How will Obama's health care reform plans affect dentists?

[PSU SHC 414]

So this issue has been brought up in several of the medical forums, so I'm wondering if anyone could offer insight on whether or not Obama's plans for a government-sponsored health insurance program will adversely affect dentists? Is dental coverage even being discussed at this point?

Physicians are concered that reimbursement rates would be similar to current Medicare rates; should dentists also be concerned (since most elect not to accept Medicaid/Medicare patients for this exact reason, not to mention the tedious paperwork)?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[robhmnt]

IMO, Obama's plan at its worst won't affect dentists. At its best, it will enable disadvantaged people to see dentists as well (those dentists who accept insurance), and in that case, those dentists will benefit more.

 

[teeth63a]

Where we're headed:

Federal mandate that compels all dentists to take Medicaid/Medicare patients on the Medicaid schedule.

Be prepared to be reimbursed for $300 crowns and $50 fillings.

Ok, I'm exaggerating, but we'll see what happens.

 

[robhmnt]

Where we're headed:

Federal mandate that compels all dentists to take Medicaid/Medicare patients on the Medicaid schedule.

Be prepared to be reimbursed for $300 crowns and $50 fillings.

Ok, I'm exaggerating, but we'll see what happens.

May I know what your source is?

 

[teeth63a]

May I know what your source is?

My brain.

 

[mike3kgt]

Where we're headed:

Federal mandate that compels all dentists to take Medicaid/Medicare patients on the Medicaid schedule.

Be prepared to be reimbursed for $300 crowns and $50 fillings.

Ok, I'm exaggerating, but we'll see what happens.

Make that $427.29 (PFM crown, anterior only if it has RCT) or $51.21 (one surface posterior composite) if you are a provider with Ohio Medicaid.

That's some sweet dentistry.

 

[teeth63a]

Make that $427.29 (PFM crown, anterior only if it has RCT) or $51.21 (one surface posterior composite) if you are a provider with Ohio Medicaid.

That's some sweet dentistry.

mike3kgt:

In my state:
PFM $234
One surface posterior composite (paid the same rate as amalgam) $38.53

I'M MOVING TO OHIO! I'M GONNA BE RICH!

robhmnt: The Bright Idea Fairy gifted our state legislature a few years ago with the thought of forcing ALL dentists to accept Medicaid. Thankfully the bill died. The point I was trying to make was that one shouldn't be surprised if someone in Washington comes up with a half baked idea like that.

 

[mirk3]

If you actually read the bill introduced by house democrats, participation is voluntary. To my knowledge, it does not involve dentistry. If it passes, millions of uninsured people would be able to get health insurance, and thus have more money for dental care. If it does include dentistry, it will help the dentists who need more patients, but those who don't won't need to accept it. Obama is great for dentistry.

 

[teeth63a]

If you actually read the bill introduced by house democrats, participation is voluntary. To my knowledge, it does not involve dentistry. If it passes, millions of uninsured people would be able to get health insurance, and thus have more money for dental care. If it does include dentistry, it will help the dentists who need more patients, but those who don't won't need to accept it. Obama is great for dentistry.

Until it comes to tax time. Since his new plan will balloon the national debt to 1 trillion dollars, taxes will inevitably have to go up. And since we now live in a socialist/Robin Hood era, count on the rich to get taxed more to support the nationalization of healthcare.

Universal healthcare is not a right. It's a benefit. A benefit that the goverment has no business in providing without restriction. Those living below the poverty line or unemployed should be the only qualifiers. We already have a system, called Medicaid. He ought to fix that first before sinking the country into more debt. With the ability to proglong life with medication and a larger aging population, the cost to the government, and therefore the taxpayer, will be astronomical.

 

[mirk3]

Until it comes to tax time. Since his new plan will balloon the national debt to 1 trillion dollars, taxes will inevitably have to go up. And since we now live in a socialist/Robin Hood era, count on the rich to get taxed more to support the nationalization of healthcare.

Universal healthcare is not a right. It's a benefit. A benefit that the goverment has no business in providing without restriction. Those living below the poverty line or unemployed should be the only qualifiers. We already have a system, called Medicaid. He ought to fix that first before sinking the country into more debt. With the ability to proglong life with medication and a larger aging population, the cost to the government, and therefore the taxpayer, will be astronomical.

Actually George Bush doubled the national debt to $11 Trillion dollars, and it's going up because of the bailouts and stimulus package. Other countries that have universal health care are in far better fiscal shape than the US. It's the cost of tax breaks for the rich (I'm talking fat cats on wall street not your town's surgeon or businessman), and indescribably outrageous war spending ($800 billion per year) that has us in the whole. And Obama can't stop it because too many people who are too powerful love it how it is, there's no way to end it. This worries me more than anything else, the debt/deficit must be dramatically cut.

 

[MrKnowitall11]

Mirk3, I don't think anyone will argue the point the Bush's spending habits were out of control. However, most people with conservative views want the spending to stop. We are all in agreement that healthcare and insurance is too high, but a total spending and control reform by the government is not the answer. I challenge that statement that countries with universal health care are in better fiscal shape. Most of europe is in just as bad as shape as we are and they are trying to get away from universal healthcare. If I need my hip replaced, i can find someone in the US to do it within weeks, compared to canada were i will have to wait 5 months, or compared to england where they will flip a coin and tell me yes or no. The obama plan looks good now, but it will quickly go to a single payer system and how do you battle the government when you don't like their medical bill statement? You can't.

 

[teeth63a]

Actually George Bush doubled the national debt to $11 Trillion dollars, and it's going up because of the bailouts and stimulus package. Other countries that have universal health care are in far better fiscal shape than the US. It's the cost of tax breaks for the rich (I'm talking fat cats on wall street not your town's surgeon or businessman), and indescribably outrageous war spending ($800 billion per year) that has us in the whole. And Obama can't stop it because too many people who are too powerful love it how it is, there's no way to end it. This worries me more than anything else, the debt/deficit must be dramatically cut.

I actually agree with most of what you're saying. I only take issue with the comparison to other countries. Canadian citizens pay upward of 30% in income taxes (if I'm wrong on this correct me)... and that is the price of socializing healthcare. I know many Canadians who gripe about the tax situation. They tell me those who can, get private insurance, and those who really can, go down to the US to get care.

