Click Here for the actual unedited article.

July 25, 2009 | Here’s a truism: The wealthiest 1 percent have never had it so good.

According to government figures, 1-percenters’ share of America’s total income is the highest it’s been since 1929, and their tax rates are the lowest they’ve faced in two decades. Through bonuses, many 1-percenters will profit from the $23 trillion in bailout largesse the Treasury Department now says could be headed to financial firms. And most of them benefit from IRS decisions to reduce millionaire audits and collect zero taxes from the majority of major corporations.

But what really makes the ultra-wealthy so fortunate, what truly separates this moment from a run-of-the-mill Gilded Age, is the unprecedented protection the 1-percenters have bought for themselves on the most pressing issues.

The rich have never had it so good | Salon

Click Here for actual unedited article.

For Healthcare reform to be of any value

• Every legal American citizen and resident must be covered.
• Everyone capable of paying premiums must do so. Those legitimately unable to pay should be subsidized.
• Preferably a non-profit government run insurance should pay for healthcare but at minimum a robust public insurance option must be included that channel all healthcare dollars to healthcare.

The aforementioned requirements are simple but extremely difficult to implement for one specific reason; many large corporations make exorbitant profits from the current inefficiency of our system and have thus far successfully lobbied Congress to write Healthcare Reform to insure their exorbitant profits remain. The reality is the only way to reduce our healthcare cost is to remove profits from areas where no real innovation is required, specifically private insurance companies that take 30% of your premiums simply to pay your bill.

Let’s be clear. If healthcare reform does not occur now, it will likely not occur for some time and will be more costly to solve going forward. If healthcare reform does not occur now, many employers will drop health insurance, all premiums will be increased immediately, those with pre-existing conditions will likely remain uninsurable, and private insurance companies will continue to rescind policies, select procedures you may have, select medicines your doctor may prescribe, select the hospital you are able to get care from, and select your doctor in order to maximize their profits.

Those concerned that illegal aliens may get medical care should insist that the healthcare reform ensure ones nationality for care except for communicable diseases which could affect us all irrespective of nationality.

Healthcare reform should be paid for by everyone based on one’s ability to pay. While it is true that this will puts a heavier burden on the wealthy, said burden is justified given the nature of wealth in this country being unevenly distributed to the top 5% and 1%, not because they are more productive or produce anything of lasting value to society, but because of the structural design of our capitalist society rewarding capital manipulation more so than producing goods and services of societal value. With 1% of the population owning 34% of the wealth of our nation, 5% owning 58.9%, 10% owning 71%, 20% owning 85%, and the lower 40% owning less than 1% of the wealth, as well as income similarly distributed, the societal gain from marginally taxing those of us who benefited from a country rewarding the skills that allowed us to flourish, should be seen as a responsibility to maintain a viable society.

One should note that most working people pay taxes on most of their income while the very rich whose monies are tied to stocks and investments will generally pay a maximum indexed tax to 28%. One should also note that most working people pay social security taxes on all their income while the more well off stop paying social security taxes on income over $106,000.

The argument then that asking the rich to pay a bit more in taxes for healthcare reform is unfair or would affect the economy is at best a scare tactic or at worst selfish and evil. If one stands by facts and understand income and wealth distribution in the country and the real reasons for such inequity, the population at large will be able to force politicians to pass healthcare reform specifically and better laws that inhibits the unsustainable transfer of wealth our current healthcare system and financial structures continue to allow.

Pertinent Links:

http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html

http://www.faculty.fairfield.edu/faculty/hodgson/Courses/so11/stratification/income&wealth.htm

Reforming the dysfunctional U.S. healthcare system is a major issue in the news these days. The goal of the reform efforts, we’re told, is to expand coverage to the uninsured and to reduce costs. But what many experts and citizens see as the most sensible solution to these problems is kept out of the discussion by the corporate media.

Single-payer national health insurance is a model in which healthcare delivery would remain largely private but would be paid for by a single federal health insurance fund (much like Medicare provides for seniors). Single-payer is favored by a majority of Americans and physicians, according to recent polls (New York Times/CBS, 1/11-15/09, Annals of Internal Medicine, 4/1/08).

