I have been littering the political posts of A|R with comments about policies being proposed by either McCain or Obama. In some cases I have alluded to other things I think they should be considering. And in both cases I think that the parties and the candidates are missing the boat.
Energy...
The Democrats are complaining that we can't drill our way out of this. They are whining that it will take 20 years for drilling to have any effect...
- First, that is a lie. It will be more like 3-5 years, but the effects would be felt immediately in the futures market.
- Second, 12 years ago, Clinton vetoed a bill from the GOP controlled Congress that owuld have opened up ANWR... that oil would be on the market right now.
So, to fix the problem in the beginning, open up ANWR, the OCS (Outer Continental Shelf) and the FGS (Florida Gulf Coast) for drilling. The 68m acres that the Democrat leadership is talking about are not productive areas... Drilling where the oil isn't is stupid... they know it. 70 of the people in the country want drilling and they want it NOW.
Two things will be accomplished with this. First, by NOT importing 4,000,000 barrels of oil each day, we won't be sending $400M - $600M each day to countries like Venezuela, Saudi Arabia and Iran. Second, the royalty that the federal government gets from a barrel of oil is 18%. So, they would increase their revenue by $72M - $106M each day. That means that by sourcing 4M barrels of in the US rather than elsewhere, the government would get between $25B and $40B each year.
It is time to build nuke plants. Even France generates 80% of it's electrical power from nuclear plants. There is NO reason that we can't match that. Free up the natural gas for transportation.
The next thing to do is put a man on the moon develop ground-breaking technologies to wean us off of oil for other purposes. Transportation may be the toughest... but it is also not the biggest problem.
Healthcare...
Despite the noise from the left, no other country can match the access to healthcare available in the US. Don't tell me about how healthcare is useless unless you can afford it. Every time there is a story about someone not being able to get healthcare because of a lack of insurance, there is a story about people going to jail and companies being fined many times the cost of care. You CAN NOT be legally turned away from a facility because of a lack of ability to pay.
And yet, all... ALL... ALL of the countries that are pointed to as examples have healthcare rationed and people DIE waiting in line to be treated. So, for those that say it doesn't matter if you can't aford it, I say All of the affordability in the world doesn't matter if you can't get treated.
So, what can we do to reign in prices, especially for the uninsured?
- First, healthcare providers need to publish EVERY price for EVERY procedure, service or product they provide. It needs to be public and it needs to be widely available. They already have codes that are standardized throughout the industry for every concievable aspect of care. They should make it available on their website and in print form for the cost of the print.
- Second, and this is important, each provider can only have ONE price for a service, procedure or product. If you are paying cash, you pay the same as the biggest insurance company. No negotiated fees. A hospital can't charge the Bailey's $12,000 for delivering a baby, or charge the insurance company $4,000 for the exactlsame baby.
Would people go to compare the costs and reputations of every provider while they are in the ambulance after an auto accident? No. But I can guarantee that there will be scores of companies that will do just that and the information about how good a given provider is v. their cost will be ubiquitous.
And most of the people that are uninsured are uninsured by choice. I have employed too many people that could pay $400/mo. for a car and $100/mo. for a phone, but couldn't manage $150/mo. for the employee portion of their healthcare. I know it is WAY more expensive for us. I could buy a rental home with what my family pays for our policy. But limiting competition and putting the least efficient provider in charge is NOT the solution.
And it could be implemented in weeks.
Taxes and the Economy...
They are inextricably linked. As is housing and transportation. Again, despite the whining from the Democrats in the House and Senate about "the last eight years", the damage has mostly been in the last two years. In the previous six years, the Clinton Recession was turned around, despite terrorist attacks that hurt the economy in addition to killing thousands of Americans on our own soil.
Look at what we had going two years ago in regards to unemployment, inflation, oil, the value of the dollar. Also keep in mind that the Democrats couldn't get traction on the economy during the mid-term elections... they ran on the war. Now, with two years of "leadership" from Democrats in the House and Senate... it REALLY is starting to suck. So, these are the folks with a roadmap?
It is time to really shake things up. FairTax. Dismantle the IRS. Make the US the biggest coporate tax haven on the planet. After the FairTax is adopted, people would have to hide under a rock to avoid a job. We have among the highest corporate taxes in the world. And we wonder why companies want to be headquartered elsewhere? US companies have to pay taxes on international profits... foreign companies don't have to pay taxes in their home country on earnings here. And we wonder why companies want to be headquartered elsewhere? We can fix that, simplify life for business owners and non-business owners alike. We can end the intrusion of the government into people banks accounts and life. We can tax the underground economies. And we can surtax illegal residents... all in one fell swoop.
So, there you go...
Unless otherwise noted, all content of this blog is the property of Lane Bailey, ©2012 Lane Bailey.
I'd love to hear from you...
I just wish there was a way to get very detailed examples of what and how the candidates plan to fix.
The insurance companies are part of the health care problem. You think the doctor gets all the money for your procedure? No sir, the insurance companies haggle with the doctors and put them on a "split" so to speak? Insurance companies are a giant part of the problem and a necessary evil. I say drill like hell for oil here, and nuclear power is the answer or we are all in big trouble.
I always wonder why is is such a crime for some Texan to be filthy rich from oil, but it is okay for the middle east to be wealthy beyond our wildest dreams and rub it in our noses to boot? Maybe we could drill, responsibly for oil here, have the drillers pay taxes and maybe save taxes for our country? But, hey, what do I know?
