"Wes" wrote in message
...
"Ed Huntress" wrote:


"Wes" wrote in message
...
Hawke wrote:

The reason why they aren't changing anything right now is because the
passage of the bill is on a tightrope. If anything goes wrong it won't
pass and all the work that went into it is wasted.

A lot of the stuff doesn't kick in for years. What is the hurry? Maybe
it is that
election coming up that has the Obamunists worried that their turn at
rule
is coming to a
well deserved close in November. There is an opinion poll that matters.

Wes

Maybe it's that they've been trying to pass this since 1933 and it's now
or
never, because the business interests in medicine -- particularly the
insurance industry -- will spend with no limit to confuse and defeat it.

I'm thinking that is a canard in respect to the insurance industry. At
the proposed law
is constructed they will have to work with a new framework but there is no
chance they
will go over one year without adjusting rates to the new framework or
existing heath
insurance. A lot of us think the whole concept is to destroy private
insurance and force
us into single payer aka socialized medicine. Time will tell on that one.

As one who worked with that industry, I don't think it's a canard. And as
I've said before, it isn't because they're bad people, but it's because the
whole system of incentives works against the interest of the people who need
the insurance.

I agree there is little in the bill now that will turn the incentive
structure in the right direction, but putting controls on the industry is a
first step. We have to get the bit out of their teeth, or else tighten up
the reigns. As long as they win these legislative battles (and they always
have) they have NO incentive to change. None. Nada. Their only incentive is
to keep the money rolling in, which means to ignore medical costs and hang
onto their market share. If higher prices decrease the size of the market a
bit, that's trivial compared to their income increases that come from rising
costs. They just take a percentage of whatever it is.

As for whether the "concept" is to destroy private insurance, I'm sure there
are plenty of people who want to. Like John, I think it's probably
inevitable -- not because something else wouldn't work, but because nothing
else will have much of a chance to work. The industry may adjust and we may
be able to work together with government to produce a private insurance
system that accomplishes what we need. But I doubt it. I think we'll have
single-payer within two decades. I've thought that for ten years.



Now or never. And if it's never, brace yourself for a declining economy
that
is totally in the hands of big business interests.

You left out unionized governmental and Davis Bacon protected union
workers that currently
are sucking at the debt troth. (I don't think I spelled that right) That
is a drag on the
economy. Taxes collected on those that are paid by the government don't
count when it
comes to our deficits.

I'm not sure what you mean by that. People covered by Davis Bacon law(s) pay
taxes. So do government workers. What are you saying here?


Republicans, who suddenly have expressed an interest in "alternative"
reform
measures, have had 70 years to propose ideas. The first ones came last
year,
in an effort to defeat the ones the Dems had proposed. If they feel no
pressure to do anything about it, after a defeat, they'll put it on the
shelf again for the rest of their lives.

You know Republicans tend to be free market types expecially the
Libertarians in the
party.

There are few libertarians in Congress, except on their few pet issues. And
they aren't really libertarians. They're people on both sides who want their
favorite region, state, industries, and friends, free to make a lot of money
at other peoples' expense.

There are a lot of Republican congressmen who align themselves with business
interests. That includes many who are big supporters of ag subsidies, pork
spending, and so on.


No further responses tonight, I'm off to bed. Sleep tight, sounds like
you are winning on
this one atm. Just hope you like what comes out of it if it passes.

This is just a first step. Now we have to get incentives aligned right, if
that's possible, to start getting sensible controls on costs. I don't think
we'll have a socialized health system in our lifetimes, and maybe never. But
it is likely -- virtually inevitable -- that we'll have a heavily regulated
health care insurance industry.

Sleep tight.

--
Ed Huntress