The fact of the matter is that people, in general do not take care of themselves. Poor diets and lack of exericise (documented many times in different studies) is contributing to heart disease and obesity of people. I think its morally wrong for one to ask that everyone (all taxpayers) to foot the bill for their excesses. Likewise, I opposed the auto bailouts. I only supported the bank bailouts to a certain degree, since the collapse of the banks would bring the whole economy down.

And again, morally, is it right to ask the richest to foot the bill? The top 10% earners of the country already pay for 70% of income tax collected. Shouldn't the taxable amount (as a percentage) be fair acriss all income brackets?

 

[mike3kgt]

Actually George Bush doubled the national debt to $11 Trillion dollars, and it's going up because of the bailouts and stimulus package. Other countries that have universal health care are in far better fiscal shape than the US. It's the cost of tax breaks for the rich (I'm talking fat cats on wall street not your town's surgeon or businessman), and indescribably outrageous war spending ($800 billion per year) that has us in the whole. And Obama can't stop it because too many people who are too powerful love it how it is, there's no way to end it. This worries me more than anything else, the debt/deficit must be dramatically cut.

The sad thing is that Bush was supposed to be great for medicine/dentistry as professions. Instead, it seems like both sides (Bush then Obama) are bad for dentistry as a profession. 8 years later, haven't seen a huge benefit for doctors or dentists as a profession. We did get Medicare Rx coverage... that should help the elderly right? Oh wait, that was steered towards the bottom lines of the pharm industry (http://www.azstarnet.com/news/163911).

Ultimately there is only one winner when it comes to public healthcare policy, the insurance companies. They are the ones who will truly benefit from mid-level practitioners & independent hygiene. I can see it, the slight scent of being able to drop the UCR while keeping premiums at the same level by introducing these mid-levels is getting them excited.

Maybe it also seems the ADA has their hands in the pockets of both the politicians and the insurance companies as well? Give kids a smile sure is nice though. From drbicuspid.com - "The Senate Committee on Finance is expected to introduce one this month that could make adult dental benefits a mandatory part of Medicaid for all states, a key objective of the ADA. " I did have to look it up, yes, it is official ADA policy that comprehensive adult Medicaid dental benefits mandated to the states. Just hearing that makes me ill.

Sorry, I am really not this cynical in "real life." My experience in corporate dentistry has opened my eyes to some disturbing trends in this profession, however.

For as seemingly inept as it can be sometimes, I still pay my ADA dues because it's the best we've got at this point. They've got pretty good conventions too, I love all that free stuff.

 

[areucool1234]

Barack Obama is a crook...his HEALTHCARE PLAN IS SO FLAWED!!! so many americans in this country are naive and think that Obama will SAVE THEM...he is just a crook politician (he recieved a crapload of money from AIG during his campaign, and then he bails them out..coincedience??...i dont think so!)...He is a lawyer out to make things better for lawyers...he is probably jealous of doctors because he was TOO STUPID TO GET INTO MED SCHOOL (he got into harvard because of AA)...i HOPE HE DOESNT SCREW UP DENTISTRY..LUCKILY DENTISTS ARE SMART AND TAKE STRAIGHT UP CASH and this avoids bull**** insurance companies....all of you who think higher taxes are good: you guys GOT A LOT of growing up to do! The government doesn't care about poor people and NEITHER DOES BARACK OBAMA

 

[jvanewportnews]

I think that it is people like this who set the country back as a whole. OK you have a different opinion. If you voice it in a biased, angry manner do you think you are doing you or anyone else any good? Do you think you are changing any minds or even getting any points across? What other president have we had in the past 8 years who was smart enough to get into medical school? And Mccain couldn't get in either! You say he is a lawyer? PROVE IT. You have no facts. Even if Obama's healthcare plan is flawed, howso you did not point out, does that make him a crook?
GET SOME FACTS

 

[12345a]

Barack Obama is a crook...his HEALTHCARE PLAN IS SO FLAWED!!! so many americans in this country are naive and think that Obama will SAVE THEM...he is just a crook politician (he recieved a crapload of money from AIG during his campaign, and then he bails them out..coincedience??...i dont think so!)...He is a lawyer out to make things better for lawyers...he is probably jealous of doctors because he was TOO STUPID TO GET INTO MED SCHOOL (he got into harvard because of AA)...i HOPE HE DOESNT SCREW UP DENTISTRY..LUCKILY DENTISTS ARE SMART AND TAKE STRAIGHT UP CASH and this avoids bull**** insurance companies....all of you who think higher taxes are good: you guys GOT A LOT of growing up to do! The government doesn't care about poor people and NEITHER DOES BARACK OBAMA

thanks for the laugh

 

[DrReo]

I think that it is people like this who set the country back as a whole. OK you have a different opinion. If you voice it in a biased, angry manner do you think you are doing you or anyone else any good? Do you think you are changing any minds or even getting any points across? What other president have we had in the past 8 years who was smart enough to get into medical school? And Mccain couldn't get in either! You say he is a lawyer? PROVE IT. You have no facts. Even if Obama's healthcare plan is flawed, howso you did not point out, does that make him a crook?
GET SOME FACTS

Evidently you didn't get the message

 

[jvanewportnews]

Tell me. What was the biggest mistake? Electing him president, the bailouts, his healthcare plan, or all of the above? I think some would agree with me when I say Bush was a mistake too...so something had to change. "Obama for change"! lol in other words Mccain seemed to be on the same track with the last administration. He's in office for a few more years, and bashing him won't do any good to anyone. If you've noticed at least he listens to people and advisors when making decisions.

 

[mirk3]

Obama is too stupid to get into med school? He was an unknown minority with a weird name and he won the state of North Carolina and Colorado, and you're saying he is more dumb than the average medical student? You haven't hung around a medical school long enough then.

 

[mirk3]

I actually agree with most of what you're saying. I only take issue with the comparison to other countries. Canadian citizens pay upward of 30% in income taxes (if I'm wrong on this correct me)... and that is the price of socializing healthcare. I know many Canadians who gripe about the tax situation. They tell me those who can, get private insurance, and those who really can, go down to the US to get care.

