. SouthAmerica: Since my college days, I have been 100 percent in favor of the market economy, and that belief is fully documented on all my articles published over the years. Here is an example from the beginning of an article published in November 2000: Brazil and the Euro - Part III - Published in November 2000. âHow can currency stability be achieved for the Brazilian economy?â Today, the Brazilian government is missing a great opportunity to adopt the euro as the new Brazilian currency. After Brazil adopts the euro, Brazil will have eliminated the currency risk between Brazil and the European countries of the European Union. Afterwards, the market place would make the necessary adjustments to the prices of assets in Brazil to reflect the fair market value of these assets in terms of the new euro currency. By: Ricardo C. Amaral SouthAmerica: But in the last few years, as a result of the massive stock market losses in the market crash of 2000 in certain industries, plus the mess created in various industries that were deregulated, plus the new advancements in technology that we had in recent years, plus economic implications of outsourcing that are available today for the first time, the way privatization of government companies were conducted in many places around the world - a combination of all of these factors makes me have second thoughts about the validity of free market concept for everything. Here is an area that I am having second thoughts about - the health care system in the United States, and I give my reasons below. But I am glad to see Paul Krugmanâs column on The New York Times on April 22, 2005 regarding the US health care system. ******************** SouthAmerica: This is what I had posted on another message board on April 22, 2005. Paul Krugmanâs column on The New York Times of April 22, 2005 â âPassing The Buckâ was right in the mark. As usual Paul Krugmanâs column was very good and he wrote about Americaâs crazy health care system. He said something on his column and I quote: ââ¦First, in the US system, medical costs act as a tax on employment. For example, General Motors is losing money on every car it makes because of the burden of health care costs. As a result, it may be forced to lay off thousands of workers, or may even go out of business.â ******************** SouthAmerica: I have some bad news to General Motors and Ford. In todayâs New York Times in the business section they had an article about the announcement just made by Mercedes/Chrysler Corp that they will start making cars in China in the near future to be exported to the US market. It looks like that means another nail on those companies coffin. It is not only General Motors that has the problem with the costs related to health insurance. Basically, it is a problem that affects the costs of every company that does business in the USA. Insurance in the private sector will be even more expensive in future years because of the unraveling of the genetic code of the DNA molecule. In the near future every private insurance company will design tests that Insured people will have to take to check everybodyâs DNA and what kind of diseases that person will have in the future. The private insurance companies will price their policies accordingly with the DNA results. Even if you are healthy today, the private insurance companies will ask for a premium based on the possibility of the future diseases that will show up on your DNA test. Private insurance companies are in the business to make money and not in the business of paying the bills for sick people. The insurance companies will try to give health insurance only to the healthiest segment of the population. Everyone else will be priced out of their monetary means. The United States government very soon will not have another choice other than offer ânational health insurance coverageâ for every American citizen. Ten years ago, many Americans were glad the politicians in Washington killed Bill Clintonâs national health insurance bill. Today, the ball game has changed drastically because of global competition, and the unraveling of the genetic code of the DNA molecule. Does not matter what your ideology is if you are a right-wing or a left-wing on your politics; the reality of todayâs world changes everything. Your political inclinations are completely obsolete regarding the future of national health insurance system in the USA. I hope that Paul Krugman will bring up this point of view in one of his future columns in the NYT regarding the health insurance system in the US. .
Your posts are nothing but SHAMELESS RHETORIC. Give me a fing break. Show me some empirical analysis. Go to Starbucks if you just want to have some lyrical masterbation....
. Citizennobody wrote: Your posts are nothing but SHAMELESS RHETORIC. Give me a fing break. Show me some empirical analysis. Go to Starbucks if you just want to have some lyrical masterbation.... ********** SouthAmerica: in a nutshell: There are two major reasons for US national health insurance today. 1) American corporations will be 100 percent in favor of such a plan because would reduce their costs of production, and they can become more competitive in world markets. American corporations already started repudiating their obligations related to pension costs here in the US. 2) Please give a little time, since they just finished mapping the genetic code of the DNA molecule. Believe me the insurance companies right now must be figuring out ways of coming up with tests based on this knowledge of DNA to start screening people before they give them insurance. Mainly now that we have a very fast ageing population in the USA, and older people get sick more often. Insurance companies will try to develop new technologies based on DNA screening to be able to avoid future costs as soon as they can. As a for profit type of business if these insurance companies are not doing that right now, then they are not doing their job. Their number one goal is the bottom line. After they develop these new screening tests, (and I bet they are doing that right now) they will price their policies accordingly to the results of these tests â if someone has the potential of getting a bunch of diseases they will charge a lot of money from that person to give him health insurance coverage. If you think the US has a health care crisis right now with over 40 million Americans with no coverage, and the costs of health care going completely out of control. Wait until you see what is in the store for the near future when the health care crisis in the US is magnified by corporate repudiation of health care costs, and by the development of these new diseases screening technologies. You donât need to be a rocket scientist to figure out that all of this is around the corner - all you need is a little common sense and voila. .
National health insurance sounds great in theory but won't work in real world application. Take a look at a few of the countries that provide it and look at the quality of care. It takes months to see specialists, it takes a year to get an appointment for a physical, and this seems like a good idea to you?
Brainiac....have you even read any of Krugmans' books. He addresses this issue in them and states the exact opposite of what you are proposing you socialist freak. Still, where is your empirical analysis. Show me in a Solow Growth model how this will affect steady state growth. Show me other hydraulic effects in the economy such as inflation trends and currency trends. Show me the % of growth within GDP and why this affects hardgoods sectors and cyclicals.... I have an MS in Econ.....show me the money....
. Mschey wrote: National health insurance sounds great in theory but won't work in real world application. Take a look at a few of the countries that provide it and look at the quality of care. It takes months to see specialists, it takes a year to get an appointment for a physical, and this seems like a good idea to you? ******************** SouthAmerica: Is not a question of being a good idea or not. It will happen as a matter of necessity and because of costs. A lot of things will change in this country in the coming years, and people will have to adjust to the new situation. Medicare will have a major crisis in the near future because of the ageing population. And a larger and larger segment of the population will be without any health insurance coverage â they will be priced out of the market. I believe that in ten years we will have such a national health crisis in the US that the government will have no choice other than adopt national health insurance coverage for all Americans. The people who can afford it still will be able to do what they want regarding their health care needs. .
Free markets have a way of finding workable solutions if you give them a chance. In ten years or so, we will see who's right!
Not in ten years.....TOMORROW BEEYATCH.... Look at Europe and their little euro referendum.... We run circles around those socialist countries
i have recently changed my mind on basic health care. it needs to be nationalized because of basic fairness. in this country you get free health care if you are poor, if you are old, if you are a politician, if you are in the military, if you are an illegal alien and if you are in prision. if you are rich you dont care. the only people left who dont get free health care are the working middle class.
not for long. we are becoming them, unfortunately. boggles my mind that the left, and even the so called right, wants to copy a system that produces no growth, 10% unemployment, and a lazy society that feels entitled to everything and no need to contribute to society for the lifestyle they live. ironically, while we are becoming them, western europe will be forced to reform due to competetive pressures from eastern europe. the government is defrauded out of hundreds of billions a year already wasted $40 billion last year in simple overpayments. nothing they do is efficient, without waste, and without fraud. yeah, but let's expand it. they are doing so well on a small scale.