Cantor come right out and says that people with less money deserve crappy health care

[eridani]

http://thehill.com/blogs/healthwatch/health-reform-implementation/158979-cantor-private-healthcare-rationing-better-than-governments

Cantor appeared to go further than Republicans have in the past by acknowledging that not all patients are certain to get optimal healthcare under a system of private insurance.

"I think that the fundamental nature of our system of third-party payer is the problem," he said. Patients, he added, too often are left with "no decision about what they want and what they can afford."

Later, Cantor said Republicans want a safety net for people who can't afford care but that "we're not for everyone having the same outcome guaranteed."

Comment by Don McCanne of PNHP:

It is somewhat refreshing to hear such a frank discussion of rationing by House Majority Leader Eric Cantor. He does not pretend that only government programs might lead to rationing, but concedes that the private sector already makes rationing decisions.

Cantor not only acknowledges that not all patients are certain to get optimal healthcare under a system of private insurance, but Republicans are "not for everyone having the same outcome guaranteed."

Democrats appear to be in agreement. Under the Affordable Care Act, many will be left without coverage, and many more of those who have coverage through private health plans will not be able to afford the out-of-pocket expenses required for accessing health care, in spite of the subsidies. These financial barriers to access result in not everyone having the same outcome guaranteed, but the Democrats remain silent when confronted with this unacceptable deficiency in their version of health care reform.

There is already enough money in the health care system to ensure that everyone receives all essential health care services in a timely manner, with the same high quality outcomes guaranteed for all. The government rationing that Eric Cantor claims is inevitable occurs only if politicians are unwilling to budget through a single government program (single payer) the amount comparable to that we are already spending, publicly and privately.

Now if only the Democrats would admit that they have made a mistake in choosing a model of rationing that does not guarantee the same quality outcome for everyone, then maybe we could have a discussion of a model that would work. If so, then we could have the frank debate that Eric Cantor has initiated. Cantor says, "we're not for everyone having the same outcome guaranteed," but are the Democrats? Let's ask them.

[Hugabear]

1. I've heard similar from teabagger folks

Including some who flat out say that those without money just shouldn't have access to health care period. They say that health care is a privilege, not a right.

[joshcryer]

9. Yep.

I've heard the same thing said about a plethora of things that capitalists take for granted yet a civilized society should have as a mechanism to provide socially.

[ejpoeta]

11. yeah that's smart. how many of these folks would end up under that umbrella of not having the mone

so when their kids get sick with cancer and their insurance won't cover it... or they do... i guess they will still think that

[WinkyDink]

17. Republicans want everything to be a "privilege, not a right."

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

19. Right up until the moment it's their ass on the line.

Happens every single time.

[dkf]

2. If all the other health care systems cost so much less surely something about our current

System is excessive. Do all the other countries test as much, prescribe as much?

[eridani]

3. They certainly prescribe as much--in France they prescribe much more

There is less testing, but the main savings is that insurance companies are forced to accept government cost controls. The government also allocates capital spending, so you don't get the useless waste you see with competition. If a town has one cardiac center and someone decides to open another, do you think that people will obligingly start having twice as many heart attacks. This wasteful duplication is like having three competing fire departments serve a city.

[dkf]

5. Interesting take on duplication of machines.

Maybe that is why our Kaiser hospital farms out the harder procedures to the other hospitals.

[eridani]

8. Yes. There is a substantial increase in average health care costs--

--when you add more hospitals to a town whose population does not increase by much. It is also why Canada farms out some complex procedures to the US, which has 10 times the population. And why my former employer decided not to replace our thermal analysis machine when it crapped out--not enough demand, so we outsourced to a larger lab. Odd how what is smart business practice in private companies instantly becomes evidence of abysmal incompetence when governments do it, no?

[dkf]

10. I have to admit when I heard that Kaiser didn't have certain equipment...

I judged them to be second rate instead of smart.

Yet the thought of having to be transported to and from major surgery isn't very comforting. Maybe pricing plans does come to this sort of decision.

[ejpoeta]

13. i think the fact that they focus on prevention. also the fact that everyone

can afford to go to the doctor for check ups and if they are sick before it becomes something that would be very expensive. plus, since everyone is covered, then they don't have the inflated prices to pay for the uninsured that end up in the ER. my guess is they have some kind of controls on pharmaceutical costs. if there is only one insurance, their doctors don't have to have a whole section of employees whose job is just to deal with all the insurance companies. there would be streamlined forms, schedules, pricing.

[eridani]

16. Prevention raises lifetime health care costs--it does not lower them

Sure, it reduces costs attributable to the particular disease that is prevented, but the end result is longer life spans, which increases costs. The Dutch just came up with yet another study that fat smokers are cheaper to care for on a lifetime basis because they have shorter lives. In the 80s, RJ Reynolds tried to get the government of Czechoslovakia to promote smoking with data showing how much money was saved in pension ahd health care payouts. That they are sociopaths does not stop their data from being correct.

[pacalo]

4. "We're not for everyone having the same outcome guaranteed."

Wow. Amazing how utterly frank they can be when their party has elections $ewn up.

[eShirl]

7. just a back-door "death panel" is all that is

[Hannah Bell]

6. the poor should die.

the disabled should die.

seriously, this is how things are going.

[PA Democrat]

15. And we should call them on the disgusting immorality of that position at every opportunity.

My fear is that while Democrats have fought back on cuts to Medicare, that they will not fight as hard against cuts to Medicaid. The poor and disabled are considered as expendable by too many people.

[Citizen Worker]

12. When $0.30 out of every health care insurance dollar goes to the insurance company is it any wonder

the US has the highest health care costs in the world? Yet, despite the enormous sums of money we spend critical health statistics in the US continue to decline. For instance, a mere decade ago the US was tied for 24th place in longevity. We are now 39th and the costs keep going up. How is this possible? Greed by the parasitic insurance companies.

[nonperson]

14. I believe the Republican attack on Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security

And virtually every program that help anyone but the rich can be seen as another route to eugenics.

[sendero]

18. Not so much..

... eugenics as a final solution.

[eridani]

20. Meaning that for a long time they haven't needed a lot of us as producers--

--and now we're becoming more and more useless as consumers.