I wish Thom would point out to these right-wing doctors that having "the finest health care in the world" is meaningless to those who are financially beyond its reach. And does anyone think that health insurance industry cares about the patient as much as the doctor claims to? What the doctor deems necessary is not necessarily compatible with what the insurance company considers so, and that incompatibility may cost the patient his or her house, or force them into bankruptcy. So in fact the insurance companies stand in the way of the patient receiving what the doctor considers "the finest health care in the world"--even primary care. The doctor is either a fool, naive or a hopeless ideologue to see this. If one digs deeper, you might even find his ultimate consideration is the money he may or may not lose from health care reform.
Yes, people who don't use their health coverage, or those who can afford the best coverage, are quite happy with their insurance, while those on government-run Medicare who need care the most are also generally happy with it. It is everyone in the middle who need what health care reform offers. And why do we need reform, again?
According to the National Coalition on Health Care, insurance coverage is decreasing while medical costs are going up. Over the last decade, employer-based insurance has more than doubled in cost. 62 percent of all bankruptcies are linked to health costs. 1.5 million families lose their homes every year in part due to health care bills. Workers wages stagnate or decrease because of the cost of health insurance to employers; in some lower wage jobs, employer-based premiums for coverage for a family nearly exceeds what they are paying a worker. Within the next ten years, health care costs will again double, particularly troubling if GDP stagnates.
This is the situation the good right-wing doctor wants to continue. Today, private insurance covers about 60 percent of medical costs for those privately insured. But increasingly higher premiums, higher deductibles, higher co-pays and higher out-of-pocket expense can be expected to change that equation for the worse. Higher deductibles are particularly insidious, since insurance companies will not honor coverage unless that is paid first. Meanwhile, as baby-boomers reach Medicare age, by 2018 it is expected that over half of people in this country will be covered by a "public option" by default. And it has to be paid for.
Some conservative say that spiraling costs are due to government interference in "market-oriented" solutions. These people have no idea of what they are talking about. If they are referring to the Republican-passed Plan D, they are certainly right about that, but they otherwise seem to be extraordinarily naive about everything else. The insurance and drug cabals are nothing more or less than trusts which have no interest in reigning in costs, because they hold all the cards; employers and individuals must pay, or else. The reality is that the health insurance industry has a stake in increasing costs, just as oil companies have a stake in high oil costs. For oil companies, the inevitability of running out of oil heightens their desire to get as much profit as they can now; for health insurance companies, the decreasing percentage of the population that is not Medicare eligible makes future profitability a concern.
A significant reason for those runaway costs, reported by Business Week, is that expensive new technology is driving up costs, although they may have only "modest" benefit to patients. Doctors who like to play with this new technology certainly do not have cost in mind (except how much they will be paid), or the patient's ability to pay. According to the story, "Price insensitivity on behalf of customers, lack of competition, technological complexity—they all add up to immense inflationary pressures on health-care costs." This medical price inflation accounts for 51 percent of the rise in medical costs. Although an older population's access to expensive technology that prolongs life has been a major contributor to costs, this does not explain the CBO's finding that more than half of all medical treatments have not been supported by evidence that they actually work; tried and true treatments which are less expensive have been set aside for questionable new toys. Furthermore, the Week notes that the cost of the "learning curve" to acquire proficiency in new technology has been prohibitive.
Health care reform means more than just enacting a public option, since it will be sooner rather than later that half of us will be on government-run Medicare. Reeling-in costs will require government "interference," because market-oriented "solutions" have proven to be disastrous for this country.
If we continue to offer terrible health care or no health care to the American people, we will kill off the American population. Who will be left to to fight to expand the American empire? Or, will the American government commence a nuclear war with a preemptive attack against our so-called enemies? Will the religious right be truly glorified with the end time and the rapture so near?
Our son works for a European company. He must have a full medical examination every two years as preventive health care. This full medical examination must be scheduled in Europe. His company believes that the American health care is too expensive. European health care is as good or even far better than American health care.
Our son also talks to various people in Europe and Asia and he has said that European and Asian companies are reluctant to open up offices in the U.S. because American health care is three and four times more expensive than European and Asian health care costs. The U.S. is losing jobs with foreign companies unwillingness to open offices in the U.S.