How bad is Obamacare? Worse than you may have thought.
Proponents of the nationalized health care system frame basic human health needs as a human right. They will cite all kinds of statistics on preventative care creating better outcomes. They also will pull at guilt strings and tell you that a country as wealthy as the US should provide doctor visits for its citizens.
Of course, they ignore basic microeconomic theory in those arguments. The proponents of Obamacare think care should be given cost free. To put it in layman’s terms; Advocates think you should spend more to go to the hairdresser than the doctor.
Even seemingly “free” has a cost. There ain’t no such thing as a free lunch.
Plus, because the Democrats passed a bill without reading or understanding what was in it, they are rewriting the bill as they go. It’s a just like a bunch of kids playing sandlot baseball constantly calling for a “do over”.
The latest twist is that the government isn’t going to check if someone has the correct income level to receive a subsidy for individual insurance. From the WSJ:
“Anyone can receive subsidies tied to income without judging the income they declare against the income data the Internal Revenue Service collects. This change has nothing to do with the employer mandate, even tangentially. HHS is disowning eligibility quality control because pre-clearance is “not feasible” as a result of “operational barriers” and “a large amount of systems development on both the state and federal side, which cannot occur in time for October 1, 2013”
If you thought all the layered social programs the US has passed since 1933 have been expensive, you haven’t seen anything yet.
Additionally, administrations all over the country are scheming how to get their medical pension expenses transferred from city and state liabilities to Obamacare. In Illinois and Chicago, they are already talking switching all of the public pension costs from the state and city to the federal government. That will take state and city negotiated burdens which should be appropriately paid for by the citizens of those states and cities to every tax payer in the US.
If they don’t bankrupt your pocketbook, they will kill you another way. Buried in the bill was a tax on medical devices.
The federal government makes things brutal on medical innovators through their plodding pace in approval at organizations like the Food and Drug Administration and US Patent Office. But Obamacare takes these hurdles to an even higher level. A 2.3% tax.
This will cause two things to happen:
1. Incentives to innovate new medical devices for more efficient, better and cheaper care will drop off.
2. Investors won’t invest in medical devices because of the risk/reward, and time to market.
The nationalized health care system will kill you, or at least make you very uncomfortable before you expire.
Obama has instituted this at a time when there is nascent technology that could be applied to devices for breathtaking breakthroughs in care. It’s like telling the inventors of the internal combustion engine that they can’t put it in a car. Of course, Obama isn’t a fan of the internal combustion engine anyway (heh).
Clearly, our government and private medical system was on an unsustainable path. There were going to be huge changes to healthcare with our without Obamacare. But, the way the Democrats are re-engineering the nation’s health care system is clearly not the way. No amount of rewrite of the bill will fix it.
The pace of technological change is quick, and the cost for research and startups is decreasing. Obama has artificially increased the cost of innovation at a time when it should be getting significantly cheaper.
If you wonder why House Republicans constantly pass bills that repeal Obamacare, those are two of the reasons why.