The House of Representatives intends to ram its healthcare legislation through Congress. A mere week ago it revealed some of what it plans to do to our "health" with the latest iteration of ObamaCare. We can only say "some" because floor action will see new amendments added, and after that the bill must still be reconciled with the $2 trillion Senate abomination put out by Max Baucus's (D-MT) Finance Comittee in October.Read the rest of it here. There's no such thing as "free" health care. Never has been, and never will be under Obamacare.
The Congressional Budget Office has estimated the 10 year (2010-2019) cost of the House Democrats' bill at $1.055 trillion. As usual, there is so much budget gimmicry in these estimates as to make them virtually meaningless.
The Democrats are dishonest on so many levels about this healthcare "reform" it is almost impossible to untangle all their lies. Let's start by clarifying some basic truths.
First, who pays for healthcare right now? That's right, the taxpayers who foot the bill not only for their own healthcare, but for illegal immigrants, the poor and seniors as well. (Some seniors continue to pay a premium for Medicare but it still doesn't cover all the costs).
Who is feeling the pain of the rapid annual growth in healthcare costs that the Democrats claim so desperately to want to fix? Right, these same taxpayers.
Some will argue that employers pick up most of the tab. That is true when employers offer healthcare policies to their employees, but it is an illusion. Businesses must make a profit to remain alive, so every cost they pick up is passed on to the consumer in higher prices. So, in reality, we pay.
Others will remind us that actually, employers don't pay the entire tab -- that offering healthcare benefits is a big plus for employers because they get subsidized from the government. Since healthcare benefits become part of a "compensation package," employers actually pay less, by the amount of the government subsidy, than they would have to pay the employee otherwise.
True again. Employers don't pay the full cost of healthcare benefits, the government subsidizes them. But where does the government get the funds to subsidize employer-provided healthcare? From taxes or borrowing (which will require more taxes in the future to retire the debt). So who pays? Again, we pay -- now or in the future.
One of the primary causes of skyrocketing costs in healthcare is the low cost or no cost healthcare available to low income groups, including illegal immigrants. This creates an explosion in demand, and as we have seen all over the world, immigration, both legal and illegal, to take advantage of our low cost, high quality services. Government sometimes reimburses doctors and hospitals for the service they provide, but not always. Even when they do, the reimbursement is often below cost, sometimes significantly below cost.
Who pays for all this? We pay! Twice!
We pay the taxes to cover the government reimbursements, and we pay in higher insurance premiums that result from doctors and hospitals trying to recoup their losses by passing them on in higher fees to private insurers. If this is not an option, they go out of business, reducing the availability of healthcare for everyone.
Who pays for that? We all do!
Sunday, November 08, 2009
Who is Really Paying for Health Care?
James Simpson at American Thinker says it's you, and you do it in more ways than you realize:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
2 comments:
One way to pay for health care to end the subsidies to growers and processors of corn.
The government is no longer giving away money and Americans might find less high fructose corn syrup in their products.
It must be so difficult to coordinate the health care from the federal level! I mean the federal government is as far from the people as it can be. Smaller the area that needs to be looked after, the less money is wasted and the better it is coordinated.
As you pointed out, it's all funded by taxes. So why not take this portion of taxes and give it to states or even counties to look after the health care? Maybe I'm completely missing something, but I do believe that when if a body controls just a few hospitals, less money is wasted and better the control.
Jay from Vancouver
Post a Comment