Dumbest campaign ad so far this year
Published August 19, 2004
You can try to shift the costs around, and get someone else to pay for your medical care through socialized medical coverage such as Medicare and Medicaid — but at some point SOMEONE has to actually pay for it. NO politician can just pass a law to make it free. Reality, John Kerry. John Kerry, reality. Oh, pleased to meet you.
Now, there is ONE major area of medical expense that IS within the government's control, as it is entirely a creation of government. That, of course, is legal liability. Every time we have one of these winning-the-lottery $10 million medical malpractice lawsuits, that feel-good giveaway ends up costing more like $30 million dollars in increased insurance costs.
Lots of doctors are paying SIX FIGURES for standard malpractice insurance — besides the similar insurance issues for drug companies, medical equipment manufacturers and others. Inevitably, YOU the consumer are paying for all this.
Of course, the obvious choice would be some major tort reform to minimize the abuses and costs. Some level of malpractice liability is important and necessary, but some significant reigning in of medical costs could be achieved here relatively painlessly.
FAT CHANCE that a Democrat president or Congress is going to cross their number one campaign donors, though. Michael Moore will tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth before Democrats cut the legs out from under themselves. The vampiric and parasitic medical malpractice and product liability lawsuits of the likes of John Edwards are the very lifeblood of the modern Democrat party.
Hey, I've got a better idea: We could just cut some paperwork costs to make it cheaper. It'll be like the guy in the Ditech ads taking a page off the top of the two foot stack of mortgage forms he expects the borrowers to fill out.
- Dumbest campaign ad so far this year
- Published: August 19, 2004
- Type:
- Section: Video
- Filed Under: Politics: Law and Rights, Video: Television
- Writer: Al Barger
- Al Barger's BC Writer page
- Al Barger's personal site
- Spread the Word
- Like this article?
- Email this
Save to del.icio.us
Comments on this articleComments
Simon, that socialist crap doesn't work. It just plain, flat out doesn't work on the ground.
What has worked fabulously is companies trying to make a buck. Who is developing all the amazing life saving drugs, US or Cuba? It is exactly the interest in commerce that has driven these critical advances in human society.
Some drugs are quite expensive, and there might be some considerations as to how to help make them more affordable. I know full well that it can be tough paying for meds. However, we should all be thanking Yahweh or Allah or whoever for all those greedheads at Lilly and Pfizer.
Plus, not to put too fine a point on it, who the hell are you to arbitrarily decide how much "modest" profit a company should make? You expect them to keep working and taking the risks for a "modest" profit of your designation?
This belongs in etc. Video??? Only by virtue of the fact that it appeared on TV. But this a political post through and through.
"Hmmm... medicine costs a lot to develop, it's true, but it could cost a whole lot less if Big Drug Companies weren't taking a massive cut."
Without the profit motive, they would have no incentive to invest the hundreds of millions of dollars it costs to bring a single drug to market.
With risks come rewards. Or else no one will bother taking the risks in the first place...
Add your comment, speak your mind
(Or ping: http://blogcritics.org/mt/tb/18826)
Hmmm... medicine costs a lot to develop, it's true, but it could cost a whole lot less if Big Drug Companies weren't taking a massive cut.
Here's an idea: why not get the universities to develop the drugs? The cash that's wasted paying drug corps for their patents could be used to fund this; and, as a side benefit, drug development independent of commerce would be able to focus on the conditions that need treatment, rather than conditions which can generate huge profits through their treatment.
It's always puzzled me as I make donations to cancer charities just what would happen if they did crack a cure - presumably SmithKleinBeechamGlaxoWelcome would rush to get its patent in, and a cure developed through public goodwill would disappear into corporate hands.
Let drug companies make drugs. Let them make modest profits, certainly, for taking the time to package and distribute them. But let's stop them holding patents on your dad's heart disease and your mother's sciatica