Democrats decry Walker’s decision on health care
November 16, 2012 at 6:00 pm in Duluth News Tribune
MADISON Gov. Scott Walker’s decision to hand off creation of an online marketplace to connect Wisconsin consumers with private health insurance providers riled Democrats and others who hoped he would support a state-run exchange despite his opposition to the federal law.
Continue Reading
To say the US’s health care system is broken would be an understatement. Doctor and corporate owned clinics and hospitals known as “providers” increase their prices and profits whenever and however they want in the name of better care. Unfortunately the US is middle of the pack in resulting health outcomes when compared with other countries around the world. Ask your doctor if that new MRI machine or hospital wing with marble floors, big screen TVs and fancy dining areas will result in better health for patients or just higher rates that get paid by you via higher copays and taxes. C’mon docs let’s take the greed out of health care and get back to caring for patients.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
55 
11
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
26 
39
Stupid.
Like or Dislike:
15 
9
Private insurance in this country has 20% operating costs plus profits on top of that. Medicare has 3% operating costs and no profits. Seems to me the government run system is ridiculously more efficient. How can this be argued? Trust me people that qualify for medicare love their healthcare system.
The incentive in our private insurance system is to deny care and angle for profit. There are countries, such as Germany, that have private health insurance, but it is non-profit for the care they provide via the universal healthcare system. The incentive then is for preventive care and keeping people healthy which reduces cost. The companies can then offer for profit supplemental insurance for elective procedures not covered by the universal healthcare system. I don’t know how anybody could tell me this is not a far superior system than ours.
Everybody in Germany is covered for about half the cost we spend while leaving 45 million people uncovered.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
37 
13
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike:
21 
33
That’s such a load. Your augment sounds like just another “America is better than everyone else” rant with no evidence whatsoever. The fact is, you can get the exact same procedure or treatment in other countries, and receive the exact same results, for a fraction of the cost we pay in the USA. And this isn’t some claim that I’m pulling out of my backside. I personally know people who have gotten lasik eye treatment abroad for less than half the price it costs in the US; dermatology treatment for less than 1/4 the cost. And they worked just fine. The problem is the oh-so sacred profit motive. Personally, I went into St. Lukes because I thought I had an ear infection, had a guy shine a light in my ear, tell me I didn’t have one, and I got a $180 bill for it. And it would have cost $360 if I didn’t have private insurance (such a great scheme that is). The same diagnosis would have probably been $10 or $20, if not free, in a different country.
Not only is treatment outside of America less expensive, it’s more personal too. You don’t get juggled between the receptionist, the nurse, the doctor, the specialist, the insurance handler, and finally the bill collector. It’s absurd here! I can only suppose that Americans have had it so good for so long that many people, particularly of older generations, are failing to notice all the excrement piling up in their own back yards. There are so many things that we just consider normal, like it’s “a given” to anticipate this type of routine, and it goes far beyond the medical field.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
37 
19
Several years back I was referred to a surgeon to discuss having a cyst removed from my knee. The surgeon walked in to the room without so much as a hello, asked where the cyst was, felt it, said “I won’t remove it. It’ll probably cause more pain than just leaving it.” and walked out. He didn’t even sit down.
My appointment was at 8:40. He walked in the room at 8:41. By 8:42 I was in the elevator and by 8:44 I was sitting in my car. These times are not exagerated.
A month later I received a bill in the mail for his “surgical consultation.”
$250
There is absolutely no way to justify that nonsense. This country’s healthcare system sucks.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
40 
2
One has to ask, who is that $250 going to? Are doctors really paid that much, or are there so many middlemen now that this is the base rate for stepping into a hospital? It’s a shame that so many people in this country view healthcare as an industry rather than a basic service like schools, fire, and police. This is what 40 years of pro-privatization policies have brought us. And unlike the local government, you don’t have the right to know how much money local hospital workers are making. That’s why it’s so much easier to blame the government, because at least you can have access to all the information.
