Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
StumbleLetter to the editor:
Absent from health care debate: Perspective
Tuesday, Sept. 1, 2009 | 2:04 a.m.
Why hasn’t there been a public discussion about the cost savings that would be achieved by consolidating existing government-funded programs such as SCHIP, Medicaid, CHAMPS, the VA and even Medicare?
It seems that those who receive health insurance coverage from employers don’t really understand how much their coverage costs. Why hasn’t Congress mandated that the total premium cost be shown as wages on every pay stub but not taxed? This seems to be a simple solution to a simple cost awareness problem.
The lack of adequate health care for all is not just about morality — it is also about the total cost to society, both direct and indirect. Our society invests a great deal of manpower and money to educate our citizens and make them productive. Individuals who do not receive proper health care because it isn’t available die prematurely or become disabled. This financial and personal loss is an inconvenient truth that does not show up in our health care debate. Why not?
Those who have thoroughly examined the industrialized countries that provide all-inclusive public health care know that they made the choice to first meet the health needs of citizens. Then they addressed the cost issue. Why is it that in our country, a country that now spends far more than any other on health care, we are focusing mainly on the cost aspect first? Clearly the solution isn’t the money; we have more than almost everyone else. It is now about health care and who should or shouldn’t get it. At our current rate of cost increase, most Americans will soon be without decent coverage and/or pay raises anyway, so it is clear that we need a significant change to health care delivery and not just another tweak.
Ask your congressional representative: Why and when?
Discussion: comments so far…
Comments are moderated by Las Vegas Sun editors. Our goal is not to limit the discussion, but rather to elevate it. Comments should be relevant and contain no abusive language. Comments that are off-topic, vulgar, profane or include personal attacks will be removed. Full comments policy. Additionally, we now display comments from trusted commenters by default. Those wishing to become a trusted commenter need to verify their identity or sign in with Facebook Connect to tie their Facebook account to their Las Vegas Sun account. For more on this change, read our story about how it works and why we did it.
Only trusted comments are displayed on this page. Untrusted comments have expired from this story.
No trusted comments have been posted.
Post a comment
Most Popular
- Viewed
- Discussed
- E-mailed
- Photos: Olivia Culpo, 20, of Rhode Island is crowned 2012 Miss USA at Planet Hollywood
- US Navy hopes stealth ship answers a rising China
- Photos: Derek Hough celebrates 27th birthday at Tabu Ultra Lounge
- Learning about Electric Daisy Carnival fans will help Las Vegas court them
- On the horizon: A quick look at projects poised to shape downtown
Everything Under the Sun
Blogs
The Kats Report
Joe Pesci remembers his own honeymoon in Vegas -- meeting the Rat Pack
Las Vegas Philharmonic says search for new music director to begin 'immediately' (1 Comment)
With Shenandoah project stalled, Wayne Newton hits back legally (7 Comments)
Where does a Playmate play when she turns 21? Vegas! (3 Comments)
Ice Ice Billy
The road to six-toed cats and Mayor Bubba
The Kats Report
David Itkin tells L.V. Philharmonic officials he's on his way out (14 Comments)
Diamond Dave sells it well as Van Halen pours out the power at MGM Grand (2 Comments)
- Locally owned and independent since 1950; Winner of the Pulitzer Prize for Public Service, best news website in the nation & DuPont Award for broadcast journalism
why the focus on money???
well that is what our retarded republican friends do...
that is all that they do...
it is about greed...
it is about arrogance...
it is about feeling superior...
they have lost all sense of community..
they would rather have an extra few thousand in their pocket...
than help a poor innocent child with medical problems...
sad...
truly sad...
Birdiedreamin: That poor innocent child with medical problems has and always will get treatment. Your all about arrogance like your freind Harry
You cannot consolidate these programs. They all have their own bureaucracy and they control their kingdoms. Consolidation could cost jobs and power. We know a government program never dies, it just grows and grows.
If the government is such a good provider of health care why don't they take care of those they have already promised the moon. The medicaid program is a farce. It pays next to nothing and forces hospitals to charge everyone else more to make up for it.
The VA cannot even clean its equipment and exposes thousands to HIV and HepC.
Fix what you have before you take on more.
Hey Birdie the focus on money is that those of us that worked hard and earned it, do want to give it to you slackers who think the world owes you. Go work hard for your own instead of sharing the wealth like your "leader" wants to do. Get it skippy???
Hey Birdie the focus on money is that those of us that worked hard and earned it, do NOT want to give it to you slackers who think the world owes you. Go work hard for your own instead of sharing the wealth like your "leader" wants to do. Get it skippy???
Hey Birdie, have you cleaned your cage lately? Looks like you are getting quite a build up there...
