Saturday, September 19, 2009

Carol says, "But---"

This is a continuation of my e-mail conversation with Marxist Carol. My remarks are in italics. Carol starts off this series with:

Preventative health care is what we all strive for.

This is a personal, not government, responsibility.

Regular check-ups can go a long way towards that goal.

There is some question about this. TV just gave a report that it is not cost-effective. This is likely under present conditions where a number of unnecessary tests are performed in order to protect doctors and the medical profession in general from unreasonable lawsuits.

If you have not had an accident, emergency room care usually means some condition has become intolerable, which is more difficult to treat.

If the condition is intolerable, the patient has allowed it to become so.

Once treated, the patient is on his/her own again. Some treatments require follow-up or a maintenance program. For whatever reason, lack of insurance prevents those people from getting appropriate care. And, no, emergency room treatment saves lives but it may not restore health.

Maintaining or restoring personal health is a personal responsibility. It is not the function of government.

Does emotion bother you? I cannot write every sentence without feeling anything about this subject; especially, since I have worked in the health care industry. In life-threatening situations, most people do not worry about personal liberties. Emergency health care exists for just that purpose...emergencies.

No. Emotion is a good motivator, but it has to be controlled. The key word here is "abuse". Do not abuse in motion beyond the need for reasonable action. I agree that emergency healthcare exist for emergencies, but as I have said before from personal experience, no one is denied "emergency", even if it is a simple headache.

There is much more to health care than emergencies. The personal liberties part comes in when people have the time to make choices. Many just don't have the money.

Correct. Health care is a personal responsibility. Emergency room care should be reserved for accidents. No one has ever been denied emergency care, because of money.

I do not have the power to force anyone to accept anything, except for myself.

Great! Maintain that philosophy. You will have a better life in accepting personal responsibility. You can also offer help to those who are apparently unable to handle personal and financial problems in our complex society. You have no right to transgress on their personal choices.

Even if you are tired of the number, 45,000,000, whatever it truly is, a whole lot of people in this country do not have access to any health care on a regular basis.

False. People have access to health care by their own personal treatment, reference to the Internet for technical advice and available medical books, help from family members. Emergency rooms are always available for emergencies. The cities have free medical clinics. The only questionable and accessibility is for those who live in the remote areas without the companionship and support of family members. Those persons are usually very reliable their own personal treatment capabilities.

Neither one of us falls into this category, I can only imagine what it must feel like to have chronicconditions, that may not be life-threatening, but that the people are stuck trying to cure themselves. Yes, I am aware of the religious cults that reject health care. I have also assisted in treating these same believers when an emergency arose (only as a student, however).

Everybody has a chronic condition. It might be a weak left knee, a left shoulder ache, susceptibility to diverticulitis attacks, or a multitude of other things. The patient should try to fix them himself by local treatment or modification of lifestyle. If that is unsuccessful and no money is available, he should go to the free clinic for help. Chronic conditions are usually not life-threatening, and if reasonable attempts to cure are unsuccessful, one should learn to live with the chronic problem. Many times chronic conditions cure themselves, through the use of self curing mechanisms, which are part of the human body's structure.

Since the outcry for reform of the health care industry is a long-standing problem, at least a majority of the millions have spoken for reform. It is certainly not my position to say that reform is not needed.

Millions of people want health care reform, because it will remove them from responsibility of their own health care and because they anticipate that it will be free or at least significantly lower cost than what is now available. However, systems can be improved, and the health care system is no exception. We should address and correct problems within that system one of the time.
As to dropping seriously ill people, it happens. I have not experienced the lying about pre-existing conditions on the application to be the primary reason for being dropped. No, it is not supposed to happen.

Pres. Obama did his best to demonize the healthcare insurance people in a previous speech, by using gallstones and acne as excuses for health care insurance people denying treatment on more serious illnesses. I have shown separately that this is false. No one has brought to my attention a case where an insurance company has dropped a patient from healthcare insurance payments, without justification. The chances are that such cases essentially do not exist, because opportunistic lawyers would be all over the insurance companies like fleas on a dog.

Regarding the Public Option, I cannot anticipate nor speculate on how it will run and whether it will close the doors of private insurance companies. Based on the enormous size of most insurance companies, it does not seem possible that they would be run over by a Public Option program. Nor does it seem likely that the 85% insured would jump ship and go for the Public Option, especially if their employers were paying part of their coverage.

I have explained previously how unfair competition by a government insurance company can put private insurance companies out of business. You seem to have gotten part of that message. The size of a private insurance company has nothing to do with its continued existence in the face of unreasonable competition. AIG, Enron, and General Motors are examples of very large companies that have gone out of business because of their inability to compete through a combination of competition and their own ineptitude. My previous employer is paying part of my healthcare coverage. However, if a government insurance company offers better service at lower out-of-pocket cost, I would jump ship. Those who would not do so would be strong standers on principle or generally unknowledgeable. They would be few, and at least few enough to be unable to support the existence of the private health insurance industry.

Maybe the competition will motivate the private insurance companies to clean up the fraud and waste, which is helping to cause health care costs to rise exponentially.

Competition is generally good for the public, which is why we have anti-monopoly laws. However excessive competition, which drives all but one supplier out of business can be a monopoly creator. Again, watch the keyword "abuse". Market pressure on private insurance companies will usually aid in reducing fraud and waste. Government intervention should only be involved when it is obviously necessary. Government abuse will close the private industry. The cost of health care is rising exponentially, because of public demand for service. This is a normal market response, and the healthcare industry should not be criticized for supplying what the public wants. This is a large-scale temporary fad, which will eventually correct itself as individuals recognize some of the stupidities of their actions. However, you can be sure that intervention by government with a government health insurance program, will tend to stabilize the high cost demands.

Alan Greenspan went to College with my first cousin. Did you not know the Federal Reserve is a private corporation? Didn't you know how it came to be in 1913 and that Woodrow Wilson apologized for selling out his country? Did you know that today HR1207 passed, which authorized the investigation of how the interest money collected in the Federal Reserve is dispersed? View "The Creature of Jekyl Island" for the history.

Do not be confused by historical accounts. Remember that historians write about a historical situation from their own personal point of view, meaning they have at least a portion of their agenda in the writing. If you don't believe this, look at how some of the public school history books are now being written. The Federal Reserve is no more a private corporation than is the Lubbock Independent School District (LISD). No matter what the historians or current analysts may say, if it looks like a duck and acts like a duck, it's a duck.

DOE is really part of the government. My position is that if you ask the government to bail you out of your failed business decisions, then you have to expect some input from the government on what might have gone wrong and how to fix it. Also, I see no problem with the Union being represented on the Board of GM. First of all, the workers may have some suggestions for improving the line operations since they work there every day; and, second, lack of communication exacerbates problems between the union and management. No, I have never been in a union...always in management.
Yes. If you ask anybody for a bailout, you are expected to give up some of your independence; usually part of the profit or control of the operation. Government should not be bailing out anybody, and nobody would be asking government for bailouts, if they know the request is futile. Workers and government being part of company operations has its precedents. It appeared in Tito's Yugoslavia in the late 50s and early 60s. I have first-hand experience with it. Notice that the country of Yugoslavia no longer exists. It was unable to sustain this worker-government control. Obviously workers and management must be in communication with each other. This is rather routinely done these days. Government need have no part in this.

No comments:

Post a Comment