Finally, It’s Put-Up or Shut-Up Time on Healthcare
Posted on March 10, 2017 by Robert Ringer
The Republican’s initial offering for an Obamacare replacement has a lot of people very nervous, especially those who have to run for office again in 2018. Everyone acknowledges that the bill doesn’t come anywhere near close to accomplishing what Republicans have been promising for seven years — replacing the much-hated Obamacare with a cost-effective solution — but it’s time for the GOP to put up or shut up.
There are two schools of thought on a replacement bill. The Ryan-Price coalition’s thinking is, “First, let’s keep our promise to voters by repealing Obamacare immediately, which will give us time to work on improving it through a second, third, fourth, and fifth step. Their viewpoint is purely political in nature, which is understandable, because there’s a lot at stake politically. The problem is that many aspects of Ryancare are as bad or worse than Obamacare, which could be a fatal blow to Republicans in 2018.
The problem with counting on steps two, three, four, and five to clean up the bill down the road is that the Dirty Dems will use every trick in the book to see to it that the GOP will never be able to get any of those measures through Congress. Which means Republicans run the risk that their timid step-one offering will end up in an Obamacare-like death spiral before they have a chance to improve on it.
If you’ve read my first book, Winning Through Intimidation, you may recall that I explained that when it comes to working on selling a real estate project that involves a second development phase, a broker should make it a point to get paid for both phases on closing of the first phase, even if he has to take a drastically reduced commission on phase two. The reason for this is that second phases have a way of never happening. (See Chapter 15 of the newest edition of Winning Through Intimidation.)
What’s at the heart of the healthcare fiasco is expectations. A consistent rule I’ve observed over the years is that once you give someone something, the person on the receiving end tends to see it as an entitlement. This is why most government programs not only become permanent, but grow by leaps and bounds.
This was the psychological strategy the Dirty Dems were counting on when they locked the prim-and-proper Republicans out of all Obamacare meetings and forced the bill through the legislative process by nefarious means — before anyone was even allowed to read it! Once it became law, of course, it was easy for anyone with an IQ over 30 to see that it was nothing more than a massive redistribution-of-wealth scheme, which is why the Dirty Dems didn’t want anyone to read it in advance.
It was the same strategy that was used to legalize abortion in 1973. Roe v. Wade was a 5-4 decision by unelected officials, and now it’s looked upon as a court-given right. (As you know, God doesn’t have a say in these matters.) Today, abortion lovers are willing to fight to the death (interesting pun) for their “right” to terminate the lives of millions of unborn babies.
It’s also reminiscent of Ted Kennedy’s lying assurances that his Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 “will not flood our cities with immigrants. It will not upset the ethnic mix of our society. It will not relax the standards of admission. It will not cause American workers to lose their jobs.”
The modus operandi of the Radical Left is to get your foot in the door by lying, then be patient, slowly raise the stakes, and end up with what you were really after from the very start. And it almost always works for them.
Which brings me full circle to Ryancare. There are times in my life when I desperately want to be wrong, and this is one of those times. I’m rooting for an abrupt end to Obamacare and not so much a “new plan” but a genuine free-market approach to healthcare. I dare not get my hopes up, however, because politicians will always make certain they’re involved. The goal, then, should be to aim for a healthcare system that minimizes the harm politicians can do to its citizens.
I could go on and on, because there is no end to the complexities of this monstrous problem, but I would like to own up to at least two areas that, as a civil libertarian, cause me moral concerns. First is the insane prices of prescription drugs. In theory, I believe that pharmaceutical companies should be allowed to charge whatever the market will bear for their products. But from a humanitarian standpoint, it is beyond the pale to me that, generally speaking, drug prices in the United States are astronomically higher than those charged in other countries.
As just one example, a medication someone in my family has taken for years costs more than $200 in the United States, but only $10 in Israel — and just a bit more than that in New Zealand. It seems to me that some kind of reasonable agreement could be reached to get drug companies to bring their U.S. prices down dramatically. I sometimes wonder if GlaxoSmithKline doesn’t have a bigger GDP than the United States. Notwithstanding their enormous development and government regulatory costs, pharmaceutical profits are humongous.
