What Next: "Universal Food Insurance"?

Humans can only experience so much outrage. Once the limit is reached, no further action can increase it. So when Obama quadruples the deficit, owns banks and auto companies, determines who can use what kind of energy, and dictates our medical care, our outrage tolerance has been breached, resulting in a "red alert" (pun intended). The Obama-Pelosi-Reid "axis of massive government" has been a ravenous, gluttonous creature since inauguration day. Federal spending has expanded from 20% of GDP to 28% of GDP in one year. This is before any health care or climate change "reform" or any other whack job proposals the Van Jones' and Cass Sunsteins' have in mind. The next few months are critical and may determine our country's direction for decades.

As with all things Obama-Pelosi-Reid, everything said about "health care" is a distraction. We do need health care reform, but not this Obama wolf cloaked in sheep's clothing. The purpose of this "reform" is to create nationalized health care. They don't know, or care, what are in various legislative proposals, because it does not matter. The Executive Branch will eventually "interpret" any legislation. When 1000 pages are written vaguely enough--a guarantee--all will be permitted. A "single payer system" is the ultimate destination on the Obama super highway to socialized medicine. They have one shot to pass this---now---and the fight is about to become white hot.

Our current medical care system is already severely hampered by government regulations. Insurance companies are prohibited from competing across state lines. Insurance is not portable. Employer provided health insurance is not taxed, but privately purchased insurance is. Insurance companies are mandated by state and federal government to provide coverage for predetermined lists of ailments and treatments and deny treatment for others. The current insurance system encourages indifference to cost by you, the consumer. The AMA is a guild with 15th century rules. Most inefficiency and lack of coverage can be traced to such laws, mandates, restrictions and regulations. We need changes in laws which address these issues and others, not laws and changes which magnify the problem.
 
Pretend that food were regulated the way medical care is regulated. Virginians' food purchases would be paid by a Virginia based "food insurance" company directly to the supermarket. No incentive would exist to care what ice cream or lobster cost. "Food insurance" would be provided by employers tax free, instead of taxable cash. But self employed people would pay for food with after tax dollars. Texans' "food insurance" laws might require payment for "dinners at 5 star restaurants", even if they wished for less expensive coverage. If New Jersey employers provided $20,000 a year "all you can eat food insurance", government mandates might require Beluga Caviar, Maine Lobsters, organically grown vegetables, Filet Mignon and dinners at the Four Seasons. But New York laws might limit purchases of hamburger, non low fat yogurt, butter or brand name cereals. You would present your state approved insurance card at the supermarket to determine if your food purchases were covered. The AFA ("American Food Association") would limit the number of people permitted to provide "food care and service". Would anyone in their right mind create such a system? Actually, it sounds pretty much like Cuba's food system.

Yet, the current medical care system is very similar to our hypothetical "food insurance" world. Our medical care system needs to become more market based, not less. You know, like the one that gives us virtually unlimited free choice in food with no anxiety, as opposed to our anxiety riddled medical care system. Do you think the differences in outcomes between these two "systems" is a coincidence? The Food Industry is 10% of our GDP. Yet, miraculously, we manage to purchase it daily without a "single payer government food insurance" program. Why are there no cries for "food reform"?

Obama is misleading the country when he implies the government can pay the medical expenses of another 45 million people by doubling down on the current system. Even a low ball $4,000 for insurance (per person, per year), would cost the government $180 billion per year. Where does that money come from? It comes from massive tax hikes and/or providing less actual medical care per person per year. This would primarily impact.............the sick. This tends to be "you" as you grow older. This is Obama Care, or medical rationing. Left wing intellectuals believe a group of "smart" people can prioritize who should get medical care. They also believe they can manage the economic activity of hundreds of millions of people.

Such a medical system would be managed by unionized state and federal government workers. Is there any wonder the people are largely in revolt? This needs to be stopped now.  Obama wants to move the country in the wrong direction. If you disagree, you "bear false witness". Only when Obama unseals his school records will we listen to his phony moralizing. (Imagine hiring an employee who refused to provide you with his school records--Obama's Rocky Mountain High IQ--what is he hiding?)

The odds, unfortunately, still favor the president and all his men and women. It is up to us to increase our opposition, or they will indeed jam this through. They are looking for any temporary easing in public opinion to get this passed. Obama again will commandeer the networks this week. He will even take over an hour of classroom time. He is becoming as big a blowhard as Castro was in his hey day. Ted Kennedy's death is being used as they slap his name on various versions of these bills."Desperado, why don't you come to your senses?"

The hour is getting late for Obama. As such, he will start speaking falsely in ever greater exaggerated terms to persuade you. He must not prevail.

