These attacks are all false.
Sure, healthcare costs more than it used to - as do the drugs for many illnesses, but most of this is because the care and the drugs)are exponentially better.
Any healthcare provider can charge you exactly what healthcare cost in 1975 if you accept 1975-level care.
Look at it this way: a subcompact/economy car cost $2769 in 1975.
Now a subcompact cost $12,630.
But if you want a car as bad as a 1975 Pinto, you can buy it today for $2769.
The 2008 car is more than 10x better than the 1975 car. In fact a subcompact 2008 car is probably better than a top European sports-car was in 1975 - in terms of handling and braking, etc.
Cars are not more expensive now than in 1975; they are better and a better value. You probably couldn't pay someone enough to have them drive everyday in a 1975 Pinto today.
DITTO GETTING ANYONE TO SETTLE FOR 1975 HEALTHCARE TODAY.
SO... saying healthcare costs have "exploded" or are outrageous" (as a new Obama commercial calls it) is to lie; it is PROPAGANDA.
Here's what makes it worse: many of the policies the left/the Dems are proposing would make the healthcare WORSE; they'd retard pharmaceutical R&D, and make our system function as poorly as the NHS, for example - a system the Brits HATE because of the shoddy service.
So, please don't fall for the hyperbolic negativism of the Dems or their socialistic "remedies."
The Dems' remedies are the failed policies of the past.
BTW: The Dems seem stuck in the past - STUCK IN 1975: they had recently ousted Nixon and pulled the plug on our allies in South Vietnam, and dismantled the CIA's clandestine services, and so on. They elected Jimmy Carter who gave us a misery index of a gazillion, and let the USSR invade Afghanistan - and let the islamonazis oust the Shah of Iran.
The last thing we need is to turn the clock back to 1975 - or... October, 1917!
VOTE ACCORDINGLY.
I'm not even sure where to begin with this one.
ReplyDeleteo gee chenny thanks 4 sharin that.
ReplyDeletewut dontchu get!?
healthcare isnlt more money it's mo' better.
socializing healthcare doesn't work in canada or the uk or elsewhere.
but that'd what the dems want to do here.
they want to GIVE it to people who choose not to buy their own (with taxpayer money).
and they claim that it's gotten too expensive - as if it hadn't improved IMMEASURABLY.
and as if it would improve under socialism and with policies which punish "big pharma"
it';s schizoid.
lie u, probably.
u r a schizo or a dupe.
ur pick.
chenny the troll.
WAKE UP!
lookit chen baby:
i was born and raised into a household of cardcarrying commies.
but i woke up and saw the light.
so has DAVID MAMET.
u can do it to.
don't be afraid.
try.
the first step it to actually READ what we post. and think about it.
Buhbyeee.
Oh please, fine. Well, you could have started by adjusting for inflation:
ReplyDeleteWhat cost $2769 in 1975 would cost $11522.28 in 2007.
And if that alone doesn't shoot a hole right through the heart of your rather lame argument, perhaps this would blow it to pieces:
The overall cost of health care -- everything from hospital and doctor bills to the cost of pharmaceuticals, medical equipment, insurance and nursing home and home-health care -- doubled from 1993 to 2004, said the report from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. In 2004, the nation spent almost $140 billion more for health care than the year before.
....
The health care increase of 7.9 percent in 2004 was almost three times the overall national inflation rate, which was 2.7 percent. The average hourly wage for workers in private companies was essentially unchanged that year, according to the U.S. Department of Labor.
....
The researchers concluded that the overall quality of care in 2005 had improved at a rate of 2.8 percent from 2003. That was the same increase as the year before, and many measures showed no improvement or even decreases.
Go ahead and read the whole thing, but I doubt you'd have to. I mean, you can't honestly argue that I get 2x as good of care for, say, a broken arm in 1993 as I did in 2004. Or that the prescription drugs from one year to the next are so much improved that they warrant double the increase of inflation (for the same drugs, mind you).
But by all means, keep talking about Pintos. I think you might convince someone.
you wrote: "What cost $2769 in 1975 would cost $11522.28 in 2007.
