Profile | Americans for Tax Reform
Website | www.ATR.org
Author's Latest Posts |
- The Best We Can Get: Support H.R.3905
- White House Wages War on Free Speech
- Healthcare Bill Breaks Obama's Oft-Repeated Promise on Taxes
- Government Healthcare: Everyone is Equal, Some More Equal Than Others
- Cap and Trade: Price Controls Don't Exist in a Rational Market
More»
Government Healthcare: Everyone is Equal, Some More Equal Than Others
By Americans for Tax Reform | 10/20/09 | 01:16 PM EDT | 10 Comments
Government run healthcare - the promise of equality for all! Everyone is equal, universality for all!
In reality, of course, it doesn't work like that. Like in George Orwell's masterpiece Animal Farm, everyone may well be equal, it's just that some are more equal than others.
One of the best instances of this comes from the sacred heart of modern government-run healthcare - the UK.
The Times of London reported yesterday that "The National Health Service has spent £1.5m paying for hundreds of its staff to have private health treatment so they can leapfrog their own waiting lists. More than 3,000 staff, including doctors and nurses, have gone private at the taxpayers’ expense in the past three years because the queues at the clinics and hospitals where they work are too long."
Just think about that for a minute: the only way for people who work in government-run healthcare to actually get adequate healthcare, is to seek out private treatment. You know, the very thing the Obama Administration doesn't want the American people to have.
The Times continues: "The health department defended the practice and said sending doctors, nurses and other key staff for private treatment helped to get them back to work. If trusts want to get their staff back to work more quickly they can’t jump NHS waiting lists, so going private is an option,” said the spokesman."
Of course, this option isn't availiable to most people. While taxpayers wait for years for critical surgery, health bureaucrats still get first class treatment. And the only way for a doctor to get treated themselves is to go outside their own system.
With socialised medicine, all patients are equal. It's just that some are more equal than others.
| 
|
10 Comments | Related Topics »National
RECOMMENDED SITES
Comments
The quality of care will suffer greatly under a government run system. This legislation must be defeated.
- reply
|More whining from Republicans. Health care reform will save lives, period! We have the votes...keep crying.
- reply
|Sally: As an independent, I can easily spot the whining on both sides of the political debate. In this case I cannot overlook the irony of your post:
What, with Anita Dunn boasting of controlling the media, the White House engaging in a war of words and your argument which may as well come from Mao's Little Red Book- reply
|Again the same old story, Democrats lie to the public, they cry cry cry, whine whine whine, and mislead the world on their agenda. Oh wait! I'm sorry, WHAT AGENDA?!! They don't have an agenda. They have NOTHING. Just alot of hot air.
Notice how Sally's been enlisted to comment only on the Obama bad press related to the Health Care issues. Other minions are enlisted to comment on other categories. A concerted effort of deceit to sideline American citizens.
- reply
|To your point, there is an exponential impedance mismatch between BHO’s rhetoric and the current legislation under consideration:
Free abortion, massive tax increases & massive cuts to Medicare, while excluding conscience protection for health professionals who may object to abortion, for example.
After all, no one has bothered to ask the unborn how they would like to choose.- reply
|As an accountant, I find the inequity in the tax laws as it applies to healthcare and health insurance just insane. And the really sad part is that it would be easy to fix. For example, if your employer has adopted a Section 125 plan, you can pay your health insurance premiums with not only pre-income tax money, but also with pre social security and pre Medicare money. If your employer has not adopted a Sec. 125 plan then you probably will not get any tax savings because you would have to itemize your deductions and then you would only get to deduct what exceeds 7.5% of your adjusted gross income.
We need to expand health savings accounts so that you can contribute for not just the out of pocket high deductible premium stuff, but rather the insurance premium itself so that all Americans can pay for their medical costs and insurance with pre-tax money. This would also go a long way in solving the portability problems because health insurance would be at the individual level.
HSAs are probably one of the best things President Bush did. California still has not even conformed to the modest federal laws which in my opinion is unconscionable.
I could go on and on. It is insane that you can get a tax deduction for giving money to that Friends of the Sea Lions place, or “Alley Cat Allies,”, but you help your out of work neighbor with her cancer medication, you get nothing.
Andy Favor
Candidate for California State Controller
PS: I am curious to see if anyone has built their HSA account to a spectacular amount through prudent investing. I have emailed CNBC about this because I thought hearing how someone was able to grow $15,000 in contributions to over $100,000 would generate a discussion as to the benefits of HSAs.
