Cato President Ed Crane Frames the Health Care Debate

[ConservativeHealth]

The commodification of human health is fundamentally a good thing in that allows stakeholders to extract value from policy holders in exchange for truncated service.

[tonzimala]

Lying fat fuck runs a corporate press release laundering service. Cato Institute is funded by ExxonMobil, Monsanto, Philip Morris, JP Morgan Chase, etc. Cato hires "scholars" (whores with PhDs) to churn out "studies" (pro-corporate propaganda). Ed Crane wants to turn back the clock to robber baron times -- before Social Security, unemployment insurance, labor unions, environmental protection -- anything making life bearable for working people.

[ChoronzonicChaos333]

yay that means the overpopulation problem can be mitigated!!! Obama is a globalist. He doesn't want healthcare either bc he knows more ppl dying is good!

[tyronebumblebee]

I love how this bozo speaker quotes the lewin group to make his point. The lewin group is owned by United insurance company. Don't believe me? Look it up

[fdoric6]

The intersting thing is that since the economic collapse the von mises web site ranks now about 15th in the category "society, politics" according to Alexa web traffic browser--with a massive increase of 34% in hits over the last 3 months.

The turn towards this perspective of corporate facism indicates many people are having problems in accepting the BIG LIE of the magic hand of the self regulating free markets and are searching for a means to preserve this anachronism

[termsofusepolice]

Cato say, "The Nazi's were only evil because they were government run. Let the market carry out the Final Solution. If the poorest, weakest members of society can't afford to pay for their own health care, they will, eventually and rightfully, die. And our nation will be strengthened, thanks to the process of natural selection."

No thanks... I'll stick with the Dogo Institute. They believe that a pack is better than a lone wolf.

[rsaswest]

De-constructing Cato:

1) Privatize everything to benefit the rich and srew everyone else.

2) Lie to get it done.

[oambee]

Maybe they support privatization because it makes economic sense...

[rsaswest]

For the wealthiest - yes. For everyone else - no.

[ChoronzonicChaos333]

For the wealthiest ye.... for everyone else it helps even more...

[rsaswest]

Sorry, but the history of radical privatization tells a different story. It doesn't help everyone else.

[ChoronzonicChaos333]

It clearly does. Look at the 19th century. Support for free markets and privatization over mercantilism lead to a much higher standard of living. Since that time began capitalism has brought much of the world out of poverty.

[librarianeric]

Yeah, let's look at the 19th century - slavery, child labor, no worker or consumer protection laws, 12 hour work days ....

What a great time to be in business!

[fdoric6]

That is blantantly false. The last 6 decades has seen the living standards of the vast majority of the world's people blasted back into the stone-age---including the US where wealth polarization is at 1917 levels, while 80% of the world's population lives on less than $10 a day

Google

Poverty facts and stats--global issues

This is a pro capitalist site

[CH3MIS7RY]

Decontructing you:

1) Be a do-nothing critic

2) Take the moral high ground

[rsaswest]

HHHhhhmmmmm...

Very projective on your part.

"Do-nothing?" How the fuck would you know?

Wanker!

[librarianeric]

Right wing libertarians possess a peculiar, quasi-religious devotion to the free market. For example, Ayn Rand dismissed slavery and child labor as mere road bumps in the otherwise glorious history of American capitalism.

Modern right wing libertarians are so politically bankrupt they compromise their own principles by supporting anti-choice candidates like Ron Paul.

NO system, economic or political, is above reproach, including capitalism.

I guess that makes me a commie, huh?

FUCK CATO!

[rsaswest]

librarianeric - I agree!

[ChoronzonicChaos333]

Ron Paul isn't anti-choice, he just morally opposes abortion. Also he doesn't believe roe v wade was a constitutional decision but that doesn't mean he is anti choice

[ivanmikhailov]

Why do you think the free market solution to healthcare is a mistake? It seems that most of the problems we face are related to too much government interference and not enough competition and accountability among insurance and medical providers. When people are given more control over their money, they'll spend it more responsibly.

[tyronebumblebee]

The free market has give us by far the most expensive healthcare per capita on the planet and certainly not the best. Every single western european nation socialized system ranks ahead of america and yet they spend a fraction of the cost

[ivanmikhailov]

The health service, product, and insurance market is one of the most heavily regulated, if not the most heavily regulated market in this country. Already, 46% all health costs are spent by government. You can call the US health market many things, but free is not one of them.

[tyronebumblebee]

Since Government runs healthcare for elderly people and obviously elderly people get sicker and suffer more chronic sickness that younger people it would make sense that these programs need a lot of funding. The real question we should be asking is why every other first world socialized healthcare system offers higher ranked healthcare than America, and covers every last one of their citizens, and spends a fraction of the cost per capita.

[tyronebumblebee]

This idea that everything has got to make a profit is a farce. Even right wing republicans who hate government run healthcare are now positioning themselves as the protectors of medicare.

[tyronebumblebee]

Do you honestly think the private insurance companies want a share of that elderly market that is currently provided for by the goverment. Whole point of the free market is to take in as much money as possible and to shell out as little as possible. They like young healthy people. Let the government shell out the big bucks for old sickies.

