Because they know that he’s lying to them. Obama is loyal to only two constituencies. Unions and the trial lawyers. Everyone else he’ll sell out as soon as it’s convenient. If you don’t believe me ask the opponents to the Iraq Campaign, gay people who thought he’d overturn “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” or oppose DOMA , people who opposed the NSA surveillance of phone calls, the people who thought that he’d release the so called torture tapes, those who thought that he’d over turn the Bush policy on “Extraordinary Rendition”, those who believed he’d open up White House visitor logs to the public, or that he’d overturn the “State’s Secrets Privilege”. Not to mention the auto and high tech industries, which are finding out what being Obama’s friend can really mean.
All of which means that there is not one reason to believe that Obamacare will improve coverage or benefits for anyone. If it saves costs at all, it will do it by curtailing care for all so as to “equalize” the disparities. Here is what Obamacare will do. It will stifle innovation in technique and pharmacology because there will be no money in it. Companies will continue to make equipment and drugs for which the amortization has already occurred. Doctors will see malpractice rates rise because no matter what happens there will be no tort reform or limitation on law suits. Many bright people will either not go into or get out of medicine because there will not be enough money in it to make medical school costs pay off.
The members of the AMA, usually a Democrat friendly organization know that and that’s why there were boos the other day. Maybe it’s just the greedy doctors speaking, but I’m betting that they know that this plan is a loser and are expressing their displeasure early.
We should pay heed to their implicit warning.
I'm sorry, I love your blog. But people being disspointed in Obama because he hasn't done this that or the other thing is simply ridiculous. The man has been in office for what, FIVE MONTHS? Good god, give the man a chance.
It's not what he hasn't done Nathan, it's what he HAS done. He's reputiated a number of stances that he's run on. He's also usurped the rule of law, when he promised that he'd obey it, unlike his predecessor. Many of whose positions which he attacked during the campaign he has since adopted. Sorry, you and your fellow Obama voters got sucked in by the worlds greatest Three Card Monte scam artist. The "He's only been in office X days, weeks, months" excuse won't fly.
But wait…there's more! Everyone whined about HMOs a few years back, but gov't insurance like Medicaid is the lowest payor out there and always has been (with Medicare being the second lowest). It also takes the longest to pay, and is the most rigid to work with. Now, as a physician, imagine everyone you see on a Medicaid-like program. It's full of Byzantine rules that are often contradictory, and if you violate one you are assumed to be committing fraud until you prove otherwise.Nope, I can't understand why the AMA isn't falling over themselves getting behind this one.Then you have rationing. There is no socialized medicine structure on the planet that doesn't engage in rationing in one form or fashion. Whether it's flat-out denial of services as is done in some European countries, or creating long and discouraging lines for tests and services such as in Canada, it will and has to happen here if anything near the promised savings are to be realized. I can't wait until the proponents get that letter telling them they can no longer see their long-time family doctor, and get one assigned to them by zip code just as Great Britain does. And so does Medicaid in a lot of states.Under Obamacare, I suspect we'll end up a lot like Germany with regard to medical school education and control. Med school is subsidized (and therefore controlled) by the feds. You know…like the banks and auto industry here over the past few months. Why? Because you can't ratchet the physicians' salaries down to the level of a plumber in the US and still expect them to pay $150,000 for medical school. First we take control of medicine. Then, of course, we need to control medical education. And while we're there, we should also control the rest of education. See the very, very slippery slope? If you don't just ask a German physician, if you can find one. They've been leaving Germany in droves for many years.-LT
Further comments by LT which he requested I add here.> >Nathan said…> >> > I'm sorry, I love your blog.> > But people being disspointed> > in Obama because he hasn't> > done this that or the other> > thing is simply ridiculous.> >> > The man has been in office for> > what, FIVE MONTHS? Good god,> > give the man a chance.Sorry Nathan, can't do it. As TOTWTYTR said, it's less about what he hasn'tdone and more about what he has.He very quickly reversed himself of a significant number of his primarycampaign planks. It almost seems as if he defrauded those who voted forhim. Was it intentional? Were his campaign pledges simply lies,intended to gather votes? I don't know. Or were his reversals more theresult of naivete, and a de facto admission that the priorAdministration was right far more than whe said?What else has he done? Well, as a taxpayer I now am a partial owner ofa auto manufacturer and a number of banks, all to the tune of >$780trillion. And for his next trick, we're going to provide healthinsurance for 45 million people at a cost of $1.6 trillion.That's wuite a start for only being in office for 5 months, huh? Man,I'm going to have to pick up some over time shifts!-LT
Don't get me started, much less on the "Czars" he's bringing in… THIS IS NOT RUSSIA (at least not yet), the congresscritters and Judicial and Executive are responsible for running the country, not a bunch of Czars…
Re: Old NFO "In the United States the title "czar" is a slang term for certain high-level civil servants, such as the "drug czar" for the director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, "terrorism czar" for a Presidential advisor on terrorism policy, "cybersecurity czar" for the highest-ranking Department of Homeland Security official on computer security and information security policy, and "war czar" to oversee the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. More specifically, a czar refers to a sub-cabinet level advisor within the executive branch of the U.S. government. One of the earliest known usages of the term was for Judge Kenesaw Mountain Landis, who was named commissioner of baseball, with broad powers to clean up the sport after it had been dirtied by the Black Sox scandal of 1919"Lifted direct from wiki. Explains it much better then I could have.Also an Australians point of view concerning universal health care aka Obamacare. Australians have it most firstworld and second world countries have it, run it efectivly shown by the fact you spend the most per person for healthcare (2 and a half times more per person then Australia) yet your average life span is far less then Australia(5th with 81.2) compared to America(38th 78.2) Listening to the hysterics over the healthcare reform honestly leave us slightly baffled.