Two articles in today'[s New York Times referenced health care costs on the reform bill. Stating that the reform bill focused on health care access, rather than cost-control. Jonathan Bush opined that health reform will be cost-expansionary. But Andrea Sisko, the main author of a government report predicted modest effects on the growth of health care cost to accompany a marked increase in access as more than 30 million people gain insurance coverage, although the article citing her report notes that growth in health care spending will increase from its 17.3 percent of the gross domestic product to 19.6 percent in 9 years.
Will our government be forced - by economic realities - to make new changes to health care coverage, limiting benefits for conditions now covered, imposing age barriers to obtaining palliative or even curative therapies, or barring individuals from health care coverage for conditions which they developed as a result of damage which they self-imposed, such as the use of drugs, high risk sexual behavior, abuse of alcohol, and perhaps even consuming types and quantities of foods known to increase the risk of diabetes, heart disease, hypertension, obesity related joint disease and other conditions? Will government move towards pragmatic limits which will reduce scientific research, impose restrictions which favor the young and healthy, and make individuals primarily responsible for the consequences of lifestyle decisions which end-up costing society money?
Who will judge and who will be judged? Who will live and who will die?
Who by Fire?
Showing posts with label Gross Domestic Product. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Gross Domestic Product. Show all posts
Thursday, September 9, 2010
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Obama's Quest For $634 Billion
WASHINGTON (Reuters) Feb 24 - Health spending will hit $2.5 trillion this year, devouring 17.6% of the economy, as the White House and Congress consider major changes to the health care system, U.S. government economists said on Tuesday.
Reuters reported a forecast by The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services predicting an increase in health care's percentage of the gross domestic product by one percentage point (to 17.6% of the gross domestic product) in 2009 as compared with 2008.
For my earlier discussion of this issue see the "Avalanche" blog: http://www.blogger.com/posts.g?blogID=1547787506785837911&searchType=ALL&txtKeywords=&label=Health+Care+Inflation.
Reuters quoted CMS economist Christopher Truffer: "We project that the health share of the economy will increase steadily through 2018." The increase in health care percent of the gross domestic product not only reflects the subject of my earlier analysis, but also increased costs of technology, population growth, an aging population, pent-up unmet demand (i.e., from those receiving insurance for the first time (i.e., through Medicaid) and immigrants who may not have had access to advanced health care before arriving in the U.S.), time spent with patients, prescription drug costs, and the failure of providers to provide efficient systems of care (as patients move into hospital emergency departments where extensive testing and high costs of care waste enormous financial resources.
If Obama's rationalization of health care reflects the excesses and lack of corporate responsibility that we have already seen in the financial industry, we will have a big, expensive, inefficient health care system which increasingly fails to provide care as predatory unethical and wasteful behavior flourishes. Even if Obama gets the $634B over 10 years for health care that he seeks, without a program grounded on an ethical framework which reflects American consensus, health care will not improve. We will move to a 20% of gross domestic product health care system with lots of money for corporate entities and no significant benefit for our citizens.
Reuters reported a forecast by The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services predicting an increase in health care's percentage of the gross domestic product by one percentage point (to 17.6% of the gross domestic product) in 2009 as compared with 2008.
For my earlier discussion of this issue see the "Avalanche" blog: http://www.blogger.com/posts.g?blogID=1547787506785837911&searchType=ALL&txtKeywords=&label=Health+Care+Inflation.
Reuters quoted CMS economist Christopher Truffer: "We project that the health share of the economy will increase steadily through 2018." The increase in health care percent of the gross domestic product not only reflects the subject of my earlier analysis, but also increased costs of technology, population growth, an aging population, pent-up unmet demand (i.e., from those receiving insurance for the first time (i.e., through Medicaid) and immigrants who may not have had access to advanced health care before arriving in the U.S.), time spent with patients, prescription drug costs, and the failure of providers to provide efficient systems of care (as patients move into hospital emergency departments where extensive testing and high costs of care waste enormous financial resources.
If Obama's rationalization of health care reflects the excesses and lack of corporate responsibility that we have already seen in the financial industry, we will have a big, expensive, inefficient health care system which increasingly fails to provide care as predatory unethical and wasteful behavior flourishes. Even if Obama gets the $634B over 10 years for health care that he seeks, without a program grounded on an ethical framework which reflects American consensus, health care will not improve. We will move to a 20% of gross domestic product health care system with lots of money for corporate entities and no significant benefit for our citizens.
Sunday, August 24, 2008
Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac & Your Family's Health Care
America is in a severe economic slump. Concurrently, the nation's health care costs, for a growing and aging population, are increasing. When the denominator (gross domestic product or GDP) shrinks or stalls, and the numerator (health care costs) grows, we will devote an increasing percentage of the gross domestic product to health care, giving politicians an excuse to vote against meaningful health care reform with health services for all Americans. I expect to hear the refrain "we don't have the money just now" from state capitals and Washington, coupled with the inference that health care is taking too big a bite out of America's economic apple.
The collapse of Wall Street, the exposure of our government to default on $5.2 trillion in mortgages (which you, the taxpayer, will be expected to underwrite), the lack of overall government credibility with its effect on individuals' and business' purchasing plans, and dismal newspaper headlines all affect the GDP denominator. A decrease in preventive medicine, early diagnosis and treatment, childrens' services and health technology, coupled with accelerating pharmaceutical costs, will eventually inflate the numerator.
As we move into the Democratic and Republican conventions, listen critically for realistic discussion of serious health care reform. It's your family's health and well-being they won't be talking about.
The collapse of Wall Street, the exposure of our government to default on $5.2 trillion in mortgages (which you, the taxpayer, will be expected to underwrite), the lack of overall government credibility with its effect on individuals' and business' purchasing plans, and dismal newspaper headlines all affect the GDP denominator. A decrease in preventive medicine, early diagnosis and treatment, childrens' services and health technology, coupled with accelerating pharmaceutical costs, will eventually inflate the numerator.
As we move into the Democratic and Republican conventions, listen critically for realistic discussion of serious health care reform. It's your family's health and well-being they won't be talking about.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
