Obama Care

By increasing demand for Physicians but not increasing their supply, the cost to use them will increase. As costs increase, people will be forced to buy less coverage. Some will make sacrifices to maintain the same coverage, others will not be able to. Several weeks ago, you posted a link demonstrating the upcoming Dr. shortages. Do you expect fewer doctors to provide more services for less money?

Sure, you can keep what you have, but, as costs increase due to increased demand, fewer and fewer people will be able to keep what they have. Do you expect costs to stay the same even though you are increasing demand by at least 10-15% without increasing the supply? Do you believe premiums for private insurance will not increase? If not, why not? If so, do you believe that rising costs won't force many families into poorer coverage?

As for the public option, 1) If it offers competitive pricing to private insurers, it will eventually drive out these companies as it has an innate market advantage of not needing to be profitable. It can offer the same services, lose money and still draw from the public teat; 2) If it is not competitive and truly an insurer of last resort with a bare bones package, only those who are absolutely uninsurable, and thus the most costly to insure, will purchase it and, as they inevitably cost more to insure - and, of course, the horror stories of insufficient coverage will continue.

Nice post. Good points. I'll be interested to see if/how Saden responds.

By increasing demand for Physicians but not increasing their supply, the cost to use them will increase. As costs increase, people will be forced to buy less coverage. Some will make sacrifices to maintain the same coverage, others will not be able to. Several weeks ago, you posted a link demonstrating the upcoming Dr. shortages. Do you expect fewer doctors to provide more services for less money?

Sure, you can keep what you have, but, as costs increase due to increased demand, fewer and fewer people will be able to keep what they have. Do you expect costs to stay the same even though you are increasing demand by at least 10-15% without increasing the supply? Do you believe premiums for private insurance will not increase? If not, why not? If so, do you believe that rising costs won't force many families into poorer coverage?

As for the public option, 1) If it offers competitive pricing to private insurers, it will eventually drive out these companies as it has an innate market advantage of not needing to be profitable. It can offer the same services, lose money and still draw from the public teat; 2) If it is not competitive and truly an insurer of last resort with a bare bones package, only those who are absolutely uninsurable, and thus the most costly to insure, will purchase it and, as they inevitably cost more to insure - and, of course, the horror stories of insufficient coverage will continue.

The price will not go up because of the lack of physicians as the goverment will now regulate what they can and cannot charge. Its going to force the best and brightest to go into other fields where they can make more money and quality will go down.

Now here's a guy with a clue. Why can't we get more dems and reps who think like this guy? Screw the extremists and elect more guys like Mark.

Washington Times - EXCLUSIVE: Warner: Obama misplayed health care debate (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/nov/10/warner-obama-misplayed-health-care-debate/print/)

Now here's a guy with a clue. Why can't we get more dems and reps who think like this guy? Screw the extremists and elect more guys like Mark.

Washington Times - EXCLUSIVE: Warner: Obama misplayed health care debate (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/nov/10/warner-obama-misplayed-health-care-debate/print/)

Thanks for sharing. I think Mark Warner is going to be a really good senator and probably a good presidential candidate at some point down the road. Not to come off as partisan here, but the Dems do have a coalition who are more fiscally conservative when it comes to addressing the deficit and are capable of working across party party lines. The health care debate has really polarized Washington right now and both sides seem to be at a stalemate.

Senator Warner raises a few good points in this article, but I think more than anything he highlights the challenges of selling something as huge and complex as health care reform and connecting that with the nation's current deficit woes.

I tend to agree with the president's current approach, though not entirely, in the sense that it's more practical to sell the need for insurance coverage, which is more tangible, than to focus on the strain on the financial system, which the everyday Joe has a difficult time relating to.

But if you go back to the president's recent speech before Congress and even before that he has talked about, at length, the very issues Warner states here. We absolutely must get the deficit under control.

Thanks for sharing. I think Mark Warner is going to be a really good senator and probably a good presidential candidate at some point down the road. Not to come off as partisan here, but the Dems do have a coalition who are more fiscally conservative when it comes to addressing the deficit and are capable of working across party party lines. The health care debate has really polarized Washington right now and both sides seem to be at a stalemate.

Senator Warner raises a few good points in this article, but I think more than anything he highlights the challenges of selling something as huge and complex as health care reform and connecting that with the nation's current deficit woes.

I tend to agree with the president's current approach, though not entirely, in the sense that it's more practical to sell the need for insurance coverage, which is more tangible, than to focus on the strain on the financial system, which the everyday Joe has a difficult time relating to.

But if you go back to the president's recent speech before Congress and even before that he has talked about, at length, the very issues Warner states here. We absolutely must get the deficit under control.

I didn't mind Warner. You had best forget that Presidential run though. The guy is about as charismatic as stale bread.

I didn't mind Warner. You had best forget that Presidential run though. The guy is about as charismatic as stale bread.

You're right about that. He's plenty smart though.

By increasing demand for Physicians but not increasing their supply, the cost to use them will increase. As costs increase, people will be forced to buy less coverage. Some will make sacrifices to maintain the same coverage, others will not be able to. Several weeks ago, you posted a link demonstrating the upcoming Dr. shortages. Do you expect fewer doctors to provide more services for less money?

Sure, you can keep what you have, but, as costs increase due to increased demand, fewer and fewer people will be able to keep what they have. Do you expect costs to stay the same even though you are increasing demand by at least 10-15% without increasing the supply? Do you believe premiums for private insurance will not increase? If not, why not? If so, do you believe that rising costs won't force many families into poorer coverage?

As for the public option, 1) If it offers competitive pricing to private insurers, it will eventually drive out these companies as it has an innate market advantage of not needing to be profitable. It can offer the same services, lose money and still draw from the public teat; 2) If it is not competitive and truly an insurer of last resort with a bare bones package, only those who are absolutely uninsurable, and thus the most costly to insure, will purchase it and, as they inevitably cost more to insure - and, of course, the horror stories of insufficient coverage will continue.

Your assumption is that we're already at 100% capacity utilization of our health-care system and those 47 million new patients will utilize the capacity all at once. I don't believe this to be the case across the country. Furthermore you aught to be familiar with H. Res 903 (http://rules.house.gov/SpecialRules_details.aspx?NewsID=4498), which allocated 100 million dollar annual grant to organizations/institutions to develop medical schools in areas experiencing medical professionals shortage, was passed along with the Healthcare Bill (note that all your boys voted against it (http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2009/roll882.xml)).

There's also the expectation on your part of perfection from this bill which I think is ludicrous. You also seem to completely ignore the law of demand (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_demand). Revamping the healthcare system is an incremental process and there's lots of good stuff in the bill and the kinks will get worked out. You can have a doom and gloom attitude but I don't think the substance of this bill warrants it.

I have no love for the insurance industry. Frankly they're going to reap what the sawed. They need to compete with the government and if they can't then their business model is dated. Honestly, I can not muster the emotion required to feel sorry for them or care for their wellbeing, kinda like how I don't give a shit what happens to a child molesters in prison.

p.s. Those of you that complain about the number of pages in the bill but can't be bothered to read it you're in no position to complain about it. Well, you can but you'd sound, like, kinda like, umm, you know, dumb.

So when you need open heart surgery your OK with the person who received their training at the local Community College?

He still has to go through medical school numbnuts. It's not how you start, it's how you finish.

He still has to go through medical school numbnuts. It's not how you start, it's how you finish.

For god sake man...trying to destroy this country's healthcare system is hard enough as it is without you telling everybody our secret!

For god sake man...trying to destroy this country's healthcare system is hard enough as it is without you telling everybody our secret!

I'm sorry, I will never do that again.