The less observed consequences to government health care

Socialized medicine through out the world has the following characteristics:

• It leads to delays where, as in the case of Canada, patients wait for 17 weeks on average from the time a general practitioner says indicates that something is wrong until one visits a specialist

• It leads to rationed care, where people not only wait for years for things such as hip replacements, but often find themselves forced to pay for such out of their own pockets in foreign countries

• It has a negative effect on mortality rates, as we see those who suffer from certain diseases such as cancer, surviving half as long in countries like England compared to patients in the United States

• It has been linked to "economic euthanasia," in which individuals are allowed (or even encouraged) to die because they are no longer economically viable since they no longer pay taxes. That is exactly what happened to my own grandfather in England • It leads to no recourse, as government officials "apologize" for their negligence or horrible mistakes, but there is no viable way of pursuing damages

These are fairly obvious and well known and observed by medical and policy professionals around the world. In spite of how horrible they are, their proponents tell us that "socialized medicine is better than nothing." In fact, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer used those words recently. Our indigent population is provided for better in our current and flawed system than those under socialized medicine, so the reasoning simply does not make any sense.

To make matters worse are those effects that are less noticeable. I do not want to sound like a conspiracy therapist, but their implications are far reaching and threaten to undermine both our robust health care system and, historically, the most vibrant economy in the history of the world.

Socialized medicine is part of a "cradle to grave" approach to governing that puts enormous financial strain on individuals and undermines individual responsibility. The mega rich can be taxed to pay for the cost of such programs and still have plenty of resources to do what they want with their money. They can still start enterprises, buy additional businesses, buy new toys, and more. But for the vast majority of individuals in the upper middle class and lower, such excessive costs can literally drive people into a lower income bracket in terms of quality of life and spending power purposes. Such costs make it all the more difficult for people to invest in new tools, to transition from employee to self-employed, and to pursue the climbing of the rungs of the ladder towards economic success.

In essence, these types of programs actually protect the very wealthy from aspiring entrepreneurs that are attempting to achieve economic success of their own, this is among the reasons the rich support big government programs. They might be an inconvenience to them, but are devastating for those who want to be rich. It should not be a surprise then that, in the last presidential election, the highest income group supported Obama 3 to 1 over McCain. It is not only because they can afford to support it, but because it is a small price to pay to stay "competitive."

Kevin Price is a syndicated columnist whose articles frequently appear at ChicagoSunTimes.com, Reuters.com, USAToday.com, and other national media. Kevin Price is Host of the Price of Business (M-F at 11 AM on CNN 650) and Publisher of the Houston Business Review. Hear the show live and online at PriceofBusiness.com. Visit the archive of past shows here.

Federal Government will Pressure States in Health Care Revenue Collecting

As the states desperately try to pass legislation to protect itself from the many potentially adverse effects of the President's health care proposal, the federal government is working all the harder to make sure state governments do the heavy lifting for the bill's funding.

According to a recent article by Dick Morris and Eileen McGann, the amount of spending required for the new Medicaid package is so staggering, it requires state as well as federal funding. Southern states have tended to try to contain costs by keeping Medicare spending in check. The Obama administration is planning on forcing states to bring more dollars to the table.

The authors cite the following examples:

• My home state of Texas will be hit the hardest ($2.8 billion in additional state spending), Pennsylvania will be second ($1.5 billion), followed by California ($1.4 billion), and finally Florida ($909 million).


• The amount is so high, financially strapped Florida may believe it has no choice but to impose an income tax. This is a practice the state has long tried to avoid.


• The impact may include political tones, since for many of the states represented by swing senators in the health care debate, the required increases in state spending are likely to be quite high, say Morris and McGann:


• In the state of Arkansas, where swing Senators Mark Pryor and Blanche Lincoln live, the increased spending required under the Obamacare bill would come to over $400 million (not counting the federal share). This adds up to a 10 percent increase in state spending. Lincoln is considered one of the most vulnerable Senators in 2010, so this debate has particular meaning to her.


• In Louisiana, Senator Mary Landrieu is literally being accused of selling her vote in return for more Medicaid funding, the increase would come to $432 million (a 5 percent hike in state spending), more than wiping out the extra funds she got in return for her vote. What is so myopic about this is that, not only will the amount of dollars she got be offset due to the costs on the state from day one, the "pay off" will only benefit for a limited period of time. The new cost on the state will be annual and without an expiration date.