 

Comments

[Bruce]

I am actually more optimistic that this will not be enacted than I was in 1994 with HillaryCare. In 1994 the Republicans put forward an alternative proposal that could only be described as HillaryCare Lite. I thought at that moment that it was inevitable that something would be enacted, but somehow it died. Now the Republicans seem to be hanging tough and the Democrats who care about re-election really don't seem to have the stomach to do this on their own. I never thought I would say this but thank God for the Congressional Budget Office.

What I have never understood is how any clear-thinking liberal could ever think that universal coverage provided by the government would actually improve very many people's lives. It just runs counter to history and common sense to think that government could fulfill this function at all competently.

[Mike Rulle]

I really don't get it either. Perhaps they do not believe a government option inevitably leads to single payer--even as the proponents of the government option say that is ultimately what they want. It is bizarre. Or perhaps they think a government rationed lotto system, where 15-20% lose, is more "moral" than a market system where 5-10% lose---or something along those lines. But I definitely do not get it.

[Guy Average]

There is only one motivation for this, and for the "Economic Stimulus" and everything else in the pipeline of "legislation"...the centralization of power. The Constitution was written in order to avoid a strong central government. These folks don't give a rip about the Constitution, though. Their seminal document is the Communist Manifesto, and while that statement is true, it sounds unfortunately so outrageous to so many people to even think that it can be happening here in the USA, so many are collectively fiddling while Rome burns.

[Rick Gilbert]

Obama does not care at all about health care, green jobs or carbon output, it all leads to one thing, POWER in his HANDS. I believe that is his mandate from the ruling elite and they think he can pull it off as they steal from the treasury through the Fed. How much money has been printed and sent off overseas to 14 central banks and how much money has been given to their friends here on Wall Street. We are being stolen from, lied to and are now we may be ready to stop it, I hope. Healthcare, Green whatever or carbon somethings are a front friends, look behind the curtain as Guy Average has!

[m2]

i've been wondering why everyone is focused heavily on the 'provider' (insurance vehicle) and not on the 'producer' (physicians, medical community, pharma, therapy, etc).

what happens with a state run option (or rather fed run option) which sets reimbursement thresholds, common care and policy standards to the 'producer'? is what they produce (taking your food analogy) now dictated to them by the 'provider'? the producer who at one time provided berries and cream could be told he is no longer to provide cream, it is a non essential, and therefore must substitute / compensate his decreased product line with a new product authorised by the 'provider'? is the level of service dictated to the 'producer' by the 'provider'?

i not only think its dangerous to the medical service / product line we now have available to us (by state option regulations imposed upon them -- more mediocrity / forced concepts of market) but to the future of research and development community.

i want to know the detail. i want to know how far the regulatory body ventures into the 'standard' services provided...and i do not want to see the regulatory body competing in the industry.

so many dependencies in the equation. so many scenarios.

m2

[buy cialis]

now we need a reform in the health sector, to ensure access to medicines without medical treatments are too expensive for citizens

[How to win the lottery]

Nationalization of helt care is not bad either...But to attain this, we need to reform first the sector. Then let the people decide what is the best for them..

[how to win the lottery guaranteed]

Yes, I fully agree that Nationalization of helt care is not bad! There are a lot of advantages in this.

[overcome panic attacks]

It's interesting for people. I want to know more details. Where can I find it?

[Asics shoes]

The study found that people with depression or anxiety were more likely to associate their mood with the color gray, while happier people preferred yellow.
http://www.yaahshoes.com/

[lottery software]

If the nationalization of health care can help the people and can save the national, why not?

[how to win the lottery]

i agree with nationalization of health care. it will help to create a balanced health care society. but nationalization may decrease the efficiency and effectiveness of the health care sector, the reason is there is no competitors.

[the lottery black book]

Yes, I fully agree that Nationalization of helt care is not bad! There are a lot of advantages in this.

[Internet product reviews]

Hi, many, many thanks for taking the time to share.. It was useful for my team. Thanks for all of your hard work!

[satellitedirect software]

oh nice article i like it , i am a teacher of english as a second language and i do feel the content of your article so much.

[Air Jordan Shoes]

Men marry because they are tired; women because they are curious; both are disappointed

[Larry Blair]

Thats a very grim outlook on things

[Site Launch System bonus]

Thats such a negative outlook, I loved Reagen because he was always so positive!

[android spy apps]

A really well written and researched article. I loved it from beginning to end. I had to come back to it a few times. Thanks for the great read and so well done.

[Lottery Black Book]

I have to agree with you.

[Auto Parts & Electronics]

Thank you for sharing. Very happy to see your article, I very much to like and agree with your point of view. Have a good time.

[keylogger for Mac]

Yes, I fully agree that Nationalization of helt care is not bad! There are a lot of advantages in this....

[How To Jump Higher]

It seems that Obama cannot do anything right for this country. I do not agree with anything he is currently doing.

[Ryan]

I cant say I have liked much Obama has done either but that seems to be the name of the game for presidents lately.

[James]

I cant agree with you more Ryan