POLITICAL: Obamacare death spiral?

Thursday, April 2, 2015

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/mar/26/susan-parnell-the-obamacare-death-spiral-may-have-/

*** begin quote ***

According to the Manhattan Institute, premiums climbed by 41 percent on average from 2013 to 2014, and premiums are likely to rise sharply again after two insurance company bailout programs included in Obamacare expire in 2017.
 
The other sign health insurance markets are in the early stages of a death spiral is the age mix of those buying policies through Obamacare. Originally it was estimated that around 40 percent of enrollees had to be in the relatively healthy 18 to 34-year-old age segment, so their premiums could be used to pay for the health expenses of older, less-healthy enrollees. So far it appears only some 28 percent of enrollees are in that coveted age group, which also comprises around half of the uninsured.
All of this means insurers are getting a risk pool that is less healthy than expected, and more premium hikes are around the corner. While subsidies hide some from the full impact, others in the middle class will not be shielded.
 
It will undoubtedly take a few years to know for sure, but for anybody concerned about setting off a death spiral or thinking Congress surely didn’t intend to do so, don’t worry. It looks like it’s already here, whether Congress intended it or not. 
 
*** end quote ***
 
Like Social Security, it’s fiscally unsound — in addition to being immoral, ineffective, and inefficient.
 
Why Statists — on both the left and right — think that they can ignore the “Laws of Economics” is a mystery to me. Like the time the Louisiana Legislature voted to repeal the “Law of Gravity”! Just because the “laws” of Economics are a little more subtle, doesn’t mean they exist. 
 
In this case, the invisible hand of the free market is going to slap the politicians and bureaucrats upside the head and say “fools”!
 
Where insurance is virtually unregulated — life insurance for example — it’s cheap, easy to get, and simple. (You die; you get paid!) Across the spectrum of “insurance”, the more regulation, the more expensive. Until you get to “health”, “health care”, “health care insurance”, or something else whatever this is. Most regulated; impossible.
 
And, this fluff about “pre-existing” conditions, is like being able to buy “fire insurance” after the fire!
 
Also, the routine heath care tests? That’s like “insuring” your cars oil changes. Makes no sense. Go to Jiffy lube for 30$ (but don’t buy the air filters); “insure” it and the paperwork alone will make it $100 at least.
 
Argh!
 
So, because there were some without “insurance”, the liberals decided to fool us into a USSR style system. Argh! 
 
Anyone figure out if “we” just took all the money spent on Obamacare, we could have give every uninsured a Congressional style plan.
 
But, then they wouldn’t have their power over a seventh of the economy.
 
Anyone think this is going to work out well?
 
# – # – # – # – # 
 

HEALTH: The Gooferment should get out the “heath” business completely

Saturday, February 28, 2015

http://www.newser.com/story/177742/big-problem-with-last-weeks-big-cholesterol-news.html

Big Problem With Last Week’s Big Cholesterol News
THE ONLINE RISK CALCULATOR MAY SIGNIFICANTLY INFLATE RISK
By Kate Seamons, Newser Staff
Posted Nov 18, 2013 7:27 AM CST

*** begin quote ***

The changes to the way doctors prescribe cholesterol-lowering statins were described last week as “tectonic” and “profound”; today, the New York Times uses the phrase “major embarrassment.” The issue: the online risk calculator introduced by the American Heart Association and the American College of Cardiology to flag candidates for statins may overestimate risk—hugely. The issue was apparently identified a year ago by two Harvard Medical School professors who had reviewed a draft version; their input never made it to those developing the calculator, and the professors noticed the same errors in the final calculator when it was revealed publicly on Tuesday.

*** end quote ***

And, there was the announcement by the Gooferment that dietary cholesterol doesn’t impact blood cholesterol numbers.

Disputing decades of “settled science”.

Then, into my email box drops this gem.

http://nutritionfacts.org/video/optimal-cholesterol-level/

Transcript: Optimal Cholesterol Level

*** begin quote ***

The optimal cholesterol level, the optimal “bad cholesterol” LDL level, Is 50 to 70. Accumulating data from multiple lines of evidence consistently demonstrate that that’s where a physiologically normal LDL level would be. That appears to be the threshold above which atherosclerosis and heart attacks develop.

That’s what we start out at birth with, that’s what fellow primates have, that’s the level seen in populations free of the heart disease epidemic, but we can also look at all the big randomized controlled cholesterol lowering trials. This is graphing the progression of atherosclerosis versus LDL cholesterol. More cholesterol, more atherosclerosis, but if you draw a line down through the points, you can estimate that the LDL level at which there is zero progression is down around 70. 

*** and ***

Atherosclerosis is endemic in our population in part because the average person’s LDL level is up around 130, approximately twice the normal physiologic level. The reason the federal government doesn’t recommend everyone doesn’t shoot for even just under 100, is that despite the lower risk accompanying more optimal cholesterol levels, the intensity of clinical intervention required to achieve such levels for everyone in the population would financially overload the health care system. Drug usage would rise enormously. But they’re just assuming drugs are the only way to get our LDL that low, but those eating really plant based diets may hit the optimal cholesterol target without even trying. Just naturally nailing under 70.

*** end quote ***

As regular readers know, I’m changing my diet from mostly meat based to mostly plant based.

In part, because of these “scary videos”.

It’s amazing that “We, The Sheeple” have never heard this simple way of avoiding some really nasty health consequences.

I’m sure my maternal Grandmother would have never fed her family “things that would kill them”.

She died of Colon Cancer. If she’d known, maybe she’d have lived to a ripe old age.

So once again, we have the Gooferment mis-informing us either due to stupidity or laziness, or is there a bunch of Crony Capitalists in the woodpile somewhere.