• In Indiana, where the more moderate (by Democrat standards) Evan Bayh is senator, spending would go up by $586 million. This is a significant increase of 4 percent.
  Ben Nelson of Nebraska has been one of the health care bill's stronger Democrat critics. His state will require an additional spending under the bill of $81 million, a 2 percent increase.


• The pain continues to other states, as North Dakota, home of Senators Kent Conrad and Byron Dorgan, will face a spending increase of $14 million, and in South Dakota, represented by moderate Democrat Tim Johnson, Medicaid spending would have to rise by $33 million.

These increases in spending do not include the direct cost that will have to be carried by Americans in federal tax. This bill remains complicated and the extent of the financial injury it provides only grows daily.

Kevin Price is a syndicated columnist whose articles frequently appear at ChicagoSunTimes.com, Reuters.com, USAToday.com, and other national media. Kevin Price is Host of the Price of Business (M-F at 11 AM on CNN 650) and Publisher of the Houston Business Review. Hear the show live and online at PriceofBusiness.com. Visit the archive of past shows here.

Obamacare will Destroy Innovation

In addition to costing (on the low end) approximately $1 trillion simply to launch President Obama's ambitious move towards socialized medicine, this proposal will also have a devastating effect on the nation's health care. In fact, I believe the passage of this bill will pave the way for a new Dark Ages in health care.

The entire debate on health care seems to be focusing on costs and covering the uninsured. The latter group is almost a misnomer because one can argue that our "uninsured" are better protected than many under socialized medicine in Europe and the former cannot be contained through government controls without sacrificing quality and fostering rationing health care system.

The United States is the only major nation with health care that is still (to some extent) market driven. There is an impetus in US health care towards innovation that other countries simply do not enjoy. The Cato Institute noted in a recent study that innovation should be the number one concern in the health care debate, according to Glen Whitman, an associate professor of economics at California State University, Northridge and Raymond Raad, a resident in psychiatry at New York Presbyterian Hospital/Weill Cornell Medical Center.

They make this case by examining four categories of innovation -- basic science, diagnostics, therapeutics, and business models. They found:

• In the areas of basic science diagnostics, and therapeutics, the United States has contributed more than any other country, and in some cases, more than all other countries combined.
  
• In the last category, business models, the researchers lack the data to say whether the United States has performed better. What is interesting is that other countries have their own problems in this area. Government bureaucracy has replaced business bureaucracy, how can that be better? "Government" is the common thread in all of these inefficient systems (including our own) and one should argue that should be the point of focus. We should look at reducing the role of government and increasing the role of the market.

The US approach, with all of its costs and inefficiencies, has provided the greatest innovations in health care for its patients, according to the authors. These include:

• The quick adoption and broad use of new treatments and technologies, which in turn create an incentive to develop those techniques in the first place.
• When the American people "subsidizes" medical innovation through higher costs, the whole world benefits; that is a virtue of the American system that is not reflected in comparative life expectancy and mortality statistics. It is almost humorous that the rest of the world is not denouncing the US for moving away from a system that other countries are benefiting from.
• Medical treatments must be invented before costs can be reduced and its use extended to everyone. Becuase of that, innovation remains critical. If the incentive for innovation is not there, everyone (including those who are suppose to benefit from socialized medicine) will suffer.
  

Innovation has had virtually no role in the current health care debate and this shows how myopic supporters of socialized health care are. They too will find themselves suffering from the lack of options that are common in systems that are not market driven.
For more information I suggest Glen Whitman and Raymond Raad, "Bending the Productivity Curve: Why America Leads the World in Medical Innovation," Cato Institute, November 18, 2009.

Kevin Price is Host of the Price of Business, the longest running show on AM 650 (M-F at 11 am) in Houston, Texas and on AOL Radio. His articles often appear in Chicago Sun Times, Reuters, USA Today, and other national media. Steve Moore of the Wall Street Journal calls Price the “best business talk show host in the country.” Find out why and visit his blog at www.BizPlusBlog.com and his show site at www.PriceofBusiness.com. You can also find Price on Strategy Room at FoxNews.com.

Canadians Die Waiting for Health Care

The Canadian health care system, which is often touted as the future of medicine, has been the subject of controversy for years. So much so, in fact, that the Canadian government is seriously entertaining privatizing major elements of the system.


The surface of the program should discourage most. It is touted as free, but is funded through taxpayer dollars. We are told it is universal, but the country's own Supreme Court says that is only in its lines. In fact, two Canadian justices wrote three years ago that "access to a waiting list is not access to health care."



