This is a great example of journalism being used to affect positive change.
Friday, February 17, 2012
Wednesday, February 15, 2012
Preventative Health Care Does NOT Reduce Health Care Costs!
I'm taking a break from by "break", so to speak, to address a premise that everyone in this country seems to accept as gospel. The premise is this:
"A healthier America will reduce health care costs for all".
I've heard this argument over and over again. It is the main talking point in favor of legislation that controls trans-fats, taxes cigarettes, mandates universal health care or any other of a myriad of excuses to expand the role of the Federal government in all of our lives. No one challenges this premise. It sounds reasonable... less fat people, less heart attacks, less diabetes, less money being spent on unhealthy people.
There are a few problems with this argument, and I'm frankly shocked that I haven't heard anyone else put the pieces together.
1. Everyone dies. I know this is a hard pill to swallow, but we do. Some die when they are 40, others when they are 90. If I choose to smoke, drink, and eat 5 cheeseburgers a day and die when I'm 40, am I putting a larger strain on the health care system than if I live a healthier lifestyle and linger on long into my 90's? I wouldn't think so... that's 50 years of preventative health care we're talking about... probably costs a lot. The guy who dies at 40 probably hasn't spent much on his own preventative health care so his "footprint" isn't as large as the healthy guy.
2. Capitalism. Supply and demand dictates that the more demand a product or service has, the higher price you can charge for the product or service. If there is a sharp increase in the popularity of preventative health care, the providers will be able to charge more for it.
3. More People. If we are somehow able to legislate our way into a utopian system where there is no obesity, diabetes, smoking, drinking, etc., then a logical conclusion would be that there would be a whole lot less people dying young. We're already starting to see the Baby Boomer generation enter retirement and we are worried about how we are going to pay for them. More people = greater health care costs.
Now, I'm not against preventative health care, just the notion that it is the irresponsible among us who are placing a strain on the system. Bringing the government into our lives by way of bans on trans fats or examining a child's lunch box to ensure that the food pyramid is being followed will not reduce health care costs...
... no matter what the First Lady thinks.
"A healthier America will reduce health care costs for all".
I've heard this argument over and over again. It is the main talking point in favor of legislation that controls trans-fats, taxes cigarettes, mandates universal health care or any other of a myriad of excuses to expand the role of the Federal government in all of our lives. No one challenges this premise. It sounds reasonable... less fat people, less heart attacks, less diabetes, less money being spent on unhealthy people.
There are a few problems with this argument, and I'm frankly shocked that I haven't heard anyone else put the pieces together.
1. Everyone dies. I know this is a hard pill to swallow, but we do. Some die when they are 40, others when they are 90. If I choose to smoke, drink, and eat 5 cheeseburgers a day and die when I'm 40, am I putting a larger strain on the health care system than if I live a healthier lifestyle and linger on long into my 90's? I wouldn't think so... that's 50 years of preventative health care we're talking about... probably costs a lot. The guy who dies at 40 probably hasn't spent much on his own preventative health care so his "footprint" isn't as large as the healthy guy.
2. Capitalism. Supply and demand dictates that the more demand a product or service has, the higher price you can charge for the product or service. If there is a sharp increase in the popularity of preventative health care, the providers will be able to charge more for it.
3. More People. If we are somehow able to legislate our way into a utopian system where there is no obesity, diabetes, smoking, drinking, etc., then a logical conclusion would be that there would be a whole lot less people dying young. We're already starting to see the Baby Boomer generation enter retirement and we are worried about how we are going to pay for them. More people = greater health care costs.
Now, I'm not against preventative health care, just the notion that it is the irresponsible among us who are placing a strain on the system. Bringing the government into our lives by way of bans on trans fats or examining a child's lunch box to ensure that the food pyramid is being followed will not reduce health care costs...
... no matter what the First Lady thinks.
Wednesday, February 8, 2012
Former Congresswoman Wakes Up From 26 Month-Long Nap!!!
In a miraculous turn of events, former Democratic congresswoman Kathy Dahlkemper, a Catholic from Erie, Pennsylvania, finally realized what a bill contained for which she cast a vote in December of 2009. Doctors were mystified by this sudden awakening and as of this evening, have no explanation of this event.
The "event" took the form of a press release sent out by Democrats for Life in November. The statement read,
"I would have never voted for the final version of the bill if I expected the Obama Administration to force Catholic hospitals and Catholic Colleges and Universities to pay for contraception.”
One theory on which doctors are working is the idea that Ms. Dahlkemper was stricken by a mini stroke or some other debilitating disorder when she voted for the bill. This theory is based mostly on the fact that the bill was available for her to read before the vote. However, there is another theory being thrown around that the entire Democratic side of the isle was stricken by an unknown virus that affects the portion of the brain responsible for reading and comprehension. Evidence that supports this is given in this video of Nancy Pelosi who doesn't seem to know herself what is in the bill...
Doctors are hopeful that this is a sign that the other politicians who were hit with this nasty bug will soon "snap out of it", as one doctor put, under the condition of anonymity.
The "event" took the form of a press release sent out by Democrats for Life in November. The statement read,
"I would have never voted for the final version of the bill if I expected the Obama Administration to force Catholic hospitals and Catholic Colleges and Universities to pay for contraception.”
One theory on which doctors are working is the idea that Ms. Dahlkemper was stricken by a mini stroke or some other debilitating disorder when she voted for the bill. This theory is based mostly on the fact that the bill was available for her to read before the vote. However, there is another theory being thrown around that the entire Democratic side of the isle was stricken by an unknown virus that affects the portion of the brain responsible for reading and comprehension. Evidence that supports this is given in this video of Nancy Pelosi who doesn't seem to know herself what is in the bill...
Doctors are hopeful that this is a sign that the other politicians who were hit with this nasty bug will soon "snap out of it", as one doctor put, under the condition of anonymity.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)