs now as it is?
Obama and this Congress and Administration are getting scarier by the moment.
This is Soylent Green & Hitler wrapped into one, yet being marketed as a "solution," to a government created situation to begin with in not performing its governmental function in regulating some of those industries sufficiently but rather getting into bed with them for politicians personal political careers.
Warren Buffett must be making plans to buy Africa as a real estate investment in order to shelter some of that windfall profit he will be making, since included within the bill are measures which require the public to use "approved" health care providers for the cut rate plans.
Maybe that is also part of the plan, installing owner/CEOs in the various third world countries funded by their corporate holdings (of course funded also by the public in their public offerings, which market is then manipulated by the European bankster/owners) in the industrialized West and Far East so that the G-20 conferences are in truth of fact nothing more than corporate Board of Directors' meetings for Earth, Inc. of the principal owners with the world's population at that point nothing more than disinterested shareholder/members working for the planet's "corporate" greater good. Robot workers, in other words, at the mercy of the planet/state.
Did L. Ron Hubbard or Orwell write this script?
After all, Obama and this Congress and Administration are big believers in "science" based technology. Even predicting the planet's demise thousands of years down the road is within their grasp (although not tomorrow's ice storm or path of the next hurricane).
Maybe they left a word out. "Science fiction" based technology, perhaps?
And the little workers bees worth in the event of downtime then determined according to actuarial tables configured according to job position and risk/benefit losses at time of injury or their life expectancy.
At this point, all those on the Hill need to have a mental health check and/or check in to the nearest psychiatric ward.
After all, WE'VE paid for their coverage for years.
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Obama and Congress's Non-Universale Health Care Plan: Are States Ceding Powers?
What is now being presented in "politically correct" terms as is being reported on the universal health care plans now being "hatched" in Washington is nothing more than using "politically correct" corporate logic and analogy to justify a plan under which the Nazi's operated.
Evaluate life on a cost/benefit ratio, and genetic superiority by subjective criteria. And that criteria will be some lackey in Washington trained as an actuary according to the health care provider (since this will be a huge government contract, I would imagine that it will be Warren Buffett and AIG, the global insurer "bailed out" on the backs of the American people that get the contract, in another public/private partnership to "stimulate" the global economy and as payback for Mr. Buffett's campaign support of a great many of those on the Hill over the years no matter which party "officially" was in office, since he has expressed interest in expanding his empire to global investment as recently as two to three years ago).
And Buffett is a zero population growth guy (although has three children of his own, so zero growth must not apply to those who consider themselves as genetically superior and apparently own businesses that provide fundamental "life" costs and owe their very livelihoods to the public as now more a financial services company than a solely publicly funded "product" which it is).
What is needed is regulation over the health care industry, which was actually circumvented under Nixon who allowed medicine to be corporatized with that HMO concept. Which has resulted in Boards of Directors, rather than doctors, now determining levels of treatment. And the "caps" placed back on punitive damages for medical malpractice awards that stood at the treble levels under the common law throughout our nations history until the TLA went across the country getting those lids removed for their own "welfare."
Not getting into bed with the unions and insurers, or taking over health care which is determined then by the "distant ruler." And also evaluating just why it is that the costs to train new doctors has far exceeded the cost of living and bears no relevance at all to the actual costs.....since the taxpayers themselves fund those universities in which they are trained.
This is a nightmare, and all those that think this is a solution, you are talking Orwell here now.
Not to mention that even at its most basic level, the entire socializing of our health care is actually not at all a governmental function under our existing law, the U.S. Constitution.
What is needed is what the founders provided. Strict regulation of those national and global insurers, and also better oversight of doctors independent of the AMA, and also breaking up those "monopolies" and health care networks that are using business models now in order to evaluate health care provision, and incompetent and morally challenged doctors who are supplementing their practices and services for governmental cut rate costs by upping their charges on the insureds and those who they profile CAN afford the higher costs.
Some of their support staff know how to work those health insurance forms to the max, and are actually given bonuses if they reach certain quotas set by these health care networks and mega doctor's practices.
Neither business models, nor governmental actuaries have any moral fibre or background. And if anything this is not an "industry" at all, it is a basic service that is a need at one time or another for all Americans.
So the lax oversight of this industry and favoritism for the health care leeches such as the unions and providers is what has lead to this. And Nixon's crap with the HMO concept, and over-inflated costs to train new doctors for the banker's profit margins which makes most of them bankrupt before they even begin their practices.
But I think what is being missed by most Americans is that whether or not to provide or "socialize" health care really is a state issue, not a federal one at all. That is why the local governments were to be the most powerful, not the federal government for such matters as public education, and health costs.