The system is overused, there is virtually no consumer incentive to act responsibly regarding it, and the results are huge lines, delayed treatments, and even death.

In spite the government's best efforts of controlling every aspect of Canada's health care system, the market has risen to address the needs of a public that has grown discontent of having to wait on a list. Seventeen weeks from the time a general practitioner says one needs a specialist and one actually sees one, is too long for most Canadians. Responding to the need, the British Columbia Automobile Association recently began offering "waiting-list insurance" to some of its members as part of a pilot program.

Those who buy the coverage receive treatment in a private clinic in British Columbia or the United States if they were placed on a government care waiting list longer than 45 days. 45 days is still too long for most, but it was an improvment. The kind of improvement the government could not handle as it shut it down to investigate if the program was legal.


"This is an example of a company that's actively soliciting for clients that have the ability to pay for the privilege of queue-jumping," said Adrian Dix, a member of B.C.'s Legislative Assembly. "In my view, and in the view of the legal opinion that we obtained, it is illegal, and it violated both provincial and national health legislation." This is one of the many dark sides of socialized health care. Not do its proponents want to put everyone in a collective system, they do not want anyone who can afford to do more (like insurance for waiting lists) to have that opportunity. The idea of any elected official -- or any responsible individual -- being opposed to such a program is beyond comprehesion. What is "fair" and "equal" in the Canadian system is the misery.

Kevin Price is Host of the Price of Business, the longest running show on AM 650 (M-F at 11 am) in Houston, Texas and on AOL Radio. His articles often appear in Chicago Sun Times, Reuters, USA Today, and other national media. Steve Moore of the Wall Street Journal calls Price the “best business talk show host in the country.” Find out why and visit his blog at www.BizPlusBlog.com and his show site at www.PriceofBusiness.com. You can also find Price on Strategy Room at FoxNews.com.

Congress is bent on making "Public Option" Inevitable

The phrase "public option," when it comes to the health care debate, has become so poisonous that everyone who supports socialized medicine have distanced themselves from that language. No longer will the government mandate everyone to be on "public" insurance. Rather, the government is going to force everyone out of private options and to government care. It is not as "cut and dry" as the approach they prefer and some (the very rich) will still enjoy private coverage, but the vast majority will find themselves with no other practical option than the government.

Peter Landers of the Wall Street Journal reports that "Insurance companies have another made-to-order report saying that the Senate Finance Committee's health bill would drive up health costs." Citing a report from PriceWaterHouseCooper, Landers notes that "The Oliver Wyman report says that unless the Senate beefs up the proposed mandate on Americans to carry insurance, average annual medical claims five years after the overhaul takes effect would be 50% higher than today, not accounting for medical inflation. That would increase the premiums for family coverage by $3,300 in today's dollars, it says." Many families who are struggling to hold on to the health insurance they have will feel forced to give up that private option, especially if there is a government option in the wings and regardless of how poor of an alternative it is.

That is the other side of the two edged sword; not only will Obamacare drive up the prices of health insurance for all those who stay in the private option, it will also put taxes on virtually everyone to pay for it, including (or maybe, especially) those who are already paying for insurance of their own. Just like those individuals forced to pay property taxes while their own kids attend private schools, socialized health care will mandate every taxpayer to pay for the services, even if they are not using the programs themselves.

The demagogues that are currently driving the debate are telling those that have private insurance (approximately 85 percent of the population according to US News and World Reports) will continue to have such after a socialized medicine program becomes law. The truth is, they might have the right, but between being forced to pay for a service they do not want to use and having the cost of the insurance they want to use growing exponentially, they will find themselves "crowded out" of the private option and forced in to the public one.

Because of the same "crowding out" effect in education (people being forced to pay taxes for it, even if they prefer their children to go to private school), 90 percent of all children in the US are in public schools. In England, where public health care is financed in a similar way as we are moving, 90 percent of the population is under socialized medicine. This is not a mere coincidence, but a clear warning for us today.

Kevin Price is Host of the Price of Business, the longest running show on AM 650 (M-F at 11 am) in Houston, Texas and on AOL Radio. His articles often appear in Chicago Sun Times, Reuters, USA Today, and other national media. Steve Moore of the Wall Street Journal calls Price the “best business talk show host in the country.” Find out why and visit his blog at www.BizPlusBlog.com and his show site at www.PriceofBusiness.com. You can also find Price on Strategy Room at FoxNews.com.

