Against the Wind — Bob Seger
On Friday, May 23, 2008, I went to the Ron Paul rally in San Diego. My main purpose in going was to meet the man himself and speak with his senior staff and see if I could get them interested in my manuscript. If I could get Ron Paul to co-author or write a forward to my book, it would sell more copies. He mentions the collapse of the housing bubble in his stump speeches as part of the problems with a lack of fiscal discipline and the use of a fiat currency through the Federal Reserve. I bought a copy of his book, The Revolution: A Manifesto, but I didn’t wait through the two-hour line to get it signed. It was a cool, blustery day in San Diego. It rained for the hour before the rally, but it did not deter about 500 people from attending and listening to his hour-long stump speech. What surprised me was the number of young people there. I did not expect his message to resonate with young people. He isn’t offering any handouts. Maybe fiscal responsibility will not die in our society.
If you have never been to a political rally, they are very interesting events. It is easy to get caught up in the excitement of the crowd and the energy of the environment. What was interesting about seeing Ron Paul speak was the sense of being part of something much larger. There was almost a religious aspect to the gathering. Everyone there was interested in the “big picture” ideas of small government, fiscal conservatism and a non-interventionist foreign policy. All of the issues that excited people about Newt Gingrich back in the early 90s are now living on through Ron Paul in the late 00s. It is unfortunate that Newt Gingrich’s “Revolution” was such a dismal failure as his own party abandoned all the priciples he championed as they came to power. Ron Paul is likely to be a lonely voice trying to rekindle the flame of this revolution as few in his own party have an credibility on this issue, and the other party doesn’t even try. For the foreseeable future, we will be running Against the Wind. I wish him well in his quest, and if he wants to use my manuscript to further his cause (and help me sell 10 times as many copies,) I am all for it.
What do you think? Is Ron Paul good for the country?
.
It seems like yesterday
But it was long ago
Janey was lovely, she was the queen of my nights
There in the darkness with the radio playlng low
And the secrets that we shared
The mountains that we moved
Caught like a wildfire out of control
Till there was nothing left to burn and nothing left to prove
And I remember what she said to me
How she swore that it never would end
I remember how she held me oh so tight
Wish I didnt know now what I didnt know then
Against the wind
We were runnin against the wind
We were young and strong, we were runnin
Against the wind
And the years rolled slowly past
And I found myself alone
Surrounded bv stranners I thought were my friends
I found myself further and further from my home
And I guess I lost my way
There were oh so many roads
I was living to run and running to live
Never worried about paying or even how much I owed
Moving eight miles a minute for months at a time
Breaking all of the rules that would bend
I began to find myself searchin
Searching for shelter again and again
Against the wind
A little something against the wind
I found myself seeking shelter against the wind
Well those drifters days are past me now
Ive got so much more to think about
Deadlines and commitments
What to leave in, what to leave out
Against the wind
Im still runnin against the wind
Well Im older now and still
Against the Wind — Bob Seger
Too often the mantra of small government and fiscal responsibility comes from individuals that believe that capitalism is the only answer to all of our problems. This is only true when there are no externalities (forces that impact the transaction, but are not part of the transaction) to the transaction. We have a big problem with health care in this country.
Ron Paul’s position will not fix the problem. The problem is that if you are very sick, you will be treated regardless of whether or not you have insurance. Because a significant portion of the population will feel that insurance is a bad deal (they haven’t been sick in the past, so why would they be sick in the future).
How do you convince a 20 year old to buy health insurance when they barely have enough money for food, rent, school and surfing? I’ve known these individuals in the past, and they have ended up in the emergency ward at Hoag at some point.
At some point the government will have to intervene. There are two externalities that are not being addressed: that some people will not see any value in health insurance and emergency rooms will treat everyone that walks in. It will either have to force people to buy health insurance, give them health insurance or prevent them from getting treatment.
Giving them Health insurance is not much different than giving them a full tax credit for the cost of health insurance. Changing the tax code is no different than a direct subsidy, they both result in changes to the amount of money collected or disbursed by the government.