The fact of the matter is that people, in general do not take care of themselves. Poor diets and lack of exericise (documented many times in different studies) is contributing to heart disease and obesity of people. I think its morally wrong for one to ask that everyone (all taxpayers) to foot the bill for their excesses. Likewise, I opposed the auto bailouts. I only supported the bank bailouts to a certain degree, since the collapse of the banks would bring the whole economy down.

And again, morally, is it right to ask the richest to foot the bill? The top 10% earners of the country already pay for 70% of income tax collected. Shouldn't the taxable amount (as a percentage) be fair acriss all income brackets?

Canada's per-capita (person) national debt is half of ours. Their infrastructure (roads, schools, bridges, etc.) and economy are in far better shape than ours. I DO NOT support a single payer system for health care like they have. But my aunt lives in Canada and she says she can see the doctor and have an operation tomorrow if she wanted to (she has needed to).

Sure there are some stories of people waiting, but the same thing happens here (the local ear, nose and throat specialist MD is booked out 4 months in my town). Insurance companies use these stories to spread lies about their healthcare system. It's stupid tax cuts and war spending that is killing us, along with stupid trade policies (if you sell US stuff in China, you pay a huge tarrif and have to file endless paperwork, but if China wants to sell their crap here, no problemo). It's because the politicians are corrupt and paid for.

 

[dentwannabe]

How about we all just wait UNTIL the healthcare plan is actually UNVEILED. So far, no details are known as far as what the plan will be.

 

[wigglytooth]

How about we all just wait UNTIL the healthcare plan is actually UNVEILED. So far, no details are known as far as what the plan will be.

This is very true. Right now, the only arguments going on are the basic conservative vs. liberal invective. My understanding of the fuzzy plan in the works is that there will be a government insurance option available and that low income families will have some sort of rebate to purchase said option. Everyone else can continue under their current health plan (from their employers) or opt in. I'm not sure if they are making it mandatory that employers offer health benefits, but that has been talked about as a solution to universal health coverage in the past. Essentially, the private insurance companies will have to find a way to compete with the government insurance plan, and they'll either improve or get gone via market stresses.

As for dentistry being included, the ADA is much stronger than the AMA in that like 70% of practicing dentists are members vs a much lower (40%?) of physicians participate in the AMA. So we have people working towards protecting the profession in politics and I have faith that they will work out a plan that is a compromise between getting adequate reimbursements and expansion of care to underserved people. In addition, there are dentists who work without taking any insurance at all, and this may be an option in the future. If this becomes the overwhelming norm in practice and many populations are being left out, then this is a signal that a better solution needs to come up to those working in policy. I don't think there will be a mandate on forcing providers to take insurance in the future, because this will cause way too many problems for the government from the ADA. Bottom line, support ASDA and ADA, and our voice will still be strong in congress.

 

[banana23]

My prediction:

The bailouts, "stimulus" package and nationalized healthcare insurance plan will cumulatively drive up inflation and interest rates and will require tax increases just to service the interest on our national debt. That first part is not a prediction or my opinion, it’s an economic certainty. I do predict that Obama is going to become much less popular when he tries to increase taxes which he will have to do across the board. You can’t simply squeeze the "rich" (anyone who grosses over 250k which is really upper middle class) to dig us out of the hole we are in. In fact those who are truly wealthy will see little in tax increases because to date no one has been successful in taxing unrealized income. Also to be clear the ultra rich predominately vote democrat. Maybe if we are all really lucky republicans will be able to keep the ultra right out of their primaries and we will be able to render Obama a lame duck president by the midterm elections...

As far as dentistry is concerned I don't think we are at risk of being mandated to take on Medicaid Medicare in the short term. In my state of Michigan, Medicaid for dentistry was just cut completely excepting pedo. Many state budgets are totally messed up right now and when it comes to deciding between teacher salaries and paying state employees giving away free dentures just isn't a priority.

 

[Locutus of Borg]

This healthcare debate is just another facet of problems caused by capitalism. Even doctors (and other healthcare professionals) have to fret about monetary issues.
I think the whole economic system needs to be overhauled. Capitalism encourages excessive and conspicuous consumption, eventually leading to the depletion of Earth's resources. Unemployment is a unavoidable phenomenon in a capitalist society. It fosters crime, depression, and the underused of society's manpower and brainpower.
Consider Participatory Economics, which is a compromise between money- driven capitalism and incentive-deprived socialism. I speculate that before the end of our lifetime, the economics of this world will evolve to be similar to that of the Star Trek universe.

 

[denner]

This healthcare debate is just another facet of problems caused by capitalism. Even doctors (and other healthcare professionals) have to fret about monetary issues.
I think the whole economic system needs to be overhauled. Capitalism encourages excessive and conspicuous consumption, eventually leading to the depletion of Earth's resources. Unemployment is a unavoidable phenomenon in a capitalist society. It fosters crime, depression, and the underused of society's manpower and brainpower.
Consider Participatory Economics, which is a compromise between money- driven capitalism and incentive-deprived socialism. I speculate that before the end of our lifetime, the economics of this world will evolve to be similar to that of the Star Trek universe.

 

[aphistis]

Canada's per-capita (person) national debt is half of ours. Their infrastructure (roads, schools, bridges, etc.) and economy are in far better shape than ours. I DO NOT support a single payer system for health care like they have. But my aunt lives in Canada and she says she can see the doctor and have an operation tomorrow if she wanted to (she has needed to).

Sure there are some stories of people waiting, but the same thing happens here (the local ear, nose and throat specialist MD is booked out 4 months in my town). Insurance companies use these stories to spread lies about their healthcare system. It's stupid tax cuts and war spending that is killing us, along with stupid trade policies (if you sell US stuff in China, you pay a huge tarrif and have to file endless paperwork, but if China wants to sell their crap here, no problemo). It's because the politicians are corrupt and paid for.

...as opposed to China, where politicians are apparently paragons of virtue? That's some persuasive logic you've got going.

 

[NyCzPeter]

This healthcare debate is just another facet of problems caused by capitalism. Even doctors (and other healthcare professionals) have to fret about monetary issues.
I think the whole economic system needs to be overhauled. Capitalism encourages excessive and conspicuous consumption, eventually leading to the depletion of Earth's resources. Unemployment is a unavoidable phenomenon in a capitalist society. It fosters crime, depression, and the underused of society's manpower and brainpower.
Consider Participatory Economics, which is a compromise between money- driven capitalism and incentive-deprived socialism. I speculate that before the end of our lifetime, the economics of this world will evolve to be similar to that of the Star Trek universe.

