As we've long maintained, health care costs drive health insurance costs. It follows, then, that any decrease in the former should be welcome news to us all. And it appears that, in at least a few areas, the increases in health care costs have slowed:
"U.S. healthcare spending rose at the lowest rate on record in 2008..."
The article then goes on to repeat some discredited memes, but it does point out an interesting conundrum: while "U.S. healthcare spending rose 4.4 percent in 2008," the lowest such increase in the last half century, "federal healthcare spending increased 10.4 percent in 2008 over 2007 levels." [emphasis added]
So what does that tell us?
Well first, that the private sector is much more adept at controlling costs than the public (d'oh!). This should (but probably won't) give pause to all those who advocate granting the government control over our health care.
Second, despite the Medicare cuts already in place - let alone those "in the queue" - the gummint still can't reduce its cost of health care.
Tell me again how handing these folks the keys to the whole shebang will have a happy ending?
UPDATE: Want to know why the government can't (or won't) keep health care costs in line? Well, here's a textbook example:
"A woman says Medicaid is wasting thousands of dollars on a clunky device to help her speak that an iPod application can do much more easily and much less expensively."
Claudia Burrows, whose son is autistic, has a significant speech impediment as a result of ALS. Between her speech issues and her son's health problems, she has difficulty communicating with him. So, "Medicaid insisted on spending $8,000 for a large medical device to do essentially the same task that the iPod and software can do for $375."
That's right, a better, more efficient and cheaper (by a factor of 2,000) solution is readily available, but "rules is rules." Heaven forfend that common sense, let alone a sense of responsibility for tax-payer dollars, should play any part in gummint-run health care.
[Hat Tip: Neal Boortz]
"U.S. healthcare spending rose at the lowest rate on record in 2008..."
The article then goes on to repeat some discredited memes, but it does point out an interesting conundrum: while "U.S. healthcare spending rose 4.4 percent in 2008," the lowest such increase in the last half century, "federal healthcare spending increased 10.4 percent in 2008 over 2007 levels." [emphasis added]
So what does that tell us?
Well first, that the private sector is much more adept at controlling costs than the public (d'oh!). This should (but probably won't) give pause to all those who advocate granting the government control over our health care.
Second, despite the Medicare cuts already in place - let alone those "in the queue" - the gummint still can't reduce its cost of health care.
Tell me again how handing these folks the keys to the whole shebang will have a happy ending?
UPDATE: Want to know why the government can't (or won't) keep health care costs in line? Well, here's a textbook example:
"A woman says Medicaid is wasting thousands of dollars on a clunky device to help her speak that an iPod application can do much more easily and much less expensively."
Claudia Burrows, whose son is autistic, has a significant speech impediment as a result of ALS. Between her speech issues and her son's health problems, she has difficulty communicating with him. So, "Medicaid insisted on spending $8,000 for a large medical device to do essentially the same task that the iPod and software can do for $375."
That's right, a better, more efficient and cheaper (by a factor of 2,000) solution is readily available, but "rules is rules." Heaven forfend that common sense, let alone a sense of responsibility for tax-payer dollars, should play any part in gummint-run health care.
[Hat Tip: Neal Boortz]
Posts
