A critic of this blog recently stated we should look at proven healthcare systems around the world and model our reform after those. It was rather hilarious that he included Canada and Britain in that list of successful systems while ignoring that a lot of our problems are due to current government interference, not the free market. However, looking at relevant past performance on a matter can give us insight into future performance.
Barack Obama is proposing spending at least $1 trillion over 10 years to reform healthcare, which accounts for 16% or so of spending in our economy.
Let’s look at how he’s done when he has spent significantly less.
The “stimulus” at $787 Billion
More unemployment after passing stimulus then they had predicted we would have if it was not passed. (graph)
The money has been released even more slowly, after Obama said it would speed up. (source)
In summary, our debt dramatically increased on top of the lack of positive effect on the economy.
Cash for clunkers at $3 Billion
Ran out of money early and may be out of money again. (total of $3 billion promised thus far)
One locale has had only 2% of rebates approved. (source)
Dealers opting out because they've had to wait so long for the refunds. (source)
“But it’s in the hands of this enormous bureaucracy and regulatory agency,” he added. “If they don’t get out of their own way, this program is going to be a huge failure.”
The needless destruction of property that will reduce supply in the used car market and thereby raise costs. (source)
Clearly, Obama and the Democrat’s programs have faired very poorly while drastically increasing our debt and helped raise the costs of products for those who can’t afford brand new cars.
How can there be any doubt that the performance of Obamacare will be much worse?
The amount of money to be spent is greater. At least $1 trillion over 10 years.
A further government takeover of healthcare in this country is the takeover of $2.2 trillion in spending for 2007.
Some of our states are larger than European countries that already have failing Obamacare type systems. That, combined with the diversity of our country adds a complexity that practically ensures massive failure.
Oregon rations healthcare, resulting in odd priorities, to put politely.
*update* I forgot this about Oregon government healthcare. The Oregon Health Plan funds assisted suicide rather than chemotherapy.
As previously noted, the language of the bill is so complex that unconstrained regulators are about the only certain guarantee.
With Obama and the Democrat’s recent history on the economy is there any reason to suspect they will do any better grabbing control of 16% of the economy consisting of 80,000 doctors and 5,700 hospitals, let alone every consumer of healthcare, with a scheme that intentionally creates a larger bureaucracy and unaccountable regulatory minefield?
For those who inexplicably think the answer is yes they will do better despite their recent history on other smaller and less complex intervention in economic matters, I have some “lovely riverside property in Brooklyn” to sell. I can guarantee that Biden, Pelosi, Reid, and Barney Frank have demonstrated the intellect to buy this property so you had better hurry.