Unfortunately, I don’t know what the answer to affordable drugs is, but I do feel that it’s inhumane to allow people to suffer — and in many cases, die — because they cannot afford the drugs they need. A lot of work and negotiating time needs to be put into this all-important issue.
The second problem that causes a civil libertarian like me to have a tug of war with my compassionate side is tort reform. From a freedom standpoint, I believe that a person is entitled to any amount a court is willing to reward him. But most plaintiff awards are way out of line with reality, and they only encourage ambulance-chasing attorneys whose popularity rivals that of politicians and the media.
I therefore begrudgingly come down on the side of capping the amount of money that can be awarded for various kinds of medical damages. In addition, and perhaps even more important, I have always favored a loser-pays system, but with one new wrinkle: The losing attorney — not his client — should be the one who has to pay the winner’s legal fees. Since the whole system is driven by money-hungry attorneys, this would make them think long and hard before filing frivolous lawsuits. Best of all, it would have a major impact on lowering healthcare costs.
That said, when it comes to affordable healthcare, I again emphasize that we should always strive to move closer to a free-market healthcare system, Uncle Bernie be damned.
I’m glad I’m not Donald Trump when it comes to the healthcare leviathan, because it can never be solved in a way that comes anywhere near close to pleasing everyone. And given that it’s the first big piece of legislation out of the Trump starting gate, the consequences of a bad move could bring the horrid, anti-American Radical Left back to power — and the consequences of that would be far worse than the most abominable healthcare plan Republicans could ever come up with.
Robert, why aren't you president?
I keep being reminded "We get the government health care (sic) we deserve, Good and Hard!"
The redistribution of wealth has been going on for decades from lower and middle income to the corporations and their wealthy handlers. Insurance tax codes etc.The debate over whether corps should pay taxes is mute since the big boys bribe the congress or hire tax lawyers so GE etc end up with tax credits.
As far as healthcare destroying the Republican party good! and please take the Dems with you. Our country will thrive again when the two major parties are declared as organized crime parties and the FBI investigates. Does anybody receive more bribes than these two organisations?
Free market for healthcare may work and put us in the top 20 of modern nations but I doubt it. We have never been better than 23rd by any measure. Maybe time to look at what the top 20 are doing.
I read this while watching Daniel Horowitz discuss the same topic in detail with Steve Deace on CRTV. On the pharmaceutical issue, as usual, government is the issue. I read a James Bovard book nearly twenty years ago that included a chapter on the FDA. Back then he wrote, as I recall, that on average it took $30 million and ten years to get FDA approval. He also pointed out that the FDA doesn't actually test drugs or even have a lab. They require the drug companies to document THEIR testing with literally truckloads of paper that is mostly unread by the bureaucrats at the FDA. I heard Mark Levin say last night that it's now 15 to 20 years to get a drug approved.
I'm always floored while watching TV when I see a slip and fall lawyer run a commercial about a class action over a drug followed, usually shortly, by an ad for that very drug.
I wonder if these drugs are so much more expensive in the US (and no safer anywhere) because our government makes it so expensive, most advanced drugs are developed here and the pharmaceutical companies are recouping their government imposed costs here. So we're essentially subsidizing healthcare for the rest of the world.
Big Pharma is an example of corporatocracy on steroids. With the govt. involved (and they should have NO say in anyone's health care – PERIOD!), and free market options limited, it is a certainty that prices will be fixed and fixed high to the advantage of Big Pharma. Aside from the fact that these drugs are poison, and RARELY, if ever needed, their continual advertising has convinced the sheeple that they are necessary. I watch "Jeopardy" each weekday night and ALL the ads are by Big Pharma or the local ambulance-chasing attorneys, so there is a connection. I mute the ads, but am not surprised that so many fall for the propaganda.
Your assessment is correct. In addition to all of the testing and documentation that is required for the INITIAL approval of a drug going to market, the FDA requires redundant testing and documentation of an existing product if it is discovered that it can be used to treat conditions outside of its initial target. The manufacturers can't use the first set of documents / tests and then provide additional testing to ensure there are no adverse events associated with an expanded treatment population; they have to start their research FROM SCRATCH. A lot of wasted time and money goes into the R & D, while people who could benefit are denied access to a drug that the FDA has already approved.