Everything sounded good until you mentioned Star Trek...

 

[NyCzPeter]

...as opposed to China, where politicians are apparently paragons of virtue? That's some persuasive logic you've got going.

HEY! You leave China out of this nonsense

 

[Hawkeye7685]

I say we just get rid of all forms of government and live in anarchy. We can even go back to a barter system of economy. One wisdom tooth extraction can be roughly the equivalent of a dozen loaves of bread from a baker or a fine set of horseshoes from your local blacksmith.




The best part about how SDN works, is that in all likelihood somebody will take me seriously and whine about how you need government. Everybody here cracks me up.

 

[Locutus of Borg]

Everything sounded good until you mentioned Star Trek...

Those of you are familiar with the franchise would know that it has an underlying political statement made about our current society.

 

[atlanta478]

How about we all just wait UNTIL the healthcare plan is actually UNVEILED. So far, no details are known as far as what the plan will be.

Then it could be too late....I will use some parts of Lou Pritchett’s letter to President Obama:

Mr. President, you are the thirteenth President under whom I have lived and unlike any of the others, Mr. President, you truly scare me.

Mr. President, you scare me because you did not spend the formative years of youth growing up in America and culturally you are not an American.

Mr. President, you scare me because you have never run a company or met a payroll.

Mr. President, you scare me because you are a cheerleader for the ‘blame America’ crowd and deliver this message abroad.

Mr. President, you scare me because you want to change America to a European style country where the government sector dominates instead of the private sector.

Mr. President, you scare me because you want to replace our health care system with a government controlled one.

Mr. President, you scare me because you want to kill the American capitalist goose that lays the golden egg which provides the highest standard of living in the world.

Mr. President, you scare me because the media gives you a free pass on everything you do.

Mr. President, you scare me because you prefer controlling over governing.

Finally, Mr. President, you scare me because if you serve a second term I will probably not feel safe in writing a similar letter in 8 years.

 

[mirk3]

...as opposed to China, where politicians are apparently paragons of virtue? That's some persuasive logic you've got going.

I don't care whether it makes sense to you or not, but China does a much better job of protecting/benefiting their own economy then US politicians do. US and Chinese policiticians work for the Chinese economy.

 

[Locutus of Borg]

Alright, I see that there are some here who are pissed because the People's Republic has of late proven itself better at playing the game of capitalism, ironically, than the "free-market economies" of the West. Well, those of you who know about Chinese history would also know that China did not have a strong, pragmatic government before the current one for a long time! So, you should understand that China is merely trying to catch up to the West!

Next series of reforms for China: Eliminate the follies of Confusionism. Resurrect some of the policies advocated by Lord Shang.

 

[DMDreaming]

We recently had a Q & A session in one of my DS classes about socalized medicine. The panel consisted of one member each from Canada, Sweden, Great Britain, and Australia. Across the board all members felt that a change to socialized or government controlled healthcare would result in higher taxes, decreased quality of care, and decreased access to care. They went on to point out that when the government or insurance companies control the amount every provider across the board can charge for a given proceedure, the level of care decreases as does the need for competition. Everyone is paid the same regardless of skill.

The professor from Sweden gave us a handout of information from his home country. On it, he showed where the average doctor was taxed 79% of gross income, the average wait time for non-emergency surgery (ie: tonsilectomy, joint surgeries, myringotomy or tubes in ears, etc) was over 12 months. Canada piped up with similar concerns over wait times although their tax bracket isn't quite as high. She thought it was around 65% for a medical professional.

One of the other members handed out a medicaid fee schedule for our state and a print out of estimated costs per proceedure for amalgam and composite fillings, PFM, FGC, and single canal endo. If adult medicaid for dentistry is mandated, and the fee schedule is not increased, it will be very difficult to keep the doors open financially. My guess is that some providers/practices will start using over seas labs among other things to reduce cost. However, there is no way to monitor the materials going into the restoration and dentistry could end up with a scare much like the numerous toy recalls of the last few years.

Ultimately, healthcare reform is something most Americans want but they have not considered the long term ramifications. My biggest fear is the current administration's rush to push all of these agendas through before the president's popularity rating falls. Rushing though something with as large of financial consequences as healthcare reform isn't in the best interest of any one. If it is to be done, it should be done with great care and diligence as well as a ton of foresight. This is especially true given that the government's other medical coverage policy, medicare, is about to collapse.

 

[teeth63a]

Next series of reforms for China: Eliminate the follies of Confusionism. Resurrect some of the policies advocated by Lord Shang.

We need to resurect the philosohipcal beliefs of Liu Kang and FINISH HIM!!!

 

[dentalmon]

We recently had a Q & A session in one of my DS classes about socalized medicine. The panel consisted of one member each from Canada, Sweden, Great Britain, and Australia. Across the board all members felt that a change to socialized or government controlled healthcare would result in higher taxes, decreased quality of care, and decreased access to care. They went on to point out that when the government or insurance companies control the amount every provider across the board can charge for a given proceedure, the level of care decreases as does the need for competition. Everyone is paid the same regardless of skill.

The professor from Sweden gave us a handout of information from his home country. On it, he showed where the average doctor was taxed 79% of gross income, the average wait time for non-emergency surgery (ie: tonsilectomy, joint surgeries, myringotomy or tubes in ears, etc) was over 12 months. Canada piped up with similar concerns over wait times although their tax bracket isn't quite as high. She thought it was around 65% for a medical professional.

One of the other members handed out a medicaid fee schedule for our state and a print out of estimated costs per proceedure for amalgam and composite fillings, PFM, FGC, and single canal endo. If adult medicaid for dentistry is mandated, and the fee schedule is not increased, it will be very difficult to keep the doors open financially. My guess is that some providers/practices will start using over seas labs among other things to reduce cost. However, there is no way to monitor the materials going into the restoration and dentistry could end up with a scare much like the numerous toy recalls of the last few years.

