Sunday, September 23, 2012

Novermber Elections Issues: ObamaCare

Yes, the elections are coming up.  I have been inundated with news, but have not seen one article yet on what the election is about and whether or not it matters.  I should probably do a series on how I see it, so here is the first one.

The original health care problem in the US was a government imposed cap on the training of doctors and nurses, litigation gone wild, and billions of pages of federal regulations on health care.  Throw in an aging population with an increasing need for health care, and we were already experiencing the early symptoms of a house on fire.  Per the last century plus of leftists policies, every problem is an opportunity to stir people up and make things worse.  Admittedly, this formula wasn't restricted to leftists.  Didn't "Hope and Change" work for Lenin, Mao, Attila, Hitler, and countless others?  How many people voluntarily came to America not looking for "Hope and Change"?  Why not offer it up again?

ObamaCare simply mandated more free treatment and added reams of new regulations, but did exactly nothing about the long list of existing problems, thus, effectively throwing a large bomb into a burning house.  Obama is now content to watch what happens, while Romney wants to go in and take the bomb out before it goes off.  Romney won't succeed, however, because when he goes in the Democrats in congress and the judiciary will trip him up, kick him, and then the news media will laugh and howl and beat him up some more.  The bomb will finally go off and then Romney will go down in history as the one who deliberately planted the bomb and blew up the house.  Of course if Obama is reelected, the bomb still goes off and the Republicans in congress will be formally identified as the terrorists who planted it.  

Meanwhile, none of the parties seem inclined to do anything about the burning house.  But to be fair, the news media and intellectual elites will immediately condemn anyone who proposes a true fix to health care.  Someone will lose - at least temporarily - and this will form a pretext for screaming that the politician is ruthless and evil and doesn't have a heart for homeless kittens.  

My voting inclinations are to pull up a chair, get a drink, and watch the fireworks.  The problem is that I won't be able to find a safe distance.


10 comments:

Vid said...

I found a quite safe distance at 8000 miles away in the Philippines.

Oh wait, I have to come back after a year, don't I?

Inklings said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Looney said...

Vid, you might want to learn what you can about the Philippine health care system while you are there ... even if it means faking an illness. My last short hospital operation cost $10,000 and I was only in about 4 hours. For the same money, you can buy a round trip ticket to the Philippines, get your hospital care, and have a servant to take care of you for a month ... or at least that is what I can do in Taiwan. A significant operation in the US will wipe out a lifetime of savings.

Looney said...

Inklings, I have an optimistic side also ... that God is really running things and it is always for His good purposes.

Delirious said...

It doesn't matter who is elected, the Republicans will always be blamed. Don't you know that every ill we encounter today was Bush's fault? If you don't believe me, just ask a leftist. :P

Looney said...

Delirious, I have heard plenty of leftists blame Bush. The problem is that Bush was a Big Government Republican, which certainly is blameworthy, but neither the Republicans nor Democrats will blame Bush for pursuing leftist economic policies. Obamanomics is simply a more extreme version of Bushonomics.

Rummuser said...

I am not qualified to comment on the health care situation in the USA and shall refrain from doing so. I would however point out that no health care system anywhere in the world has worked so far to the satisfaction of everyone. Exceptions being places like the Arabian Emirates, Brunei and Saudi Arabia where the rulers handle the entire program.

Thr problem as I see it is that all such programs are thought up by Economists who really do not take into account all factors that go into any program and hope that broadly things will work out and they will tweak the programs to make them work - somewhat.

You should see what happens in India.http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2012-08-15/news/33216875_1_primary-care-primary-healthcare-higher-levels

Actual fact of the matter is that the individual has to pay for the privilege of medical expenses in one form or the other and the weaker sections of the society are usually in perpetual debt paying off such incurred expenses.

While the extended family orientation helps, the ground reality is to say the least abysmal.

I am yet to see any one system anywhere other than the monarchy paid for systems to work in a universally acceptable way.

Inklings said...

Dee Ice tells me it was him that commented under the name I left signed in, so I don't even know what was said, but he said it and he deleted it. :0)

Looney said...

Rummuser, the WHO lists India as spending 4.2% of GDP on health care. The US comes in at 15.2% by comparison ... 17.4% according to the OECD. Of course that is 2009 and we have been increasing at 10% per year, so we could be nearing 20% of GDP on health spending.

But I certainly agree with you that every system has its major problems.

Looney said...

Inklings, Dee Ice Hole wrote that he has full confidence in the future solvency of the US health care system.