"But from a humanitarian standpoint, it is beyond the pale to me that, generally speaking, drug prices in the United States are astronomically higher than those charged in other countries."
Instantly solvable. Repeal the laws & regulations that bar (re)importation.
Some situations have no good solution. Healthcare (really Sickcare) is one of them. Health insurance isn't really insurance at all — at least not in the same sense as homeowners or liability insurance. The latter are "just in case" policies, pooled risk, in the rare event that an unforeseen disaster strikes. But everyone has to see the doctor every so often, even if just for checkups. Everyone will have some more or less major health issue in his/her lifetime. Some will have accidents and need emergency care. Or long-term care. It's really a case of "I'm paying X dollars in premiums a year and I want to get X dollars (or more) back a year."
IMHO there needs to some creativity in health insurance policies, a free market approach with a myriad of choices for the consumer. People would choose the policies that make the most sense for them and which they can afford. If you can't afford anything then you may have to count on the kindness of strangers. Above all, get government out of it.
"get govt. out of it!" AMEN. THAT is the solution, but when the lying politicians fall for the premise that healthcare is a right (Repubs just as much as the Dems), we are bound to only get more dysfunctional, incompetent, immoral plans, and the citizens suffer.
Excellent analysis RJR. I will provide sources in a later post, but it is important to remember that most of what the politicians are addressing are symptoms, not the disease (pun intended) of health care. The fact is we spend more per capita in this country on health care than any other member of the G-20; about $9,200/year! Among what really contributes to the "disease" are:
– extreme taxation of medical devices, materials, implements, machines and drugs – among the highest of all taxes!
– torts resulting in very high errors and omissions insurance for medical professionals
– lack of any meaningful competition in the space
– fraud and waste in medi-care and medic-aid
– price fixing by the federal government
Despite conventional thinking, insurance carriers bear little blame in this game. The for profit companies actually operate on narrow margins. However they do tend to collude with providers in price and cost controls resulting in little input from the patient and doctor.
Part of our challenge in this country has been indecision; do we want a single payer, universal coverage system vis a vis Europe or do we want a true free-market capitalist oriented system free of nearly all governmental controls and interference? We presently find ourselves in "no man's land," that place in between where neither is the rule and we suffer greatly because of this.
Good analysis. It's called a mixed economy, and it doesn't work.
Is it possible that single payer could actually PROMOTE capitalism and entrepreneurship? I know people that work at corporate jobs ONLY for the health insurance. For example, I know one person who owns makes enough investment income to retire on, but he works at a company just for the insurance. Wouldn't single payer increase the # of jobs available as these people would no longer filling these positions? Wouldn't companies hire more people if insurance costs per employee were not such a burden? I bet there are many people who would be willing to start their own businesses if they did not have health insurance to worry about.
How about a single payer system that covers everyone for catastrophic issues? The smaller stuff can be paid out of pocket and the free market can sort out the costs. Those who are poor and have no money can get the national coverage. Anyone who wants better coverage can pay for it (assuming their employer does not provide it).
How do we finance it? Let Bill Gates and Warren Buffets of the world put their money where their mouth is and pay for it.
You've focused the dichotomy, Czech, as to why we have a mess. Through the "progressive" political propaganda and media deceptions, America has been led to vacate its principles as a republic and be guilted into a collectivist system, which is just more unworkable nonsense. Healthcare is NOT a right, and one size does NOT fit all. Let people buy what they want, let free competition prevail, and with NO govt. interference, the market WILL create a better system. We are NOT a social democracy in the US (like most of Europe is), so the constant comparisons to what they have are not relevant. Look at the results of what the current system gives us – some of the highest costs for healthcare in the world, and yet a ranking very low amongst "advanced" countries. Yet all we hear is more govt. proposals for yet another controlled "plan" and it too will fail.
One cost saving aspect that could be incorporated is to allow prescription drugs to be imported from other countries …
A brilliant, over-arching summary of the healthcare quagmire….shining the bright light of truth on several political facts: 1): follow the money trail; 2): stick to the the Fabian strategy of 'gradualism' vs 'revolution' to achieve socialist ends; 3): realize the rampant, heavy hand of 'entitlement' as a consequence; 4) live to fight another day.