Ultimately, healthcare reform is something most Americans want but they have not considered the long term ramifications. My biggest fear is the current administration's rush to push all of these agendas through before the president's popularity rating falls. Rushing though something with as large of financial consequences as healthcare reform isn't in the best interest of any one. If it is to be done, it should be done with great care and diligence as well as a ton of foresight. This is especially true given that the government's other medical coverage policy, medicare, is about to collapse.

I totally agree !.. I hope that ppl would realize what's really going on with our government... instead of just riding the Obama band wagon and think everything he does is right!

 

[Cold Front]

Make that $427.29 (PFM crown, anterior only if it has RCT) or $51.21 (one surface posterior composite) if you are a provider with Ohio Medicaid.

That's some sweet dentistry.

are you from Ohio?

Ohio passed it's own universal healthcare plan bill to provide coverage for all Ohio residents sometime last week. Obama's people were involved, they want to use this bill as a test run before they nationalize it.

91 percent of Ohio residents would experience no tax increase. Only those who pay over $100k.

Here is the juicy part. Health-care services would be provided without co-payments or deductibles. Coverage would be provided regardless of employment status or income.

 

[aphistis]

are you from Ohio?

Ohio passed it's own universal healthcare plan bill to provide coverage for all Ohio residents sometime last week. Obama's people were involved, they want to use this bill as a test run before they nationalize it.

91 percent of Ohio residents would experience no tax increase. Only those who pay over $100k.

Here is the juicy part. Health-care services would be provided without co-payments or deductibles. Coverage would be provided regardless of employment status or income.

Well geez, man, how can you go expecting people to have to contribute something to the society they're freeloading from? Don't be such a heartless jerk.

 

[teeth63a]

I think the whole economic system needs to be overhauled.

Wish granted with a socialist as president.

Capitalism encourages excessive and conspicuous consumption, eventually leading to the depletion of Earth's resources. Unemployment is a unavoidable phenomenon in a capitalist society. It fosters crime, depression, and the underused of society's manpower and brainpower.

I don't know where you learned history or economics, but you are so far off, it's mind boggling. You pick the WORST aspects that capitalism can foster and don't even spend a second on the good that comes of it.

Capitalism allows for competition between companies. Competition between companies leads to better products. That iphone, Dell computer, Toyota Prius, shamwow, and that ronco food dehydrator you enjoy? Thank human ingenuity and capitalism. Companies that cannot compete (ie GM) will disappear, allowing more room in the market for another competitor.

What are the greatest inventions that came out of communist China or the Soviet Union? Nothing. The auto, internet, telephone, all came about from our capitalist country. If you want the latest invention buy it American, Japanese or European. If you want it cheap, buy it Chinese. Of course, don't complain when it falls apart the minute you pull it from the box.

Human nature causes excessive consumption. People want, whether it be a communist, socialist or theocratic government. Whether they're rich or poor. When the firs McDonalds opened up in Moscow 30 years ago, the line went for miles.

eventually leading to the depletion of Earth's resources.

And the Chinese are doing so much better? They're quickly out pacing the US in terms of carbon emissions. With a free governement as ours, and enough social pressure, capitalists comapnies have STEPPED UP environmentally friendly businesses: biodiesel from oil/algae, solar/wind/hydro power. Why? Because there is a public demand for this and they can supply and profit from it. Read this article :the world's dirtiest cities are third world countries, former Soviet block countries and current communist dictatorships. There's no OSHA, or EPA there.

Unemployment is a unavoidable phenomenon in a capitalist society. It fosters crime, depression, and the underused of society's manpower and brainpower.

When is unemployment NOT a problem? Oh that's right, a Communisst dictatorship where everyone is equally poor. There are too many factors to blame capitalism alone: mental health, addictions, economic turns, shifting economic trends, poor business practices (ie GM again).

It fosters crime, depression,

People CHOOSE crime and are SUBJECT to depression. Someone with free will in a free market system, capitalism allows THE MOST social mobility....up AND down. Where else in the world can Barack Obmama's story happen? Could a black man have been voted in Russia? China? He came from a home with a single parent and relatively poor. Michael Dell and Bill Gates were just ordinary college students. Their entrepreneurial spirit spawned huge companies that employ thousands of people.

Consider Participatory Economics, which is a compromise between money- driven capitalism and incentive-deprived socialism. I speculate that before the end of our lifetime, the economics of this world will evolve to be similar to that of the Star Trek universe.

Incentive deprived socialism? Dream on. When the government gives SOMETHING FOR FREE, THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO REASON TO LIFT A FINGER TO EARN IT. The mentality "I pay my taxes, I earned it" prevails. Well him and 299 million other Americans can say that. If everyone thought like that, we'd go bankrupt tomorrow. Nothing given is as appreciated as something earned. Human nature is fairly predictable, people will most likely stay on unemployment, collecting a check if they have no motivation to go find a job. People who can't afford to have any more children will still have more children as long as the government gives them more food stamps or tax cuts.


Human nature is also the only undoing of a capitalist system. Greed can spawn corruption, and if corruption is not reigned in by the highest power (government), the system will unravel. The housing meltdown is an example of greed running unchecked by the government.

Ultimately though, capitalism builds wealth. When wealth accumulates beyond what we need to survive, we can spend it on things that make us happy, we can donate that wealth to charities, we can plan for our retirement, and plan for our children.

That's exactly why conservatives are so adamant about not raising taxes. They've made their money on their own merit, why should the government take a bigger bite out of it to support people with their hand out?

Out of all the possible choices (not including fantasy Star Trek world) - communism, socialism and capitalism, capitalism allows for the individual to succeed the most.

If you as a dentist, can't understand the free market system and how competition works, your practice is doomed to failure. Or you'll be working at your state's free dental clinic doing bottom level dentistry for $60,000/year.

 

[Cold Front]

Well geez, man, how can you go expecting people to have to contribute something to the society they're freeloading from? Don't be such a heartless jerk.

I find your comment demeaning. The information I provided was not my opinion, but something i came across, a healthcare reform bill from Ohio.

 

[utahdentist2be]

Amen, Dharma Dentist, amen.

 

[War Eagle]

Wish granted with a socialist as president.



I don't know where you learned history or economics, but you are so far off, it's mind boggling. You pick the WORST aspects that capitalism can foster and don't even spend a second on the good that comes of it.