I just had to say it since everyone else here is bashing the bird...
Many who want to reform health care want socialized medicine in America. If the government option is adopted then it will not be long before all businesses stop providing insurance and allow their employees to sign up for that option.
Few who support this want to talk about the cost. When they do, some have suggested it will SAVE money. But, what is the cost? As best I can tell....
U.S. Health care in 2007 consumed about 16% of the GDP or about 2.214 trillion dollars.
In my view, every dollar taken out of the economy and given to the government is a dollar that came out of the pocket of a U.S. taxpayer.
Yes, some of that tax revenue came from business, corporations, etc. but at the end of the day it was all money that could have been in the hands of the tax paying public if it hadn't been siphoned off.
With universal coverage the taxpayers would have to absorb 2.214 trillion dollars in health care expenses. If you take out the 447 billion for Medicare and the 345.7 billion for Medicaid (which we are already paying) then you are left with 1.412 trillion that has to be made up.
There were only a total of 90.53 million tax returns filled last year by earners that paid taxes. If you count those filling jointly there were a total of 110.53 million total tax payers (to support the U.S. population which is just above 300 million).
So now it is easy. The burden of universal coverage is $1.412 trillion/110.53 million tax payers = $12,774.81 per taxpayer more than you are paying now ($25,549.62 for those filling jointly). That's $1,064.50/month ($2,129.00/month for couples filing jointly).
Recently I spotted this on another website:
You didn't get mad when the Supreme Court stopped a legal recount and appointed a President.
You didn't get mad when Cheney allowed Energy company officials to dictate energy policy.
You didn't get mad when a covert CIA operative got outed.
You didn't get mad when the Patriot Act got passed.
You didn't get mad when we illegally invaded a country that posed no threat to us.
You didn't get mad when we spent over 600 billion (and counting) on said illegal war.
You didn't get mad when over 10 billion dollars just disappeared in Iraq.
You didn't get mad when you saw the Abu Grahib photos.
You didn't get mad when you found out we were torturing people.
You didn't get mad when the government was illegally wiretapping Americans.
You didn't get mad when we didn't catch Bin Laden.
You didn't get mad when you saw the horrible conditions at Walter Reed.
You didn't get mad when we let a major US city drown.
You didn't get mad when the deficit hit the trillion dollar mark.
You finally got mad when the government decided that people in America deserved the right to see a doctor if they are sick.
The same "loons" spout their venom on the Sun Opinion pages day in, day out? What is their beef with healthcare reform?
Death Panels ? -- The authorization for end of life consultation has been in existence for decades. Do you think end of life consultancy is different with private insurance companies? Ask your physician if he or she doesn't have the same reimbursement program provided by their private insurance contract. Do the research!
Government take over? -- ("Don't touch my Medicare! Cause I don't want no government program.") Believe it or not, government works. The CDC, the NIH, state health departments. Should we get rid of them too? Not to mention Social Security, the VA, fire departments, police departments and yes, Medicare!
We have to protect the private insurance companies so they can stay competitive !? - Really? And they will of course never raise rates, right? When have companies that can collude on pricing ever been competitive? You want insurance companies to act responsibly? Guarantee all of them a non-profit return at a fixed percentage. But not one that is 38%. It is about providing healthcare, isn't it?
Paying for abortions? - Existing law -- a law I do not agree with -- prohibits public funding of abortions -- even when some imbecile rapes his eleven year old daughter and she is forced to bring the baby to term. It's not there. Period.
Illegal immigrants get healthcare? Another -- it's not in there. But even George W. knew that anyone, ANYONE, can walk into an emergency room and get medical treatment at 4 to ten times the cost what it otherwise would be. The mad will stay mad -- but in truth, they are just that -- mad, not angry.
questions on Health Care Reform:
1) Will coverage and cost be the same for individuals who smoke, excessive drinking, over eating, eating unhealthy foods, drug use and no exercise?
2) What about individuals not using helmets, seat belts or other safety gear?
3) How about sexually risky behavior? Should HIV and STDs be covered?
4) What about "elective" surgery? Some say some forms of plastic surgery is part of the cure. Who decides?
5) What about couples attempting to get pregnant? Using artificial methods? With know high risk diseases? Or already having premature babies?
Where do we draw the line and have individuals responsible?
That's part of the problem...where do you stop? Who determines what is considered a risk or a normal variant? What if you have multiple medical problems? Are you then too risky for anything???
Frankly, I would rather put my hands in the care of a physician who has met with me face-to-face than leave it in the hands of some "health care czar" who has no idea who I am or even cares for that matter.
Hey!!! we are being called "loons" again...
