The Health Care PR Movement

Doug Ross rounds up the incredible PR effort being employed to sell Obama's Health Care agenda. I heard the clip of Obama claiming that his only rationale for forming a public insurance option was to encourage insurers to become more competitive. Really? Someone needs to ask him to name one area in which the Federal government has proved itself capable of accomplishing something more efficiently and cost effectively than the private sector. There is nothing he can name. Such a move is guaranteed to put private insurers out of business eventually. There can be no other ultimate design.

Government is structured to do only those things which the private sector can't or won't provide on a broad scale but require a single coordinated planning and operations approach at the top level. And it always accomplishes it by taxing the population to underwrite on going operations openly, or below the radar somehow.

Obama knows if he sets this course there will be no other outcome, whether it happens on his watch, or not. There will be no going back. Once the government subsidizes coverage for a portion of the population, it will never win political support for removing it. From there, the government will be positioned to manipulate the market until private insures simply can't or will refuse to compete.

When that happens, the government will be the single payer in the system Obama has acknowledged he prefers. Once there, it isn't even a hop, skip and jump to dictating everything from doctor incomes to acceptable treatment options and the various criteria they will establish to determine what you can or can't get in terms of care. It will all be justified by cost-effectiveness and "good government". Much of it will then be accomplished through regulations upon which you wll never get to vote.

What it will be is socialized medicine, clear and simple. He's only muddying the water now in hopes of keeping people confused, uncertain and undecided enough for him to pull it off. And he is in a hurry because he knows he must be. They were in a hurry on the stimulus, yet have still only managed to spend a small percentage of it as of now. What was the big rush? Simple, let's get it done before the people have a chance to think it through and figure it out.

His window could easily close in 2010 with just enough Republican gains in the Senate. If you believe that the private sector brings real value to our current system, no matter how problematic, or expensive it might be - you owe it to yourself and the generations that will come after you to do everything you can to oppose him on this. It will be your last chance.

Doug's same item from above is here.

Comments

[mark l.]

"I am not seeing any links to any website that is remotely impartial that support the numerous claims above that the U.S. health care system is better or even as good as those partly socialized systems in the rest of the industrialized world."

done.

{in europe}"The age-adjusted 5-year survival rates for all cancers combined was 47.3% for men and 55.8% for women, which is significantly lower than the estimates of 66.3% for men and 62.9% for women from the US Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program ( P http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/561737

this isn't a state secret. yes obama wants to save money on redundant testing, but to truly be like europeans we need to reduce testing altogether.

we currently have 16.4 million people who have been dx for cancer at one time in their life...

two ways to look at this...number of europeans who would be alive with US care, or number of americans dead, were they treated by europe.

guessing 50% male/ 50% female...
1.55 million men, 533k females--

over 2 million of the 16 million americans who were dx for cancer would not have survived had they been treated in europe.

[mark l.]

let me provide the narration for the above information of a possible commercial:

over 16 million americans have been diagnosed with cancer(start soft violin)

of those 16 million, over 10 million will go on to survive beyond five years. sadly, almost 6 million will not.

the president and democrats are seeking to replace our existing healthcare system with a european style system of care, for the sake of saving money.

what kind of results would we see?

2 million fewer fathers, mothers, grandparents, and (in a hushed voice) children.

(why do democrats want more children dead?)

[Nishner]

So what's your solution?

"Survey results suggest that levels of professional dissatisfaction among physicians have doubled in only a few decades. In 1973, less than 15 percent of several thousand practicing physicians reported any doubts that they had made the correct career choice. In contrast, surveys administered within the past 10 years have shown that 30 to 40 percent of practicing physicians would not choose to enter the medical profession if they were deciding on a career again, and an even higher percentage would not encourage their children to pursue a medical career."

http://www.emediawire.com/releases/2007/4/emw516822.htm

[Nishner]

The current system is unsustainable. Costs are going up way faster than inflation. Insurers keep increasing premiums and co-pays. More people are uninsured. But you've offered no solutions other than some amorphous appeal to increased competition.

And Obama's NOT PROPOSING SINGLE-PAYER.

*********
http://www.medpagetoday.com/Psychiatry/PainManagement/7103
IRVING, Tex., Oct. 25 -- Half of physicians from ages 50 to 65 are frustrated with their practices and plan to sharply cut back or abandon patient care within the next three years, according to a survey.

Fifty-two percent of these older physicians said they find medicine has become less satisfying over the past five years, according to a survey by Merritt Hawkins & Associates, a national physician search and consulting firm.

Only 10% of nearly 1,200 responding physicians said the practice of medicine is "very satisfying," down from 20% in earlier surveys.

[North Dallas Thirty]

"But you've offered no solutions other than some amorphous appeal to increased competition."

Sure we have.

First one: eliminate the barriers that prevent people from buying insurance in other states. Let there actually BE competition instead of the 50 different markets that we have today.

Second one: institute "loser pays" laws that require frivolous lawsuit filers to pay the costs of defending against their cases and ban contingency fees for trial lawyers.

Third one: cap Medicaid and S-CHIP eligibility at 200% of the poverty level and crack down on the $60 billion in fraud that is estimated to take place in Medicare every year.

Fourth one: pass a law disallowing the use of tax dollars in any "public plan" and requiring it to be supported solely by premiums.

Fifth one: pass a law specifically forbidding the Federal government from imposing any type of price cap on health insurance plans.

[North Dallas Thirty]

"Half of physicians from ages 50 to 65 are frustrated with their practices and plan to sharply cut back or abandon patient care within the next three years, according to a survey.

And of course, the solution for that is to cut their pay and make them government workers, as is in Obama's plan and is in Canada.

Isn't it amazing how Canadian physicians are streaming across the border precisely because they get MORE respect, MORE pay, and MORE prestige in our system?

[Nishner]

Nice plan - rearrange the deck chairs while the ship sinks. And then you'd probably end up with even more uninsured than today.

And you accuse me of being unrealistic.

[Nishner]

And you STILL haven't answered the most basic question of why we spend so much more than anyone else.

Please explain that.

[Google]

http://search.live.com
If you do not wish to receive similar messages please inform us on it by mail ban.site[dog]gmail.com