A brilliant, over-arching summary of the American healthcare quagmire….shining the bright light of truth on several political fronts: 1): follow the money trail; 2): recognize the reality of Fabian strategy of 'gradualism' towards a socialist state; 3) understand the rampant entitlement culture; 4) live to fight another day.
“…it’s time for the GOP to put up or shut up.”
Oh, they won’t put up all right you can count on that. Robert gives the answer himself later in the piece by saying, “What’s at the heart of the healthcare fiasco is expectations.” But there’s a big problem with that response Robert…you dont say it loud enough. We need to shout it out so all the fools residing in D.C. can hear loud & clear. But he deserves credit because 99.9% of all commentators on this subject wont touch this with a 10’ pole. Here’s why.
Obamacare will never be completely repealed despite whatever Trump & the mainstream republicans do or say otherwise because it all gets down to this: the spineless jellyfish republicans cannot take the heat of repealing it. Ask yourself what would happen if they did. Take your time…tick…tick…tick…bzzzt. Times up. Hundred of thousands of people, if not millions, would instantly lose their subsidized welfare medical insurance and be thrown off the rolls. Can you imagine the reaction in today's spoiled & welfare addicted society? The piercing screams, the shrieking howls, the yelling & the shouting would be so loud and unending coming from the left you would never hear the end of it. It might even trigger serious protests, and I mean serious.
Now, every politician inherently knows this to be a fact so there’s your answer kiddies. They’ll simply rename it and pretend to take credit for a job well done. Here's to another “Mission accomplished.” Good job boys. And for all of us Trump’s supporters who thought he was really going to make a difference (drain the swamp, HA!), I’m opening a cool-aid stand just down the street.
Hillary 2020 anyone?
Rand Paul's actual free-market plan (that Trump and GOP leadership has discarded in favor of RyanCare) has a two-year sunset period on existing subsidized plans, so the transition chaos you speak of is just a left-wing (and big government Republican) red herring you've unfortunately fallen for.
Sounds like you’ve been frequenting that cool-aid stand buddy, you seem to be a bit mixed up. Rand Paul’s plan is anything but a free-market plan, that is unless your definition of a free market is a different than mine is.
I’ve read the highlights of his so-called plan and disappointed is too subtle an adjective to describe how I feel about it. If the republican bill is Obamacare 2.0, Paul’s bill is 3.0, and I’ll bet his father would never in a million year endorse it. He should be ashamed of himself.
Now, this is coming from someone who supported him fervently in 2012 for his senate run. But I’m afraid Rand went off the rails almost two years ago when he announced his prez candidacy. Seems he started hitting the cool-aid stand too. No, the simple, moral, righteous & constitutional solution to this entire medical care fraud — which has gripped the nation for over 50 years since that traitor LBJ enacted the two headed monster known as Medicare & Medicade — is to get government entirely OUT of the system and let the free market do its thing. Simple, straightforward, effective…but not easy… which is why O’bomberCare will never be entirely repealed.
The principal cause of high drug prices in the US is the FDA. Their senior managers are mostly revolving-door managers from the major pharmaceutical companies, and their primary motivation is NOT to protect the health and safety of Americans, but to protect the profit margins of the big drug companies. They put up hugely expensive and complicated barriers to new drugs and routinely destroy startups that might introduce innovation that would hurt the bottom line of their true clients.
Clearly, the CDC and USDA play supporting roles in this effort, but the chief culprit is the FDA. Eliminate them, or drastically revise their mission and authority, and drug prices would drop while quality improves, but there are a lot of highly paid lobbyists in Washington, along with the recipients of their largess in Congress, who will make sure that the American consumer never gets a fair deal.
"I’m glad I’m not Donald Trump when it comes to the healthcare leviathan, because it can never be solved in a way that comes anywhere near close to pleasing everyone."
Let's be totally honest: Candidate Trump made more than a few very grand campaign promises. Healthcare is going to be so great, so much better than Obamacare, that we just can't believe how great it's going to be… And Mexico is going to pay for the Wall. ISIS will get the shit kicked out of it. There will be massive, massive tax cuts and regulations will be shredded. It going to be so great. Winning, winning, winning. Americans are going to be winning so much that they'll have to beg President Trump to lose once in a while just so they don't forget what it's like…..
