That news article has not been written yet, but perhaps one day …
Karl writes an article, “How to Stop Socialized Health Care”. I will go on record and state that I am not a mental health practitioner. But it is apparent to even a mental health non-practitioner, that he is not the brightest bulb when it comes to Health Care. He is in fact a phony, his concern is that he might be able to influence other non-bright bulbs. He does not care a whit about your quality of life or health.
If you think the last sentence is undeservedly harsh, then I remind you of the Bush Administration’s failed response to the devastation caused by Hurricane Katrina. You can place the ultimate blame on GW, because the buck does stop there. But let’s not forget his top advisor and the role he played, Karl. If he had advised Bush differently, then the area of America which was destroyed would now be fully recovered. But it is not.
So does Karl truly care about you or America? Or does he only care about attempting to resurrect an obviously failed ideology? Karl does not give a damn about you.
For the time being, I will ignore the name-calling and fear mongering aspects of his article. I’ll provide an opposing view for each of his points.
First, he states that the public option is not necessary for competition, that there is already enough competition in the insurance marketplace. Competition, as we learned in school, is supposed to improve quality and reduce prices.
So has the quality of health insurance improved? Does it cover all my needs? Yes, but then I am healthy and have not had a major health problem. If you consider how the health insurance companies treat grandmothers with pre-existing conditions, or daughters that need liver transplants, then the answer to the quality question is a resounding NO.
Have health insurance costs to both employers and those covered been reduced? NO, and NO. Health insurance costs are significantly growing, and eroding the profits of companies trying to offer benefits to their employees. And on top of that, the deductibles for those covered constantly rise.
So Karl’s argument that there is enough competition is pure fertilizer. The real argument, is that we need the RIGHT kind of competition. And the public option is that type of competition.
Second, he argues that a public option will undercut [the profits] of the private insurers, passing the tab to tax payers and health care providers. My response to that is two-fold. First, remind me why shareholder profits and citizen health care needs are a fantastic union? Can anyone explain how the motivations and needs of one meet the other? There are plenty of examples that demonstrate that the sick and shareholders (and the companies that serve them) are at odds. Just search for ‘pre-existing conditions’ to get a feel for this. Second, the cost of the uninsured is already being passed on to tax payers and health care providers. All you have to do is take a look in any Emergency Room throughout America to see this. Bull shit argument Karl.
Third, he argues that the public option would crater the private insurance market. Neither Medicare nor Medicaid have destroyed the private insurance market, yet both programs compete with it. Karl, bull shit again.
Fourth, he argues that the public option is too expensive and that Medicare (a similar program) is going to run out of money in the near future. WRONG and WRONG. He simply cannot back up the claim that the public option is too expensive. Privatized health insurance is too expensive. The public option would not be burdened by exorbitant salaries and millions thrown away for lobbying and advertising. Separately, Ronald Reagan predicted in 1983 that Medicare would be broke by the 1990′s. So it’s no surprise that Karl is using that argument again. But like Reagan, Karl is wrong. Bull shit on both counts Karl.
Fifth, he argues that the public option puts the government in between the patient and doctor, and that you should imagine how bad that would be. You don’t have to imagine how bad it is that health insurance companies are between us and our doctors. There are plenty of examples of how their profit driven decisions have negatively impacted the health of Americans. But I can imagine that removing profit, exorbitant salaries, and huge lobbying costs from the equation would be best for America.
The public option is the sanest idea when it comes to health care.
Posted by shadowinthedarkness 