We should force people to buy health insurance or post a significant bond. You can’t drive without insurance because you endanger others and without health insurance you endanger others as well.
For those who really can’t afford to buy insurance – we (they gov)can put together a low cost fund like Medicaid. The fact is that at least 50% of those uninsured ‘choose’ to be uninsured, and could afford it…
BD
“We should force people to buy health insurance” That’s advocating very intrusive governmental coercion, don’t you think? And who cares about health care when they’re in their 20’s? Hardly anyone. Why should healthy 20 year old be forced to buy health insurance if they don’t want to? This is not freedom you’re advocating here, it’s governmental oppression. Government has no business forcing anyone to buy anything.
BD: You put “gov[ernment]” and “low cost” in the same sentence. Funny stuff.
If you knew more about Ron Paul you’d realize that he believes that it is not the government’s role to provide health care, retirement, disability, unemployment, and all the other forms of social welfare.
Ron Paul is a strict constitutionalist. He doesn’t see our health care system as a problem, he sees it as THE problem.
The only reason you need insurance is because the health care system is broken and entirely unaffordable. Making the government subsidize everthing isn’t going to help. The government doesn’t earn money, the people do. How does the government pay for national health insurance? It takes the money from the people and redistributes it.
A recent trip to the ER to pull out a dislocated finger and get a 50 cent brace (crappy sheet metal and foam) cost me $500 without insurance. Why $500 bucks? It took the doctor 2 minutes to help me. As a small business owner I understand the overhead of running an operation like and ER, but the price was still staggering.
Switching gears, Ron Paul believes that it is the government’s responsiblity to NOT meddle in foreign affairs that got us into Korth Korea, South Vietnam, and Iraq. He is a non-interventionist–not an isolationist as many critics call him–who believes in free trade with all nations.
Long story short, the ideas that Ron Paul is preaching resonate loudly with the younger generation because we’re completely fed up with the way this country is being run into the ground and we can see our future going down the drain with it.
All of the other CNN political candidates say “Change change change change” yadda yadda to the point where its meaningless as they promise more of the same to make yet more Americans politically apathetic. Ron Paul on the other hand is so radically different in his thinking than McCain, Obama, and Hilary (yet not radical at all in my mind as his roots lie with the constitution and the founding fathers) that he brings a new, fresh dimension to the political spectrum and attract those who have been disillusioned and exiled from the mainstream media circus that focuses more intently on $400 haircuts than the war in Iraq which is costing us 2 trillion dollars and thousands of American lives.
Personally I’m glad he ran for president, and although he will not win, he is influencing the mindset of the younger generation.
BTW Irvine Renter I am about 1/2 of the way through his book. I went to borders a week ago and I bought the last one on the shelf. The store clerk that helped me find it told me that they are continually running out of stock…Looks like Ron Paul’s ideas are still popular even after he has been pushed aside by the news media as they focus all of their attention on the differences between two identical democrats.
Two main reasons why your ER visit cost $500.
1) They treat and can’t collect from uninsured
2) They can’t pass all the cost of treating the uninsured onto insurance companies and the government
So, you pay cash and actually end up paying more than any insurance carrier would even though the hospital cost is lower when they accept cash. Those are real externalities and something that’s not going to be fixed by the mantra that all government involvement is bad.
My point is that the government has no business providing health care. Universal health care wasn’t listed on the government’s list of limited job responsibilities.
Universal health care, comprehensive retirement benefits, and every other entitlement politicians can think up in exchange for votes all have to be paid for by somebody. It means high-jacking the next generation’s future. IMHO its a one way road to socialism.
Why doesn’t the government just take 100% of my income and give me back whatever it feels like at the end of the year?
And my point is that almost everybody can get some level of health care already. It’s a societal norm that if you are sick and go to the emergency room you will get treated for life threatening illnesses or injuries. We already pay for it in the form of higher insurance for everybody else…and extremely high fees for the underinsured. Fees that cause medical expenses to be the leading cause of bankruptcy.