Again, this is what happens when all these taxes, fines, and fees are “a given”. So many people assume that the standard of living associated with constant 4-5% annual growth is sustainable… and for a few people it is. But for more and more people it’s unaffordable, and our institutions should reflect this. And while “getting the government out of the way” as some suggest is actually not a bad idea in certain areas, like development, where conforming to all the standards, laws, codes, and regulations can cost more than the building itself, the government should definitely be “getting in the way” to assist more people with skyrocketing healthcare and higher education costs. This is not a black and white world.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
25 
8
I should add that, when I say government should lay off all the development regulations, the only reason most of these regulations exist is to ultimately serve the banks. The major banks believe that every plat and parcel of property really belongs to them, and you just happen to be living there for now. But if you want to build a narrow driveway, or decide that you don’t need a parking spot, the government will stop you – all to make it easier for the banks. The deck is stacked against the people in countless ways. Socialism for them, capitalism for us. Economist Gerald Celente has said, “State controlled capitalism is fascism.”
Like or Dislike:
18 
6
Vespa – spoken like a person who has been fortunate enough to only use our far superior medical system for not much more than a skin rash. The loopholes in medical coverage required to enjoy our far superior medical system practically ensures that any one who suffers from a major illness will be on the way to backruptcy. If are are able to recover physically and fiscally then (pre-Obamacare) no one would ensure the pre-existing condition, making a re-occurance another fiscal and physical killer. I think it would more fair to say our medical system is far superior for the majority that are fortunate enough to not have to rely on it fo routine care and basic outpatient care. For the rest our health care system is broken beyond repair. This is where your dreaded government has been forced to step in.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
25 
10
R.Vespa what you state is simply not true. We rank 38th in healthcare in the world. We are the only industrialized democracy without universal coverage and it shows in our wellness statistics. Look them up. We are dead last among industrialized democracies in healthcare outcomes. There is no more waiting for top care in most of these countries. Some of the best care in the world is available here, if you have the money.
I will never understand why in the US it is considered normal for the government to provide for the health of our roads, but not the health of our people.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
24 
7
Vespa if you cannot pay for care you do not get comprehensive healthcare. What you get is emergency room care. An entirely different animal. Been quite documented the failures of that set up.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
19 
4
All good points, even the tail end of Vespa’s, healthcare is free on welfare. Another reason we need to re-structure welfare, it’s free to the recipients but passed on to the rest of us. I can assure you the docs aren’t losing any money. Check out your cell bill too, one of those fees pays for all these “free” phones you can only get with proof you have an EBT card. What a country we live in.
Hot debate. What do you think?
11 
20
We need to stop worrying about the pittance the poor get in this country and cast our gaze in the opposite direction. The greedy lobbyists for Big Pharma, the AMA and the Insurance Industry are the problem. Profit over actual healthcare results. For example the Canadians pay 20-40 cents on the dollar we pay for US made drugs because their government does the negotiating for the populous. Why aren’t we doing the same. Because our elected officials have an agenda other the our well being.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
24 
7
I agree with middleman. The problem isn’t that welfare exists. The problem is all the reasons people end up on welfare. You can’t have a system of vulture capitalism, declining wages for most people, and then say you’re going to cut the safety nets too. That is a HUGE upward redistribution of wealth, and it kicks way too many people to the curb. The best healthcare in the world is not worth it if nobody can afford it. If anything, we should expand medicare and other social programs to the working people who have been victimized by the private financial games at play.
Hot debate. What do you think?
22 
9
We could just let poor people die in the streets. If that was me it would be time for war.
Like or Dislike:
12 
8
Hey middle, it’s not the pittance of the poor, it’s the extravagance of the lazy. http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/current_spending, check out that site, see where welfare programs rank in government spending. Lazy 20-30 year old welfare recipients with 5 kids need to get a job! I’m not talking about your 70 year old aunt Gerty that truly needs the help. Look at the expense now, how are my kids going to take care of existing recipients 5 kids’s kids, that’s exactly what is going to happen. It’s out of hand and you liberals just can not grasp that, it is far past a safety net for the poor it is ridiculous. Merv, I don’t disagree, but at least the CEOs are at work while stealing from us.
Hot debate. What do you think?