And that the states are voluntarily ceding their power to the federal government, all representations in the 10th Amendment movement to the contrary. Because then the states don't have to come up with those "matching sums" and then have more of the public purse to spend on unaccountable and pork projects for their campaign backers.
So I think the true picture here is being obscured by both Congress and the media reports. Because right now the feds are already providing health care for the underinsured and less fortunate, and also now even "illegal" and non-Americans. This "universal" health care that Obama is proposing is nothing more than putting another party, the federal government, now DIRECTLY involved in determining care, rather than the state.
And Americans will have no recourse then other than suing the federal government if denied coverage, and there is a federal statute that provides only for the reimbursement for the actual demonstrated losses, not punitive damages or even the costs or bringing the suit itself. This entire plan will remove actually any and all accountability for health care provision from insurers and also the medical community. Which is why, also all "public faces" to the contrary, the medical community and insurers are also behind it.
That way the insurers can also sell those "supplemental plans" at ridiculous rates, but then fail to pay on them and blame the federal government (the primary insurer) for the denial of also their provision if the federal government denies the coverage.
The truth is actually much more Machiavellian than what is being portrayed. And the headlines so far really tell it all. It is "cut rate" and loss/benefit care, and it appears the boomer generation is one which the federal government would like to get rid of at the earliest opportunity. And also those that are not productive, and each successive generation thereafter.
Until pretty soon, the life expectancy in this country will eventually equal the birth rate survival and be less than third world countries.
I just love that NO ONE ever thinks to examine just why in most of these areas we now are where we are with respect to health care, and our economy. No one examines our history to see how veering from the Constitution and Constitutional intent, has brought us to where we are.
And I disagree on the economy. The reason things haven't "picked up" is because the market is speaking, and by that I mean the American people. Who would buy a home today with the way those loans are written, since the terms of the loans which also created this disaster have not been addressed or changed in some of their usurous terms and rates?
Nothing has changed, Obama is simply attempting to entice the new home buyers and refinancing in order to trap another generation in the boom and bust cycle -which is the fault of the unregulated and uncontrolled Federal Reserve and its policies.
No one is buying into the stock market, because Obama and Congress proved that when push comes to shove, it is the unions and foreign investors that are protected, not the individual American investor.
Do you really think these lessons have not been lost on most educated or aware Americans? And how many that have lost their homes now can qualify for new ones, what with the lack of regulation also over the credit reporting services?
These guys are in their own bubble. The market is speaking, and so are the Americans. We aren't buying your products because you are all a bunch of scam artists.
The people have spoken.
Evaluate life on a cost/benefit ratio, and genetic superiority by subjective criteria. And that criteria will be some lackey in Washington trained as an actuary according to the health care provider (since this will be a huge government contract, I would imagine that it will be Warren Buffett and AIG, the global insurer "bailed out" on the backs of the American people that get the contract, in another public/private partnership to "stimulate" the global economy and as payback for Mr. Buffett's campaign support of a great many of those on the Hill over the years no matter which party "officially" was in office, since he has expressed interest in expanding his empire to global investment as recently as two to three years ago).
And Buffett is a zero population growth guy (although has three children of his own, so zero growth must not apply to those who consider themselves as genetically superior and apparently own businesses that provide fundamental "life" costs and owe their very livelihoods to the public as now more a financial services company than a solely publicly funded "product" which it is).
What is needed is regulation over the health care industry, which was actually circumvented under Nixon who allowed medicine to be corporatized with that HMO concept. Which has resulted in Boards of Directors, rather than doctors, now determining levels of treatment. And the "caps" placed back on punitive damages for medical malpractice awards that stood at the treble levels under the common law throughout our nations history until the TLA went across the country getting those lids removed for their own "welfare."
Not getting into bed with the unions and insurers, or taking over health care which is determined then by the "distant ruler." And also evaluating just why it is that the costs to train new doctors has far exceeded the cost of living and bears no relevance at all to the actual costs.....since the taxpayers themselves fund those universities in which they are trained.
This is a nightmare, and all those that think this is a solution, you are talking Orwell here now.
Not to mention that even at its most basic level, the entire socializing of our health care is actually not at all a governmental function under our existing law, the U.S. Constitution.
What is needed is what the founders provided. Strict regulation of those national and global insurers, and also better oversight of doctors independent of the AMA, and also breaking up those "monopolies" and health care networks that are using business models now in order to evaluate health care provision, and incompetent and morally challenged doctors who are supplementing their practices and services for governmental cut rate costs by upping their charges on the insureds and those who they profile CAN afford the higher costs.
