Annoying - and healthy - facts
By STEVE STOCKMAR, City Editor
Originally Published: November 18, 2009 10:32 a.m.
Facts and information are the order of the day - as in where to find them and how to recognize their absence in a single bound.Facts are the same on both sides of most hot-button issues, but interpretations vary - greatly in many cases. Both sides call for a spirit of bipartisanship, but in the next breath ask how the other side can be so dumb? You know who you are.Let's dissect an offering by Liberals offer ZERO substance, who overshot a par-3 fairway with his 1-wood on Letter: Health care plan seeks to control everything:"Well, now that we've heard from the usual smattering of liberals in our community...and they've contributed their standard input which equals ZERO substance, we can now proceed here in the real world, where insane socialist models ALWAYS fail to deliver what they promise. Why are American liberals so disgustingly ignorant and so hateful of actual fact and information? Why do they offer NOTHING except anger, insults, emotion and hatred for anyone who disagrees with them? Why do they insist that "change" should come forth despite how that change may actually make things WORSE? Why do they believe that big-government can ultimately make everyone in society equally happy and comfortable? Why are they so child-like in their approach to the world around them? Why don't they recognize the fact that if socialized medicine on the scale that Obama wants was to become the law of the land, that quality and availability of service would suffer terribly along with our ability to develop new advancements in medical technology? Why?"Why indeed. Let's rewind and watch that again, this time with subtitles:Well, now that we've heard from the usual smattering of liberals in our community in the Prescott "community" that amounts to The Raven on Cortez Street >> ...and they've contributed their standard input research, details >>, which equals ZERO substance, we can now proceed here in the real world Dancing with the Stars, talk radio >>, where insane socialist models ALWAYS fail to deliver what they promise like Medicare >>. Why are American liberals so disgustingly ignorant and so hateful of actual fact and information? specifics not required >> Why do they offer NOTHING except anger, insults, see: "ignorant," "hateful," "disgusting" >> emotion and hatred for anyone who disagrees with them? that all American liberals hate facts and information? Okay yes, I disagree >> Why do they insist that "change" should come forth just because of a corrupt health care system that rewards the denial of coverage with annual premiums that rose 119 percent from 1999-2008 >> despite how that change may actually make things WORSE? at its current rate without a changed system, premiums will double between now and 2020 >> Why do they believe that big-government can ultimately make everyone in society the U.S. currently has 8.6 million uninsured children >> equally happy and comfortable? Why are they so child-like in their approach to the world around them? Why don't they recognize the fact that if socialized medicine on the scale that Obama wants at its current non-Obama scale, a typical older couple in traditional Medicare will pay almost $90 next year on average to subsidize private insurance companies who are not providing their health benefits >> was to become the law of the land, that quality and availability of service would suffer terribly eliminating overpayments to Medicare Advantage plans could save the Federal government, taxpayers, and Medicare beneficiaries $177 billion over the next 10 years >> along with our ability to develop new advancements in medical technology? Why?As for that last one, let me hand the ball off to Christian Renaudin, DVM, PhD, the managing partner and CEO of Davis, Calif.-based The MarkeTech Group, an international medical technology marketing consulting firm. He took part in a round-table with the radiology industry which covered, among other things, the House bill's proposed tax on medical device manufacturers in an effort to raise revenue for national coverage - ostensibly our blogger's closing point. "I don't think the tax would impact the way vendors do their research today," Renaudin said. "If they want to survive, they have to improve technology and equipment. If they don't, they will likely exclude themselves from the market." Translation: If their research remains innovative and beneficial, they will remain solvent. If not ... do we patients really care about an "if not"?What I just cannot understand are senior citizens who oppose the House bill. Opposition here makes less sense than my 9-year-old's recipe for Thanksgiving stuffing. The anti-'socialism' stance? This, from a demographic that relies on Medicare. The belief that the bill will reduce options and raise costs for the elderly? Great for talk radio and cable news ratings. Not so great on "actual fact and information," as our original blogger put it.According to the Seattle Times, the House bill calls for nearly $500 billion in spending cuts that are designed to keep Medicare solvent longer by reducing fraud, waste and excessive spending; eliminates Medicare copays for cancer screenings, vaccines and other preventive services; and adds doctors for treating Medicare patients, helping to keep a shortage of such providers from getting worse. Yet in a remarkable oddity, polls show that Americans 65 and older are less likely to support Obama's health-care efforts and are more skeptical that changes would benefit them personally - in spite of the fact that both AARP and the American Medical Association each gave the bill its respective endorsement.The elderly "tend not to want change from what they've got, even though what they've got costs too much," Edyth Koch, a senior, told the Times' Kyung Song. "They don't have confidence that change is better."Maybe. Or, is it something else? Song points out that "Seniors are the only group in the nation that enjoys near-universal coverage." But are they also the group least likely to support that same coverage for their kids and grandkids?Ouch. A harsh indictment ... but untrue?Why that would be ignorant, hateful and disgusting. And that's a fact.