17 
16
Have you actually drilled down into the numbers? Latest budget shows $451.9 billion counted as welfare. What does that include (according to that web page):
$111.6 billion towards foodstamps and child nutrition programs
$104.5 billion towards the unemployment trust fund
$59.6 billion towards housing assistance of various types
$52.2 billion towards payments for Earned Income Tax Credits that go to working poor families with kids
$51.6 billion for the Supplemental Security Income program which goes to the blind, disabled and aged people with little to no income
$22.5 billion towards payments for the Child Tax Credit
$8.3 billion of worker’s benefits, much of which goes towards providing social security like benefits for railroad workers (congress separated them many years back)
which is already $410.3 billion of the overall total.
So, what do you cut? I am intrigued. I hear silly arguments about these programs. For example, Hannity asks “Foodstamps, shouldn’t these people work?” Well yeah, except that half of the people getting foodstamps are in households where someone works. 47% of the recipients of foodstamps are children. Another 8% are elderly. Similar arguments apply to housing assistance. The EIC credits and Child Tax Credits go only to working families (and the Republicans especially love these programs). The unemployment number includes money taken in to deal with unemployment and the differential (whether it is taking in more than it pays out or less) varies with our unemployment numbers overall. Providing basic assistance for the blind, disabled, etc. seems like a no-brainer. So, what do you cut??
Like or Dislike:
17 
9
Who’s got 5 kids and isn’t working? Maybe the cost of childcare is more than the wages that person could earn at any job around here. But that’s an economic problem. You want to talk about the government deficit? Why not start with the 50 TRILLION dollar, unregulated, untaxed financial derivatives market? That could certainly make a dent in the deficit… it could certainly help people with children pay for childcare so they can find worthwhile jobs.
But you don’t focus on that. You’re ignorant to these kind of industries, because you don’t bother to research them. So you find the easiest target to blame, and you place all your energy on that. THAT’S what I call lazy. If people like yourself are going to talk like big politically-informed individuals, then you need to start looking much further down the rabbit hole. Otherwise, this country is going to be plundered into bankruptcy, and you’ll be stuck blaming the person who got the best deal at Goodwill.
Like or Dislike:
14 
8
Merv, have you ever seen Goodwill Hunting? You’re the guy at the bar Will schools in front of his buddies. Regurgitating everything you read on your liberal rags and then spewing it like it’s yours. What ya need to do is get your butt off the Internet and go get yourself some real life experience, that’ll help you arguments exponentially. And Rick, that is a wonderful, liberal approach to the problem, no matter how astronomical the numbers are, we are going to stay the course, we need to provide for everyone, how dare we expect them to contribute to their own survival? What do you cut? Eliminate all the people abusing the system and you’ve made a heck of a dent.
Like or Dislike:
12 
12
So, there’s the problem. You can’t pick something to cut since you agree with it by and large. So, instead you focus on the idea that there is massive amounts of waste. I concede there is waste. President Reagan created the idea of the “welfare queen” out of several individuals he pulled together to suggest that there are many such individuals. Various folks have investigated these sorts of claims over the years. For example, Ezra Klein looks at foodstamps and notes that the program has a less than 4% error rate. For overpayment it is below 3% (so some of the errors are in underpayment). Medicare and Medicaid report similarly low rates. With administrative costs of less than 2%, we literally could not hire a company to do it as well, since government contracts guarantee 8% profits for the contractor (leaving aside that many contractors further pad their bills).
Don’t get me wrong, if you have some magical way of finding abuse, I am sure the GAO would love to hear it. But I suspect you have just been listening to the conservative entertainment complex, which repeats misstatements about “welfare” programs (its odd, these same conservatives used to make fun of the Russian people’s willingness to go along with the misinformation of the USSR news service Pravda (the truth) but they follow Fox which does the same exact thing and somehow think they are more patriotic).
I also find it amusing that so many conservatives focus on “welfare” to the poor as their way of solving the budget problems of the country. So, lets see, $200 billion of the stuff your site labels welfare, the Earned Income Tax Credit, the Child Care Tax Credit, Unemployment Insurance, Retirement Benefits for railroad workers are things that the conservatives like or are paid directly by payroll taxes (and so aren’t spending in a sense). That leaves $250 billion that might, just might be real welfare for the poor (the number is really nearer $100 billion but why quibble?). Lets say we cut that by 50% across the board. So, you are saving $125 billion a year. Less than 10% of the current deficit. Actually if I gave you the whole thing, we would be at 20% of the deficit, with a huge increase in crime, homelessness, and general poverty that we would pay for in other ways (dealing with crime, etc.)
