Stan Geiger

Health Care: Do We or Don't We?

So, the whores in the Senate finally came up with their 60-vote filibuster-buster. Now it’s on to a catfight with the whores in the House that will result in Obama finally having something he can sign into law. For a year, Obama has shown no real interest in what’s in a health care bill; he just wants a health care bill to sign. I’m sure the great one is beside himself with glee.

Like most Americans, I do not share the president’s enthusiasm. I have this feeling of impending doom. I have this feeling that I’m about to get screwed and there is nothing I can do about it. That feeling is not new to me; I’ve experienced it many times in my life. Repetition makes it no easier to accept.

The CBS Evening News---a liberal, piece-of-crap, alleged news agency that can take a lot of credit for putting Obama and the Democrats in control---panned the Senate bill in a report a few days ago. The report said 30 million more people would be insured should the bill become law, but it will also enrich doctors, hospitals, insurance companies and drug companies. In this particular instance, I have no doubt the CBS report hit the nail on the head.

Lobbyists for the abovementioned groups have swarmed Washington, passing out millions. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: Congress doesn’t write laws; lobbyists write laws.

Obama and the Senate claim this bill will reduce the deficit. Does anyone believe that? Anyone? Anyone at all? Raise a hand if you do. Feel free. Does anyone believe what a bunch of whores---that has proven time and time again it can’t manage the nation’s money---has to say about the numbers concerning this bill?

I know. I shouldn’t keep referring to politicians as whores. My doing so does a disservice to every streetwalker in the business. I mean hookers are at least honest in their dealings.

The politicians’ argument concerning a reduced deficit relative to health care “reform” seems to stem from two things. One is reduced costs across-the-board. Costs for medical care will go down because more people will be insured, and premiums for health insurance will go down because more people will be insured. The other reason stems from Medicare cuts.

Are doctors going to cut the price of an office visit in half just because? Are hospitals going to cut the price of a visit in half just because? Are companies that provide MRIs and CT scans going to cut their prices in half just because?

If you answer any of the above questions in the affirmative, I’ve got some Bernie Madoff shares I’d like to sell you.

Will health insurance companies cut premiums in half just because? So says the theory. But to buy into that theory one has to throw the profit motive right out the window. Even if the cost of treatment goes down, and even if the pool of the insured increases, health insurance companies will go for every dollar they can get. It is the nature of our capitalist beast.

On Meet the Press this past Sunday, it was twice mentioned that insurance company stocks have recently hit 52-year highs. Not 52-week highs but 52-year highs. Keeping in mind the bill would force health insurance companies to take people with preexisting conditions and block them from dumping high-cost policy holders, does it sound like big-money investors are expecting health insurance premiums to go down?

From a political standpoint, does it sound like the Republicans that are trying to block “reform” are in bed with the insurance industry or does it sound like the Democrats that are busting a gut trying to pass “reform” are in bed with the insurance industry?

Without question, one of the things that has health insurers---and investors in health insurers---salivating is the federal mandate. Millions of people out there don’t have health insurance even though they can afford it. They are the young, strong and healthy. They are commonly referred to as the “invincibles.” The insurance industry wants these people---and wants them badly.

We have laws mandating auto insurance. If you drive a car, you are supposed to have at least minimal liability coverage. What if we expanded the auto insurance laws to include everybody? I mean what if you were required to have auto insurance even though you never drive? Well, you’d be getting the business. From the insurer’s point of view, however, you would be the perfect customer. You would dutifully pay your premiums year after year while your insurer would never have to pay out a dime.

There are rare exceptions, but 95 percent of the time the invincibles are right: they don’t need health insurance. They would likely be better served by dedicating money to building healthy retirement accounts early in life rather than paying unnecessary health insurance premiums.

You might argue the point with me. And I certainly don’t lay claim to having the last word on anything. But much is made of the “right” to health care. I think a young citizen---living in a nation that touts its alleged freedoms all around the world---has the right to decide what happens to his or her money. Uncle Sam has no business issuing mandates.

Lastly, there is the issue of Medicare cuts. No doubt, seniors are quite concerned about the rhetoric surrounding Medicare. Don’t worry too much; Medicare cuts will never come. Threatened Medicare cuts are simply being used as a marketing device to sell the bill. People are concerned about government borrowing, so, hey, make something up to allay those fears. Spending trillions more in federal money won’t add to deficits. Hell, spending trillions more will actually reduce the deficit.

Why am I so confident there will be no cuts in Medicare? Well, it’s all about the numbers. In short, it’s all about the Baby Boomers.

The Boomer generation began in 1946. It comprises the biggest population bubble in U.S. history, some 78 million people, they say. The leading edge of that population bubble is approaching Medicare age. There is no way a bunch of Washington whores will cut entitlement benefits to 78 million registered voters. I don’t care which major party you’re talking about, there is no freakin’ way.

This health care “reform” bill is junk. Frankly, should it become law, I fear it might be the last nail in the coffin for the great United States. As noted, politicians don’t want to vote to cut benefits for large groups of registered voters. Neither do they want to vote massive tax increases on large groups of registered voters. All that’s left is debt. More and more and more debt, until our economy finally collapses under the weight. Then we’re done.

Other countries have universal health care, so why can’t we? That’s a valid question. So let’s run the list.

Other countries don’t have our land mass. China has a land mass about equal to ours, but it is largely undeveloped. Russia has more land mass. It is largely frozen and uninhabitable. The Netherlands, Switzerland, France, Britain, Japan, well, aren’t they the cutest little things? We have a large land mass to deal with, and it’s covered with rotting infrastructure.

Other countries don’t pay to support the biggest military machine the world has ever seen. I saw an episode of one of those pundit shows a few weeks ago. The topic of the military was raised. It was said the U.S. has 820 military bases around the world, housing over 300,000 personnel. That can’t be said of any other nation on the planet.

Other countries probably aren’t issuing government debit cards so a tenth of the population can eat. That is to say, government debit cards are issued to a tenth of the nation’s population. More than a tenth of the population, then, is eating gubment food. More like a third. Or maybe even half.

What do people buy with their gubment money? Most likely they buy frozen pizzas, bologna and Twinkies. Hence, the gubment is making people fatter, unhealthier, and is putting them on a course to become chronic problems for the health care system.

That’s a good thing for the corporate entities that produce the crap consumed through the expenditure of gubment money, though, right?

Other countries---developed countries---don’t spend anywhere near what we spend on education. They do a better job of educating students, but they spend much less in the process.

You can’t have everything all the time. If you want a nicer house, maybe you have to give up the fancy car. If you want to live well when you’re old, maybe you have to give up living the high life when you’re young. If you want to go to a university, maybe you have to give up the beautiful high school girlfriend. Life is full of decisions. Sometimes you make the right one; sometimes you make the wrong one. Choices have to be made nonetheless.

If we are to have health care for all, I’m cool with that. But choices have to be made. We simply can’t afford everything all the time.

---