ECONOMICS OF JOHN F. KERRY --Kerrycare: Don't Grow Old And Don't Get Sick!

ICONOCLAST ^ | by R. Bastiat

[clintonbaiter]

How do you deal with a ticking time bomb that is primed to blow key US entitlement programs to bits in the not-too-distant future? If you're John F. Kerry and you want to be President of the United States, apparently your solution is to bury your head in the sand so deeply that you won't hear the explosion when the bomb goes off.

And how do you deal with a national medical system that offers most US citizens superb healthcare but is in urgent need of market incentives to expand its coverage and improve its performance? If you're John F. Kerry and you want to be President of the United States, apparently your solution is to drown the system in massive taxpayer subsidies, replace personal healthcare choices with federal mandates, and ensnare more and more people in government-run medical programs.

Both of these themes were very much in evidence during the final presidential debate in Tempe, Arizona, on October 13. Based upon Senator Kerry's remarks, I would characterize his two-pronged approach to these questions as: (1) a mindless refusal to acknowledge the existence of the impending crisis of Social Security and Medicare despite 21st century demographic realities, and (2) a major expansion of the government's role in managing the nation's healthcare system.

In contrast, President Bush demonstrated during the debate that at least he understands -- intellectually and philosophically -- where the best possible solutions lie: market-based incentives and personal choice.......

[clintonbaiter]

At last, an economist who tells it like it is. Only on Iconoclast!

[ClearCase_guy]

The Progressives are very busy defending FDR's policies from the 1930's.

The Conservatives are coming up with bold, new, optimistic plans for the future.

[Question Liberal Authority]

Maybe Kerry can kill everyone over 30 who doesn't windsurf.

[ClearCase_guy]

The big benefit is that, by participating in the FEHBP, these companies agree to waive the exclusion for pre-existing conditions. That's HUGE for people with long-term medical issues.

Gee, do you think that will drive up costs? Or do you think it will degrade services?

I'm pretty sure it will do both.

[dano1]

Based on what Kerry said in the debates, his health care plan has two planks:

1.) Everyone joins Blue Cross,

2.) People earning over $200,000/yr pay for it.

This plan seems ridiculous.

[ClearCase_guy]

I think you are seriously missing the point. Sure, "Blue Cross/Blue Shield is one of scores of insurers in the program" but if the economics of the program are sound and extensible, then everyone (everyone!) could choose Blue Cross/Blue Shield. Then the taxpayers would be contractually bound to pay for every single cancer patient, AIDS patient, and hypochondriac. And the level of care given to factory workers in Detroit will be at the same high level as that given to a Senator from Massachusetts. There would be no mechanism to hold down defensive medicine or reduce costs. The money would have to be "found" because the level of care is contractually mandated.

What crazy business would offer health care for their workers? Why bother? The government says it will cover you -- treat you like a Senator, mate! No need for your employer to get invovled.

Kerry is pretty blatantly saying "everyone joins Blue Cross/Blue Shield" and people earning over $200,000 a year will pay for it.

[trutexan]

I would rather pass a law that makes smoking & drinking illegal and if you do it you will not be covered by insurance.

The problem this country has is not "lack of health care" but lack of "percieved free health care" better known as insurance.