http://www.ovationbenefits.com/blog/2009/07/sustinet-universal-healthcare-in-ct-by-2012/ We Are Trailblazers in the World of Employee Benefits Thu, 02 Feb 2012 01:13:19 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v= http://www.ovationbenefits.com/blog/2009/07/sustinet-universal-healthcare-in-ct-by-2012/comment-page-1/#comment-35 Mark Prudowsky Tue, 21 Jul 2009 20:24:54 +0000 http://www.ovationbenefits.com/blog/?p=138#comment-35 "...exciting times and noble intentions..." To be kind and to quote the infamous..."Hell's path is lined with good intentions." To believe that Universal Healthcare accessibility, so-called health-care reform, is the "fix" required to set our healthcare system back on the right track is solely inaccurate based upon prior analysis and a historical perspective. Risk assumption, and the payment of that Risk, is mitigated by the accumumlation of funds from individuals under-, or not, utilizing healthcare assets in order to pay for the smaller percentage of individuals consuming those health resources. An example of how risk assumption should work is from Social Security Benefits themselves. FDR paid for SSI benefits for retired individuals because he had a 9 or 10 to 1 ratio of tax payers to benefit recipients...now less than two taxpayers pay for the SSI benefits of one individual...and, Social Security faces insolvency by 2035. Congress fails to protect SSI recipients because of its continued social engineering. Ultimately, it is the American Taxpayer experiencing increased loss of personal income in order to pay for the irresponsible, social-engineering, political contituency maintaining actions of an arrogant and detached representative hierarchy. You may feel better about yourself in relation to the "undermenchen" you strive to satisfy while you drive to work in your BMW and sipping your Soy Latte. You may be an example of whats wrong with society. Europe, and European Social Democracies, have the same "...let them eat cake..." mentality when it comes to sating to social requests of the less fortunate. On the surface, the social liberals "feel good" because they're caring for people who cannot care for themselves; however, history has proven that such "caring" individuals are more concerned about protecting their social status and growing their political franchise. What's lacking in all the cost-benefit analyses is a determination of the actual costs to taxpayers for the growing numbers of government plan sponsored enrollees. Second, while the government(s) call for qualitative and quantitative analyses of our existing healthcare system, the principals fail to call for the same analyses of existing governmental health systems (i.e., Canada, U.K., France, Australia). You're being sucked into an argument because you "feel" for those who do not enjoy the same level of health benefits your family enjoys. If parity of health benefits were a righteous and equitable benefit to enrollees, why would Congress exempt themselves from the Government Healthcare Reform Bill Congress wishes to impose on the American taxpayer? When Ted Kennedy (et. al.) agrees to allow wind farms in his neighborhood, I will, possibly, support Democratic National Committee reforms...until then, I can't help but equate the stench of hypocracy with the pile I accidentally placed my boot while walking amongst the honorable...farmers. Consumers need to be held accountable for their actions...government programs have never held anyone accountable because they're founded on the belief of asuaging the complaints of those who fail to invest in themselves, compete for a better life for their families and save for the future. Its about time we all did. “…exciting times and noble intentions…” To be kind and to quote the infamous…”Hell’s path is lined with good intentions.”
To believe that Universal Healthcare accessibility, so-called health-care reform, is the “fix” required to set our healthcare system back on the right track is solely inaccurate based upon prior analysis and a historical perspective.
Risk assumption, and the payment of that Risk, is mitigated by the accumumlation of funds from individuals under-, or not, utilizing healthcare assets in order to pay for the smaller percentage of individuals consuming those health resources.
An example of how risk assumption should work is from Social Security Benefits themselves. FDR paid for SSI benefits for retired individuals because he had a 9 or 10 to 1 ratio of tax payers to benefit recipients…now less than two taxpayers pay for the SSI benefits of one individual…and, Social Security faces insolvency by 2035. Congress fails to protect SSI recipients because of its continued social engineering. Ultimately, it is the American Taxpayer experiencing increased loss of personal income in order to pay for the irresponsible, social-engineering, political contituency maintaining actions of an arrogant and detached representative hierarchy. You may feel better about yourself in relation to the “undermenchen” you strive to satisfy while you drive to work in your BMW and sipping your Soy Latte. You may be an example of whats wrong with society.
Europe, and European Social Democracies, have the same “…let them eat cake…” mentality when it comes to sating to social requests of the less fortunate. On the surface, the social liberals “feel good” because they’re caring for people who cannot care for themselves; however, history has proven that such “caring” individuals are more concerned about protecting their social status and growing their political franchise. What’s lacking in all the cost-benefit analyses is a determination of the actual costs to taxpayers for the growing numbers of government plan sponsored enrollees. Second, while the government(s) call for qualitative and quantitative analyses of our existing healthcare system, the principals fail to call for the same analyses of existing governmental health systems (i.e., Canada, U.K., France, Australia).
You’re being sucked into an argument because you “feel” for those who do not enjoy the same level of health benefits your family enjoys.
If parity of health benefits were a righteous and equitable benefit to enrollees, why would Congress exempt themselves from the Government Healthcare Reform Bill Congress wishes to impose on the American taxpayer? When Ted Kennedy (et. al.) agrees to allow wind farms in his neighborhood, I will, possibly, support Democratic National Committee reforms…until then, I can’t help but equate the stench of hypocracy with the pile I accidentally placed my boot while walking amongst the honorable…farmers.
Consumers need to be held accountable for their actions…government programs have never held anyone accountable because they’re founded on the belief of asuaging the complaints of those who fail to invest in themselves, compete for a better life for their families and save for the future.
Its about time we all did.

]]>