How about a progressive’s approach to fixing the budget:
1. Eliminate the cap on payroll taxes, raises $100 billion a year and completely closes the gap for social security, medicare, medicaid and other income insurance programs for at least the next 75 years (as far as the congressional research office will project). We eliminate those programs from the discussion.
2. Cut the defense department. Depending on how you count it, we spend $750 billion to $1 trillion of our $3.6 trillion budget on defense. More than the next 26 countries in the world combined. And we are friendly relations with all but one of those countries. 5% a year every year for say 5 years gets us down to less than 75% of that number. $200 billion in savings.
3. Roll back the Bush tax cuts for everyone making more than $250K (and possibly institute a higher rate for income over $10 million). Raises $50-100 billion a year. I guess you could also look at Governor Romney’s notion of capping itemized deductions as a stand in for this idea, but that would actually hammer charitable giving. I guess you pick your poison.
4. Eliminate various tax cuts/credits not needed anymore (farm subsidies, energy subsidies to many companies). Depending on how tough you get on the big companies, potentially huge savings here. If you paired it with a general cut in business taxes to say 20% and offered forgiveness for funds currently held overseas you might even make people happy. Hard to estimate how much savings here, but potentially enough to finish off balancing the budget. For example, GE in 2010 did actually pay roughly 11% of its income in taxes (an off year for them, much higher than in some past years). This despite a reported 39% business tax rate.
To be honest, I actually favor a Rick Perry sort of “flat” tax system with a government sales tax. Go to one rate for income (which becomes everything, including capital gains) and one for business incomes for corporation with a higher per person deduction and a similar business deduction. So, for example, have a 20% rate but give every person a personal $5K deduction per person in a family (so a family of four has to make $20K before paying taxes and pays 20% only on the amount above $20K). Do something similar for business income. Then the sales tax gives a slight drag to spending and encourages saving. Not sure how to keep such a system unpolluted by giveaways to the rich and big businesses (who lobby for them), so even if we got it, the system would likely be back to the one we have now pretty quickly.
Like or Dislike:
11 
2
Brian~ It’s pretty hypocritical that you lecture Merv he need’s real life experience instead of just touting liberal statistics…but you don’t even attempt to refute his facts, and instead for rebuttal you do nothing but toss out a bunch of baseless stereotypes….and a bunch of clueless conservative rhetoric that has no basis in reality…am not sure could possibly be more hypocritical.
You would be the one that need’s life experiences instead of just touting garbage fed by the reichwing. Mitt’s infamous 47% getting assistance and just lazy living off the system BS…almost half of that 47% are senior citizens that don’t have to pay federal income tax and worked and paid into it their whole life’s. Over half of what you have left are people that are working but because don’t make enough to get above poverty line don’t have to pay taxes. Then you have kids, teenagers and college students working part time that count as tax payers and file, but don’t make enough to pay federal income tax. Then there’s the disabled who would love to work and just can’t, then those that due to economy would absolutely love to work but can’t get a job….
The shocker for conservatives because clueless about the poor…the majority of the homeless have jobs!! To which most conservatives say then why are they homeless? Too stupid to grasp the concept that if you’re only working part time at Mc Donald’s as example that you can’t afford a place to live …SMH!
In fact the biggest bunch of bull pushed by and believed by conervatives is that the poor and disabled are just lazy and don’t want to work and are happy with their little stipend keeping them down in poverty struggling month to month and most of the times week to week.
You are the one that needs to get out into reality. Only a clueless conservative thinks that the wealthy are worth protecting but our children, disabled and even our own Veterans are NOT. Only a clueless conservative says we need to cut money by taking it from those with the least, those in crises that need help and those who can’t afford to lose anything while defending those with the most from even paying a fair share.
Repubs taken the insane position to defend the wealthy by claiming Corporations are people too…well guess the poor are Americans too and clearly conservatives can’t seem to grasp that rudimentary concept either.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0