- reply
|Andy:
You have a good point - on the other hand, the notion that is so easy that a caveman could do it simply highlights the fact that not much will be done in Sacramento until lawmakers commit to a bureaucracy realignment and closure initiative, and lobby reform.
Consider that registered lobbyist outnumber lawmakers 8-1. Then there are government funded unregistered lobbyist which outnumber the registered ones, such as the California Law Revision COmmission (CLRC), and now even the OCSD Government Relations desk!
- By the way, there is reportedly pending legal action against the CLRC for contacting a book publisher and allegedly requesting to remove a book critical of the CLRC - when we contacted the CLRC the response was "We do not comment on pending legal action"
Another example of total disregard for taxpayers money: the LAFCO committee mis-communicates. SO the solution from the OCBOS office? Hire a consultant!
Now consider lobby spending in Sacramento:
1. The Service Employees International Union spent $10.9 million over a two-year period.
2. The Western States Petroleum Association, which represents oil and gas companies, spent $10.5 million
3. The California Teachers Association ($7.9 million)
4. The Bromine Science and Environmental Forum ($6.5 million)
5. The California Hospital Association ($5.9 million)
So do you suppose the Caveman has enough dough to bake the pie you are selling?- reply
|I hear you Coto! I think the reason the state legislature is so opposed to HSAs is that they pose the greatest threat to the liberal dream of socialized medicine.
It is tragic that ideology has stopped a very simple reform that could be a tremendous benefit. Arizona has embraced HSAs and I have heard that HSA compatible health insurance plans cost a fraction of what California plans cost. Certainly shoppoing accross state lines would be a reform I would advocate in addition to my expanded HSA plan.
I know as Controller I would not be in a legislative position, but I would hope I could use the position to lobby for simple change.
Andy Favor, Candidate for California State Controller
- reply
|Hi Andy:
Now that we are on the same ball park, perhaps we can publish an interview on your plans.
I do not characterize the state legislature as opposed to HSAs because it is a threat to the liberal dream of socialized medicine, as much as it is a threat to their personal thirst for power.
Keep us posted!- reply
|Coto,
I will keep you posted. Now that October 15th is passed, I have started preparing my campaign materials and positions. I don't have too much yet, but in the end a lot of my positions will be the same as I have had when I ran for State Assembly.
For now, here is something I wrote for the OC Register regarding my health care plan:
FAVOR'S ANSWER
First off, the solution toCalifornia
By way of background, there are three primary categories of people inCalifornia
A Health Savings Account works just like an IRA and provides a pretax savings vehicle to accumulate money to cover medical costs. Currently, to have a deductible medical insurance premium you have to itemize your taxes and even then you only get to deduct what exceeds 7.5 percent of your adjusted gross income. Or, your premiums can be deductible if you are self-employed or are fortunate enough to work for an employer who has adopted a Sec. 125 plan. I think every American, legal or otherwise, should be able to pay their health insurance premiums with pre-tax dollars regardless of who they work for.
Congress has taken a good step in the right direction with the creation of "HSA Accounts." However, these have too many restrictions and do not go nearly far enough to be considered a solution.
I envision accounts that have no contribution limits that can receive contributions from an employer or an individual, and can be used to pay the medical costs for friends, family, sponsored immigrant relations, or anyone. The entire contribution would be a page one deduction on an individual's tax return and would generate a credit for social security taxes so that contributions have all of the benefits of a Sec. 125 plan.
The adoption of such a plan would diminish the numbers of uninsured Californians as follows:
Healthy Individuals: Tax deductibility would give healthy individuals an economic incentive to contribute to a plan knowing that they can buy a high deductible or catastrophic policy that would leave the bulk of their contribution to grow tax free to cover future medical needs, or personal enjoyment later in life.
Workers Between Jobs: Participation in a health insurance plan would be at the individual level and the medical savings account will allow families to accumulate funds to cover insurance premiums between jobs without portability issues.
Poor People: Obviously a tax deduction is meaningless to a poor person who does not pay taxes. My plan allows for an employer to contribute to a HSA for an employee as part of a salary package, but goes further in that it makes a legitimate tax deduction for people who come to the aid of a "needy family." Because government programs typically are like a leaky hose with only pennies on the tax dollar actually going to help the truly needy, my plan eliminates the middleman so that 100 percent of aid to the needy goes to cover medical expenses without the fraud element of government programs. More money going directly to aid the poor and less fraud will result in dramatically more help for those in society who are truly in need.
- reply
|Post new comment