Comments on: Lack of Information by Liberals on SCHIP http://healthcarethoughts.com/2007/10/28/lack-of-information-by-liberals-on-schip/ observations on healthcare, technology and the American way by Brian Sharp Mon, 06 Feb 2012 23:29:21 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.2 By: Daniel http://healthcarethoughts.com/2007/10/28/lack-of-information-by-liberals-on-schip/#comment-26 Daniel Sat, 17 Nov 2007 16:17:00 +0000 http://healthcarethoughts.com/2007/10/28/lack-of-information-by-liberals-on-schip/#comment-26 I couldn't understand some parts of this article Lack of Information by Liberals on SCHIP, but I guess I just need to check some more resources regarding this, because it sounds interesting. I couldn’t understand some parts of this article Lack of Information by Liberals on SCHIP, but I guess I just need to check some more resources regarding this, because it sounds interesting.

]]> By: Dorrence http://healthcarethoughts.com/2007/10/28/lack-of-information-by-liberals-on-schip/#comment-11 Dorrence Thu, 01 Nov 2007 14:31:09 +0000 http://healthcarethoughts.com/2007/10/28/lack-of-information-by-liberals-on-schip/#comment-11 SCHIP is an excellent example of the liberal policy of incrementalism. We have seen this policy exercised in many forms over the last 50 years, every since the FDR Administration. Incrementalism states that for a "worthy cause" we should slowly expand our nations involvement in a matter. We have seen this in the welfare offered by this state, which began under the FDR administration when it was a much needed service for the people of America. Later, it expanded into "entitlements" (a concept foreign to the Constitution of the United States). SCHIP is just the latest incantation of incrementalism, in that we now are being told that the definition of "Children" includes individuals up to age 25. President Bush has vetoed and (rightly so) says that he will continue to veto this measure. To do otherwise would be disaster for the USA. If 25 year olds are "Children" how will that definition affect the troops? If 25 year olds are "Children" how will they be required to pay taxes? If 25 year olds are "Children" should the federal government then pay for education through age 25? You can see where incrementalism can take us. We are right in standing our ground and calling for individual rights. Let us, as free-market individuals provide solutions for ourselves, not being dependent on the "State" to do this for us! SCHIP is an excellent example of the liberal policy of incrementalism. We have seen this policy exercised in many forms over the last 50 years, every since the FDR Administration.

Incrementalism states that for a “worthy cause” we should slowly expand our nations involvement in a matter. We have seen this in the welfare offered by this state, which began under the FDR administration when it was a much needed service for the people of America. Later, it expanded into “entitlements” (a concept foreign to the Constitution of the United States).

SCHIP is just the latest incantation of incrementalism, in that we now are being told that the definition of “Children” includes individuals up to age 25. President Bush has vetoed and (rightly so) says that he will continue to veto this measure. To do otherwise would be disaster for the USA. If 25 year olds are “Children” how will that definition affect the troops? If 25 year olds are “Children” how will they be required to pay taxes? If 25 year olds are “Children” should the federal government then pay for education through age 25?

You can see where incrementalism can take us. We are right in standing our ground and calling for individual rights. Let us, as free-market individuals provide solutions for ourselves, not being dependent on the “State” to do this for us!

]]> By: Bush http://healthcarethoughts.com/2007/10/28/lack-of-information-by-liberals-on-schip/#comment-10 Bush Wed, 31 Oct 2007 03:42:55 +0000 http://healthcarethoughts.com/2007/10/28/lack-of-information-by-liberals-on-schip/#comment-10 I think this all flies above the greater problem of the rising costs of healthcare. This is all just a band-aid to cover the true problem.To better understand this problem, you need to go straight to the source. Healthcare spending is rising faster than inflation. Why are we paying more for healthcare? Is it frivolous lawsuits? Maybe it's costs handed down from pharmaceutical advertising? In my opinion it's just that we're more sick than we were in years past. <a href='http://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dnpa/obesity/index.htm' rel="nofollow">Obesity</a> is reaching epidemic levels, and the healthcare industry is now responsible for patching us up from our overindulgence. We're paying more because we're using it more. Insurance companies have to drive up their costs to cover the increased risk. Our nation needs a healthcare (and health in general) paradigm shift . The current system won't scale, so we need to step back and look at the big picture. I think this all flies above the greater problem of the rising costs of healthcare. This is all just a band-aid to cover the true problem.To better understand this problem, you need to go straight to the source. Healthcare spending is rising faster than inflation.

Why are we paying more for healthcare?
Is it frivolous lawsuits? Maybe it’s costs handed down from pharmaceutical advertising? In my opinion it’s just that we’re more sick than we were in years past. Obesity is reaching epidemic levels, and the healthcare industry is now responsible for patching us up from our overindulgence. We’re paying more because we’re using it more. Insurance companies have to drive up their costs to cover the increased risk.

Our nation needs a healthcare (and health in general) paradigm shift . The current system won’t scale, so we need to step back and look at the big picture.

]]> By: Bryan http://healthcarethoughts.com/2007/10/28/lack-of-information-by-liberals-on-schip/#comment-9 Bryan Tue, 30 Oct 2007 13:55:38 +0000 http://healthcarethoughts.com/2007/10/28/lack-of-information-by-liberals-on-schip/#comment-9 Our country doesn't need to pay for healthcare for those over the age of 21. I agree that this just further extends the control that they would have and our decreases ours. Let's stop extending the rights of our goverment. We are responsible heads of our families. We don't need another handout. Yet, there are those in our government that would love to give us one. At what price are we willing to sell ourselves? I agree that this is another approach on the slippery slope to nationalized healthcare. I was recently on a website of a company who touted great efficiencies in healthcare delivery systems here in the US. The comments on it I found to be less than factually or reality based - it turned out that the companies headquarters we located in Ontario, Canada - I'll leave you all with that to think about! Our country doesn’t need to pay for healthcare for those over the age of 21. I agree that this just further extends the control that they would have and our decreases ours. Let’s stop extending the rights of our goverment. We are responsible heads of our families. We don’t need another handout. Yet, there are those in our government that would love to give us one.

At what price are we willing to sell ourselves? I agree that this is another approach on the slippery slope to nationalized healthcare.

I was recently on a website of a company who touted great efficiencies in healthcare delivery systems here in the US. The comments on it I found to be less than factually or reality based - it turned out that the companies headquarters we located in Ontario, Canada - I’ll leave you all with that to think about!

]]>