Capitalism allows for competition between companies. Competition between companies leads to better products. That iphone, Dell computer, Toyota Prius, shamwow, and that ronco food dehydrator you enjoy? Thank human ingenuity and capitalism. Companies that cannot compete (ie GM) will disappear, allowing more room in the market for another competitor.

What are the greatest inventions that came out of communist China or the Soviet Union? Nothing. The auto, internet, telephone, all came about from our capitalist country. If you want the latest invention buy it American, Japanese or European. If you want it cheap, buy it Chinese. Of course, don't complain when it falls apart the minute you pull it from the box.

Human nature causes excessive consumption. People want, whether it be a communist, socialist or theocratic government. Whether they're rich or poor. When the firs McDonalds opened up in Moscow 30 years ago, the line went for miles.



And the Chinese are doing so much better? They're quickly out pacing the US in terms of carbon emissions. With a free governement as ours, and enough social pressure, capitalists comapnies have STEPPED UP environmentally friendly businesses: biodiesel from oil/algae, solar/wind/hydro power. Why? Because there is a public demand for this and they can supply and profit from it. Read this article :the world's dirtiest cities are third world countries, former Soviet block countries and current communist dictatorships. There's no OSHA, or EPA there.


When is unemployment NOT a problem? Oh that's right, a Communisst dictatorship where everyone is equally poor. There are too many factors to blame capitalism alone: mental health, addictions, economic turns, shifting economic trends, poor business practices (ie GM again).


People CHOOSE crime and are SUBJECT to depression. Someone with free will in a free market system, capitalism allows THE MOST social mobility....up AND down. Where else in the world can Barack Obmama's story happen? Could a black man have been voted in Russia? China? He came from a home with a single parent and relatively poor. Michael Dell and Bill Gates were just ordinary college students. Their entrepreneurial spirit spawned huge companies that employ thousands of people.




Incentive deprived socialism? Dream on. When the government gives SOMETHING FOR FREE, THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO REASON TO LIFT A FINGER TO EARN IT. The mentality "I pay my taxes, I earned it" prevails. Well him and 299 million other Americans can say that. If everyone thought like that, we'd go bankrupt tomorrow. Nothing given is as appreciated as something earned. Human nature is fairly predictable, people will most likely stay on unemployment, collecting a check if they have no motivation to go find a job. People who can't afford to have any more children will still have more children as long as the government gives them more food stamps or tax cuts.


Human nature is also the only undoing of a capitalist system. Greed can spawn corruption, and if corruption is not reigned in by the highest power (government), the system will unravel. The housing meltdown is an example of greed running unchecked by the government.

Ultimately though, capitalism builds wealth. When wealth accumulates beyond what we need to survive, we can spend it on things that make us happy, we can donate that wealth to charities, we can plan for our retirement, and plan for our children.

That's exactly why conservatives are so adamant about not raising taxes. They've made their money on their own merit, why should the government take a bigger bite out of it to support people with their hand out?

Out of all the possible choices (not including fantasy Star Trek world) - communism, socialism and capitalism, capitalism allows for the individual to succeed the most.

If you as a dentist, can't understand the free market system and how competition works, your practice is doomed to failure. Or you'll be working at your state's free dental clinic doing bottom level dentistry for $60,000/year.

. Especially the part about the Shamwow. That infomercial guy is my new favorite.

 

[Locutus of Borg]

Wish granted with a socialist as president.



I don't know where you learned history or economics, but you are so far off, it's mind boggling. You pick the WORST aspects that capitalism can foster and don't even spend a second on the good that comes of it.

Capitalism allows for competition between companies. Competition between companies leads to better products. That iphone, Dell computer, Toyota Prius, shamwow, and that ronco food dehydrator you enjoy? Thank human ingenuity and capitalism. Companies that cannot compete (ie GM) will disappear, allowing more room in the market for another competitor.

What are the greatest inventions that came out of communist China or the Soviet Union? Nothing. The auto, internet, telephone, all came about from our capitalist country. If you want the latest invention buy it American, Japanese or European. If you want it cheap, buy it Chinese. Of course, don't complain when it falls apart the minute you pull it from the box.

Human nature causes excessive consumption. People want, whether it be a communist, socialist or theocratic government. Whether they're rich or poor. When the firs McDonalds opened up in Moscow 30 years ago, the line went for miles.



And the Chinese are doing so much better? They're quickly out pacing the US in terms of carbon emissions. With a free governement as ours, and enough social pressure, capitalists comapnies have STEPPED UP environmentally friendly businesses: biodiesel from oil/algae, solar/wind/hydro power. Why? Because there is a public demand for this and they can supply and profit from it. Read this article :the world's dirtiest cities are third world countries, former Soviet block countries and current communist dictatorships. There's no OSHA, or EPA there.


When is unemployment NOT a problem? Oh that's right, a Communisst dictatorship where everyone is equally poor. There are too many factors to blame capitalism alone: mental health, addictions, economic turns, shifting economic trends, poor business practices (ie GM again).


People CHOOSE crime and are SUBJECT to depression. Someone with free will in a free market system, capitalism allows THE MOST social mobility....up AND down. Where else in the world can Barack Obmama's story happen? Could a black man have been voted in Russia? China? He came from a home with a single parent and relatively poor. Michael Dell and Bill Gates were just ordinary college students. Their entrepreneurial spirit spawned huge companies that employ thousands of people.




Incentive deprived socialism? Dream on. When the government gives SOMETHING FOR FREE, THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO REASON TO LIFT A FINGER TO EARN IT. The mentality "I pay my taxes, I earned it" prevails. Well him and 299 million other Americans can say that. If everyone thought like that, we'd go bankrupt tomorrow. Nothing given is as appreciated as something earned. Human nature is fairly predictable, people will most likely stay on unemployment, collecting a check if they have no motivation to go find a job. People who can't afford to have any more children will still have more children as long as the government gives them more food stamps or tax cuts.


Human nature is also the only undoing of a capitalist system. Greed can spawn corruption, and if corruption is not reigned in by the highest power (government), the system will unravel. The housing meltdown is an example of greed running unchecked by the government.

Ultimately though, capitalism builds wealth. When wealth accumulates beyond what we need to survive, we can spend it on things that make us happy, we can donate that wealth to charities, we can plan for our retirement, and plan for our children.