Yet a recent study by FAIR found that of hundreds of stories about healthcare in major outlets earlier this year, only five stories included the views of advocates of single-payer–none of which appeared on the TV networks. In May, news coverage of the arrests of single-payer advocates showed that practically the only way to get single-payer mentioned in the corporate media is to get thrown out of Senate hearings.
Let’s send a message to the networks: The insurance lobbies and many politicians don’t want to talk about single-payer. But that makes it all the more important that the media do. Sign our petition to ABC, CBS and NBC, demanding that single-payer be a part of their coverage of the healthcare debate. Add your name below to lend your voice to this effort to broaden the debate over the broken U.S. healthcare system.

Sign Here

We are finally rebuffing the evil of the for profit insurance companies who are trying to make it seems that some how a government option or single payer healthcare system is less efficient than ours.

Healthcare Reform Would Be A Done Deal If We Stick To The Facts

If false and misleading ads from the private for profit health insurance companies and their cohorts were debated objectively by responsible journalists, the healthcare reform debate would be over. If Congress follows the will of the people and the facts that are readily available on the internet from reputable objective organizations, the healthcare debate would be over.

Fact:
It is mathematically impossible for a for profit private insurer to be less expensive than a public not for profit insurance giving the same benefits. It is for this reason why insurers are fighting the public option. They must convince you that basic arithmetic does not apply here. Of course it does.

Fact:
Medicare’s administrative cost is between a low of 2 percent and a high of 6 percent. Private for profit insurance ranges from 16 percent to over 30% in administrative costs. In other words for every thousand dollars you pay in premiums 300 of those dollars go into the pockets of shareholders, overpaid executives, advertising and other costs. Those are dollars that could have been used to lower healthcare costs.

Fact:
Accusations by for profit health insurers and their cohorts stating that government will take over healthcare delivery are false. It is a fact that for profit insurance today tells you which doctor you can see. It is a fact that for profit insurance tells you what medical procedure you can have. It is a fact that for profit insurance tells you which hospital you can use. It is a fact that for profit insurance tells your doctor which drugs you may be prescribed. It is a fact that for profit insurance selectively rescind your coverage if they can find away to qualify your medical condition as pre-existing. It is a fact that for profit insurance will not insure those with pre-existing conditions.

Fact:
US Healthcare as % of GDP: 15.3%
Canada Healthcare as % of GDP: 10%

Fact:
US Per Capita Cost of Healthcare: $6714.00
Canada Per Capita Cost of Healthcare: $3,678.00

Fact:
Government Spending on Healthcare Per Capita is 23% higher in the US than Canada.

Fact:
Canadian health outcomes are better than ours.

If we stick to the facts healthcare reform will be realized

Links:

Most People Support Public Option
CBS/New York Times Poll
Quinnipiac Poll

Cost of Administering Healthcare in US Versus Canada Versus All Countries
The New England Journal Of Medicine
OECD Health Data 2009
World Health Organization Core Health Indicators

This is unacceptable. If the public option is not provided upfront it will never be provided. The Insurance Lobbyist will ensure that.

CALL THE WHITE HOUSE AND YOUR CONGRESSPEOPLE TODAY!!! 

WASHINGTON — It is more important that health-care legislation inject stiff competition among insurance plans than it is for Congress to create a pure government-run option, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel said Monday.

"The goal is to have a means and a mechanism to keep the private insurers honest," he said in an interview. "The goal is non-negotiable; the path is" negotiable.

His comments came as the Senate Finance Committee pushed for a bipartisan deal. To help pay for the package, the committee planned to announce an agreement Wednesday with hospitals and the White House for $155 billion over a decade in reductions to Medicare and charity-care payments for hospitals, according to a person familiar with the agreement. That will help pay for the legislation, expected to cost at least $1 trillion over 10 years.

One of the most contentious issues is whether to create a public health-insurance plan to compete with private companies.

Mr. Emanuel said one of several ways to meet President Barack Obama’s goals is a mechanism under which a public plan is introduced only if the marketplace fails to provide sufficient competition on its own. He noted that congressional Republicans crafted a similar trigger mechanism when they created a prescription-drug benefit for Medicare in 2003. In that case, private competition has been judged sufficient and the public option has never gone into effect.

White House Open to Deal on Public Health Plan – WSJ.com