You’re right on about Ron Paul. I think if more young people actually understood what he believes, they’d run like the wind from him. I think his main attraction for young people is his opposition to the war in Iraq.
Patently absurd. Remove the confiscatory taxes, and allow charities to pickup the tab.
Government involvement in health care is a recipe for bloat, mismanagement, and low quality (See HMOs).
MiniPlen should never be encouraged.
Doctor’s could work donated shifts, either for free, or fully funded by charity. When not faced with ludicrous taxes used to fund the endless stream of pointless initiatives and pet projects, Americans have proven to be among the most generous nations on the planet. Check out historical charitable contribution rates over the last two centuries. You see a direct and inverse relationship between taxes and charitable giving.
Exactly. People have very little money left to give to charities after the government has confiscated all of their discretionary $.
If the government doesn’t take the money, what makes you think the corporations won’t find a way? With the debtor society that we live in, don’t you think people will pay off their own debt before giving to charity.
Oh, wait, we tried this a few years ago…Bush enacted all those tax cuts and encouraged people to volunteer/give to charities. Yep, worked at really well.
I can get with Ron Paul about some things, but for me he jumps the shark at his foreign policy.
Still like him, though I would never vote for him in this world climate.
A vote for anybody else other than Ron Paul is a wasted vote.
Bring Back Bob Dornan
You’ve got to be kidding me.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Dornan
I agree fully with Ron Paul’s ideas on fiscal policy, and believe he and Bartlett of MD are the only politicians we have with sane ideas of fiscal policy and energy issues.
However, I would wish that Paul’s rationality on fiscal issues was coupled with rationality on other important issues, and unfortunately, on other matters he sounds insane.
I could no way, no how vote for a pro-creationist who believes in teaching this in our schools. We’re losing our lead in science and technology fast enough as it is without electing a religious nut.
Instead of vague generalizations, details should be provided otherwise we have no idea who the nut job is between him and you.
Direction on fiscal policy and energy issues is exactly what this country needs and should be darn near the top of the priority list. Do you know how long it takes to convince everyone to make significant changes? Four years is not a lot of time.
In addition, the guy is a strict constitutionalist and unlike so many people in our government, Paul is intelligent enough to keep his personal beliefs seperate from running the country.
If you think Paul’s agenda is to jump into the White House and push creationism down your throat, then I’d argue you are the nut job.
Ron Paul would argue for creationism or evolution in public schools. He would argue for privitisation of public schools.
Sorry, I meant to type “Ron Paul would NOT argue for creationism …
I heard Ron Paul doesn’t like parfait. Who would vote for a candidate that doesn’t like parfait. I mean, you ever heard of anybody that says “I don’t like parfait?” Of course not! What a nut job!
Seriously, its better to vote for a candidate who coincides with your viewpoints on big issues than parfait, or pro-creationist teachings in school.
Oh and by the way, pro-creation is not a science. Evolution is a science–it has facts, dates, data, and hypothesis. Pro-creation can and is tough in the humanities, where it belongs academically.
If anywhere. Perhaps religion or history of
philosophy.
The fact alone that Ron Paul is a creationist, tells me all I need to know about him. Clearly, his head is not on straight and there is no way I could support him. It isn’t a matter of whether or not he will push it into schools (actually, no it is important) but the fact that the guy has a set of completely ignorant beliefs. There has been far too much of this stuff pushed into our schools in recent years; it doesn’t need further encouragement.
I firmly believe that the ignorance (rise in blind belief) and lack of decent education in this country is part of the reason we find ourselves in the current housing bubble and its aftermath. When more people can learn to question the things they are signing we will be much better off.
Perhaps you forget that the men who wrote and signed the Declaration of Independence and fought to create this wonderful country were devout and outspoken Christians. I’m pretty sure they would be “Creationist’s”. Don’t try to call out one guy for his beliefs and conveniently forget about all of the other “intelligent” people who believe the same way.