Lane,
RE:
The costs of all procedures and medical care should be regulated. It is to a certain extent by CPT codes that identify the procedures and ICD-9 codes which is the reimbursement codes.
That being said, the think your meant here: the cost of the print (procedure maybe or did I read you wrong there?)
In my 25 years in the medical arena, cash paying individuals usually were given a discount. The reason behind this is as follows: Reimbursement for procedures usually only amounts to 80% of the billing price to the institution.
While I totally agree with you that health care reform is mandatory, there are current issues for people trying to get health care insurance, not everyone qualifies, such as myself.
I have tried to get health care insurance for two years now. Because I had kidney cancer and a total nephrectomy in 2002, I can not get past the question that asks if you've ever been diagnosed with cancer. As soon as I am honest and say "yes", they tell me that I have to be cancer free for 10 years before they will even consider it. I for one, do not have insurance as a choice. If I went back into being a Radiology/Nuclear Medicine Director position, I could get health care coverage through the company, however, I'm a Realtor and I love what I have been doing for the last 3 years.
I wish you would have split this blog into two as if I continue to remark here on Taxes and the Economy, I will be writing a blog on your blog.
Great points here as always. Karen
Oh and one more point Lane.
France as you noted above uses Nuclear power with great success.
If you break your arm and need x-ray's and a cast, it's about $200. US dollars...Health care is cheap there, my customer's from France and I were just discussing how expensive health care is here in the US.
Hey, Lane. Kudos to you for putting it out there. I appreciate your post and wish you all the best, Jim
Exactly, Trey. I fear that the political system is flawed beyond repair. The only honset guy is the guy who never gets elected. You may start with the best of intentions, but once you're in the game you've got to sell your soul to special interest groups to stand a chance. By the time you are elected you owe so many favors to so many factions that the 'regular guy' you once felt obligated to help is so far down on that list that nothing ever changes.
Perhaps curtailing or capping campaign funds would help, but I doubt it. Not that THAT would ever happen anyway.
A word on healthcare: There are many people who cannot afford the ongoing treatment of their illnesses. I'm not talking about a visit to the ER. I'm talking about money for meds.
Our medical system is a national embarassment. It makes no sense that in the wealthiest country in the world, there are people who cannot afford the medicine they need.
Trey - The candidates websites have a lot of info, but they can't be too specific, because then people will hold them to it.
Audrey - I know that the insurance companies negotiate a lower rate... covered it in the post. In addition to the insurance companies and their profit though, hospitals and other institutions like to have a high "book" price... and they know that the insurance companies won't pay... but they might find a sucker to pay it that is already over the barrel.
Karen - The cost of procedures, etc. should NOT be regulated. If they are, there is no more competition. If all rates are regulated, there will be shortages and cutbacks. Look at getting an MRI in most of Canada... You can go to your vet and get one for your dog, same day... couple hundred bucks. But, you have to wait months to get one for yourself... It's free unless you die first. And it is illegal for the vet to run you through his machine.
Karen again - Sure, but setting an arm isn't a big deal. Try breast cancer. It's like a 20% higher death rate than the US.
Jim & Maria - You're welcome. I know it is crazy, but it seems to me that it is what a couple of candidates need to hear.
Marty - I have a couple of ideas about campaign reform and a different way to run Congress... later.
Mary - All of the pharma companies have free prescription programs... and another thing I think should happen is that the pharma companies should NOT sell medicines in other countries for less than they sell them in the US. The problem there is that other governments won't respect patents unless the companies sell them drugs at lower prices. So, in effect, WE (everyone in the US) are paying for the majority of the R&D in the drug industry. If we regulate them the same way, the R&D stops...
And I know several people that have been able to get free or cheap maintenance drugs from pharma companies.
And, our national embarrassment happens to deliver the best medical care to the widest range of people in the world. Dig into the World Health Organization report from a couple of years ago. The headline was that we rated 38th or something overall... but when you started to see what we were graded down for, it wasn't availability, quality, accessibility or care to population. We actually topped the charts for everything except cost.
People in every part of the world come here when the going gets tough. That isn't because we are an embarrassment.
Lane almost no one qualifies for the free drugs. It's a good idea, but it's not widely available. The need is far greater than the availability. High drug prices are a killer for middle class families, lower class folks and seniors on fixed incomes. I know in my dad's case, there was NO help for his high Rx cost at all. He was just plain stuck with the bill. I investigated every available option. In the case of our son, the cost was horribly high in the US because it's a newer drug so no generic yet available. When they first told us $800 per month, I was horrified. I was still horrified at $380 per month in Canada, but heck, that is a huge huge savings. I think Canada must be doing something right.
Mary - What Canada is doing right is holding the drug company hostage. They can either sell it cheaper than the drug company sells it in the US, or Canada will allow a Canadian company to reverse engineer the drug and make their own generic. Despite the patent being internationally enforcable, it won't be enforced. If it wasn't as cheap in the rest of the world, it wouldn't be as expensive in the US.
Lane - you bring up a lot of good discussion points. I wish that congress would have some of the discussions that are held on this network and others. Unfortunately, their discussions appear to trend towards the political ramifications of proposed legislation rather than implementation. They also tend not to consider "unforeseen consequences".
Lane - Brilliant Post! YOU should get into politics. The U.S. needs thinkers like you!
By the way, yesterday I joined you in the 100,000+ Point Club!! (See my blog.)
Mike - For them it is all about sound bites... and naming bills with things that sound like something is being accomplished.
Lisa - No politics for me. Too many skeletons...