[ivanmikhailov]

Why do you think it is that other insurance markets don't have this problem? Even bad drivers can find insurance, people who live on bluffs can find home insurance. When we have an open marketplace (not controlled by govt or employers) over which insurance company we'll use, they are forced to keep their prices competitive to stay in business. The extent to which other countries' health care systems are successful is the extent to which they've incorporated these market mechanisms.

[tyronebumblebee]

Private insurance runs at higher costs than the government run programs despite the fact that they cherrypick the healthiest people whist the government is stuck with the bill for the sicklier people. All the rest of the industrialized world has favors government run healthcare and the results are plain to see. Higher ranked healthcare for every single citizen for a fraction of the cost

[tyronebumblebee]

Again, do you honestly believe that the insurance companies want a share of the elderly sick market. Try going to Cigna, Aetna and telling them you want to buy insurance but have a "pre-existing condition.

[tyronebumblebee]

The private insurance company compete against each other for a share of the healthiest people. That is the problem with the current system.

[tyronebumblebee]

The extent to which other countries' health care systems are successful is the extent to which they've incorporated these market mechanisms.

LOL, America has incorporated market mechanisms into the healthcare system more than any other nation and the results are plain to see. Lower ranked healthcare for less people at significantly higher costs.

[ivanmikhailov]

1) private insurance runs at higher costs because they can afford to--no consumer cost control. Government runs at lower costs because of subsization.

2) If people have money in a free market, there will be services available to them (even if they have pre-existing conditions). This is how a marketplace works. Those without money are supported by govt.

4) Countries that incorporate choice, cost-sharing, and transparency are the ones that avoid rationing, deficits, and inefficiency.

[tyronebumblebee]

Goverment healthcare runs at a lower cost because of subsidization

Scratching my head at this one. GOVERNMENT HEALTHCARE IS SUBSIDIZATION. Government spends less on healthcare even though it covers the healthcare of the sickliest than private insurance spends even though it cherrypicks the healthiest. A dollar spent is a dollar spent whether it is spent by the government or private insurance.

[tyronebumblebee]

Again, the nation which incorporates the free market to the largest degree is the one that has by far the highest healthcare on the planet. Explain?

[ivanmikhailov]

What is your evidence that the US health market is free? This is simply not true. If it were free we'd expect to see the same type of efficiency and cost-effectiveness of other sectors--technology, communications, etc. Your comparison between govt and free market is not valid--the health market is heavily suppressed by govt. It's not a free market and hasn't been for 3/4 of a century. When governent imposes restrictions and mandates, costs will increase. This is what we're seeing now.

[tyronebumblebee]

1,2,4? Must be a russian

[ChoronzonicChaos333]

No lies here. I think you are confusing them with the real liers, obama and the republicrats!

[DiNatalli]

You know the problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other peoples money. :)

\What do you call a liberal/progressive whose been mugged?.......... a conservative:) dundumtum tum tsshhh

[gskibum]

Supporting government healthcare is a value system that believes it is a good thing to tax people who aren't old enough to vote, or aren't yet born, in order to allow all the others the luxury of cheating death for a short spell.

Medical technology is why an affluent society such as America's has the problems of diseases such as cancer. People are simply living longer because of it.

It is immoral to force one group into slavery to fund healthcare access to another group.

[iowntwocats]

@gskibum But its totally moral to let people die if they cant afford insurance right? btw, what taxes are in effect for people under 18? What taxes for unborn people? What are you talking about sir?

You think its okay letting people die. If this is your view go ahead and stick your supposed moral high ground up your ass.

[Nokx]

so tired from people running to the government first to "fix" things. a free market, a free society, etc... gets the government out of the picture, personal decisions, etc... and leaves no one to blame.

when the government intervenes they almost always screw things up 100x worse.

[kennny732]

...when the government intervenes they almost always screw things up...

what a crazy statement!

lets look at it another way...

when the private sector CANNOT or WILL NOT provide an important need or service to society, it is the governments RESPONSIBILITY to intervene.

it seems obvious that the private insurance companys have failed to provide comprehensive coverage at a reasonable price.

i do not think we need to go into insurance horror stories...

[herbs814]

When the private sector doesn't provide enough to meet people's wants, it's either because people were unrealistic or government impeded the free market too much. Comprehensive insurance for all is completely unreasonable. Comprehensive insurance is the cause of the affordability crisis. Government mandates and government subsidies erode cost controls.

Most insurance "horror stories" are because people just expect insurance to cover everything. Too much is expected of insurance companies.

[kennny732]

healthcare is not a 'want'...

if the free market actually worked, insurance companies would not be mismanaging peoples' healthcare to the tune of a 30% overhead, and medicare would not be the compensation leader.

why not comprehensive coverage? all that is needed is 3% increase in FICA (across the board). presto, done!

additional savings will be gleened as other heath insurances (workmans comp, auto) are eliminated.

[herbs814]

Why is health care expensive while home and auto insurance is not? Because health insurance is too comprehensive. Because home and auto insurance do NOT cover routine maintenance; they do NOT cover every oil change, tire rotation, broken toilet, HVAC clean and check. Comprehensive care is inefficient because it erodes any incentive to hold down costs. Medical insurance that only covers catastrophic costs is affordable. Comprehensive coverage is a luxury and a model of inefficiency.

