Tag Archives: Elderly

Tom Coburn explains what Republicans think of Obama’s health care bill

Video from the Washington News Observer. (H/T Granite Grok via ECM)

Senator Coburn is a medical doctor who has delivered over 3,000 babies. He is a staunch social conservative.

Social conservatives are stopping the Democrat health care bill from passing

Maybe it’s time that social conservatives got a little more respect from fiscal conservatives?

From Riehl Worldview. (H/T Health Care BS via ECM)

Excerpt:

There are still a number of dirty little secrets stalking the back alley’s of Congress ready to derail health care reform. And chief among them is abortion. Surprise, surprise, it’s moderate and conservative Democrats, especially many who won seats in the last election, preparing to cause trouble, no matter how much Pelosi wants to not discuss the issue right now.

[…]The stumbling block is especially huge given the dynamics of many of our largest cities. Catholic hospitals carry the bulk of the load for health care in those areas. They’ve already dug in their heels on this a long time ago, claiming they would close facilities before allowing them to perform abortions.

I’m conservative in both areas, of course.

MUST-READ: How government-run health care leads to euthanasia

I have been writing a lot of posts in the last few months about the pitfalls of government-run health care in Canada’s single-payer system, and in the National Health Service in Britain. Some people may wonder whether comparisons can be made between these systems and Obama’s government-run medical insurance idea.

Consider the words of bioethicist Wesley J. Smith: (H/T ECM)

The UK’s National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence–the Orwellian-named NICE–is the template promoted by Obamacare’s primary non government pusher, Former Senator Tom Daschle, called by the New York Times to be the most influential adviser to the POTUS and Congressional Democrats on health care reform.  Indeed, he has repeatedly stated we need an American version of NICE.

That means what NICE does matters to Americans.

Smith then notes this article from the UK Guardian which explains what NICE does.

Excerpt:

A drug which can give women with advanced breast cancer extra weeks or months of life has been turned down by a government watchdog body for use in the NHS. The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (Nice) says it proposes to reject Tyverb (lapatinib) in spite of changes in the rules brought in specifically to allow people at the end of their lives to have the chance of new and often expensive treatments.

Tyverb is the only drug licensed for women with advanced breast cancer whose tumours test positive for a protein called HER2 and for whom Herceptin, a Nice-approved drug, is no longer working. In much of the rest of Europe, Tyverb is then given, in combination with a standard chemotherapy drug called capecitabine. Around 2,000 women in the UK could be eligible for the drug, which has the additional benefit of being taken in pill form, which means that women can stay at home and attempt to live normal lives. Nice turned down Tyverb earlier this year, saying it was too expensive for the benefit to patients it offered…

Smith concludes:

And don’t forget NICE also pushed the Liverpool Care Pathway, that may have brought back door euthanasia to the UK.  Similarly, we recently discussed a similar refusal of coverage in Ontario, Canada, for life-extending colon cancer chemotherapy.

This is our future if we pass Obamacare, unless we explicitly forbid by statute such rationing power to the cost control boards. But attempts to do so have all been turned down.  NICE isn’t nice, and it is an approach to health care that Americans should reject.

Now consider this story about the Liverpool Care Pathway from the UK Daily Mail. (H/T Andrew)

Excerpt:

A grandfather who beat cancer was wrongly told the disease had returned and left to die at a hospice which pioneered a controversial ‘death pathway’.

Doctors said there was nothing more they could do for 76-year- old Jack Jones, and his family claim he was denied food, water and medication except painkillers.

He died within two weeks. But tests after his death found that his cancer had not come back and he was in fact suffering from pneumonia brought on by a chest infection.

To his family’s horror, they were told he could have recovered if he’d been given the correct treatment.

[…]Mr Jones was being cared for at a hospice which was central to the contentious Liverpool Care Pathway under which dying patients have their life support taken away, although the hospice claims it wasn’t officially applied in his case.

The scheme is used by hundreds of hospitals and care homes, and is followed in as many as 20,000 deaths a year.

Read the whole thing.

In a socialized system, you pay you income to the ruling elite based on your ability to produce. You only have value to the state while you are working to pay taxes, taxes that socialists can use to buy votes and control other people lives. When you stop working and start needing services, you become the enemy of the state.

Contrast socialism with a free market system. Now you have the power because you have the money. Doctors and hospitals only get paid if they give you what you want – quality health care for the lowest price. You can go a competitor if you don’t like what you are offered from any particular provider. Choice and competition.

More NHS horror stories listed here.

Britain’s Office for National Statistics predicts looming demographics crisis

Here’s an article from MercatorNet. (H/T ECM)

Excerpt:

Britain is bracing itself for the ageing of its population with the latest figures released by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) showing that the proportion of people aged over 65 is set to rise dramatically.

[…]The fastest growing age group has been been 85-and-over group –now referred to as the “oldest old”. This group has doubled to 1.3 million since the early ’80s;

By 2033 the number of people aged 85 and over is projected to more than double again to reach 3.2 million. It will grow to will account for five per cent of the total population;

The article is filled with statistics about the increasing number of retired seniors. In Western countries, seniors depend on the government social programs for pensions and health care. A lot of countries had a baby boom in the 50s and 60s so that a large number of of people are retiring. Unfortunately, due to feminism and the sexual revolution, the numbers of new workers has been decimated by hedonism, the breakdown of the family and abortion. So who is going to pay the income taxes needed to provide for the larger number of retirees?

Today, there just aren’t enough new workers to pay for all the social programs. Either the younger generation will have to be impoverished by high tax rates, or the older generation will have to be denied health care. In one sense this actually just, because the same generation of people that introduced their children to feminism is going to face the consequences of their worldviews. Young people were taught hedonism and that sex is recreational. Saving money and having children took a back seat to careers and having a good time here and now.

When a person expects to be taken care of by the government, they don’t save their own money and they worry about having more children to take care of them in their old age. The government started the whole wealth distribution game in order to equalize the life outcomes of people who worked and saved to pay for their own retirement and health care, with those who didn’t work and save. This caused those who were working and saving to slow down or stop, since it was now the government’s job to take care of people.

I also think it is interesting that the left-wingers who complained about “overpopulation” are going to finally find out exactly how badly they miscalculated. There is one group of people still having lots of babies. Muslims. And when they become the voting majority, a lot of multiculturalists will be surprised to see their liberties vanishing. In particular, special interest groups on the left, e.g. – feminists, will have their liberties curtailed. And so, feminism will have set in motion demographic forces that led to its own destruction.

Share