Another point that would be helped Freethinker, is the cost of workers comp would be drastically reduced if the health care aspect was taken out, again a boost to business and hiring. And more small business who now don't have workers comp could afford it. I don't understand why they don't just add a health care fee to each order of fries and cheesburgers. You pay for a portion of your health care caused by bad habits as you incur the damage. The government could hire some of the insurance companies actuaries accountants to figure the health care cost of a high fat, high salt diet in terms of health care. The extra $0.50 added to a 800 calorie double cheese burger wouldn't hurt sales that much and if the consumer didn't want to pay the fee he wouldn't have to buy the unhealthy food. It wouldn't pay all the cost, but it would only be fair for the unhealthy lifestyle people to pay for it. Even republicans couldn't argue that point.
Then tell that to Reich who is the one suggesting negotiations. Actually real negotiations occur all the time on large DoD service contracts, and between private providers and insurerers. Think about it- medicare pays below market level for services, and you claim has low administrative costs, therefore cost is clearly not the problem. You tell me, what does a thinking man conclude about Reich and about medicare?
You can't see the forest through the trees. You will still have to pay via taxes if you insist that everyone gets all they want, you will still have to pay. military - government health care for life it really can suck for some, just look into VA quality and availability as well as care for dependents. I know, I was in it once. elderly - government health care out of control, period. it is bankrupting the nation federal, state, county and city - government health care um, no. It is simply government paying premiums for private insurers as part of the pay package, and it is causing major problems for government budgets. poor - government health care again, a major drain on society due to poor policy large corporation employees - employer paid and subsidized health care if they have the money, yes. self employed - paid for by the individual, if insured at all employees of the self employed - a good chance there is no health insurance, which means when it gets real bad the government takes over. Wake up people. yes, wake up. stop insisting that every unproductive dying person gets hundreds of thousands in health care. Stop making stupid assertions that this is all about evil private this and that when this is yet another problem created by liberal government. Certainly good government has a role, but people like Reich are ruining it for us.
free lunch philosopy, but guess who will end up paying anyway here's an idea, how about no gov't health care for cheeseburger eaters and let them bear the consequences of their own actions? It's called liberty and freedom, some guys about 240 years ago in Philly thought it was a swell idea.
Never mind the forest, you're the one who's barking up the wrong tree. Out-of-control spending is a symptom, not the problem. Jefferson's greatest regret during the ratification of the Constitution was his inability to get an amendment added that would have prohibited the federal government from borrowing money to fund it's operations. Ironic that you actually referred to him and the rest of this country's founders, yet you're pointing fingers in the wrong direction. Politicians love people like you...
Old enough to understand that liberal ideals put into law never work as people like Reich say they will. Old enough to understand that the only pricing mechanism that has ever worked is a free market. Old enough to understand that government programs cannot cure human death and suffering and that do-gooders cause unintended consequences.
The only tree I was barking at was Reich's tree of leftist academic bilgefruit. So out of control spending is not the problem for entitlement programs, got it, thanks for clearing that up. Liberals love people like you. Given the vigorous defense in here, I think the words bear some sort of memorializing, after all they are the product of decades of profound Harvard-Berkeley liberal economic thinking "Spending is not the problem when it comes to the entitlements budget crisis, it's the cost of what is being bought." Well then, the next step is clearly obvious. In fact I will out liberal everyone. I am for making a law which says all medical care is provided for free. All set, problem solved.
Some good points on both sides. My BIL is a general practice physician. He says he gets $XX dollars for every Medicare patient he sees, whether its 15 min or an hour. The problem with the govt reducing payments, arbitrarily I might add, is that eventually it makes no sense to keep seeing Medicare patients. Regarding the Prescription Drug Benefit, originally the Republicans wanted other Medicare spending reduced by a like amount. This made sense...if you forego a medical procedure in lieu of drug treatment, why pay for both? Of course the Dems balked. As an aside, of all major entitlement programs, the Drug Benefit has had the least cost overrun over the life of the program. This includes SS, Medicare and Medicaid. And lastly, for all those in favor of a "public option, keep in mind that means the govt is in control of access to healthcare. At least with the current system I have a choice, as limited as it may be for some.