You know I supported candidate Trump, and I support President Trump, but I don't believe for one minute that Trump can turn this country around. He can only delay the fall.
" Making America great, again" sounds a lot like two-thousand year old political rhetoric "for the glory of Rome" sounded like to the Romans.
At this point, the more I see what's happening in Washington, the more I have the urge to buy gold, silver and gunpowder. And if the mining stocks pullback far enough, I'll buy those, too.
Wikileaks just dumped another treasure trove of truth about the CIA. This release is bigger than the Pentagon Papers… Hey, where is Fox News? What massive story has Fox ever broken? Fox has billions of dollars in manpower, women power and every other power of the press, yet they can't seem to break a historical, meaningful story…..
Put-up or shut-up time has arrived for all the branches of government and the press.
Fox is another one needing to put up or shut up.
I think it's admirable that everyone has an opinion about Obamacare. I believe it should just be repealed and a fair market system be implemented. However, please keep in mind that It's not quite 2 months since he's taken office and not one second of that time has he been free of the self-serving, self-important, whining and critical opposers. I'd say he's doing an admirable job of changing things considering the lies, roadblocks and subversive actions of Obama's shadow regime. Let's support the man…..the previous "pseudo president" had 8 years to screw around with the United States. I think Trump deserves more than 2 months to fix it.
Agree completely re: pharmaceutical costs in the US. They are irrationally high and I suspect the entire PDP program is a massive scam designed by our government in collusion with the drug firms to forcefully "trick" the populace into thinking they have gotten some kind of discount or "benefit" from participation in the program, when in fact the drugs could actually be purchased much cheaper in a free market… (kickbacks by lobbyists via campaign contributions?). Then there are the lawsuit leeches we see advertising on TV targeting every new drug. A M.D. once advised that the lawyers sue pharmaceutical companies " untill all the money for that drug is depleted"…"then they move on to the next one".
Here’s a snippet from Jack Perry’s comments on Lew Rockwell today – so apropos regarding Trump & mainstream rupublicans:
Shovel-Ready Again: I’ll Say!
Remember when Obama became president and touted what he called “shovel-ready projects” to revamp infrastructure? And he wanted several billions of dollars for it? Remember how the Republicans came unglued about the spending? Okay, so what gives here? Trump has just asked for one trillion dollars and is now asking state officials around the nation to present him with the list of public works projects to spend it on. Say what?! Man, ponying up the ducats and THEN telling the government to tell us what the money should be spent on is a good way to ensure graft, bogus purchase orders/embezzlement, and waste. The process Trump present is bass ackwards. You present the projects, iron out a budget, then you allocate the funds. Not hand Imelda Marcos a credit card and then point her to the shoe store.
But the point is, this is hypocrisy. The Republicans applaud Trump for doing what they scolded Obama for proposing? Oh, right, let me guess: “We were against shovel-ready projects before we were for them…” John Kerry’s famous quote rings true once again. Wow! We’re getting the Republican version of Obamacare and now we’ll get the Obama shovel-ready projects, too! Swell! We can look forward to the public works version of Obamacare, basically. “If you like your airport, you can keep it…”
A trillion dollars in search of a home. Splendid. I have a better idea for the money. How about returning it to its rightful owners? You know, the American people? That’s where the money came from. Oh, wait, not really. It was actually borrowed from some other country, probably China. The taxes we pay only pay the interest on those loans. Let’s not forget the hundreds of billions of dollars they’re handing to the Pentagon. This is all shovel-ready. It’s shoveling a bunch of bovine excrement. When the shovel is not digging us all into a hole.
A trillion could easily be spent on upgrading the railroads.
Another trillion on making the enterstate bridges and secondary roads great, again.
Yet another trillion on air and sea ports.
At least a trillion on the outdated nuclear defense.
A trillion or two on the sewer, water and electric grid….
And that just for starters.
Wait until the pension fund crisis hits. And never mind the 220 trillion of unfunded liabilities, e.g., SSI, Medicare…
Buy gold, buy silver, buy gunpowder and have faith…..
