Guess what Greece has to cut?

[there buster]

Policy Failure: Greece was told that if it wanted a bailout, it needed to consider privatizing its government health care system. So tell us again why the U.S. is following Europe's welfare state model.

The requirement, part of a deal arranged by the IMF, the European Union and the European Central bank, is a tacit admission that national health care programs are unsustainable. Along with transportation and energy, the bailout group, according to the New York Times, wants the Greek government to remove "the state from the marketplace in crucial sectors."

This is not some cranky or politically motivated demand. It is a condition based on the ugly reality of government medicine. The Times reports that economists - not right-wingers opposed to health care who want to blow up Times Square - say liberalizing "the health care industry would help bring down prices in these areas, which are among the highest in Europe."

Of course most of the media have been largely silent about the health care privatization measure for Greece, as it conflicts with their universal, single-payer health care narrative.

The public health system in the Hellenic Republic is operated by the Ministry of Health and Welfare, where centralized decisions and rules are made.

It provides free or low-cost treatment through what is essentially a single-payer system established in 1983 when the Socialist Party was in power. Family members and retirees are also covered. Like the systems in Britain and Canada, it has agonizingly long waiting lists.

It should be no surprise that in Greece, health care spending as a percentage of the economy is relatively steep. According to Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development data, it's higher than that in the Netherlands, Italy, Spain, the United Kingdom and Japan. Despite all the spending, Greece could never cover 100% of its citizens, reaching only about 83% for primary care.

Today, the patient most in need of a room in the intensive-care ward is Greece itself - what with government debt nearing 120% of GDP and the deficit at 13% of GDP.

The mere possibility of government spending cuts sent striking workers and public employees into the streets. Groups upset with the budget cuts have protested, rioted, looted and killed.

On May 5, three died in a bank fire fueled by a Molotov cocktail during a riot against the austerity measures that have been intended to save the government from bankruptcy and, as well, secure aid from other nations.

After much wrangling, a bailout (an ill-advised reward for bad behavior) of roughly $145 billion is in line for a government that could not control its spending addiction.

The U.S. won't be the next Greece. Other nations, all of them with some version of government health care dragging them down, will fail first. But we are next in line among developed nations to turn over our health care to politically minded lawmakers and rule-making bureaucrats who operate in their own self-interest.

At what point will this nation realize that ObamaCare, lumped onto the pile of entitlements that are already headed into a financial abyss, is an expense that the nation cannot afford?

Already we've seen government agencies tell us that the initial estimates for the Democrats' health care overhaul were too low. We've watched as patients have suffered in Britain and Canada because the large demand placed on their "free" health care systems caused them to be overloaded.

We've stood in awe as Washington, refusing to hear the strong message from voters, forced on the American people a new health care system that most clearly did not want.

What more do we need to see?

Life provides us with an infinite number of situations that can teach us valuable lessons. The problems in Greece are teaching us one of those right now. If we don't learn from this history lesson, we are bound to repeat it.

[Dr. Shane]

Of course our health-care reform did not include a public option although I would have liked to seen it include co-ops. That probably will not happen before the Lord returns.

[lazarus]

We've stood in awe as Washington, refusing to hear the strong message from voters, forced on the American people a new health care system that most clearly did not want.

?

[karl]

?

Greece was told that if it wanted a bailout, it needed to consider privatizing its government health care system. So tell us again why the U.S. is following Europe's welfare state model.

The requirement, part of a deal arranged by the IMF, the European Union and the European Central bank, is a tacit admission that national health care programs are unsustainable.

[lazarus]

Originally Posted By: lazarus

?

Greece was told that if it wanted a bailout, it needed to consider privatizing its government health care system. So tell us again why the U.S. is following Europe's welfare state model.

The requirement, part of a deal arranged by the IMF, the European Union and the European Central bank, is a tacit admission that national health care programs are unsustainable.

Making the font larger doesn't make the conclusion you make hold any more water. The requirement shows that Greece's national health care program is unsustainable.

[karl]

Both Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi and French President Nicolas Sarkozy cancelled trips to Moscow to mark the anniversary of the end of the Second World War in order to continue consultations over the crisis....

