In the prior post (Part One), we noticed that the same doctors and hospitals caring for you now will do so under Obamacare, so the new law is not healthcare. It is instead, about who receives the care and who has to pay for that. The millions of new recipients are funded by those who mostly, already have care; that is, workers and seniors.
We saw that covering millions of new patients requires a lot of money that the government will take from us. We saw that serving millions more with the same sized staff requires less care per person. (Just do the math!) But there are other aspects we didn’t discuss; now, we will.
First, an update: All know the Obamacare website rollout is troubled. Secretary Sibelius, who is in charge, says that the President didn’t know it was imperfect, let alone that hospitals would lay off thousands of workers on account of the lower government payments to them. The New York Times though, said that it was Sibelius that didn’t know because the project was run from the White House. Meanwhile, Secretary Sibelius said she won’t be signing up for Obamacare; she already has her own insurance. (That you pay for…) And in Congress, Senator Rubio (R) wants a years’ delay of the individual mandate. He is being ignored, but now a Democrat is writing a bill to do that. That suggests that the situation may be worse than is being reported.
Now we’re up to date, not only is Obamacare not healthcare; it’s a bunch of things that have little to do with the subject. Things that need some consideration, seems to me. One is the government’s medical data base listing everyone. Why does the Federal government want to centralized U.S. medical records? Who will access them? And how will they be kept accurate? Government doesn’t do that very well; consider the famous “No fly” database. This puts all but your financial data up for grabs, doesn’t it? Financially, the new law gives the government the power to help itself from your bank account, for which you must now furnish the information. Any time the Feds decide they’re entitled to your money, they can just go take it. You know that we will be hearing of bankruptcies resulting from this, with a story four years later that the government was in error, so sorry.
We’ll make a few predictions of our own here: Obamacare, giving as it does, less care to more people at necessarily increased expense, is a rationing system. Such always create shortages, most particularly when government with its political motives, is doing the rationing. Those who have thought healthcare from insurers is bureaucratic, will learn something.
Obamacare cuts payments to providers but it also contains rewards for qualify. Quality for a hospital, is successful outcomes for patients and reduced readmissions. Consider how you will improve outcomes on less money, with fewer workers… You’ll find ways to ditch the sickest patients for one thing; they’re going to make you look bad. Doctors will be expected to hospitalize fewer patients as well, if they want to retain hospital privileges. And the less sick but elderly and needing services will come to understand the British system, where numbers of elderly patients starve to death in hospitals every year. It happens in Canada and other places too. Increasingly, expending scarce resources on unproductive people is frowned upon if they are elderly. Young welfare clients are wanted, on the other hand, as the entire premise of Obamacare indicates.
So Obamacare isn’t healthcare; it’s instead, government control of who receives healthcare, how much they will receive and who will pay for it. It is coerced, not voluntary and necessarily both reduces services per patient and raises costs to all but the many newly subsidized. It provides the government with your personal information plus access to your bank account. and it pays less to providers while loading them with more patients. It is then, unworkable in its present form.
Therefore, it will be amended repeatedly no matter who is in charge; neither party will repeal a goody already sold to the young who mostly haven’t needed insurance. The coming alterations will follow the political winds, subject eventually the the fact, now showing up in Europe, that these programs cannot be funded in a democracy; there aren’t enough resources.