[kennny732]

at 28, it probably seems unlikely 2 you that you may develope cancer, sustain a closed head injury, or become paralyzed...

i assure you, all are quite possible

[herbs814]

And I assure you that none of these possibilities justify stealing from productive people. Socialized medicine is always and everywhere immoral. Stop trying to excuse the evil that is government coercion.

[kennny732]

stealing is when a health insurance company denies a claim

a coherent health system is an imparitive to a modern industial stae

i can safely say, every productive person will one day become unproductive...

[herbs814]

When government forcibly takes from the most productive people in society, this is stealing.

A just health system is one based on freedom. A "coherent" health system is TYRANNY.

When an insurance company denies a claim, that is a decision based on the contract you signed, and unless you can prove in court that you were wronged, you have no right to call this stealing.

[kennny732]

'a coherant health system is tyranny'

when each member from society contributes, and each benefits when the need arises, it is called 'a good idea'

i know what you are discribing though...i've seen it many times...

when a conservative minded person who does not bother to obtain insurance (because god wouldn't allow such a thing happen to him) and he comes up needing...he will scream is head off

[herbs814]

You mean when each member of society is FORCED to "contribute". You mean that the only "benefits" offered are those the government approves of. This is the very definition of tyranny.

People can be responsible for themselves (and do a better job of it) without government tyranny.

[kennny732]

actually, i feel 'forced' to contribute everytime a conservative, who never thought he'd need healthcare, and therefore, did not bother to buy insurance, and then turns up at the ER...

[herbs814]

Then let's end the mandate that ERs treat people who can't pay. The answer is not to force healthy, responsible to buy insurance they don't need. The answer is more freedom and responsbility, not more force and coercion.

It is the government that makes most insurance policies wasteful by their excessive mandates of the comprehensive list of contingencies that the policy is forced to cover.

[kennny732]

you have a responsibilty to your community, and nation...and part of that responsibility included folks you may fear and hate.

you need to watch the movie 'sicko' to understand how your belief that gov't makes insurance companies 'wasteful' is silly.

have you ever read 'a peoples history of the united states' by dr howard zinn?

[herbs814]

You need to stay away from this leftist propaganda. People are most responsible when they are responsible for whom they know: themselves, their family, friends, and community. Compulsion to extend beyond this sphere of accountability by bureaucratic means is inefficient, ineffective, and immoral. Less government and more freedom is always better.

[kennny732]

less government is right wing code for 'we're after your money'

gov't is infinately more efficient then health insurance companies, and is much more fair.

[herbs814]

Less government is less violence. Government is immoral. Having your choice of private insurance companies is infinitely better than being forced to accept government intrusion into health care.

[kennny732]

government is immoral

since 'we the people', are the government are you insinuating that the american people are basically 'immoral'?

[herbs814]

Government only derives its just powers from the consent of the governed. Since government arrogantly oversteps our express consent, government MUST be radically downsized, or else it has no legitimacy.

[herbs814]

Such "efficient" use of government force is violence against freedom. It is only possible by using force against free people. Government is force; it is immoral.

[herbs814]

"public investment" is left wing code for we're after your money.

Less government is more freedom.

Government is infinitely more evil than health insurance companies. Choice of private companies (or the choice to not be insured) is infinitely more fair than ANY amount of government intrusion in health care.

[kennny732]

so, you believe that medicare, is evil, even though it was created because the elderly are uninsurable?

and you feel that even though 1/2 of american bankruptcys are caused by medical catastrophies, (3/4 of those had health insurance), insurance is a public good?

i certainly do not think this weird thought process represents 'freedom'

[herbs814]

elderly are NOT uninsurable. Everyone is insurable. Insurance is a private good and should be paid for privately.

Mediscare is an immoral con-game that uses fear to "justify" stealing from those who produce and are healthy.

Stealing from the responsible is always contrary to freedom.

[herbs814]

All that is needed is to raise the taxes that are stolen from productive people. This will cause more distortions in the market, causing higher prices; there will be no "savings" when more subsidies cause prices to rise faster. When subsidized insurance is compelled to subsidize more services, the demand for these subsidized services rises ever faster, since patients and providers do not pay the true cost.

High costs are because of a lack of responsibility, not a lack of taxation and subsidies

[kennny732]

you have been duped by the conserv-a-nutz...

lets consider some real capitalist countries...

Nigeria is oil wealthy, yet 95% of its people live in grinding poverty, life expectancy is low and violence is high. why isn't the 'market' correcting these problems?

the so called 'market' does not exist

[herbs814]

You're so desperate to slander capitalism that you claim Nigeria is a capitalist country? Are you shameless or senseless?

[herbs814]

Nigeria: 117th most free country, less free than Guatemala, Croatia, Mozambique, Mexico, etc. Nigeria rates especially poor in Investor Freedom, Property Rights, and Freedom from Corruption. The evidence is clear that Nigeria is broken because it is insufficiently capitalist. In capitalist countries, life expectancy is high and violence is low.