But they also decided, under pressure from the markets, to ask all 27 EU countries to agree a financial mechanism to ring-fence the Greek crisis before markets open on Monday.

"The euro zone is going through the worst crisis since its creation," Sarkozy said after Friday's euro zone summit in Brussels.....

"If the domino effect begins, no economy is safe," Finnish Prime Minister Matti Vanhanen told the Finnish broadcaster YLE on Saturday.

Euro zone sources said late on Friday that the mechanism could be funded by bonds issued by the European Commission with guarantees from euro zone states.

---------------

The bottom line here, Laz and Shane, is that the entitlement programs funded by deficits are killing Europe (and us, but we're not quite as far along down this path as Europe.)

The sad thing is that this attempt to prop up the Euro-zone will be financed by debt, as well. The bonds referred to in the last paragraph are simply debt instruments issued by governments.

The ONLY fiscally responsible position is to end deficit spending and the entitlements which spawn it.

[Dr. Shane]

I didn't think the countries using the euro were allowed to run deficits.

Entitlements are not killing the American economy. They make up only a small slice of the budget. Defense spending and funding the debt are killing us. We need to balance the budget and start debt reduction.

[karl]

I didn't think the countries using the euro were allowed to run deficits.

Entitlements are not killing the American economy. They make up only a small slice of the budget. Defense spending and funding the debt are killing us. We need to balance the budget and start debt reduction.

Have you not read the posts this thread? You didn't think countries using the euro were allowed to run deficits? The entire euro-zone is threatened by welfare state deficit spending.

European countries have high budget deficits, aggravated by the recession. Greece is exceptional only by degree. In 2009, its budget deficit was 13.6 percent of its gross domestic product (a measure of its economy); its debt, the accumulation of past deficits, was 115 percent of GDP. Spain’s deficit was 11.2 percent of GDP, its debt 56.2 percent; Portugal’s figures were 9.4 percent and 76.8 percent. The US is not far behind these troubled economies and we are catching up (or should I say we are catching down?) RAPIDLY under the Obama administration.

Entitlements ARE killing the economy, Shane. I can't believe you are so blind to this. I agree with cutting all defense spending above that which is necessary to defend our shores and our borders, but this will not balance the budget. Defense is 14% of the Federal budget. You could realistically cut that in half, but that will not do the job. Only cuts in entitlements will do the job.

Most of the people on disability are capable of useful work and need to get a job. When a quadraplegic like Joni Ericson Tada can find a way to work, somebody whose only disability is pain or depression or (fill in the blank) should be able to do the same. And they would do this if we weren't paying them not to do it.

Welfare reform needs to get serious in all areas other than temporary assistance to needy families. The child support program, child care, energy or utility assistance, food assistance, medical assistance, government housing assistance, and vocational rehabilitation services should have significant limitations similar to those applied to TANF.

Social security needs to become a REAL pension plan which cannot be raided by politicians.

[doug yowell]

[

Making the font larger doesn't make the conclusion you make hold any more water.

It doesn't?

[there buster]

Quote:

Entitlements are not killing the American economy. They make up only a small slice of the budget. Defense spending and funding the debt are killing us

Quote:

* Defense and security: In 2010, some 20 percent of the budget, or $715 billion, will pay for defense and security-related international activities. The bulk of the spending in this category reflects the underlying costs of the Department of Defense and other security-related activities. The total also includes the cost of supporting operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, which is expected to total $172 billion in 2010.

* Social Security: Another 20 percent of the budget, or $708 billion, will pay for Social Security, which provided retirement benefits averaging $1,117 per month to 36 million retired workers (and their eligible dependents) in December 2009. Social Security also provided survivors’ benefits to 6.4 million surviving children and spouses of deceased workers and disability benefits to 9.7 million disabled workers and their eligible dependents in December 2009.

* Medicare, Medicaid, and CHIP: Three health insurance programs — Medicare, Medicaid, and the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) — will together account for 21 percent of the budget in 2010, or $753 billion. Nearly two-thirds of this amount, or $468 billion, will go to Medicare, which provides health coverage to around 46 million people who are over the age of 65 or have disabilities. The remainder of this category funds Medicaid and CHIP, which in a typical month in 2010 will provide health care or long-term care to about 64 million low-income children, parents, elderly people, and people with disabilities. Both Medicaid and CHIP require matching payments from the states.