I would venture to say the people of your so called “blind faith” would not be the majority of those who signed crazy contracts before reading them. Christian principles taught are those of fiscal responsiblity, giving money to charity and those less fortunate, and not to chase that million dollar home and a materialistic lifestyle. I would also say that it is interesting how those states in the Bible belt with conservative Christian majority population aren’t overspending in their state government and aren’t leading foreclosure lists.
It seems to me that liberal states with liberal governments are overspending and fiscally irresponsible. Just my observation.
That’s an intriguing observation, and I agree with you.
Ron Paul has the same “scientific” beliefs as our founding fathers. That inspires a lot of confidence. I guess nothing worthwhile was discovered in the past 200 years.
As anyone who’s bothered to look into the religious beliefs of the Founding Fathers, would know that they were not particularly religious for their time.
http://freethought.mbdojo.com/foundingfathers.html
http://www.britannica.com/blogs/2007/05/founders-and-faith-forum-overview/
They also went out of their way to separate church and state. Furthermore, they were men of science. I doubt they would be advocating to pound “creationist” ideas down the heads of our Kids. Some of them would have left the issue up to the Sates.
Thanks Noel, you are exactly right. I get very tired of people trying to claim that this country was founded as a Christian nation. It definitely was not. Besides, a lot has happened over the last 200 years. What one believes does not necessarily make it true.
The observation that it is the liberal states getting pounded is certainly not true; I get the impression that this country is just inherently full of stupid people.
I hate to say this (probably will be getting flamed by this comment) but government is run solely on the basis of forcing people to become indentured servants for the rest of their lives. Think about it…the minute someone turns 18, credit card companies are all over that person to get him/her in debt. Once he/she is in debt, she’s in this cycle of money slavery for the rest of his/her life. Government is not set up to help people but rather force people to help it run for the rest of its, hopefully, eternal life…..though…..you guessed it…..TAX!!!!
The only way around this is becoming the other (i.e. receiving) end of this terrible cycle. However, in order to do so, you need a huge amount of equity so that you will become the creditor instead of the debtor.
How? That’s the million dollar question.
Let me provide some examples of why everyone is an indentured servants:
1. Health insurance – I’ve seen tooooooo many people talked about lack of this. Shoot, you can buy health insurance with just $1/month. Affordable right? Sure, when you’re sick, you have to pay 99.9% copay and probably $1 million annual deductible with that plan.
2. Health care – Sure, it’s expensive…..but it’s expensive in US of good ol’ A. Why the hell do you think doctors, dentists, etc, are raking in at least 6 figures per year? Malpractice suit? Well, why the hell do you think shysters, um, I meant lawyers, are raking in millions (well, not all) and millions of eventually worthless USD (with helicopter Ben at the helm)?
Did someone said “global economy”? Well, if it’s a global economy now, shouldn’t you be taking your **business** elsewhere if it’s expensive where you’re currently residing?
Don’t trust others? Well, if you’re still buying that lead-painted “Made in China” crap, why not have your health care done in China at a fraction of the cost? It’s all lead 🙂
Anyway, I’ll add more examples of other things later such as housing, investment, etc. It’ll make you think twice about what you’re currently doing that, frankly, won’t do much except to continued to be an indentured servant for the rest of your useless life.
Another topic that bugs me is all the China bashing that goes on. If a company designs, specs, and contracts the work to a manufacturer, then why isn’t the contractor on the hook for ensuring quality control in adherence to the laws where the product will be sold?
The specifications must be clear, concise, and complete (e.g. “lead-free red paint” versus “red paint”, otherwise the contractor should held in violation of the law. How difficult is this? The contractor must ensure the product adheres strictly to the specs or find a manufacturer that can deliver.
The media continues to propagate some “Evil China” agenda which is penetrating the American psyche while Mattel’s responsibility is being swept under the rug.
Except you have the choice to sign up for the credit cards or throw the application in the trash. Government doesn’t force the pen in your hand to sign that application.