For years, I've been mocking and ridiculing the goldbugs as they got stomped by the collectivist market…. Last year, the cycle turned, and it was once again time to scale back into the market. The Lew Rockwell crowd, for example, are great guys, but they're also diehard goldbugs who seem to like getting crushed and then stomped on by market collectivistism….. In the end the goldbugs shall be right, of course, when the crack-up boom finally crushes Keynisian bankers and the Great Crack-up shakes the entire world….
We still haven't got the final market capitulation in gold where all but the diehard goldbugs give up and shut up, but I still believe buying some extra gold insurance is prudent at this point in time.
As easy as BO decided to take massive action to illegally and unconstitutionally bring about obamacare why not Trump do the same to reverse it. BO probably has at least a 100 or more counts of illegalities with the BO plan.
Robert, one of your very best analyses, and note that Ryan said "this is it." So very doubtful there will be sequels unless this bill provides a time schedule for submitting the following bills, which, if not submitted, would void this bill.
What no one seeems to remember from their college days is supply and demand. We have stirred up demand with true capitalist expertise. But what about the supply of services? The old model of MDs like Marcus Welby holding every hand is ludicrous and inefficient, especially after decades of AMA effort to llimit the supply.
In fact the government needs to pioneer new service delivery models (e.g. through nurse practioners) leaving MDs mainly for surgery. It needs to drastically expand training programs for medical service personnel. But it is doubtful this will be done since it would threaten those currently making obscene oligopolist profits. It's not about the health of society, but about unjustified gains by a few. One example is how big pharma got congress to forbid the executive branch from negotiating prices on pharmaceuticals it buys.
Over thirty years ago the Libertarian Party came up with the solution to the problem of medical care in America and that was called "Project Healthy Choice" It wasn't expensive or over regulated at all and I helped roll it out. I can sum it up in just four words. "INDIVIDUAL MEDICAL SAVING ACCOUNTS".
Several points here.Just the elimination of obamacare and its penalties to Middle Americans like myself would be a dramatic improvement, and that alone may be better than Trump Care or Ryan Care.The HSA accounts for individuals(just like cafeteria plans for companies) ,and tax credits (which individuals get when their companies provide insurance) could by themselves be better than any proposed health plan.
There are many good points in the article, but the article itself is examples of why the "problem" will only get WORSE.
"But from a humanitarian standpoint, it is beyond the pale to me that, generally speaking, drug prices in the United States are astronomically higher than those charged in other countries."
Humanitarian one of those meaningless words, Libtard speek for "you are an evil Nazi, Racist, .. whatever, if you don't agree with me. Just WHAT is humanitarian? The next sentence proves the point.
"As just one example, a medication someone in my family has taken for years costs more than $200 in the United States, but only $10 in Israel — and just a bit more than that in New Zealand. It seems to me that some kind of reasonable agreement could be reached to get drug companies to bring their U.S. prices down dramatically."
So… are the slightly higher prices in New Zealand inhumane? Notice he uses another modifier, "bit", meaning without any actual, to prove the point. Which leads to "some kind of REASONABLE" [emphasis added] agreement.
About re-importing drugs. You can bet the drug companies will do their best to maximize their profit. That is THEIR OBLIGATION to the stockholders. So, for example, if 90% of the drugs sold in Canada are "re-imported" to the US, the drug companies will simply raise their prices to Canada. Thus the long term result could well be that Canada will impose an export tax on drug to serve the dual purpose of gaining money to support their Socialist Welfare state as well as protect their citizens from paying more for drugs so that Americans can pay less.
Bottom line is, if healthcare is a RIGHT .. again what level… then socialize it. If not, let the free market work. However that also means doing away with the FDA which interferes with the free market, the Governmental licensing of medical practitioners [the medical boards etc. are controlled by those they are supposed to regulate for the express purpose of keeping out competition "for the good of the patient"].
This would allow REAL reform. For example, the use of automated systems to diagnose diseases and prescribe medicine. This is already being done to a large extent – only the rules require that everything be "Supervised" by someone with an MD, who may or may not even talk to the say Nurse Practitioner who actually sees the patient.
Maybe it would be easier to get Congress off their current special healthcare plan. They they would have skin in the game. They are outsiders trying to make it better. They haven't lived with it. They haven't experienced it. So how can they fix it? More Politics for the special class: Congress. Make Congress use ACA and while we're at it, Social Security too. Congress needs to have skin in the game.