Some of their support staff know how to work those health insurance forms to the max, and are actually given bonuses if they reach certain quotas set by these health care networks and mega doctor's practices.
Neither business models, nor governmental actuaries have any moral fibre or background. And if anything this is not an "industry" at all, it is a basic service that is a need at one time or another for all Americans.
So the lax oversight of this industry and favoritism for the health care leeches such as the unions and providers is what has lead to this. And Nixon's crap with the HMO concept, and over-inflated costs to train new doctors for the banker's profit margins which makes most of them bankrupt before they even begin their practices.
But I think what is being missed by most Americans is that whether or not to provide or "socialize" health care really is a state issue, not a federal one at all. That is why the local governments were to be the most powerful, not the federal government for such matters as public education, and health costs.
And that the states are voluntarily ceding their power to the federal government, all representations in the 10th Amendment movement to the contrary. Because then the states don't have to come up with those "matching sums" and then have more of the public purse to spend on unaccountable and pork projects for their campaign backers.
So I think the true picture here is being obscured by both Congress and the media reports. Because right now the feds are already providing health care for the underinsured and less fortunate, and also now even "illegal" and non-Americans. This "universal" health care that Obama is proposing is nothing more than putting another party, the federal government, now DIRECTLY involved in determining care, rather than the state.
And Americans will have no recourse then other than suing the federal government if denied coverage, and there is a federal statute that provides only for the reimbursement for the actual demonstrated losses, not punitive damages or even the costs or bringing the suit itself. This entire plan will remove actually any and all accountability for health care provision from insurers and also the medical community. Which is why, also all "public faces" to the contrary, the medical community and insurers are also behind it.
That way the insurers can also sell those "supplemental plans" at ridiculous rates, but then fail to pay on them and blame the federal government (the primary insurer) for the denial of also their provision if the federal government denies the coverage.
The truth is actually much more Machiavellian than what is being portrayed. And the headlines so far really tell it all. It is "cut rate" and loss/benefit care, and it appears the boomer generation is one which the federal government would like to get rid of at the earliest opportunity. And also those that are not productive, and each successive generation thereafter.
Until pretty soon, the life expectancy in this country will eventually equal the birth rate survival and be less than third world countries.
I just love that NO ONE ever thinks to examine just why in most of these areas we now are where we are with respect to health care, and our economy. No one examines our history to see how veering from the Constitution and Constitutional intent, has brought us to where we are.
And I disagree on the economy. The reason things haven't "picked up" is because the market is speaking, and by that I mean the American people. Who would buy a home today with the way those loans are written, since the terms of the loans which also created this disaster have not been addressed or changed in some of their usurous terms and rates?
Nothing has changed, Obama is simply attempting to entice the new home buyers and refinancing in order to trap another generation in the boom and bust cycle -which is the fault of the unregulated and uncontrolled Federal Reserve and its policies.
No one is buying into the stock market, because Obama and Congress proved that when push comes to shove, it is the unions and foreign investors that are protected, not the individual American investor.
Do you really think these lessons have not been lost on most educated or aware Americans? And how many that have lost their homes now can qualify for new ones, what with the lack of regulation also over the credit reporting services?
These guys are in their own bubble. The market is speaking, and so are the Americans. We aren't buying your products because you are all a bunch of scam artists.
The people have spoken.
Thursday, May 14, 2009
The Downside To Government Provided Health Care: Not Just More Taxes
Last week Barack Obama called leaders of the insurance industry, pharmaceutical companies and labor organizations for a pow-wow regarding one of his fundamental quests as stated during his campaign: health care reform.
Although these three industries are not in any way directly tied to patient care and delivery, it appears Mr. Obama is playing diplomat with this issue and appeaser with these industry leeches in order that they don't lose a piece of their pie under any anticipated governmental program.
Under Obama's plan, it is estimated that approximately 119 million Americans would shift from private insurance to the governmental plan, putting America on the path toward a completely government run socialized health care system. This, of course, would not sit well with the private insurance carriers who would stand to not only lose business, but their very shirts and the jobs of many who are currently hawking those policies to private businesses and individuals.
The pharmaceutical industry, of course, is quite concerned because under any government plan generics and other effective lower cost drugs (think penicillin and cheaper antibiotics) on which there isn't as much profit would most likely be the preferred and "authorized" treatment with Uncle Sam picking up the tab.
Many of those drug company representatives peddling their "new and improved" wares to doctors would also lose their jobs in the process, and a few of those free bonus trips, and the physicans and health care providers a few holiday gifts.