Interestingly, to play on the last comment, my mouse-killing guy is a home schooler who cannot afford a house or health insurance for his wife and kids, and is a vehement anti-liberal (although, like Darth Vader, he has other things to do than enlist and fight in the epic-est battle of civilizations evah). My mechanic is a Christian fundamentalist Clinton-hater from way back who is still struggling to pay of some medical debt for his kid from a home accident two or three years ago. And I work with a Southern Baptist preacher (which is a long way of saying GOP Tool) whose son has a chronic disease, and who will not be with us long (due to workplace rules) and will lose his health insurance then. He claims that we socialists are brainwashing the country. All three of these people work in lower/middle income jobs, dismiss science outright, lack decent health insurance, can barely afford homes or cannot afford them altogether, and home school their kids, which means, to me, that their kids will be asking to quote scripture if they take their SATs or GREs. The irony is that they are anti-immigrant and yet are quickly going to find themselves (or their kids) competing with those very people for unskilled jobs. The world needs ditch-diggers and I don’t care if they quote the bible or speak spanish when they do landscaping around my place. This religious anti-intellectualism, anti-reason, anti-science group is smothering us all. And this is the one reason I find Ron Paul disturbing (or I should say, his alliances with some portions of the crazy-right): while I love hearing some of what he says, he is indebted to the kinds of radical Am-Taliban types that are profoundly corrupt and utterly hypocritical. And so how again is he different from what the other poster called the CN candidates? He’s interesting to me, like Nader was interesting for GOP types eight years ago.
I met my hub at a Barry Goldwater meeting a thousand years ago.
Face it–our vaunted political system rewards the medicre, the panderers, the dishonest, the people who will do anything to win.
In my youth, I was active in politics, and facinated by it. Now I am repulsed.
I expect politicians to be the worst people, not the best. I find the speeches content free. For that part of it, I blame the media, so eager to have a meaningless sound bite that will sell more denture cream, that any rational discourse is cut off.
I don’t think that people with IQs of less than, say 90 should be allowed to vote. How about them apples?
Perhaps the candidates should be put thru some sort of rigorous underwriting process? Corruption will swiftly kick in. As it did in the mtg market.
The forefathers did thought of that Liz…and hence we have…………..tada: electoral college.
So perhaps the majority felt that the electoral college didn’t do its job back in Y2K :-)…I dunno…justa guess 🙂
As far as I know, the electoral college is and always has been, a non-starter. They saw they had a problem, they tried to anticipate a fix, and they failed. WE have not done anything since
to try to do something else.
“In my youth, I was active in politics, and facinated by it. Now I am repulsed.”
It is interesting how that happens. A close friend of mine from High School became the leader of Wal-Mart’s political action committee (PAC.) As such, he met all the key politicians in Washington and got to see how our system really works. His idealism is gone now, and it is replaced with a comforting cynicism. He is of the opinion that there is little any politician can do good or bad. The system in place has everything done by our bureaucracy, and this bureaucracy is intractable. Politicians can bluster, but when it comes to actually changing course, the rudder moves only slightly on a very big ship. He likes Ron Paul, but he also believes there is no chance of removing these institutions and bureaucracies from government. He actually finds this comforting because a slow changing government characterized by strong institutions is inherently stable, and there is little that is more important than stable government. He still watches politics, but he considers it more grand theater than anything of real importance.
Everyone should be required to buy medical isurance through their employer or out right from an insurance company or from the US Government that insures their employees. If everybody contributed, monthly costs would be lower for all Americans. I know of a family that can easily afford health insurance but refuse to buy it. I’m sure they aren’t the only ones. By the way, except for our annual check ups, our family hasn’t used our medical insurance thankfully in 5 years. I pay 315.00 monthly plus a 5000.00 deductible. It was 183.00 a month when I first purchased it. Just this month my insurance company sent my annual notice raising my premiums 70.00 a month. Their reasoning was the high cost of medical care. Funny! That is 840.00 more dollars a year. I looked up Health Net and their gross profit last year was 2 Billion Dollars. Your dammed if you do and your dammed if you don’t.