That's exactly why conservatives are so adamant about not raising taxes. They've made their money on their own merit, why should the government take a bigger bite out of it to support people with their hand out?

Out of all the possible choices (not including fantasy Star Trek world) - communism, socialism and capitalism, capitalism allows for the individual to succeed the most.

If you as a dentist, can't understand the free market system and how competition works, your practice is doomed to failure. Or you'll be working at your state's free dental clinic doing bottom level dentistry for $60,000/year.

I never advocated socialism or communism. And I certainly did not say or imply that they will work any better than capitalism. I was merely stating the ills of capitalism and that there is, in my opinion, something that can work better. I would even venture to say that capitalism is unsustainable, though has endured longer than communism. Why don't you read up on parecon, and then decide if it is right to accuse me of being a communist. Also, I don't think you know who Lord Shang is or what he advocated, but that's another topic altogether (or is it?).

Human nature is indeed selfish. Capitalism merely rewards people for being so. If I have the money to purchase a Hummer H2, capitalism says I'm perfectly free to do so. So I go an purchase one and drive around with it, mean while producing much more toxic gas than if I drove a Ridgeline -- an equally potent but much more environmentally friendly transportation vehicle. So because I have enough cash, I am allowed to pollute the same air that you, I, and everyone else breathe. Is this fair for you and people other than myself? Sure, there are carbon taxes and SUV taxes that the government impose on purchases of gas-guzzlers, but how can you monetarily quantify the contributing harm that I would be doing to a young kid with asthma? Being innately selfish does not justify my acting on it. Psycologists would say that I, like any human being, have an innate desire to reproduce. Does this justify me if I force myself on a pretty lady?
The Great Depression was cause by unchecked greed, as is this recent recession. Massive economic downturns are hence periodic, expected, and certainly painful in a capitalist society. It took WWII to end the Great Depression in America. For Europe, it was only saved by the Marshall Plan, which, combined with endless deficit spending, generated for the US prosperity and secured employment (e.g. GM) for millions of baby boomers. The events we have recently witnessed are the signals that the fiesta first started by the WWII, then the Marshall Plan, and perpetuated to this day by nonstop deficit spending, is over. Also, all that deficit spending will eventually be biting us -- well, mostly the US, as Canada (a more "socialist country", what a coincidence) is in a much better fiscal shape -- in the derriere.
China is polluting like crazy because it is diligently (though some prudence) following the path to an industrialized capitalist economy. Its population is consuming ever increasing amounts of goods and material (yes, China consumes much of what it makes, in addition to exports) because its new-found capitalism has encouraged its massive middle class population to spend, just like in established capitalist countries in the west. Playing catch up in an industrialized capitalist world also requires massive building in infrastructure, which also requires materials and fuel, leading again to pollution -- and more of it compared to established capitalist countries. All this just highlights my point about capitalism going hand in hand with consuming resources.

What you said regarding unemployment/employment does not argue against my claim that it is a by-product of capitalism and is destructive.

If capitalism is sustainable, then why are companies such as GM and Chrysler artifically being injected with bailout money by the government? BTW, this was not done by only the current, left-leaning, Obama administration. Even the right-leaning (hence more tendency to adhere to the ideals of capitalism) Bush admin found themselves having to have to act against the workings of the "invisible hand" (quoting Adam Smith, a prominent advocate of capitalism) of market forces and put the two unfit enterprises on life support. Star Trek or not, the world economies of the near future, especially the US, would find themselves having to have to implement more and more socialist works such as more social security benefits, health benefits, bail-outs to failing industries, etc., in order to stave off instability and subsequent social unrest.
Yes, in a few decades, when China's GDP/capita approaches that of the West, and its 10% GDP growth per year fiesta is over, it will find itself just as susceptible to the periodic economic recessions/depression if it continues to embrace capitalism like it is now.


One final argument: Technological advancement (especially in IT and automation) and better management techniques should be making us more productive, hence work for fewer hours but have more purchasing power. So why are people working longer than ever before and real wages (i.e. adjusting for purchasing power and inflation) have decreased over the years?
My simple answer: we are more productive now than ever. But the increase in real wealth that is produced by this increased productivity is withheld by the owners of industry. They have the right to do so under the capitalist system because they are the owners and controllers of employment and the means of production. That is, the rich have gotten richer. Governments are finding themselves increasingly under pressure to combat this natural tendency of their respective capitalist societies to widen the income gap by introducing steeper incremental taxing systems. E.g. Obama's "if you make less then 250 thousand a year, then..." (equivalent to "if you make more than 250 thousand, then ...") speech. A very socialist action thing to do, wouldn't you say? So we'll have capitalist economies that are not really capitalist, because these societies are simply are too ethical to let the results of prolonged capitalism to persist.



If and when I start concerning myself about how much I make after graduating from d-school, and less about being a good healthcare provider, it simply reminds that I am a subject in capitalist system.

 

[aphistis]

I find your comment demeaning. The information I provided was not my opinion, but something i came across, a healthcare reform bill from Ohio.

I was totally kidding. I agree with you all the way. The rolling-eyes thing was supposed to indicate sarcasm, but I guess it didn't come through the wire.

 

[jmick101]

I wish that when people start comparing economies of socialist countries and the US's that they would mention this relevant fact: the US bankrolls their socialized healthcare. Que? That's right. The US, as is widely known, spends 20 times more on defense than the rest of the industrialized world. This shocking statistic is used to show how bloated our defense spending is. This is not overspending/overkill but the equivalent of "picking up the tab" for keeping the crazies in the world in check. If I spend 20 bucks paying for dinner and you leave a buck tip (cheapskate) then I am paying 20 times more than you are for food.

It is this crazy subsidization that pays for other governments programs in indirect ways. Like food shipments for instance. If we give a government 5 million dollars in foodstuffs under humanitarian guises, then guess what that government has? 5 million extra dollars to spend on weapons. This, incidentally, is one reason why Israel is blockading shipments of almost everything into Gaza. Hamas just buys rockets to bomb Israel, lets its own people starve and then blames the inevitable humanitarian crisis on the Jews. The resulting press shows poor starving people and a blockade ship. Then the world gets sad so they send them loads of aid and pressure on Israel to cave, and Hamas laughs. The point of the blockade is not to make the Palestinian people starve but to force Hamas to buy food and medicine instead of bombs. But I digress.