Two other categories together account for another fifth of federal spending:

* Safety net programs: About 14 percent of the federal budget in 2010, or $482 billion, will support programs that provide aid (other than health insurance or Social Security benefits) to individuals and families facing hardship.

* Interest on the national debt: The federal government must make regular interest payments on the money it has borrowed to finance past deficits — that is, on the national debt, which is projected to reach $9 trillion by the end of fiscal 2010. In 2010, these interest payments (net of some interest income) will claim $209 billion, or about 6 percent of the budget.

Do the math: Defense + interest = 35% of budget

Entitlements = 55% of budget

So your position is that 35% of the budget is "a big slice,: whereas 55% is "a small slice." Maybe you could run for congress.

And that doesn't count the unfunded liability of entitlements which are already at >100% of GDP.

[karl]

MANDATORY SPENDING

$695 billion – Social Security

$453 billion – Medicare

$290 billion – Medicaid

$11 billion – Potential disaster costs

$571 billion – Other mandatory programs

$164 billion – Interest on National Debt

NON-MANDATORY SPENDING

$663.7 billion – Department of Defense (including Overseas Contingency Operations)

$78.7 billion – Department of Health and Human Services

$72.5 billion – Department of Transportation

$52.5 billion – Department of Veterans Affairs

$51.7 billion – Department of State and Other International Programs

$47.5 billion – Department of Housing and Urban Development

$46.7 billion – Department of Education

$42.7 billion – Department of Homeland Security

$26.3 billion – Department of Energy

$26.0 billion – Department of Agriculture

$23.9 billion – Department of Justice

$18.7 billion – National Aeronautics and Space Administration

$13.8 billion – Department of Commerce

$13.3 billion – Department of Labor

$13.3 billion – Department of the Treasury

$12.0 billion – Department of the Interior

$10.5 billion – Environmental Protection Agency

$9.7 billion – Social Security Administration

$7.0 billion – National Science Foundation

$5.1 billion – Corps of Engineers

$5.0 billion – National Infrastructure Bank

$1.1 billion – Corporation for National and Community Service

$0.7 billion – Small Business Administration

$0.6 billion – General Services Administration

$19.8 billion – Other Agencies

$105 billion – Other

[Dr. Shane]

I don't consider Social Security and Medicaid as entitlements. We are taxed separately and the accounting for those programs should also be separate from the general fund.

[there buster]

Quote:

I don't consider Social Security and Medicaid as entitlements.

Yeah. And I don't consider penguins to be birds.

[Woody]

Social Security is something I am entitled to. Bailouts are not.

[bonnie]

I don't consider Social Security and Medicaid as entitlements. We are taxed separately and the accounting for those programs should also be separate from the general fund.

Medicaid is a entitlement. We pay into medicare but not nearly what most of us take out.I think the same holds true of Social Security.

[Dr. Shane]

The problem isn't Social Security and Medicaid. These programs can pay for themselves if run properly. The problem is the other federal spending which must be paid for by general revenues. Defense spending and the interest is what is killing the country.

[there buster]

Quote:

The problem isn't Social Security and Medicaid. These programs can pay for themselves if run properly. The problem is the other federal spending which must be paid for by general revenues. Defense spending and the interest is what is killing the country.

Right. 21% of the budget is killing us, whereas 55% isn't. Any one who says that is either not serious or can't understand basic math. Where do you think the debt comes from? The debt comes from Medicare and other entitlements whose unfunded liabilities are coming due more and more every year. And ObamaCare is totally unfunded. Even after cheating, by starting the taxes early and benefits late, the CBO just told us-- guess what? Obamacare will be in deficit immediately. This year, if we totally eliminated defense spending, there would still be most of a trillion dollar deficit.

Social security is and always has been a Ponzi scheme. In the late 1970's, the Soc. Sec. brochure had to be changed because it was in violation of the law.

[bonnie]

The problem isn't Social Security and Medicaid. These programs can pay for themselves if run properly. The problem is the other federal spending which must be paid for by general revenues. Defense spending and the interest is what is killing the country.