And how do you read the Constituion to say that a citizen may be forced to buy medical insurance or forced to buy anything?
Health care is not a right. Health care is a commodity. A health care SYSTEM is unecessary and the only reason the health care system is broken is because people assume this country needs a health care system as opposed to the right to purchase health care, insurance, or nothing at all.
OK I’ll cancel my policy because it is a strain on my budget when I would rather use it to buy myself something pretty. If I get sick, than I’ll just do what the uninsured do, go to the emergency room. I’ll never go in for a check up until I’m so sick that I’ll have to be admitted to the hospital. I’m quite sure nobody here would have a problem with paying more for their insurance to cover my irresponsible needs. As a matter of fact, I’m going to buy a house this weekend that I can’t afford. I’ll ride a motorcycle without a helmet, that sounds like fun. I think I’ll even take the kids for a joy ride and none of us will wear our seat belts while I yack on my cell phone. If we get in an accident I’ll be rushed to the hospital, but no worries I’m covered because I live in California. Oh, I think I’ll keep having kids I hear WIC and food stamps are pretty plentiful these days. When are they going to subsidies my rent and give out gas cards so I can drive to pick up my unemployment check?
Wasn’t this question answered when social security insirance was introduced?
Hey, and if you’re religious, by all means get fertility treatments so that you can have multiplies and if you get too many (like 4,5,6 … or more) you can refuse to have the reduction on religious grounds and stick the rest of us with the multi-million dollar bill that comes with multiple premature births and their long term care.
I agree, Health care is not a right, it’s a choice. But that doesn’t mean that we can’t make basic care free using government subsidies. You can always refuse to use the government subsidy, that’s your right.
Government should be in the business maximizing the potential of it’s citizens. When the capitalistic system breaks down, we need to throw out the dogma and look at how to make things better for everybody. Health care is broken, and it’s broken because of capitalistic dogma, not because of prior government intervention.
The government should step in and promote standards (e.g. insurance forms), eliminate freeloading (the uninsured), and reduce the market power of big players or those with local monopolies (e.g. drug companies). These are all about making the market more efficient and not about giving the government more power.
Of course, I guess we could go back to the government not being part of the economic system. So maybe we should get rid of the all standards bodies. Hey, we don’t need some government organization telling us what time it is. It would be better for several companies to compete to tell us the most correct time. So what if they differ from the international standards.
The original purpose of the constitutional convention was to deal with the economic mess of having each state go it’s own way with respect to import/export rules, currency, taxes, etc… That is, it was held to take rights away from the states because that wasn’t working. It wasn’t about giving rights to anybody. It was a latter compromise that led to the Bill of Rights. Have we gone too far in taking rights away? Yes, but not in the area of health care. There are too many examples of systems that have more government involvement that work better than ours.
Ditto that, awgee. Where did this become such a pervasive belief that the government can constitutionally force a person to buy health insurance?
They are trying this in Massachusetts. So far it is failing. There is a sliding scale of payments. If you are poor enough you don’t have to pay. The cohorts one and 2 steps above this are supposed to pay something. As I understand it, very few in the first cohort to have to pay are buying it, and more, but still few in the 2nd.
Maybe the poor are poor because they don’t anticipate the future, ie, are stupid, at least in this way.
Wow.
Bob Dornan.
Barry Goldwater.
U guys aren’t from Orange County r u ?
Ron Paul 4 anything? Time to get back to planet earth now .
This is exactly why the “oc” sucks. MOVE TO SAN DIEGO PEOPLE. Everything is better here, the weather, the surf, the babes (unless you like hairy persians) & housing prices.
I’ve got to get back to wipin’ up the toilets dog.
FU
“Is Ron Paul good for the country?”
I don’t think this question belongs on this blog. Leave this to Chris at HousingFEAR. Of course, it’s IHblogger’s call to decide on what they post here, but, as a regular reader, I don’t think it’s a good idea to make politics more of a topic here.
:-/
Don’t worry. This will not become a political blog. This is an open thread, and this subject was on my mind because I just met the man.