"Choice" Under Obama's Health Care

There is a huge amount of angry rhetoric surrounding Barack Obama's health care policy agenda. On the left we hear about the untold numbers of people dying on the streets without health insurance and on the right we hear about "death panels" that will determine who gets to live and who has to die. The President has asked that the America people take the rhetoric down a little bit and have a thoughtful discussion. He tells us that "choice" won't be affected. You will "always have private options," Obama has told us. This is, of course, a little different from what he said on the campaign trail, in which he discussed a single payer system like Canada's which prohibits private practice, but is more in line with the political realities he faces today.

It is this issue of choice that I want to focus on. Advocates of government health care are telling us that under a new system you will be free to keep your private option, but you are going to have to pay for the health care of everyone on the government system. Candidate Obama said that only those who make $250,000 or more a year will be subject to new taxes to pay for his expansive government. In the last few weeks that number has been adjusted to those making around $100,000. The reality is that spending is so out of control and unemployment is so high, having a job at all will be considered affluent under this Administration.

The funding model of government health care will be similar to that of public schools. Everyone pays for the school, even if they don't use the school. Millions of Americans can simply go to their schools of choice and not be subject to the under performing public schools that we have become famous for on the international scene, but approximately 90 percent of all children come from families that choose not to go private, according to the Department of Education. This happens because parents are "crowded out" of the private options due to how expensive they are and the lack of dollars available to spend on them because they have to pay for public schools no matter where their children attend. In England, approximately 90 percent are on socialized medicine and only 10 percent have private insurance.

Ironically, most of the same politicians who argue that our public schools are not performing at the level they should are also arguing for national health care. Since government has done so well in public education, let us allow it to have a shot at our nation's health. That is a scary thought.

So will you feel forced to be under socialized medicine? Do you feel forced to have your children in private schools, but would prefer a private option? If the answer is "yes" to that question there is a high liklihood you will be under government health care program. However, if you are part of that minority that have children in private schools, you know how great that additional burden can be. It will likely be very similar under socialized medicine, far more of a burden than private health insurance is currently.

According to Freedom Works only around 15 milllion (out of 300 million) of the population are uninsured withough choice (not including illegals who should clearly be treated differently from the rest of the country, in my opinion). The US is toying with the idea of destroying a system that gives us huge choices and the most advanced health care in the world in order to accomodate approximately 5 percent of the population. The way we will help them is by destroying their health care too, because they are still being treated in our system, even without contributing. There certainly has to be a "better way."

Kevin Price is Host of the Price of Business, the longest running show on AM 650 (M-F at 11 am) in Houston, Texas and on AOL Radio. His articles often appear in Chicago Sun Times, Reuters, USA Today, and other national media. Steve Moore of the Wall Street Journal calls Price the “best business talk show host in the country.” Find out why and visit his blog at www.BizPlusBlog.com and his show site at www.PriceofBusiness.com. You can also find Price on Strategy Room at FoxNews.com.

The Last Thing the GOP Needs is an "Alternative" Health Care Plan

Just when you think the Republican party is prepared to draw a line in the sand and put up a fight against the hostile take over of our health care system by the government, we are now hearing about a likely GOP alternative to the Democrat's rationed care system. This is, of course, business as usual. One party will propose a bill and the other party will offer alternatives in an effort to slow down the direction in which the country will be heading. Democrats might offer an alternative to a policy that is too "free market" for their tastes, while the GOP may offer a plan that might slow down the pace towards socialism. That is the problem, particularly when it comes to socialized medicine. To produce their "knee jerk" policy alternative to socialized medicine, which will be filled with government intervention of its own, will merely make the case for a lighter form of socialism, when a case for the free market needs to be made.

Instead, the GOP should take a different approach. Republicans should go on their own offensive and attack what the government has done to health care to date, what government will do to innovation in the future, and how rationed health care has devastated the lives of others around the world. Republicans need to read the growing sentiment of the American people who are looking for Constitutional government and not merely a slower vehicle towards totalitarianism. The following are some bullet points that might help those who want to resist this government expansion:

• Make it personal. Do you know people who have received poor treatment under socialized health care in other countries? How about those who received government care in this country? My mother's family was from England and had relatives die due to socialized medicine, so it is easy for me to make it personal. Spend a little time researching socialized health care horror stories. Conservatives for Patients Rights is an excellent source of information.