The unions earned their seat at the appeasement table due to the fact that any government plan would impact Big Labor and their own health care plans which have their administrative mark ups also built in which would, most likely, be negotiated away during the next collective bargaining session.
Mr. Obama during his campaigns assured the American people that the governmental plan he was proposing would simply be an "alternate," with Americans then able to make a choice between the government plan or retaining their own private carriers.
What was left unsaid, however, is that most private insurance is not bought by individuals in this country, but by their Big Business employers. Employers who have shareholders to answer to, and are now facing economic woes of their own throughout many major industries due to this Washington precipitated economic meltdown.
Just how long do you think those employers will keep those group plans once the government plan undercuts them?
What also was left unsaid is that the Obama plan also intends to parent America's children and youth, and mandate that parents must insure their children and themselves, and also feed Washington in providing fines and fees for non-compliance.
In other words, another non-consensual tax in the making that, if Medicare and Medicaid are any indication, will be used for other "discretionary" purposes and be an unaccountable bottomless pit of taxation.
I look for this scenario to go one of two ways:
(1) Mr. Obama will continue in his role as appeaser to all with the exception of Joe Citizen, and will attempt to placate the union bosses and fat cat pharmaceutical executives and insurers by cutting back his legislation to be a bare bones "emergency treatment" policy, with the intent not to totally "socialize" health care in this country but afford Americans then to visit their local insurance agent and sign up for supplemental coverage.
Sort of like Plan A or B supplements for the seniors, only privately obtained. And those supplemental plans will be also subject to increasing costs based upon claims as with the plans now offered, with the government plan as "primary," which will not kick in unless and until you have used the government benefits first, with the insurance industry then able to use the government as the scapegoat for denied treatments.
(2) Or Mr. Obama and Congress in the fine print of the bill will enter into public/private partnerships with the major insurance carriers in this country, and Big Labor privileges of adding in their profit and cut into the government contracts to the amounts which will be required to be withheld from employee/union member paychecks as "administration" fees, with the pharmaceutical industry perhaps being afforded longer patent rights for new medications retroactively and sums for promised grants for future research costs, especially since the embryonic stem cell bill now has been accorded them for their future profits also.
(NOTE: the patent for the original outrageously expensive drugs for AIDS which are used by and large still today expire in 2017, since litigation over ownership rights for the drugs began almost immediately after its "discovery" and have extended the patents on them already an additional 10 years since the patents don't begin until ownership is established, with two companies now sharing those profits since the case was subsequently settled in the early 90's).
The lives of Americans, and especially the large baby boomer generation, are now being bargained for between the insurers, pharmaceutical industries, and big labor.
And I wonder just what recourse will be included for citizens if denied treatment, or if there are any delays or negligence in the care received by government employed physicians and hospitals? What kind of shell game then might Americans face in attempting to redress those grievances between the bureaucrats, insurers, big labor and pharmaceutical companies playing "Whose on first?"
Another take:
http://www.getbetterhealth.com/tag/galen-institute
Gee, I wonder if in this instance as in others whether following our Constitution might be a better idea, and break up the "associations" of these large industries in order to facilitate a truly free market once again, and get Big Labor out of the insurance and health care business which they had no right to enter into in the first place.
Maybe simply beginning to perform their Constitutional function in regulating and overseeing both the type of plans sold at either federal or state levels depending on carrier customer base and home office location.
For accountability, then funding a centralized complaint department for the American citizens to utilize which might be a better useage of those stimulus monies instead of what is going to become another Lawyers Employment Act in its violation of citizens privacy rights with that concocted national health care database for citizens medical information for the feeder industries and states nefarious purposes in the interest of "public unsafety."
I foresee such a bureaucratic administrative nightmare in the end will result in eventually putting small business physicians and software providers out of work, and ultimately increase costs due to government fees and costs which will be tacked on to the patients bills in order utilize that huge mistake-in-the-making system to store and transfer patient records, even if the correct records get transferred. Just imagine the potential lawsuits for unauthorized, misused or incorrect information.
Maybe what we need to do here is step back a moment and look at the legal and "long view."
What a novel idea.
Although these three industries are not in any way directly tied to patient care and delivery, it appears Mr. Obama is playing diplomat with this issue and appeaser with these industry leeches in order that they don't lose a piece of their pie under any anticipated governmental program.
Under Obama's plan, it is estimated that approximately 119 million Americans would shift from private insurance to the governmental plan, putting America on the path toward a completely government run socialized health care system. This, of course, would not sit well with the private insurance carriers who would stand to not only lose business, but their very shirts and the jobs of many who are currently hawking those policies to private businesses and individuals.