Drugs are expensive and profitable. A vegan diet not so much so. 

I remember one nutritionist on the boob tube pleading that “if your food comes in a box, then you would be better off eating the box!”. 

I laughed at the time, but many a true word is carried in a joke!

# – # – # – # – # 


RANT: Obamacare should be rolled back

Sunday, November 16, 2014

“Stupid.”

That’s what the architect of ObamaCare called you, the American voter.

He said they wrote the law specifically to confuse voters, to conceal what the law was about.

But now ObamaCare is going to face a day of reckoning.

# – # – # – # – #   

Argh! “health”, “health care”, “health care insurance”, or something else

But, I think we should thank these bozos for getting “health insurance” disconnected from “employment”.

Like “car insurance”, it should have ZERO connection to your employer.

</EXTREME RANT>

All due to the wage and price controls of WW2.

Aggravated by the Crony Capitalist tax code that allows business to deduct “health insurance expense” but employees can not!

<EXTREME RANT/>

I hope that the R’s will correct this aspect.

If I was an R, I’d be passing bills like a machine gun. Then BHO44 can veto or sign. “We, The Sheeple” can make judgments from there.

# – # – # – # – #   


GOVERNACIDE: An “Obamacare” death

Tuesday, July 8, 2014

2014-Jul-08

http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/las-vegas/woman-class-action-lawsuit-against-xerox-dies

Posted July 1, 2014 – 11:41am Updated July 1, 2014 – 4:42pm
Woman in class-action lawsuit against Xerox dies
By JENNIFER ROBISON
LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL

*** begin quote ***

Time ran out for Linda Rolain.

The Las Vegas woman died Monday, less than two weeks after her family went public with details of how enrollment trouble through the Nevada Health Link insurance exchange kept her from getting treatment in January for an aggressive brain tumor.

Rolain was one of about 150 Nevadans suing Nevada Health Link contractor Xerox for enrollment mixups that left them without the health insurance they paid for.

Rolain is the first to die of complications from an illness that her family said went untreated for lack of coverage. But observers close to her case say she may not be the last, because others are in similarly urgent situations.

*** end quote ***

Now no one is saying that without the screw up she would have survived, …

… BUT, (and there is always a BIG butt), …

… … … it couldn’t have helped and may well have shortened her time.

The hubris of Gooferment politicians and bureaucrats is stunning.

Remembering that the whole “benefits” issue is the direct result of Gooferment meddling.

  •  WW2 Wage and Price controls forced companies to offer “benefits” as non-cash compensation
     
  • The Tax Code gave corporations breaks on “benefits” that individuals didn’t get (A corporation can deduct healthcare insurance costs, but an individual tax payer can’t!)
     
  • The Gooferment created Medicare and forced the old into a Gooferment “reservation”. (Medicare works as well as the VA healthcare and Indian healthcare.)
     
  • Obamacare

The Gooferment is immoral, ineffective, and inefficient!

This is the first death; there will be more.

# – # – # – # – #   


POLITICAL: WW2 wage and price controls cause today’s problems

Monday, July 7, 2014

http://channel-surfing.blogspot.com/2014/07/time-to-cut-employers-out-of-healthcare.html

Tuesday, July 1, 2014
Time to cut employers out of the healthcare loop
Daniel Froomkin asks one of the right questions in the wake of yesterday’s ruling in the Hobby Lobby case: “Why should employers have anything to do with people’s health insurance anyway?”

# – # – # – # – #  

I, for once, agree.

I would say why should Gooferment or its corporations be in charge of “health”, “health care”, “health care insurance”, or something else?

Look at “life insurance”. “Cheap”, easily available, and virtually unregulated.

Even “car insurance” is relatively the same when compared to “health insurance”.

When you think about it, the current “system” comes from the WW2 wage and price controls. There, the Gooferment, created the problem and “they” keep “rescuing” us from the problem they created.

Could we at least consider an alternative?

If the problem was “uninsured”, (which I dispute), then could “we” NOT bought every uninsured person a policy and avoided the financial and systematic débâcle that was Obamacare?

I think that you liberals think that only the Gooferment can solve “problems”. When in actuality, it causes the problem it seek to proclaim it’s solving.

# – # – # – # – #    


INSPIRATIONAL: “health”, “health care”, “health care insurance”, or something else

Thursday, May 29, 2014

http://www.impactlab.net/2014/05/24/3-predictions-by-vinod-khosla-for-the-future-of-health/

May 24th, 2014 at 8:25 am
3 predictions by Vinod Khosla for the future of health

*** begin quote ***

According to a newly released report, he predicts:

1. 80 percent of what doctors do, diagnostics, will be replaced by machines

2. Medicine will become tailor-made for each patient

3. Consumer-driven tech will create better incentives to keep people healthy

*** end quote ***

Amazing predictions.

But the economic engineer will have to drastically change.

Will people be “smart” enough to manage their own health?

Not coming out of Gooferment Skrules!

They can’t balance a checkbook or other simple tasks.

But they are good test takers.

Argh!

# – # – # – # – #   


POLITICAL: OBAMACARE nukes incentives

Monday, February 10, 2014

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304680904579367143880532248

The Economist Who Exposed ObamaCare
The Chicago professor examined the law’s incentives for the poor not to get a job or work harder, and this week Beltway budgeteers agreed.
By JOSEPH RAGO CONNECT
Feb. 7, 2014 6:30 p.m. ET

*** begin quote ***

Another way of putting it is that taking away benefits has the same effect as a direct tax, so lower-income workers are discouraged from climbing the income ladder by working harder, logging extra hours, taking a promotion or investing in their future earnings through job training or education.

*** end quote ***

The bad news just keeps rolling in.

# – # – # – # – #   


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,482 other followers

%d bloggers like this: