So okay. I’ve been a CEO and I know what’s going through your mind. “I don’t want the government involved in anything! Period!"
I understand. The government does some pretty stupid things.
But remember that the legislators writing the laws are paid to do those stupid things by special interests that want in the taxpayer’s pockets. They drive up government spending, which increases their profits and our taxes, and forces the state to cut employee pay and revenue-sharing and school spending and whatever it takes to retain the cash flow to the special interests that fund their elections.
Don’t get me wrong, I believe our state and federal government both need a thorough scrubbing to eliminate waste and unneeded departments. But giving away taxpayer dollars is not the correction I would recommend.
It’s getting ridiculous. Satisfying campaign contributors has already trashed our national economy, and has for a long time driven Wisconsin’s personal and business taxes out of sight.
There are two expenses that businesses should not incur, and for exactly the same reason. Taxes and health care (and related administrative costs) are simply passed on to consumers in the price of the product. We taxpayers pay 50 percent more for the mere pleasure of sticking it to corporations.
Both should be a zero burden on corporations because they make them uncompetitive with those in other countries that are not faced with them. As a result U.S. companies must cut jobs or outsource manufacturing and services. This is absolutely stupid.
Those opposing health care reform are usually insurance industry CEOs and sales brokers, because they are the make-work middlemen pocketing the cash. Unfortunately, many non-insurance executives can’t see the forest through the trees. Their business “partners” from the insurance sector are dipping into their health care wallets, in some cases to make up for losses in other areas like Katrina and the stock market. It is a total waste.
The smartest thing we could do -- both as a nation and business community -- is to switch to a single-payer Medicare-for-all system of health care. As a Medicare patient and former CEO, I think it’s great. I get sick, I get care and the caregiver gets paid. I go to the same private hospital and physician I have for years; they just send the bill to Medicare instead. I just don't deal with the insurance company.
Every U.S. citizen should have this level of care, including politicians. If they want anything outside of the norm, like cosmetic surgery, they can pay for it on the outside the old-fashioned, free-market way, with cash dollars.
A Medicare-for-all system would not only save consumers $400 billion per year; it would save every U.S. corporation $6,500 per employee per year in health care premiums. How’s that for a bailout? But this one isn’t going to just the bankers.
Ask the Big Three how important that is. They now manufacture more cars in Canada because they only pay $800 per employee. And 80 percent of Canadians prefer their health care system to ours, even with their wait times. But since we spend twice what they do, wait times will not be an issue.
So the government has done some pretty stupid things and they’ll continue doing stupid things on health care because the insurance industry has given Congress $46 million in campaign contributions. What else would you expect them to do? Money talks!
That insurance bureaucracy is draining 31 percent of health care costs, money that should instead be spent on physicians, nurses and hospitals.
Unless the business community steps in and demands a single payer fix we are doomed for years of the same. Senators Herb Kohl and Russ Feingold must pressure Sen. Max Baucus and the Finance Committee to put single-payer on the table, and they must be encouraged to co-sign Sen. Bernie Sanders’ SB703 (the senate version of HR676). Only then can our economy turn around the way it should.
Jack Lohman is a retired business owner from Colgate and publishes http://MoneyedPoliticians.net. He authored "Politicians - Owned and Operated by Corporate America" and can be reached at jelohman@gmail.com.
9 Comments
Here we go again. Every time Jack Lohman writes an editorial supporting big government health care he cites his personal use of Medicare- its like free money! Somehow Lohman can't understand the fact that the Medicare system is headed for a financial meltdown and Medicare taxes will have to be increased significantly to cover future funding deficits. As to the big government health care saving $6,500 per employee per year- that is because the bill would be passed on to taxpayers.
Lohman cites 30% administrative costs from our current insurance system that could be used for health care - does this mean the government administrative costs will be zero? Kind of like administrative costs of our economically failed big government postal system? Or administrative costs of our economically failed big government train system? Or the low administrative costs of our highly efficient big government public school systems?
What about service- what country has a single-payer government-run health care system without waiting for services, health care rationing, and slow or non-existent medical care innovation? Check out the data- here is a link to info on cancer survival rates http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1560849/UK-cancer-survival-rate-lowest-in-Europe.html -Notice the US is number one? Notice that people from Canada and other countries come to the US when they want the best medical care available?
Jack,
I'm with you but with one exception. I feel the cart is before the horse. First get the lobbying out of the system. Then the health, education, infrastructure, etc. will fall in line for the benefit of the taxpayor instead of the politician.
Removing the tax collection from corporation is part of the solution. Not only does the taxpayor benefit but if a corporation does not pay taxes, they should not have a say in government.
It's time that business replaces ideology with reality. We are in a race with businesses from other countries, and thanks to our health care "system" we are running it with one leg.
The public option would be one approach when it comes to insurance options.
Funny thing is the people who claim that private insurance cannot compete with the public option would be the same people who cry that government can't do anything right. Untwist that knot please.
There are far too many holes in this line of reasoning to even begin to address them, but in short consider these three things:
1- Medicare pays 25-50% less to hosptials and physicians than private insurance. Medicaid pays even less. Anyone that pays attention knows that this was the reason that the hospital tax was created (and is being raised already) Medicare is going broke and is threatening to lower reimbursements even further. SINGLE PAYER MEANS LESS, NOT MORE FOR PHYSICIANS, NURSES AND HOSPITALS.
2- It may be true that Canadian manufacturers pay less for insurance, but personal taxes are much higher, and are almost entirely spent on Healthcare.The satisfaction level of Canadians depends very much on who you talk to. Most people have little interaction with the healthcare system here or in Canada. Those that are chronically or serriously ill or injurred are far less satisfied than those with "the sniffles". Waiting months or years for tests or surgeries that you can have in days here is not uncommon in Canada. Americans jsut won't stand for that. Funds would be limited in any single payer system. Rationing of care will happen. It happens everywhere else that a single payer system is in place.
3- Health Insurance was invented by businesses as a way to attract employees. Businesses still have the option of offering whatever insurace they want or don't. The government invented taxes (which you claim businesses shouldn't have to pay) If you think taxes are high now, just imagine how high they'd be if the government was able to tax businesses to pay for the nation's "free" healthcare. Voters will only allow the govt. to reach just so deep into their pockets to pay for healthcare. Costs will skyrocket (not go down) and businesses will have to take the burden. Once you've entitled every American to free healthcare, you will NEVER be able to take it away.
A final thought: Healthcare is extreemly important and personal. Why would anyone really want the government to take it over? What people want is for healthcare to be affordable and accessable. Single payer improves neither if all things are considered. We NEED reform, single payer just isn't it.
No, Bill, Medicare is not free money! I've been paying into the system for 45 years or so, and I still pay today. And Medicare is only in financial trouble because politicians like Sensenbrenner and Ryan gave $780 billion to the pharmaceutical industry in the Medicare D giveaway and blocked its bargaining for the 50% discount the VA gets. Aren't politicians great?
OF COURSE we'll pay for it in taxes, but we'll pay $400 Billion per year less than we are paying today!!! And we'll cover 100% of the people and help keep jobs in the US.
Don'cha get it??? We're paying already in the form of cost shifting and bankruptcy costs and when companies add their costs to the price of their product and we reimburse them at the cash register. Pay in taxes instead and we eliminate all the other payments. Yes it needs a different form of funding, but it will still be far cheaper than what we are paying today.
Zero administration costs? No, 3.5% instead of 17%. But we'll eliminate the high CEO salaries and bonuses, insurance shareholder profits, actuarial costs, gatekeeper and marketing costs, and even the lobbying and campaign contributions that they now pass on to the patient! And doctors will be assured fair payment and not have charity care and bad dept costs and bankruptcy costs.
Waiting lines? We spend twice the dollars as any other country; we'll not have waiting times greater than what we currently have. Nor rationing. You've become hooked on the insurance industry's BS. And obviously you've not experienced the denial of care that CEOs do to keep profits up.
And I agree, Bob, that as long as the cart is before the horse it is an uphill battle. But we can't wait for our corrupt congress to fix it poorly and then pass campaign reform and try to re-fix it later. I wish the reform would come first, but we have to play the cards we were dealt. But we have extremists on both sides of the isle that can't count, and can't see how the dominoes are going to fall.
And Keith, businessmen seem not to have the smarts to replace ideology with reality. That they have let their insurance buddies rip them off is puzzling to me. And yes, I love it. Those same people who complain about our "inefficient" government fight in the worst way to avoid competing with it. Already we pay 17% more for "private" Medicare Advantage plans than traditional Medicare. Duh!
Eric, having been in healthcare for 40 years, I can assure you that physicians get paid less by Medicare than private payers. But Medicare's payment is FAIR and guaranteed and 60% of the docs prefer that to the 15,000 current policies that require larger staffs to administer.
Private insurers are billed on the basis of "reasonable and customary" (ie, whatever you can get by with). And many times the excesses (which can be 4x Medicare) are necessary to offset the charity and other losses. But with Medicare there is no bad debt or charity care. And if Medicare payments were not already fair, this idea wouldn't have 60% physician support.
Doctors and nurses should be paid well, VERY well, and they will be under a Medicare-for-all system. Those few docs and hospitals that currently overcharge, because they can, will have to accept a haircut. But they'll sill get paid 6x the average worker.
And wait times? I waited two months to see an eye doctor and another two months to see a knee doctor... that's here, in the US! But if Canada took 1/6th of their nation out of their healthcare system -- as we do here -- they'd not have wait times either. But they spend only 10% of GDP and we spend over 16%. If they increased their costs by just 10% -- to 11% of GDP -- they'd eliminate their wait times.
I once gave a 1 hour interview on radio and a caller complained so much about wait times in Canada, she had to go to another country for care. But it was to Britain, where they have socialized medicine. Not the US.
>>> Funds would be limited in any single payer system.
Not if the politicians are under the same system. But even still, you can pay cash on the outside, just as you are today.
>>> Rationing of care will happen.
As I told Bill above, obviously you've not experienced the denial of care that CEOs do to keep profits up. Remember that 17 year old in California that died because her private insurer denied her a transplant? That was Cigna Healthcare, not Medicare.
Yes, businesses will still be able to provide employees a supplemental policy. And taxes? I guess I'd rather pay higher taxes than be ripped off by CEOs making $10 million salaries. And I'm on the side of the majority of Americans.
And wow, the slippery slope begins. "Free health care to every American!!" Forever!!! Bankrupt!!!
>>> Why would anyone really want the government to take over health care?
You forgot to use the word "socialism." But Medicare is not socialized medicine, the VA hospital and army hospitals are. Under Medicare the care remains between patient and doctor, unless you want to change that in the process. :-)
I agree with Jack. I was originally from Neenah, WI and via the USAF and Fiberboard Corp. ended up in CA. Never worried about health care till Fiberboard broke up and I started Western Packaging & Display Corp., which I ran for 27 years. Got turned down at Kaiser on family health care as wife had a pre-existing condition."Insure the best, forget the rest."
Ended up with Blue Cross (renowned for backing out on big payments and sued frequently). Can't blame the health insurance and drug boys for fighting hard, and paying your elected officials big time to continue "milking the U.S. health care cow" (WI annology thrown in).
Looks like this, boys & girls, it's in the numbers:
Ref. The Economist, "Pocket World in Figures, 2009 edition" 2008 figures.