Good to hear that. Too many nice communities have become divided over politics recently!
I used to think that socialized medicine was a bad thing, until I got older & had to deal with the medical system. I do have insurance. I am
beginning to think insurance is a bad thing. People view insurance as a substitute for doing the right thing, starting with living a healthy lifestyle and ending with insurance involving credit, like credit default swaps.
We do not have the best medical system in the world. We do not have the longest lifespan and
the least morbidity.
And we are way way down in the scale of happiness, according to npr.
And to become a dr, unless the parents are independantly wealthy, you have to sell yourself into debt slavery.
It is not a happy system, all around.
Oregon proposed a system that would take all the
healthcare dollars, cover all the uninsured, and ration the services, well, rationally, according to the cost and effectiveness and need for various services.
If you have a broken arm fine. A heart replacement? Nope. Vaccines, yes. Unproven therapies? You are on your own. All kinds of preventative care? Yep.
Seemed like a great idea to me. It seems to have never happened. Anybody know?
lawyerliz (hey, I’m a lawyer, too!), if you think don’t think socialized medicine is a bad thing, then just wait until we have it here in the US. Everyone seems to think that once we have socialized health care, we’ll have the quality of care, it will just cost less or nothing at all. And if you’re older, you should be more concerned about keeping the gov’t out of health care. In Canada and England and France, the older you get, you have fewer treatment options available to you. The gov’t gets to choose who will get cancer treatments and who will not. Consequently, younger people have more access to cancer treatment than older people because it’s the gov’t calculation that if they survive, they will be working longer to pay back the system in burdensome taxes. Also, if you’re overweight, some of these systems are cutting back on the care they are providing overweight people. No, I don’t want going to the MD to be like standing in line at the local post office. We need reform, but it ain’t socialized medicine.
In most of the industrialized world, health care is provided, subsidized or heavily regulated by the state. France, Germany, Switzerland, Japan, Taiwan, Canada, etc. People in these countries get better health care than Americans, and at lower per-capita cost. None of the systems is perfect, but they’re all much better than the American one.
Using an individual insurance system to provide health care is a fundamentally unsound idea. Health insurers are incentivized to cherry pick the best customers, while individuals are incentivized to under-cover themselves. It’s insane that anyone thinks such perverse incentives could ever result in a quality health care system. And yet that’s what we’ve got.
The term “socialized” is just a scare term that can be equally applied to all sorts of other public services we readily accept, but I don’t hear people complaining about “socialized police service” or “socialized fire department service”. Granted, a lot of hard-core libertarians are basically anarchists who want to live in theoretical la-la land in which none of these services are provided by the state, but most people are realistic and happy with the idea that the government can be counted on for things like interstate highways, municipal services, and meaningful regulation. With the skyrocketing cost of health care, it’s only a matter of time before a universal health care program becomes reality. Some of you might not like it, but we’ll all be better of for it.
Jake,
What is your grounds for the assumption that these other countries have better health care? If that is the case, then how come so many top doctors from other countries come to work here? Could it be that it is better here? How come people come from all over the world to get treatment and surgery here? It is not like Americans go to those other countries to get medical care. Also, in those other countries you are assigned a doctor. No choices. He or she might be a good doctor, but they might not. They have no incentive to be a really good doctor because they will always be assigned clients. I have spoken with folks on vacation in the U.K. and other places and they hate their health care system. They always have long waiting lists to see doctors becasue nobody wants to be a doctor. There are very few doctors, so you must take a number and wait weeks and months for your appointment. Why do you think there is a running joke that British folks have bad teeth. They can’t ever get appointments to see the dentist. I think it is time to wake up to reality. Of course our system isn’t perfect, but it is still the best.
There’s no doubt about it; doctors are paid well in the US. That’s a small part of the reason that health care is more expensive here.
But health care is also worse, on average, for citizens in the United States, because many cannot afford it. Numerous international studies have confirmed this, including reports by the World Health Organization. We live in a country where over 40 million citizens (including children) remain uninsured. An even larger number is under-insured and in line for financial bankruptcy the moment medical catastrophe strikes. That’s why we are outranked by nearly every other industrialized nation when it comes to health care. Our health system is fundamentally broken.
It’s also a myth that in countries with state-supported health care that the health care is poor or that there are always longer waiting times for procedures. You have choice of doctor in nearly every country I mentioned. In fact, it is the USA where your doctor choice is most often proscribed; HMOs limit you to a small subset of available doctors. Moreover, waiting times for doctors’ appointments in the USA are comparable to what you see overseas. I know I’ve had to wait weeks for an appointment with my doctor.
Our system is not the best. It is, in fact, one of the worst. And that’s why you will see it change in the next few years. Proper health care has become unattainable to too many in this country.
http://www.photius.com/rankings/healthranks.html
Japan is the one exception. Their healthcare system is universal, mostly free, and better than the US. They also have a tax structure similar to the US so it doesn’t come at the expense of onerous taxes, unlike Canada and Western Europe. I belive their doctors are better-paid than the other socialized systems, but not as well as the US.
While bemoaning the high cost of healthcare in our world class system, doesn’t our economic system dictate that medical professionals will seek the highest possible wage for their services? Why is this bad? Why should doctors have their earning power come under attack from the government?
Actually physicians are paid comparatively very poorly in Japan. The way this is done is by a yearly negotiation between the government and industry to fix the price of every single possible procedure performed. This is the primary mechanism for keeping prices low in the Japanese healthcare system.
There is a wonderful episode of the PBS documentary show “Frontline” comparing national healthcare systems among our nation’s peers in Europe and Asia. I highly recommend it.
It is also important to point out that contrary to what NewToTheArea would have you believe (apart from anecdotes it doesn’t appear s/he has any actual evidence for anything), there are significant incentives in place in the UK system (called the NHS) for doctors to do their job. The way the incentives work is by measuring the *outcomes* of health care delivery (imagine that – actually rewarding a good job..doctors here are terrified of this because then they will actually be held accountable for their performance) in terms of metrics like blood pressure, weight, cholesterol, etc. Doctors who are able to improve patients’ performance on these metrics get bonuses; the improve part is important because then it avoids the problem of cherry-picking healthy patients.
Also to follow on Jake’s point another way we know that care in the US is so poor is that surveys have shown widespread dissatisfaction with the system, unlike in the UK, France, and Germany where the people are largely satisfied with the care they receive. Considering how much we spend on healthcare compared to the Europeans, the satisfaction levels here are appalling.
Newtothearea,
Do you know anyone in Canada or Western Europe?
I live in Western Europe and it is nice to not have to worry about care. I don’t get told where I have to go for treatment, although the specialists are sparse, so everyone in an area ends up going to one of five doctors for, say, endocrinology. I also don’t have it tied to my employment, which doesn’t make me feel like a health-care slave to my corporation.
There is a two-tier system here. EVERYONE gets a minimal care, with little or now co-pay. Then the wealthy get to buy private insurance that allows for specialists and ‘extra’ treatments not covered under the regular system.
So, everyone gets a minimum and the wealthy get more because they can afford it. Sounds right to me.
Ron Paul is great for the country. He’s waking alot of people up. One thing he never talks about that I wish he would is the fact that when older men have babies there is a much greater chance that babies will be autistic, schizophrenic, have other genetic disorders such as cancer, autoimmune disorders or Alzheimer’s, etc. or a combination of disorders. http://autism-prevention.blogspot.com/
I like you better when you stick to REAL ESTATE SCHADENFRUEDE IR.I consider myself a small government/small “l” Libertarian and center right-ish on many issues.Yet most of the sloganeering I’ve heard coming outta’ this clowns mouth leaves me little doubt as to why he’s on the sidelines and quite possibly out of a job soon.Top that off with his out & out coddling of the LOONS who think 9-11 was an “inside job”.Won’t miss him.
Unlanded,
You sound more like a teeny weeny, microscopic “l” libertarain to me.