Even if true,we are now going to suddenly have them run properly.

Highly doubtful.

I don't think there is anyway to get thru to people that entitlements cost money.Money that the government does not earn.Takes from one and gives to another.

[Ted Oplinger]

Social Security is something I am entitled to. Bailouts are not.

Ummm...that's what many would call circular reasoning there, Woody.

Social Security, as currently structured, IS a bailout, for those whom certain politicians have convinced either shouldn't or cannot prepare for one's own Golden Years.

As noted above, the way it is structured now, Social Security is also quite illegal, being the biggest of Ponzi schemes ever foisted upon a population. Legally, there is also no way to avoid participating in it, whether in being fleeced to provide "benefits", or in taking "benefits' one may not want.

If this country is successful in pursuing such a course as the European Union has pursued for the last several decades...the day of reckoning will be far more severe here than anything Greece has experienced.

When our own government is shown to be thoroughly bankrupt, and cannot make good on the entitlement programs it has promised (Social Security, welfare, housing assistance, health care {whether Medicare/caid or the new health care bill}), the rioting that will occur will make Greece look like a church picnic. Think the politicians making the promises will be held responsible, and be the target of those riots? Think again! They will have already made their multimillions, and will retreat to well-protected estates. As always, ordinary people will be the target of the mindless rage that drives riots.

I will remain of the understanding it is wrong to feel so entitled to another's money or property - that one must compel another under force of law to give said entitlement. "Nobility of the cause" only makes the sin worse, as (IMHO) theft and coveting are draped in a human-derived righteousness.

I am of the opinion that anyone in the the remnant, being the target of the drive to deny the ability to buy/sell, shouldn't be expecting any kind of entitlement from this world - and shouldn't voluntarily take them should they "qualify", either.

Food for thought...

[Ted Oplinger]

The problem isn't Social Security and Medicaid. These programs can pay for themselves if run properly. The problem is the other federal spending which must be paid for by general revenues. Defense spending and the interest is what is killing the country.

Defense spending (the favorite target) has much less waste and more accountability than any social entitlement program you could name. Social Security and Medicare are so laden with fraud and kickbacks, they make anything found on the defense industry look tame in comparison.

If those two programs could be run properly, they would be run properly. However, running them properly entails 1) prosecuting every fraudulent claim; and 2) putting in place a very effective fraud screen that would undoubtedly cause some to be denied coverage.

For #1, While the big cases would make great play in the press, good luck prosecuting those medium and small cases. The sob stories coming out of those would make many prosecutors hesitant to take these to court...so widespread fraud on "a small scale" is OK? That's what would be implicit in the system - cheat the system, but only below a certain point.

For #2, Denying anyone their benefits due to suspicion of fraud will make any current politician nervous, so the screen would be scrapped before the next election.

In short, the system is not self-policing, nor can it be expected to be. Any efforts to make it run with any semblance of efficiency would quickly be shown by the enterprising politician to be cold-hearted, unfair, and/or discriminatory...just like the efforts in times past to privatize Social Security into private accounts under individual control. Shot down under extreme propaganda.

There is a reason why Social Security has been labelled the third rail of politics for decades now, Shane. Fraud and waste was simply accepted, and any attempt to promote policy to make these programs run properly meant political suicide.

The idea these programs "can be run properly" is rooted more in wishful thinking and fantasy, than in practical reality and fact.

Food for thought....

[bonnie]

Social Security is not that you put 20,000.00? and take 20,000.00

out.Many hands are after each "contribution" and there is not enough contributions to go around.

My brother found himself in a catch 22 when he adopted his g.grandsons. Because he is on SS the children were eligible for 600.00 per child plus medical coverage.

He found he could not cover the children thru a regular insurance policy. No insurance was going to pick up two young boys when the government will cover them. But he could not get the government coverage unless he applied for and the boys received the 600.00 monthly per child.

This goes on in almost epidemic proportions cross the US. No one has paid in for these children ,yet thousands are taking it out

[Dr. Shane]

President Bush had the solution to Social Security. Just as the Democrats needed a super majority to get anything done on healthcare, the Republicans will need a super majority to get anything done on Social Security.