U.S. GDP, $13.164 Trillion, health spending, 15.9 of GDP = $2.093 trillion
U.S. population, 301,000,000, add perhaps 2,000,000 uncounted = 303,000,000
$2.093 trillion divided by 303,000,000 = $6,907 spent on health care/person
CANADA GDP,$1.272 tr.(U.S.), health spending 9.7% of GDP = $123.384 billion
CANADIAN populations = 32,600,000
$123.384 billion divided by 32,600,000 = $3,902 spent on health care/person
As a % of GDP U.S. spends 40% more of it's GDP on health care than Canada.
Canada average life expectancy, men 78.3 years
U.S. average life expectancy, men 75.6 years
Canada average life expectancy, women 82.9 years
U.S. average life expectancy, women 80.8 years
U.S. drags up dead last among all the western industrialized democracies for it's citizens health, 37th in the world, and 22nd in the world for your children's health, but we exceed all of them by 30% to over 50% in cost of health care as a % of GDP or per person. The Yanks pay more and get less, how come?
All the other western industrialized democracies, and Taiwan who adopted the U.S. Medicare system for their entire population, pay health care providers directly, eliminating the insurance middle man, or severely limit and control any roll insurnace companies might play. They also negotiate prices for drugs competitive with world market prices.
They work hard to catch health problems early and take care of them to avoid expensive emergency room care and keep advanced illness to a minumum.
U.S. drug companies, most of whom I own in my IRA, sell all these countries at a profit, they just don't "take them to the cleaners", and they probably sell more drugs per person because they are more affordable.
Reduce U.S. health spending 40% to Canadian level, SAVE $837 billion a year
Reduce U.S. health spending 30% (25% over " " ), SAVE $628 billion a year
Other industrailized democracies and Taiwan, consider health care a human right and good business.
In the U.S. health insurance and drug company profits are a human right and health care is not, so we pay more and get less on health care.
Catastrophic medical costs are the #1 cause of personal bankruptcy in the U.S.That cause for bankruptcy is non-existant in Canada or any other western industrialized democracy.
So our system of health care is great for health insurance companies, drug companies and politicians.
How about the rest of us and competitiveness of U.S. Business??
Thank you,
Brian Stompe
Owner (retired)
Western Packaging & Display Corp.
Thanks Brian. It should be very clear that the insurance industry would not be spending $46 million per year in political bribery if the benefits of getting into our pockets were not well worth it. They are, needless to say. There are massive profits at stake here, and they are preying both on our corporations and the public. Some are okay with that; I'm not.
What's really unimaginable is that politicians -- who supposedly work for us -- are taking money from them. When I was a CEO, if I had employees taking money from vendors and giving away company assets in return, I'd fire them. Maybe even have them jailed. But many of our business leaders seem okay with that when politicians do exactly the same thing. They even help them. Go figure.
Jack, you hit it right on the head. Political bribery!!! But who is at fault? The person who bribes, or the persons we all trusted to protect our families and run our country properly that are taking the bribes?? And if these people (elected officials) are so easy to sway with bribes, do we really want them running our insurance coverage. It seems even you do not believe they are trustworthy. They currently are running our country trillions of dollars in debt and some how you feel they can effectively run the insurance business??? WOW!!! What happens to research when all the money runs dry?? Most medical breakthroughs happen because the US is willing to pay for better care. Why not look at the real problem. Lawyers!!!! The ones that get elected and make it so easy to sue doctors and corporations for every little issue. Talk about driving driving costs through the roof, the fear of lawsuits will do that. I could never see how we could allow lawyers to become elected officials anyway. It is such a conflict of interest that it is crazy that this is allowed. Look at Feingold, creating more ways to have lawyers involved in government crisis and trying to protect the people that are trying to kill Americans. Eliminate the petty lawsuits and watch the costs come down. Trust the free market system to operate and competition will prevail. You just need to take away the restraints that restrict the free market system from working.
Jaime Maliszewski
RPW, Inc.