Now that Deval Patrick and possibly Michael Bloomberg are entering the race for the Democratic Presidential nomination. Why not? None of the multitudes already running has wowed the populace. The nominal leader, Joe Biden, is suffering from a wound named Hunter. As we’ve pointed out, you simply can’t go for impeachment with a leader so ethically compromised. As the Dems push impeachment, the Republicans can point to the Bidens. Saying they did nothing wrong, just insults the electorate. Joe Biden’s only real source of strength is the Black vote. This arises out of his association with Barrack Obama. Patrick has a much older friendship with the former President, and he’s black. This can’t help but diminish Biden’s black support. This will further fragment the delegate totals for those running, probably leading to a hung convention. After two ballots, the nomination we think will go to Michelle Obama by acclamation. For years we’ve predicted Michelle would be the nominee, and Patrick’s entry in the field is just another Obama cool move. In any case, the Dems are committed to promising endless spending and crushing taxes. Michelle only has to appear to be a little less extreme.
Forcing both parties to the extremes is a given with our present primary system. As we’ve pointed out in our series “the Future Party” (series available on this site), our failing nominating system gives us less acceptable candidates. Instead of the parties offering capable candidates with broad appeal, we have populist Trump facing candidates at the other extreme. The lack of fiscal restraint is indicative of the lack of sound thinking. The present President is running trillion-plus deficits, yet any of the Democratic contenders make him look like a miser.
At the forefront of the Dems proposed eye-popping spending is healthcare. Cost estimates in the tens of trillions are offered to replace our present system or slightly less to significantly expand it. Nowhere is there any reasonable elements in any of the plans to actually cut the real costs of healthcare. Rationing, along with price controls and caps, we are told will bring prices down. They claim eliminating the profit motive will make healthcare much cheaper. One doesn’t have to recall the failure of the USSR’s command society to know this is the path to long waits and shortages. We just have to look at the current crisis in Britain’s single-payer health service. Presently, almost a quarter of a million have been waiting 6 months or more for needed treatment. Remember, Britain has only 1/6th of the Us population. Worse, 25% of cancer patients failed to start treatment on time even though timely treatment is often the difference between life and death. Do we really want needless deaths on the national conscience? We want better for our loved ones.
Compare this with “Dave’s Plan” (Series Available on this site) with every man woman and child covered by a catastrophic policy for the big problems while the Personal Benefits Account allows you to pay on the spot for regular health needs. Real cost savings are readily visible. Just the elimination of third party pay on the vast majority of medical needs with prompt payment and removal of credit risk will result in significant savings throughout the system. Competition for readily available dollars should pass the savings along to the public along with improved service. Doesn’t this just sound better than endless waits? “Dave’s Plan” doesn’t stop there. By removing those presently with pre-existing conditions from the general pool, we make the catastrophic insurance coverage much more affordable. Dave’s plan will ultimately erase that frightening terminology. By using the tried and true relationship between insurance and savings, we can have a rational workable plan. Even though much more limited than”Dave’s Plan,” Health Savings Accounts (HSA) that link catastrophic insurance with savings is the fastest growing area in healthcare. With much less fanfare, far more people have HSAs than are covered by the Affordable Care Act (ACA) Exchanges ). Even with its present restrictions, the HSA shows where the market naturally wants to go. “Dave’s Plan” does everything the HSA does and much more. Why not follow the market rather than dictate to it? Which is the American way?
“Dave’s Plan” was initially conceived as an alternative to the ACA or as it is better known Obamacare. Proper principles quickly linked healthcare with savings and gave birth to the Personal Benefits Account (PBA). This, in turn, made possible even more significant benefits to individual Americans beyond healthcare. Both here and abroad, it is widely trumpeted the gap in wealth and income between the rich and the rest of us is rapidly growing. It is time to show how the PBA will increase both wealth and personal income across the populace. We will take this up in our next post.