• Talk innovation. According to Forbes magazine, 80 percent of all innovations in health care are from the United States. For decades, the prevailing technology that has been used through out the world are from the USA. The reason for this is simple, this country is one of the last with a financial incentive to improve health care. When we remove the incentives in health care, we will naturally see technology slow to a trickle


• Talk about the law. Remind Members of Congress that the Constitution doesn't have a provision for socialized medicine. Furthermore, Article I, Section of the Constitution states what the federal government can do. Point out that this is an issue that is suppose to be left to the states, according to the Tenth Amendment. States such as California, Massachusetts, and Oregon each have comprehensive health care programs. Other states can develop their own, where such is allowed, each state can observe what others are doing and increase the likelihood of developing something that works. Republicans who are afraid of opposing socialized health care should say "I am open to such reforms as long as it is done by the states, where it is allowed."

Obama's health care agenda is immoral. Period. It is stealing from some to pay for others. The state of Hawaii had a universal program that lasted only seven months. Why? "People who were already able to afford health care began to stop paying for it so they could get it for free," said Dr. Kenny Fink, the administrator for Med-QUEST at the Department of Human Services. "I don't believe that was the intent of the program" he went on to say. Whatever amount the government claims it will cost is a mere fraction of what it will actually be. It will be ineffective, expensive, destroy innovation, and be a massive waste. This is a great opportunity for Republicans to take the offensive and fight for the rights of patients.

Kevin Price is Host of the Price of Business, the longest running show on AM 650 (M-F at 11 am) in Houston, Texas and on AOL Radio. His articles often appear in Chicago Sun Times, Reuters, USA Today, and other national media. Steve Moore of the Wall Street Journal calls Price the “best business talk show host in the country.” Find out why and visit his blog at www.BizPlusBlog.com and his show site at www.PriceofBusiness.com. You can also find Price on Strategy Room at FoxNews.com.

Horror Stories are the Tip of the Rationed Care Iceberg

Americans have been discussing concerns about rationed (or government driven) health care for years. In the early 1990s, when Bill Clinton pursued such a program, we heard daily about the problems of long lines and lack of doctors that were common in government programs. Now we are hearing stories about the much lower success rates in countries with government care when it comes to combating major diseases. This goes against one of the fundamental reasons people argue for government care -- without fear of cost, people will go to the doctor quicker, get diagnosed earlier (or better still do the things that will prevent disease), and live longer and healthier lives. The facts are not supporting this hypothesis:

• The average time frame between a general practitioner and treatment in Canada's socialized health care program is more than 4 months (17.3 weeks) according to the Frazier Institute.


• 20% of curable lung cancer patients in the UK die due to long waiting lists, according to the Manhattan Institute. This is also the case in other conditions as I can speak from my own personal circumstances in which I lost my grandfather and an aunt due to Britain's famous lines.


• According to Investors Business Daily: "In France, the supply of doctors is so limited that during an August 2003 heat wave — when many doctors were on vacation and hospitals were stretched beyond capacity — 15,000 elderly citizens died."


• According to Forbes Magazine, the prostate cancer survival rate in the US is 80 percent, in the UK it is 44 percent.

These areas are huge in and of themselves, but the bigger issue is the impact rationed care will have on the development of new drugs, technology, and other innovations in health care. The poor quality of service seen in socialized systems cited above are largely would be even worse if not for the innovations created by the US system. Imagine how much more difficult quality care will be to achieve when all but the most altruistic incentives for improvements disappear. The profit driven health care system of the US drives innovation.

The Federal Reserve Bank did an evaluation of the ten leading innovations of 2001. These included improvements and discoveries in several areas, such as changess in MRIs, development of drugs for high blood pressure and heart disease, cholesterol reducing drugs, innovations in breast cancer diagnosis, surgery for heart failure, eye surgery, and more. In the ten different major areas of discovery, the United States dominated the list with its involvement in eight. The only other countries that played a role were the United Kingdom and Japan, each having only two innovations each.

Self interest has always driven innovation. The US has stood alone as a country that has made such a primary driver in changes in health care. It makes sense to wonder what the effects of worldwide health care socialism has already had on health care. Imagine what it will be like when the last bastion of innovation, the United States, loses the profit motive that has made this country the leader in health care discoveries for decades.

