« For George W. Bush to get re-elected the electorate must find out that two thirds of all Vietnam Veterans hate John Kerry. | Main | REPORT FROM THE FRONT FINAL THOUGHTS – the Vietnam Veterans against Kerry demonstration at the DNC. »

August 04, 2004

Comments

Libertarianize the GOP

I read that a very significant portion of health care spending is due to trying to prolong by a few days the life of people who are terminally ill. This proposal would allow every family faced with a hard choice to make an unlimited claim on government resources in an even futile attempt to prevent the inevitable. All resources are limited and choices must be made. This idea attempts to ignore that reality.

posted by Libertarianize the GOP

flashbunny

Great. We could also have the treasury be the 'car buyer of last resort', where the government would pick up the tab for automobiles over $20,000.

What do you think car buyers and dealers would do when that was in place? Would people buy more $20,000 cars because the government is picking up the tab? Would dealers be more or less likely to recommend $20,000 cars, knowing that the car would be completely paid for and people would therefore be willing to spend more?

Sheesh, for pete's sake, think about things like this first.

posted by flashbunny

Always Right

The plan seems to basically involve using the treasury as the reinsuror of last resort. The insurance companies act just as they do now but on all claims uop to $20,000 or something like that. Once a claim reaches that threshold the goverment then pays the bills as reinsuror.
So the government, which has shown absolutely no ability to control costs, will open up its deep pockets so hospitals can perform all sorts of expensive and possibly unneccessary operations.....oh joy, that will really bring medical costs down....

posted by Always Right

cajungirl

You really want the govt paying the bill over a certain amount,,,and how long do you think it would be before the treasury gave out a/o rationing started to happen. And who to decide if you can spend over 20 grand or not? I don't know if I want a fed b ureaucrtat telling my doc or me what we can spend. And on what. And what they reimburse.

posted by cajungirl

USMCVIETVET

Cajungirl got it right.
Who is the government if not the taxpayer?
Kerry's "plan" is just another shift of private responsibility to the taxpayer, i.e. the middle class who pays all the other bills.
Besides, in my many years in the insurance business I can tell you that most of those without health insurance are unwilling to pay for any, regardless of the price, and either wait for charity or for good luck. We already have many programs for the truly poor and working poor.

posted by USMCVIETVET

Jeff Head

Yea...more social medicine proposals. They've worked so well in the socialist/communist/marxist nations [/sarcasm].
If the author/adherents to such a proposal think such abject socialism is the way to go and that it will work then they are either blind to, or ignorant of history and the meaning of true liberty and the free market.

posted by Jeff Head

Andrew

Why is this such a good idea? I prefer Newt's proposals: Medical Savings Accounts, perhaps funded by tax rebates/credits, with catastrophic coverage provided by the government after a certain large-dollar deduction incumbent on the healthcare consumer to pay first should anything catastrophic occur. I had an HSA-type plan for a brief period of time when I was working for a congressman, and I liked it a lot--except I didn't have true freedom to spend as much of my account money as I wanted on dental and optometry needs.

avidwriter

I do not like the idea of medical care for everyone that it might come out of my pockt. I am a Republican and I believe in libertarianism so I know it is wrong for unhealthy people to live especially if they are too sick to work and pay health insurance. Keeping them alive outside of when they can work is only raising my taxes.

The comments to this entry are closed.

BlogAds