ReplyDeleteAnd if that alone doesn't shoot a hole right through the heart of your rather lame argument, perhaps this would blow it to pieces"
r u n idiot!?!?!
this further proves my case.
we are not paying too much for a car; merely comparing the pricetags in constant/inflation adjusted dollars shows that cars cost about the same and are much MUCH better.
hence: a better value.
anyione who would argue that cars are more expensive now and wre a better value them would be NUTS>
ditto healthcare.
you assholemoronjerk troll.
all healthcare is better - even broken arms.
ReplyDeletewhich prob come with mris and catscans etc and better painkillers.
u r the biggest moron dupe lefy i have ever come across.
go ask a doctor if medical was as good in 1975 as now.
ReplyDeletejerk.
I noticed that the primary selling feature in that Pinto ad was fuel economy, boasting 34mpg.
ReplyDeleteIt reminds me of a Chevy Aveo, which is a subcompact that you can pick up new for about *gasp* $12K and gets *double gasp*....
...about 34 mpg
But, hey, you can get it with a CD player. it's 10X better!!!!
gimme a break.
It's basically the same damn car, 30 years apart.
"It's basically the same damn car, 30 years apart."
ReplyDeleteIF YOU BELIEVE THAT THEN YOU ARE EVEN STUPIDER THAN I THOUGHT!
it was a terrible UNSAFE car.
a car is more than mpg and audio.
what about brakes, steering/handling/ etc.?
and: it cost the same as the 2008 nissan i featured.
which would you buy today?
if you day the pinto or it doesn't matter thas you are a moron and/or a dupe.
so sane person would pay for the pinto.
ditto today's healthcare: it's better than healthcare EVER was - at any price. but in fact: the dame care is no ,more expensive now than it was i 1975.
you get better care and it cost more. mris etc cost.
mow please: open you mind (if you still have one) or stay away!
troll.
Bottom line is your argument would make sense if the cost of health care have increased along with inflation, as the cars have, but it hasn't.
ReplyDeleteSure, automobile technology has improved and you get a little more safety and performance for about the same relative cost. You simply can't say that about health care. It's relatively a LOT more money for these little improvements in care. And the treatment for 99% of the things that you would go to the hospital for (like a broken arm) essentially haven't changed. It's a friggin x-ray and a cast fer cryin out loud. Those types things should actually be cheaper based on your model.
I like how you move the goal posts to claim that my argument supports yours though. That was cute.
As I've recently discovered to my dismay, the cost of health insurance privately purchased is outrageously high (about $4000/month for two in a private plan comparable to the group plan of $1200/month).
ReplyDeleteHOWEVER, I discovered on Sunday that there are other alternatives to that kind of plan. Some docs are not slaves to health-insurance plans and have, in effect, develop their own little networks which greatly reduce the cost of medical care, without reducing quality of care; to the contrary, the care is better. HERE is an exaple of one such doctor, who is one of the best GP's in Northern Virginia. How do I know he's one of the best? He used to be my cousin's doctor, before he went out on his own.
One can also buy catastrophic coverage at a reasonable price. In addition, putting assets into a trust will shelter those assets from bankruptcy relating to the cost of health care (chemo, brain surgery, etc.).
One reason--and there are many reasons--that health insurance is so expensive is that the government has its fingers in the pie. For example, those with health care insurance subsidized by the government run to the doctor at the drop of a hat. Furthermore, the policies sometimes prevent the doctor from conferring with the patient via telephone and/or Internet.
I know from personal experience right now that those without health insurance can "bargain" with doctors and even hospitals for a reasonable price. Nationalized healthcare would take away that option.
Oh, and healthcare is better today in many respects due to better diagnostics (MRI's PT scans, etc.). Yes, MRI's are expensive, but an MRI of the brain saved my husband's life when a brain tumor was diagnosed while that tumor was still operable. Had we been under nationalized healthcare, the delay in getting an MRI--typically, there are long delays with nationalized healthcare--would have cost him his life.