Kevin Price is Host of the Price of Business, the longest running show on AM 650 (M-F at 11 am) in Houston, Texas and on AOL Radio. His articles often appear in Chicago Sun Times, Reuters, USA Today, and other national media. Steve Moore of the Wall Street Journal calls Price the “best business talk show host in the country.” Find out why and visit his blog at www.BizPlusBlog.com and his show site at www.PriceofBusiness.com. You can also find Price on Strategy Room at FoxNews.com.

So What Could we Lose in Health Care Savings?

The Los Angeles Times reported today that "President Obama, joined by an array of groups pledging to cut the cost of health care, said today the commitment that insurers, hospitals, doctors and others have made to saving money will help him achieve the health care reform he is pursuing on Capitol Hill."

The Washington Times has taken a rather dismissive tone to the actions, stating "The pledge provided few specifics on how the costs savings would be achieved or monitored. And many industry groups remain fiercely opposed to a central plank of the Obama health reform plan — the creation of a publicly funded health insurance plan to compete with private insurers and ensure universal health coverage."

Many will argue, including this writer, that any such pledges by the health care industry will likely be more verbal than monetary. This is all the more the case when you factor in the huge amounts of money the industry will have to spend to fight the Administration's socialized medicine program.

This government-private "collaboration" has problems on several levels:

• Where does an administration that has spent more in 100 days than any Administration up to Ronald Reagan spent in their entire terms, have the right to lecture anyone on fiscal responsibility?


• These dollars are being spent on something and there are always trade offs. Will the proposed $2 trillion come from cutting waste and bureaucracy? Or will it come from innovation, salaries, patient care, and other legitimate functions of health care.


• The fundamental question of the "role of government" is again, completely ignored in this "agreement."

Right now this agreement is little more than another example of Obama attempting to do "something," even if it results in little or nothing. It is an example of rhetoric without substance. The solution to America's health care problems will be found in the market place. At some point, that is where Obama needs to seriously search. What works in our economy are things like competition, reasonable risk, innovation, and economies of scale. These are found in the market, not in the government.

Kevin Price is Host of the Price of Business, the longest running show on AM 650 (M-F at 11 am) in Houston, Texas and on AOL Radio. Eric Bolling of Fox News and Fox Business says that Price’s Blog “is very influential and moves the blogosphere.” Steve Moore of the Wall Street Journal calls Price the “best business talk show host in the country.” Find out why and visit his blog at www.BizPlusBlog.com and his show site at www.PriceofBusiness.com. You can also find Price on Strategy Room at FoxNews.com.

Socialized Medicine on Strategy Room

My second appearance on Strategy Room (FoxNews.com) this past week moved to a topic that hits close to home to me -- socialized medicine. Eric Bolling had already navigated the panel through his 3 PM hour through a plethora of topics and they were primed by the time I got on the show.

My mother came right off the boat from England. She was a war bride who left her family to join her spouse in the United States. She was young when she did this, a mere 18 years old. Maybe, as a result, she was one of the biggest fan of England you would ever find. She would go on and on about the "virtues" of British socialism and how "terrible" it was that people in this country were responsible for their own health insurance. Having had visited with members of my family in "the old country" many times over the years, my instincts tell me that my mother would have likely had a very different view of British socialism if she lived under it.

My aunt (her sister) use to tell me how such a huge portion of every paycheck was devoured by the socialized health care system, she was amazed by the large number of people who were subsidized to not work, and was disgusted by how it became almost impossible for the average Brit to buy their own home. Regarding health insurance, she said national health care is "great until you need it." It provides "enormous peace of mind" until you actually get sick. Ironically, this aunt eventually died in the British health care system. She was diagnosed with cancer and could not believe how slowly the government dragged its feet in her treatment. Things were even worse when it came to my grandfather when he became ill. Doctors informed my family that treatment options were "limited" because he no longer paid taxes. My aunt was convinced my grandfather died because of the rationing of health care (a common problem when the government controls or owns anything).

This anecdote hits close to home, but the facts support her argument that socialized medicine does not work:

• According to England's own National Institute of Health, eleven percent of the population of England has very expensive private health insurance. This allows them to get treated as a person, rather than a crowd, and to be able to hold their doctor accountable in a way you can't have when the government is your vendor.


• In countries such as Canada it is common for people to head to the US for much of their health care (particularly urgent). Many individuals will go to a veterinarian to get tests, like MRIs, because the waiting lists are too long with government doctors.


• In Australia's socialized health care state, more than half of the population has private insurance.


