A recent online article opined “It Is Over” for the Democrats in Washington: they are about to experience a crushing defeat in upcoming midterm elections. Unfortunately, after the words “It is over,” we must insert a very big BUT. As the saying goes, “It ain’t over till the fat lady sings,” but I hear no singing.
Most Americans oppose what the Democrats have done. Over 50% want Obamacare repealed. How, you ask, can any clear-thinking American reject President Obama’s free health care for all? Answer: Americans are good capitalists, at least outside the Beltway. We know that anything “free” is a chimera that ends up being grossly too expensive. We get less for more whenever something is supposedly free.
Further, we observe the failure of ‘free health care’ in Europe. Yet, that is precisely what the President and his Director-designate of Medicare, Dr. Don Berwick, want to enact here.
The British NHS has been forced to cut back drastically on health care services. If you are British, over 60 years old, and need either kidney dialysis or heart surgery, the NHS says too bad, no care for you. If you are a terminal British citizen (any age) and need hospice care, government-run health system will no longer provide.
Americans like neither what Congress has done so far nor the direction the Democrats are taking us: toward socialism. The Democrats and the President would vehemently deny that charge but what else do you call government control of resources as well as “redistribution” [President’s Obama’s word] of wealth?
The Democrats and their agenda will be repudiated. But, where is the fat lady? [No aspersions are intended on the body mass areas of either Republicans or Democrats. I am trying to be poetic.]
While the Republicans spout the right words about limited government and fiscal responsibility, they seem poised after November to do…nothing. It appears as though they are about to waste a great opportunity.
If they do not repeal Obamacare, then their words have no meaning. If they do repeal it, what substantive plan do they recommend to begin actually fixing healthcare? I see none. What we hear is minor adjustments to the existing system rather than what must be done: radical change.
In medical terms, the Democrats took a sick patient named healthcare and made the patient worse. That is malpractice. The Republicans suggest stopping the bad (Democrat) medicine and placing a band-aid on the cancer. That too is malpractice.
The Democrats claim they have fulfilled three of the five promises they made in 2008: Healthcare (and all we got was a tee-shirt exclaiming how great Obamacare is if we were only smart enough to understand), Education, and Reregulation. Education remains mired in confusion as the Democrat party continues to serve their actual constituencies: the unions. What do the Republicans propose that will inject a truly results-based education system instead of what we have now. The ‘result’ we want are educated citizens and productive workers. Do test scores correlate with those outcomes? Where is the data? What has been proven to work? THAT is what the Republicans should be offering us.
The Democrats claim that the reason for our present economic doldrums is Bush-era deregulation. Their cure is therefore Reregulation, which is code for greater government control over our financial lives. Americans want neither de- nor re-regulation. We want an environment that encourages (and rewards) hard work and entrepreneurial activities. We want more (and more and more) rich people, not turning rich people into poor people. Thus, anything that discourages business from taking risks – hiring people and expending capital – is exactly what we DON’T want. The Democrats have done that. Will the Republicans reverse this trend?
In the past, I have written that what we want is a level playing field on which good capitalists can compete to everyone’s advantage. The President wants to level the players with his “redistribution” approach. The problem with a sports analogy is that all such games are zero-sum: in order for someone to win, someone else must lose.
The American financial system called capitalism is NOT a zero-sum game. More and more people can ‘win’ without necessarily more and more losers. That is the beauty of capitalism. Though we have a large discrepancy between haves and have-nots in our country, we have many more “haves” than any other country in history, ever!
When we say to the Democrats ‘it is over for you,’ we need to say with equal force to the Republicans replacing them, give us solutions that work, not minor adjustments of what we have now.
Tweet This Post
Buzz This Post
Delicious
Digg This Post
Facebook
Stumble This Post






2 comments ↓
“If you are British, over 60 years old, and need either kidney dialysis or heart surgery, the NHS says too bad, no care for you. If you are a terminal British citizen (any age) and need hospice care, government-run health system will no longer provide.”
I live in the UK, and this is simply not the case. For example:
Heart surgery: 80% of NHS CABG patients are men over 60:
http://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coronary-artery-bypass/Pages/Introduction.aspx
Dialysis: 29% of patients at the NHS Peritoneal Dialysis Unit in Liverpool are over 60:
http://www.aintreerenalunit.nhs.uk/royalrenal/servicesfacilities/peritonealdialysis.asp
Hospices: Some are run by the NHS, some by charities. They’re all free:
http://www.nhs.uk/CarersDirect/guide/bereavement/Pages/finding-a-hospice.aspx
http://www.northamptonshire.nhs.uk/what-we-do/local-services/hospices.php
This “you’re on your own after 60″ idea has been floating around the net for months. I’ve no idea why.
There is a combination of wordsmithing, unannounced plans, and necessary draconian cuts in play here.
Fact: no one knows for sure exactly what the NHS will do but two cuts are certain: 1) personnel mainly nurses…the people who provide direct care more than doctors; and 2) “Reductions in availability of certain treatments…One-fifth of all NHS trust in England admit to closing or considering the closure of key [read expensive] services.”
The reference given by Mr. Buttery states that “80% of men needing CABG are over age sixty,” not that 80% of men who had CABG were over age 60.
When My English mother [I had two] needed a hip replacement at age 79 years, they said “Yes, you can have it. You are on our waiting list and should get the operation in approximately 27 months.” Any competent doctor knows that making a 79 year-old obese women immobile is a guarantee for a blood clot, pneumonia, and likely death long before the operation.
I do not fault the current NHS administration. I fault the system itself. Mr. Lansley et al are dealing with an impossible supply-demand: limited (and constricting) supply with unlimited (and constantly expanding) demand: a formula guaranteed to fail. There is a key lesson there that the USA should note but apparently is ignoring: you cannot offer unlimited entitlements as you will “Run out of other people’s money” to spend (Margaret Thatcher).
Bottom line: The reason why the idea that ‘You’re on your own after 60″ is floating out there is that people in England are, quite rightly, frightened. The British cost-effective panels (euphemistically abbreviated N.I.C.E.) and the Trusts must deal with the NHS fiscal crisis by cutting services. It has to. So whether it is maternity cuts or emergency room closures, no dialysis over age XX or one nurse for seven patients, budgetary constraints will require reductions that will translate to care not available when you need it.
This is a hard lesson for socialism, socialists, entitlements: reality wins (eventually) every time.
System MD
Leave a Comment