One of the biggest changes that needs to be made is that the Republicans MUST quit using the language of the left when discussing repealing Obamacare. Health insurance is NOT health care. In California during the "Hillarycare" debates, there was a cash-only clinic that offered uninsured patients quality health care at an affordable price. They were able to do this by keeping their staff slim – no health insurance billing and coding gurus, no time or effort by PAs, MDs or RNs spent on benefits checks or appeals letters. They also advertised their prices and kept them uniform, unlike clinics that accept insurance and give insurers one price and cash customers a second price. It worked for the people using it and for the medical professionals staffing it, who were able to spend more time with the patients than they did dealing with insurance companies.
With a free will self interest society, most people understand the risks of certain activities will make them ill or die a horrible death. Activities from alcohol to tobacco, and Schedule 2 illicit drugs to even the food supply having way too much high fructose corn syrup ruining people's liver and/or pancreas, these are the choices to make.
To the extent that we aware of all this and other safety issues that can impact are health, we can greatly reduce a lot of disease from happening.
So will all have to weigh the risk/reward of some of the substances above and avoid them altogether or greatly minimize their use or abuse.
Some say this is common sense and may even discourage Public Service Announcements to warn of these dangers, let the bonehead dumbasses drink up all the soda and alcohol, and smoke a carton of cigarettes a day, drive drunk and ruin their health as quickly as they can so the will perish and thin out the genepool.
All good and fine whatever your philosophy is, personally I fall on the letting people know the dangers and risks of everything that are marketed and promoted to people and once they understand what they are, do what you want, but at least you're aware.
Cigarettes if taxed to the point of what it costs to treat the diseases they cost, would be about $20 a pack. Alcohol drinks and all the health impact would increase about $2 per drink.
So everybody ends up paying for these costs, even if you don't use them. Would love to see a health impact tax on this and even maybe a tax equivalent to about a dollar per pound equivalent tax on sugar consumed per year, exempting naturally occurring produce.
So at the very least put some sort of upfront health care on taxes or at the very least warning labels that getting involved with these will damage health for HFCS food products. An upfront health insurance tax if you will, but I am sure corporations will have their lobbyists do their best to squelch such a thing.
In San Miguel de Allende, paid $5 for an drug that costs $60 in the states…
Your payment sysetm is actually better than England's where the losing side has to pay.
My friend recommended this blog and he was totally right keep up the fantastic work! Help With ASP Homework
I personally like your post, you have shared good article. It will help me in great deal. Do My Essay Assignments
"The modus operandi of the Radical Left is to get your foot in the door by lying, then be patient, slowly raise the stakes, and end up with what you were really after from the very start. And it almost always works for them."
Find a Best doctors in india and Book Online Appointment Instantly. Includes Doctor Profile, Location, Facilities and Fees Services.
Find all details and information on important vaccinations given to children in India and an ideal immunization or vaccination schedule followed in India.
Child Vaccination In India
Vaccination Chart For Babies In India
Vaccination Chart For Children In India
Child Vaccination Chart India 2017
online doctor appointment project download
Book Doctor Appointment Online In India
I like your post.
After Reading this article carefully and I want to say that a lot of immigrants lives in The United States who were getting benefit for Obamacare policy on Health care. The country gets manpower as well as Energy Procurement from that immigrants. But when Trump’s administration decided to kicked out Obamacare it’s directly impact to their health policy. Because it was a much craved service for them for treatment because they don’t earn that money which they can spent on treatment. Though I was searching to know more about Energy Procurement Texas but I must admire the author who has written a very good article regarding this & for supplying more information regarding this matter.
Actually i want to know about lost wax casting . Do you have any information about it? Please let me know. I am waiting for your update………
The tax plan that was recently passed has spurred a lot of banks and corporations to give out $1000 bonuses to their employees and also raise their minimum wage to $15. All I can say is Wow! matrixcardinfo.com
And maybe that's all I can say at this time comments, for the delivery of information that most people say helpful, nice draw. appreviewcentral
I agree with this article, similar texts I saw on https://freebooksummary.com