• More than 60 percent of innovations in health care are from the United States with a much smaller part being carried by the rest of the world. If the US chooses a socialized system, innovation will be severely damaged because it is the incentives in our system that promotes changes and improvements.

One of the best discussions I have had on the subject was with David Asman of Fox Business when he was a guest on my show (then called the Houston Business Show). While visiting in England his wife had a stroke and barely survived. Because of his resources he was able to get her the best care possible in that country, but concluded that an indigent person in the United States has a better opportunity for recovery than the best insured in England. The harsh reality is very simple, why would we believe that a government that can do so few things effectively, could handle the huge task of providing for all our health care needs?

Kevin Price is Host of the Price of Business, the longest running show on CNN 650 (M-F at 11 am), AOL Radio, and CBS Radio. Eric Bolling of Fox News and Fox Business says that Price’s Blog “is very influential and moves the blogosphere.” Steve Moore of the Wall Street Journal calls Price the “best business talk show host in the country.” Find out why and visit his blog at www.BizPlusBlog.com and his show site at www.PriceofBusiness.com. You can also find Price on Strategy Room at FoxNews.com.

Barack Obama: More Pork than Promise

Recently, AOL did a survey of the 10 people that are admired most. The list wasn't limited to modern times or the United States. In fact, Jesus Christ himself made the list and he was second only to Barack Obama. With those kind of ratings, expectations are very high.

So, tonight, when "the Messiah" entered the Halls of Congress, the American people were expected to get "wowed!" What that got was a lengthy list of promises that stand contrary to his commitment to cut the deficit in half in four years (one of his more recent commitments). The following are some "highlights" of what the President intends to do in order to not only "improve the economy," but to also fundamentally change the way we are governed.

The following are two examples in the Obama agenda of why only 13 cents of every dollar actually goes to job creation and raises concerns that the American people have bought into a questionable bill of goods.

Education

"Because of this (recovery) plan, families who are struggling to pay tuition costs will receive a $2,500 tax credit for all four years of college. And Americans who have lost their jobs in this recession will be able to receive extended unemployment benefits and continued health care coverage to help them weather this storm. "

This is the kind of aggressive spending program that will do little to add to jobs, but will do a great deal to add to the deficit. Getting a college education in this country is already more achievable than many other parts of the world, which is why we have so many people from around this planet in our universities. Some financial burden in pursuing a degree will heighten the "ownership" attitude of those who are pursuing it. Don't get me wrong, I can tell one first hand that this has been a challenge for my family (my wife and I have eight children). Some times they start at community college, they have to take a little longer to finish, but all of these things lead to better students and, I believe, a better education system. Besides being costly, adding tax credits like this will also cheapen the educational system.

Health Care

"This budget builds on these reforms. It includes an historic commitment to comprehensive health care reform - a down-payment on the principle that we must have quality, affordable health care for every American. It’s a commitment that’s paid for in part by efficiencies in our system that are long overdue. And it’s a step we must take if we hope to bring down our deficit in the years to come... I suffer no illusions that this will be an easy process. It will be hard. But I also know that nearly a century after Teddy Roosevelt first called for reform, the cost of our health care has weighed down our economy and the conscience of our nation long enough. So let there be no doubt: health care reform cannot wait, it must not wait, and it will not wait another year."

His vision of Health Care Reform is socialized medicine. Besides being terribly inefficient (I have an aunt and grandfather who died as a direct result of the British health care system, these programs are expensive. The Health Systems Innovations Network (HSI) "estimates the Obama plan would cost $452 billion per year, or more than $6 trillion over a 10-year period. The dramatic difference between this estimate and others is largely a result of HSI's assumption that under Obama's mandate to cover children, the federal government would subsidize virtually the full cost of coverage. Also, HSI finds that the employer mandate would add sizable costs to the federal government."

Obama has been saying that we have reached "the beginning of the end" of government as we knew it and he is right. Instead of a country that gave some regard to economic freedom and individual responsibility, we are becoming wards of a nanny state that plans on taking care of us through systems that are too costly, inefficient, and fundamentally opposed to the values that made us great.

Kevin Price is a syndicated columnist whose articles frequently appear at ChicagoSunTimes.com, Reuters.com, USAToday.com, and other national media. Kevin Price is Host of the Price of Business (M-F at 11 AM on CNN 650) and Publisher of the Houston Business Review. Hear the show live and online at PriceofBusiness.com. Visit the archive of past shows here.