And we didn't get mad when we read and listened to all the crap and bashing by the extremes of both political parties.
We got mad when politicians failed those citizens who they represent by passing legislation that they did not write. Legislation that they did not read. Legislation that they had no way of paying for. And finally, we got mad when we were told by our politicians not to question or challenge them on their actions or lack of action.
Sinloy Charlie...
Thanks Indythinker for seeing the problem the same way I do and not break into the extreme ranting of some of the individuals that post here.
Hate:
You didn't see what I wrote on another page because I looked up all that data on my own. It is all readily available on the internet from government websites.
If in fact others are publishing the same numbers then"..
There you go".
I guess that's the cost.
And, Hate, I didn't say I was mad. You sound mad. I just provided the information. The cost is not fear mongering, hate based, etc. The cost is the cost.
Address the cost issue. Who supports that plan at that cost?
Hate, did you get mad when a president used an intern as a humidor?
ynotjohn, LarryVegas, indythinker:
Please reread the post by Hatethehypocrisy above and try to focus on why you believe the lies and idiotic rants about the current healthcare reform proposals, versus why you believed 8 years of lies and hypocrisy, not to mention the economic deficits of the Bush administration.
It would be hard to screen out people who have bad habits".
But what about this"
What would you do with people who can afford insurance except they spend their money on their bad habits? Say a person smokes 3 packs per day at 450$/month and refuses to buy health insurance instead allowing the taxpayers to pick up the tab??
Would that be acceptable? Patients on Medicaid are means tested. Should there be something similar for universal coverage?
Gordon, I do not have a clue what the cat hair you are ranting about. Are you saying that we should blame Bush for everything that happens negatively for the next 3 1/2 years?
GordonShumway:
I don't believe either the left or the right. The left believes this reform with be utopia but don't have answers for my questions below or for the VA's poor track record or why more doctors are refusing Medicare patients yet Obama believes he can get cost savings by reducing payments. I also don't believe the system we currently have is efficient as I briefly worked for a couple of months for one of the BC/BS entities and I also was without health insurance after 18 months of COBRA and a pre-existing condition caused by genetics.
==============================================
questions on Health Care Reform:
1) Will coverage and cost be the same for individuals who smoke, excessive drinking, over eating, eating unhealthy foods, drug use and no exercise?
2) What about individuals not using helmets, seat belts or other safety gear?
3) How about sexually risky behavior? Should HIV and STDs be covered?
4) What about "elective" surgery? Some say some forms of plastic surgery is part of the cure. Who decides?
5) What about couples attempting to get pregnant? Using artificial methods? With know high risk diseases? Or already having premature babies?
Where do we draw the line and have individuals responsible?
I wonder why the sun didn't name the letter writer?
Gordon... once again... you've assumed that all Republican's who voted for Bush agreed with his policies. Frankly, much of what he did I found annoying from caving into the Democrat's, illegal immigration, trying to create a North American Union... and much more. Personally, I found it phenomenally annoying that the guy reinvented the dictionary each and every time he opened his mouth. LOL.
What I can tell you that I believe what he did in the DAYS following 9/11 kept America safe. His decision to halt air traffic was commendable. I have never supported his decision to invade Iraq although a universe without Saddam Hussein cannot possibly be a bad thing...I also believe 100% that the world might be a nicer place without Afganistan in it's entirety. (Read up on Afganistan... and how women and children are treated). One could safely argue that it would be merciful for the W & C if the country were obliterated.
But, again, being a conservative doesn't mean you embrace your party on every issue, every day, every administration. I wish you would remember that the next time you call us out on our support of (or lack of) the Bush Administration.
Do all Democrat's blindly follow their leader without question? Ah, don't answer that...
Somehow I missed the OpEd in the WSJ by John Mackey, CEO of Whole Foods. He really stirred up a hornets nest. I totally agree with Mr. Mackey. Here are the first two paragraphs of Mr. Mackey's column:
Health Care Reform
"The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money"-Margaret Thatcher.
With a projected $1.8 trillion deficit for 2009, several trillions more in deficits projected over the next decade, and with both Medicare and Social Security entitlement spending about to ratchet up several notches over the next 15 years as Baby Boomers become eligible for both, we are rapidly running out of other people's money. These deficits are simply not sustainable and they are either going to result in unprecedented new taxes and inflation or they will bankrupt us.
For the entire column go to: http://www2.wholefoodsmarket.com/blogs/j...
What I find difficult to understand is how liberals and/or those who want to be more dependent on the government do not understand Margaret Thatcher's comment. Evidently there is a large portion of the U.S. population who believe they are entitled to receive the fruits of someone else s labor. How sad. However, these people did find the energy to go out and vote for Obama. Even more sad.