When in Rome

You know why I think a government-run healthcare plan will ultimately fail? Because politicians aren’t businessmen.

Politicians look at the current broken healthcare system in our country and instead of thinking like businessmen, they’re thinking like politicians. Instead of looking at the reasons the current system fails people (pre-existing conditions, immovable coverage [if you lose your job, you can’t take your coverage with you without paying crazy amounts of money for COBRA], increased rates when you get sick, etc.) and trying to improve them, they’re trying to put in place another already-broken system just to create competition. Because, as politicians, they sincerely think that’s the answer.

Let’s look at their perspective: Healthcare needs reform: more Americans need coverage, the costs have to come down. As the government, they feel it’s their responsibility to provide the kind of reform that will extend coverage and lower costs. So, they’ll create their own healthcare system and insurance plans! This will cause competition among the existing insurance companies (= lower costs) and be an affordable alternative to private plans (= extend coverage). Their system will solve everyone’s problems and eventually completely dismantle the original broken system. Mission accomplished. (Except for the small problem that their plan won’t actually lower costs and millions more Americans will lose coverage as their companies transition over to the government plan, but those are facts none of the politicians are addressing because they conflict with their selling points.)

But the fact of the matter is that insurance companies are in business to make money. That’s why they don’t provide coverage for pre-existing conditions, why your rates increase after receiving coverage. Oh, those villianous capitalists.

Granted, I’m no CEO or business owner. And I’m completely against the government forcing us to do anything. But the feds are intent on pushing some kind of legislation through whether we like it or not. So it seems to me that what they should be doing is creating incentives for insurance companies to: provide coverage for pre-existing conditions, to make their individual plans more affordable and portable so if people lose their jobs they don’t go broke paying for COBRA, etc. Incentives that still keep the industry’s bottom line in mind but also solve the problems the whole system faces. Maybe incentives already exist and don’t work? I don’t really know. I’m still thinking through this whole politicians-trying-to-operate-as-businessmen idea.

The government option won’t make any money (I’m not aware of any government-run entities that make a profit; can anyone show me some?), it’ll continue to cost taxpayers (especially wealthier taxpayers) billions and trillions of dollars, and quality of care is completely going to suffer. If the government is going to compete with businesses in the private market, they need to actually think and operate like a business. When in Rome, Mr. Obama…



Filed under Uncategorized

3 responses to “When in Rome

  1. Sammy

    All obama will do is outsource anyways. Just think about the all the lobbyists flocking to Washington DC because of obama’s reckless over-spending of $2 TRILLION in just 6 months, which alone is increasing the National Debt by 20%.

    Politicians take people’s money and reward the large corporations, in this case companies in the health care industry, since they have the money to more effectively lobby politicians. In the end smaller businesses will be hurt.

    Politicians will only reward companies that will be in their best political interest. Honestly, when can you really trust politicians since they are basically professional liars, and being president just means you are the best liar of the time. Why not just give the money directly from the people to the companies and take politicians in government out of the equation?

    obama is going to recklessly spend TRILLIONS of tax payers’ money just to give insurance to about 25% of those who do not have it. Over 50% of people’s income go towards taxes, just imagine how many more people will afford health care insurance if their income is almost doubled because of dramatic tax cuts.

    Competition is what is needed. It lowers prices of products and services, along with developing new innovations. All of which will benefit consumers. You need to remember that monopolistic tendencies can also apply to government.

    The reason why the cost of insurance is high is because politicians in government mandate insurance companies to increase their premiums to pay for ridiculous things. In addition, politicians put up regulations so that Americans are not allowed to get insurance from another state and use the coverage in their own state. This reduces competition making it more expensive for people to get insurance. On top of that medical professionals are not allowed to freely practice their profession in any US state without taking a long and tedious licensing process. This again increases the cost of medical insurance.

    In the end, the problem with most economic issues is too much government intervention of the economy by politicians, who will only tend to do things for political self interest. Just like how obama nationalized GM to pander to its unions. Politicians can barely run government, yet people think they can run a multi-national auto manufacturing company?

    The solution is SMALLER government, LESS spending, and LOWER taxes.

  2. Anonymous Soldier

    What people seem to forget is that federal government already operates medicare and medicaid and what a miserable failure those programs are. How many doctors refuse to see medicare and medicaid patients? You’re right, maybe it’s time to elect a fiscally responsible businessman (or woman) into office.

    Today I was listening to Rush and I had an epiphany, under Obama”care” my tax dollars will be used to pay for abortions. Is anyone else opposed to our tax dollars being used to murder the babies of those who are too ignorant or lazy to abstain or use protection?

    p.s. I love your blog

  3. endapathy

    Sammy, I’m with you. Smaller gov’t, less spending…more responsibility and efficiency! I’m hoping some insurance big-wig steps up to the plate and says, “Hey look, insurance reform doesn’t solve all the problems, but I’m going to do what I can.” And then starts providing real solutions from within the industry, thus creating the competition it needs, without federal involvement.

    And Soldier, NO KIDDING. Obviously, I’m pro-life (brief side note, I disagree with the term “pro-choice.” It’s more like “anti-accountability.” Your choice is to be sexually active, a choice that comes with a wide range of consequences. In instances where the woman’s choice has been taken away [ie, rape, medical complications, etc.], she may have a true choice about abortion) but regardless of your stance on the issue, tax dollars should in no way fund something so controversial.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s