$1,200: Part II


John responded to my last post with this:

Serious question: If you waited 2.5 months last time, how long would you wait if another 40 million people had the same tier of access to health care as you? And think about supply and demand when you consider your answer. If another 40 million people have access to the current supply of doctors and hospitals–what does that do to prices?

Which perfectly sums up way too much of Republican thought: Only so many of us can receive health insurance—so don’t invite any more people in. It’s the wealthy class on the Titanic saving the life boat seats for themselves, for fear of capsizing what’s theirs. Man, do I loathe/resent such a thought pattern. Heaven forbid all Americans—not merely the ones who can afford it—have some sort of reliable coverage. Heaven forbid …

Look, this is v-e-r-y imperfect. No question about it. But universal affordable health coverage is a necessity, and it must start somewhere—no matter how imperfectly that beginning is. Go back through history: The New Deal programs were a huge mess. Desegregation—especially in the deepest of the south—was horribly unorganized and seemingly hapless. Over and over, big-reach ideas were routinely pooh-poohed because of imperfect programs with sub-stellar kick-offs. But, again, this must start somewhere. It must.

*** Final thought: Someone wrote, “So, is your rampant support for Health Care reform about what’s best for the 46 million uninsured Americans, or is it about what’s best for the 4 Americans that live in your house?” Answer: B. I’m fortunate enough to be able to afford my coverage—though not easily. But what about allllllllllll the people in this country doing without? That’s exactly what this is about. Exactly.

7 thoughts on “$1,200: Part II”

  1. Jeff, what I love about your writing is that sometimes I disagree with you so wholeheartedly (religion), and other times, like this, I agree entirely. But you never fail to be passionate about what you write, and that’s why so many people are coming to this blog. Well done.

  2. Too many people listen to Rush Limbaugh.

    Rush Limbaugh doesn’t have a problem affording health care.

    Rush Limbaugh wants to maintain that lifestyle, thus Rush Limbaugh needs an audience. That audience diminishes the closer to the middle he gets. He’ll never get close to the middle…even if Obama says the sky is blue.

    You know, the worst part about this whole mess…reading Facebook updates from people that have no idea what they are talking about. Some people really should keep their traps shut on the subject…well, on any subject.

  3. Have never listened to Rush Limbaugh in my life. I’m actually a Democrat. Why is it partisan to actually think through the economics of health care?

    The government is currently subsidizing health care costs by not taxing employer-provided health care. By not taxing it, the majority aren’t forced to choose between health plans of any sort, be it insurance or a la carte services.

    That is exactly why health care plans are so expensive–the folks who receive untaxed health care over-use it since they only have to put up a small co-pay and don’t have to pay an overall monthly charge. This cheap overuse causes greater demand on the time of health care professionals, driving prices up.

    As a result, everyone has to pay more for access to the system. Hence, Jeff Pearlman pays $1200 a month in monthly charges for his family.

    There’s nothing Rush Limbaugh or partisan or political about it. It’s simple math–greater demand (because of subsidization) reduces supply which raises prices.

    More subsidization through universal health care only hurts the system and raises prices even more.

    The most efficient solution is to lower income taxes in proportion to the taxing of health care benefits. Then people can freely choose any health plan to their liking–whether it’s a private insurer or a la carte services or simply emergency catastrophic insurance only. That will reduce the overuse of the system and lower prices.

    Please don’t make it political. It may be a moral issue, but wouldn’t lowering prices by eliminating subsidies bring greater access to health care for everyone? After all, when there is less demand, there is more supply, and greater supply equals lower prices. It’s simple math not politics.

  4. “It’s simple math not politics.”

    It is? That’s what all those protestors are screaming about at the Town Hall meetings?

    Oh yeah, now I remember seeing the signs that said, “Don’t Tread on Me,” “Keep Your Hands out of my Healthcare,” “No Public Option.”

    Right, it’s all about math.

    I’d love to believe it’s all about the math, I really would. If it was all about the math, we’d hear opponents talking about a different solution. We’d hear constructive dialog coming from both sides of the aisle.

    Instead, you get the further poloarization of our nation. Instead, we get to watch our president’s nationalism questioned. Instead, anyone behind the plan is called a Socialist and even worse, a “N—– Lover.”

    That’s how I know it’s not about the math.

  5. Okay, okay, if Universal Health Care is going to be as successful as the Cash-for-CLunkers progam, well by golly, sign me up!!! LMFAO. What a joke…

  6. The problem with healthcare is a lack of supply. The demand is huge and we’ve taken no steps to increase supply. There are simple steps we could take that wouldn’t involve throwing ourselves helter skelter into a full blown single payer system that will be written by Big Pharma, the AMA and the Insurance companies. For instance – allow pharmacists to provide you with prescriptions for common ailments. They are trained to do that sort of stuff (and this is done in Europe already). Or allow RNs or some other medical professional to run clinics and provide simple testing/diagnosis. There aren’t enough doctors (which isn’t surprising the AMA is after all a guild, a guild’s goal is to limit competition and raise the guild members income). So you need more doctors or you need to allow other people to do some of the simpler tasks.

  7. Jeff,

    where do you get the “45 million uninsured”? Is this the administration passing this on as if we are to believe there really are 45 million uninsured? I bet it is closer to 10-15 after we factor out the ones who can pay somthing for insurance but refuse and also the illegals who fall into the 45 million. we are to completely change the best system in the world for a few.

Leave a Reply