The pharmaceutical industry, of course, is quite concerned because under any government plan generics and other effective lower cost drugs (think penicillin and cheaper antibiotics) on which there isn't as much profit would most likely be the preferred and "authorized" treatment with Uncle Sam picking up the tab.
Many of those drug company representatives peddling their "new and improved" wares to doctors would also lose their jobs in the process, and a few of those free bonus trips, and the physicans and health care providers a few holiday gifts.
The unions earned their seat at the appeasement table due to the fact that any government plan would impact Big Labor and their own health care plans which have their administrative mark ups also built in which would, most likely, be negotiated away during the next collective bargaining session.
Mr. Obama during his campaigns assured the American people that the governmental plan he was proposing would simply be an "alternate," with Americans then able to make a choice between the government plan or retaining their own private carriers.
What was left unsaid, however, is that most private insurance is not bought by individuals in this country, but by their Big Business employers. Employers who have shareholders to answer to, and are now facing economic woes of their own throughout many major industries due to this Washington precipitated economic meltdown.
Just how long do you think those employers will keep those group plans once the government plan undercuts them?
What also was left unsaid is that the Obama plan also intends to parent America's children and youth, and mandate that parents must insure their children and themselves, and also feed Washington in providing fines and fees for non-compliance.
In other words, another non-consensual tax in the making that, if Medicare and Medicaid are any indication, will be used for other "discretionary" purposes and be an unaccountable bottomless pit of taxation.
I look for this scenario to go one of two ways:
(1) Mr. Obama will continue in his role as appeaser to all with the exception of Joe Citizen, and will attempt to placate the union bosses and fat cat pharmaceutical executives and insurers by cutting back his legislation to be a bare bones "emergency treatment" policy, with the intent not to totally "socialize" health care in this country but afford Americans then to visit their local insurance agent and sign up for supplemental coverage.
Sort of like Plan A or B supplements for the seniors, only privately obtained. And those supplemental plans will be also subject to increasing costs based upon claims as with the plans now offered, with the government plan as "primary," which will not kick in unless and until you have used the government benefits first, with the insurance industry then able to use the government as the scapegoat for denied treatments.
(2) Or Mr. Obama and Congress in the fine print of the bill will enter into public/private partnerships with the major insurance carriers in this country, and Big Labor privileges of adding in their profit and cut into the government contracts to the amounts which will be required to be withheld from employee/union member paychecks as "administration" fees, with the pharmaceutical industry perhaps being afforded longer patent rights for new medications retroactively and sums for promised grants for future research costs, especially since the embryonic stem cell bill now has been accorded them for their future profits also.
(NOTE: the patent for the original outrageously expensive drugs for AIDS which are used by and large still today expire in 2017, since litigation over ownership rights for the drugs began almost immediately after its "discovery" and have extended the patents on them already an additional 10 years since the patents don't begin until ownership is established, with two companies now sharing those profits since the case was subsequently settled in the early 90's).
The lives of Americans, and especially the large baby boomer generation, are now being bargained for between the insurers, pharmaceutical industries, and big labor.
And I wonder just what recourse will be included for citizens if denied treatment, or if there are any delays or negligence in the care received by government employed physicians and hospitals? What kind of shell game then might Americans face in attempting to redress those grievances between the bureaucrats, insurers, big labor and pharmaceutical companies playing "Whose on first?"
Another take:
http://www.getbetterhealth.com/tag/galen-institute
Gee, I wonder if in this instance as in others whether following our Constitution might be a better idea, and break up the "associations" of these large industries in order to facilitate a truly free market once again, and get Big Labor out of the insurance and health care business which they had no right to enter into in the first place.
Maybe simply beginning to perform their Constitutional function in regulating and overseeing both the type of plans sold at either federal or state levels depending on carrier customer base and home office location.
For accountability, then funding a centralized complaint department for the American citizens to utilize which might be a better useage of those stimulus monies instead of what is going to become another Lawyers Employment Act in its violation of citizens privacy rights with that concocted national health care database for citizens medical information for the feeder industries and states nefarious purposes in the interest of "public unsafety."
I foresee such a bureaucratic administrative nightmare in the end will result in eventually putting small business physicians and software providers out of work, and ultimately increase costs due to government fees and costs which will be tacked on to the patients bills in order utilize that huge mistake-in-the-making system to store and transfer patient records, even if the correct records get transferred. Just imagine the potential lawsuits for unauthorized, misused or incorrect information.
Maybe what we need to do here is step back a moment and look at the legal and "long view."
What a novel idea.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
