Last July ’09 the WSJ published an article by Carl Bialik, The Unhealthy Accounting of Uninsured Americans:
Congressional debate over health care hinges on numbers projected a decade forward to make sure the plan can be paid for. But it’s hard enough pinning down today’s numbers.
The Census Bureau estimates that the number of uninsured amounts to 45.7 million people. But the agency might be over counting by millions due to faulty assumptions. Another problem: That 45.7 million figure includes undocumented immigrants, even though they aren’t likely to be covered under new laws.
Over a year ago, Sally C. Pipes of the Pacific Research Institute debunked the 47 million uninsured in her terrific book, The Top Ten Myths of American Health Care.
But as Carl Bialik concludes, the debunking
hasn’t stopped both parties in Congress from using the flawed numbers liberally, as they debate health-care overhaul this summer. That’s a reprise of what happened 15 years ago, when the Clinton health plan foundered under differing cost estimates wielded by opponents. But such projections are even more uncertain than today’s fuzzy count of the uninsured, depending on tricky assumptions about people’s economic choices.
Apparently it’s had little effect on liberal doctors too.
Liberal Doctors Continue to use Distortions about the Uninsured in American to Push for a Single Payer Plan
For example, look at these posts from popular liberal web sites authored by doctors:
While the United States does provide excellent care for those with good coverage (such as those in the government financed Medicare program), overall the US does not rank very well due to lack of access to adequate care for tens of millions of people. (The Best Health Care In The World?).
Even if there is no employer mandate and no public plan we have far more than “meaningless crumbs [Health Care Reform Without a Public Option].” Among the benefits included in the current legislation which would be worthwhile even without the public plan and employer mandate:
* Far more of the currently 47 million uninsured will have insurance coverage. (Compromise and Health Care Reform)
Factcheck.org reviewed last night’s Republican debate and found a number of errors. I’m posting the two most significant errors, which repeat claims which are often heard from conservatives, as two separate posts. The first is the claim that reports of 47 million uninsured are greatly inflated by healthy people who choose not to have insurance. (Republicans Misleading on Uninsured).
The basic goal of a 2009 health care reform package is to address the problem of 46 million Americans without health insurance through a combined mandate on individuals and employers. (Individual Mandates: Expensive Policy Failure And Bonanza For Insurers And Market Stakeholders).
Watch “Uninsured In America” @ freemarketcure.com
It it too much to expect Dr. Chusid & John Geyman MD, doctors, “experts,” to take the time and effort to find out the truth about who’s uninsured in American and why? Yeah, I guess it is …
Liberal Doctors and Distortions about the Uninsured in America
Christopher Skyi
Last July ’09 the WSJ published an article by Carl Bialik, The Unhealthy Accounting of Uninsured Americans:
Congressional debate over health care hinges on numbers projected a decade forward to make sure the plan can be paid for. But it’s hard enough pinning down today’s numbers.
The Census Bureau estimates that the number of uninsured amounts to 45.7 million people. But the agency might be over counting by millions due to faulty assumptions. Another problem: That 45.7 million figure includes undocumented immigrants, even though they aren’t likely to be covered under new laws.
Over a year ago, Sally C. Pipes of the Pacific Research Institute debunked the 47 million uninsured in her terrific book, The Top Ten Myths of American Health Care.
But as Carl Bialik concludes, the debunking
hasn’t stopped both parties in Congress from using the flawed numbers liberally, as they debate health-care overhaul this summer. That’s a reprise of what happened 15 years ago, when the Clinton health plan foundered under differing cost estimates wielded by opponents. But such projections are even more uncertain than today’s fuzzy count of the uninsured, depending on tricky assumptions about people’s economic choices.
Apparently it’s had little effect on liberal doctors too.
Liberal Doctors Continue to use Distortions about the Uninsured in American to Push for a Single Payer Plan
For example, look at these posts from popular liberal web sites authored by doctors:
While the United States does provide excellent care for those with good coverage (such as those in the government financed Medicare program), overall the US does not rank very well due to lack of access to adequate care for tens of millions of people. (The Best Health Care In The World?).
Even if there is no employer mandate and no public plan we have far more than “meaningless crumbs [Health Care Reform Without a Public Option].” Among the benefits included in the current legislation which would be worthwhile even without the public plan and employer mandate:
* Far more of the currently 47 million uninsured will have insurance coverage. (Compromise and Health Care Reform)
Factcheck.org reviewed last night’s Republican debate and found a number of errors. I’m posting the two most significant errors, which repeat claims which are often heard from conservatives, as two separate posts. The first is the claim that reports of 47 million uninsured are greatly inflated by healthy people who choose not to have insurance. (Republicans Misleading on Uninsured).
The basic goal of a 2009 health care reform package is to address the problem of 46 million Americans without health insurance through a combined mandate on individuals and employers. (Individual Mandates: Expensive Policy Failure And Bonanza For Insurers And Market Stakeholders).
Watch “Uninsured In America” @ freemarketcure.com
It it too much to expect Dr. Chusid & John Geyman MD, doctors, “experts,” to take the time and effort to find out the truth about who’s uninsured in American and why? Yeah, I guess it is …
Nothing contained in this blog is to be construed as necessarily reflecting the views of the Pacific Research Institute or as an attempt to thwart or aid the passage of any legislation.