If you don't have the necessity of fielding a functioning and active Army and Navy, then you have all sorts of disposable income to spend on social programs, most notably Nationalized health care (see Canada). I am not saying this either for or against our policies regarding our military, but merely as something relevant to be considered in this conversation.

 

[jvanewportnews]

I wish that when people start comparing economies of socialist countries and the US's that they would mention this relevant fact: the US bankrolls their socialized healthcare. Que? That's right. The US, as is widely known, spends 20 times more on defense than the rest of the industrialized world. This shocking statistic is used to show how bloated our defense spending is. This is not overspending/overkill but the equivalent of "picking up the tab" for keeping the crazies in the world in check. If I spend 20 bucks paying for dinner and you leave a buck tip (cheapskate) then I am paying 20 times more than you are for food.

It is this crazy subsidization that pays for other governments programs in indirect ways. Like food shipments for instance. If we give a government 5 million dollars in foodstuffs under humanitarian guises, then guess what that government has? 5 million extra dollars to spend on weapons. This, incidentally, is one reason why Israel is blockading shipments of almost everything into Gaza. Hamas just buys rockets to bomb Israel, lets its own people starve and then blames the inevitable humanitarian crisis on the Jews. The resulting press shows poor starving people and a blockade ship. Then the world gets sad so they send them loads of aid and pressure on Israel to cave, and Hamas laughs. The point of the blockade is not to make the Palestinian people starve but to force Hamas to buy food and medicine instead of bombs. But I digress.

If you don't have the necessity of fielding a functioning and active Army and Navy, then you have all sorts of disposable income to spend on social programs, most notably Nationalized health care (see Canada). I am not saying this either for or against our policies regarding our military, but merely as something relevant to be considered in this conversation.

I never thought about them spending that much on defense. Well spoken! Do you think that if they cut defense spending in half and put that towards the new healthcare plan then it would work out better and the US would still remain safe?

 

[jmick101]

I never thought about them spending that much on defense. Well spoken! Do you think that if they cut defense spending in half and put that towards the new healthcare plan then it would work out better and the US would still remain safe?

Defense spending is a tricky thing and I really dont know enough to say how much could be cut. It is a fine line. You need the world to know that if push comes to shove, the US is ready and willing to take care of business (literally!). That is the crux of the whole Pax Americana idea, its all an idea really. How much capital does it take to maintain this image? If there was room to trim, what should be done then? Should we use that money to pay for another government program? I dont think so. If they cut defense spending in half, then the government should pass the savings along in the form of a tax cut.

Obama's plan (I just read it) has some good things and some not so good things. I think mandating electronic records is a wonderful idea. The plan reads like a Communist manifesto health care tract though. I half expected the thing to end by saying "workers of the world unite... for healthcare!" Yes there is a problem, but... throwing the tax dollars in the form of more (LOTS MORE) government at it is his best solution? What a laugher. "OK, here is the problem" I hear Obama saying in my head "healthcare is a bloated, convoluted mess. We are going to fix it with..." and I add "another bloated convoluted mess."

I prefer the Mitt Romney approach. Romney has the interesting distinction of being someone who actually managed to pass significant healthcare legislation in the modern era.

 

[Oracle DMD]

Defense spending is a tricky thing and I really dont know enough to say how much could be cut. It is a fine line. You need the world to know that if push comes to shove, the US is ready and willing to take care of business (literally!). That is the crux of the whole Pax Americana idea, its all an idea really. How much capital does it take to maintain this image? If there was room to trim, what should be done then? Should we use that money to pay for another government program? I dont think so. If they cut defense spending in half, then the government should pass the savings along in the form of a tax cut.

Obama's plan (I just read it) has some good things and some not so good things. I think mandating electronic records is a wonderful idea. The plan reads like a Communist manifesto health care tract though. I half expected the thing to end by saying "workers of the world unite... for healthcare!" Yes there is a problem, but... throwing the tax dollars in the form of more (LOTS MORE) government at it is his best solution? What a laugher. "OK, here is the problem" I hear Obama saying in my head "healthcare is a bloated, convoluted mess. We are going to fix it with..." and I add "another bloated convoluted mess."

I prefer the Mitt Romney approach. Romney has the interesting distinction of being someone who actually managed to pass significant healthcare legislation in the modern era.

clinton cut defense spending and it was devestating to our military. being a young Marine at the time, we had a hard time getting ammunition to train with! this adversley affected training, morale, and the security of our country and ourselves as Marines for that matter. when the Marines were then needed overseas, they realized that they were operating with veitnam (and in some cases korean war era) era gear and not enough of it. when they cut military funding it always ends up shorting the guys who need it, not the pentagon. how about privitizing NASA. the civilian sector would be way more effiecient there.

yeah, who knows who this heathcare system is gonna be fixed. i can say for sure that capitalism won't save it. in fact, capitalism (while i'm a big fan of it in the buisness sector) has an adverse effect on healthcare. take the phamacuetical industry for example. without government intervention, we'd still be buying snake oil and heroin. the truth is, we need to seperate profit from a person's health. profit drives progress and innovation however, so it's a tricky thing to dance with how much govt to add to the solution. but i don't have an answer, and i'm not sure anyone else does at this point.

 

[Cold Front]

I was totally kidding. I agree with you all the way. The rolling-eyes thing was supposed to indicate sarcasm, but I guess it didn't come through the wire.

No worries!

 

[Visceral]

yeah, who knows who this heathcare system is gonna be fixed. i can say for sure that capitalism won't save it. in fact, capitalism (while i'm a big fan of it in the buisness sector) has an adverse effect on healthcare. take the phamacuetical industry for example. without government intervention, we'd still be buying snake oil and heroin. the truth is, we need to seperate profit from a person's health. profit drives progress and innovation however, so it's a tricky thing to dance with how much govt to add to the solution. but i don't have an answer, and i'm not sure anyone else does at this point.

I definitely agree with you. It's hard because I don't think anyone knows the solution, as you said. I am always in favour of a balanced approach, but the issue is that any move towards the middle is perceived as a radical shift to the left or right by the opposing party.