Tuesday, May 12, 2009

Roller-Coasters and Obamacare.


The new Health and Human Services secretary, Kathleen Sebelius, was on Fox on Tuesday morning to talk about Obamacare. Of course it is urgent and of course we should just trust them on how it will be developed. All of that aside, one of the hosts did post the question that really has no meaning in the Obama administration, “how are you going to pay for this”. Her response was vague and indirect. The most I could make out is that it will be paid for by adding more people onto the program. To break it down into regular person terms it works like this. Suppose healthcare is an amusement park. You pay for a season pass and use it as needed. Some people though, sneak into the park and use it just as freely as you do. Now, the amusement park has to increase the ticket prices for paying members to cover the costs of the gate jumpers. Under the Obama plan, instead of trying to find ways to cut down on the gate jumpers, they will just add them to your plan. If you have a season pass to cover a family of 5, they will tack on an additional charge to cover two gate jumpers. Additionally, when you go to the park, you are now told which rides you can ride and how many times you can ride the ride. The reason for this is that since the gate is now wide open, everyone has come crashing into the park. And because the price of the season pass is fixed, the park cannot afford to expand or improve existing rides. The demand on the existing park and rides has caused the rationing of ridership. The park also has less money to pay its employees, which makes working at the park less attractive. Let’s face it, spending 12 years of school to figure out how to operate the flying Dutchman is just not worth it if the money isn’t there. Now the park has to cut back on the major thrill rides because they don’t have enough people or funds to operate them. The lines get longer at the barrel and tea cups. The park makes you set up appointments for when you can use your season pass. Maybe it’s your child’s birthday and they want to go to the amusement park to celebrate, but they can’t use it because it is full. The very people you wanted to help by opening the gates to everyone are now suffering. Since there is no real incentive to entice people to come because the season passes are mandatory for those that the government has decided must pay, the maintenance starts to go down-hill. People leave the park with illnesses they didn’t have before they came, such as tetanus from rusty rides. A few of the very rich, as well as the heads of government go overseas to visit privately run amusement parks so they can ride the latest roller-coasters. Roller-coasters aren’t even available in the United States anymore. This is Obamacare.

5 comments:

Kansas Bob said...

I know people that do not have health insurance.. not sure what the caring thing is for them.. some make minimum wage.. their employers don't offer health insurance.. guess we can just keep on riding the coasters and tell them to get with the program.. I have no answers.

Maybe you all can discuss solutions this Thursday.. I will be celebrating my day of formally entering geezerhood and will not be there.

jrchaard said...

Is that your birthday. Age may make you a geezer, but spirit keeps you young. As far as solution, I know it isn't government. I think, again, it comes from charities dedicated to funding healthcare for the uninsured.

Kansas Bob said...

RE: "spirit keeps you young" - see me in 30 years :)

I did a search for healthcare charities and only saw ones for Africa.. do you know of any successful ones helping poor Americans on a national scale?

Maybe the charity approach could be taken for other things like providing software for hospitals and doctors offices.. maybe we need to get computer programmers volunteering to help out in these areas.. why pay when you can get it for free :)

jrchaard said...

A charity is voluntary and can only provide what they have funds for. Administratively, they will be more cost effective than government. For any charitable program like this to be effective, all government involvement has to be removed. No medicare or medicaid or any other such program. Additionally, all of that money has to be returned to the tax payer. I'm not saying it will have the best outcome, but better and not bankrupt. Sure, the rich will get the best healthcare and the poor the worst. Until there is an amendment to the constitution saying there should be an equality of life, this is how it will be for everything. Why is healthcare exempt.

Kansas Bob said...

It seems to me that you are painting a picture where charity cannot work unless the "all government involvement has to be removed" - good luck with that :)

Not sure what the healthcare for the poor answer is but I think that charities are probably already doing what they can do and govt is not going to remove itself from the equation.. given that.. it seems that you really haven't proposed a viable solution.. careful.. people will be thinking you are in the GnoP :)

Anywho.. in a few years all of the baby boom generation will be on Medicare and the country will be pretty close to govt funded universal health care :)