Four spending myths keeping U.S. from recovery
A group of military budget experts, for example, found (PDF) that cutting many costly and obsolete weapons programs could save billions of dollars each year, and investing that money in domestic priorities like education and health care would spur the economy. That's because those sectors create more jobs per dollar than military programs do. And that leads us to myth three.
© 2012 TomDispatch Spending Myth 3: Government health-insurance programs are more costly than private insurance.
False claims about the higher cost of government health programs have led many people to demand that health-care solutions come from the private sector. Advocates of this have been much aided by the complexity of sorting out health costs, which has provided the necessary smoke and mirrors to camouflage this whopping lie.
Health spending is indeed growing faster than any other part of the federal budget. It's gone from a measly 7% in 1976 to nearly a quarter today -- and that's truly a cause for concern. But health care costs, public and private, have been on the rise across the developed world for decades. And cost growth in government programs like Medicare has actually been slower than in private health insurance. That's because the federal government has important advantages over private insurance companies when it comes to health care. For example, as a huge player in the health-care market, the federal government has been successful at negotiating lower prices than small private insurers can. And that helps us de-bunk myth number four.
Spending Myth 4: The Affordable Care Act -- Obamacare -- will bankrupt the federal government while levying the biggest tax in U.S. history.
Wrong again. According to the Congressional Budget Office, this health-reform legislation will reduce budget deficits by $119 billion (PDF) between now and 2019. And only around 1% of American households will end up paying a penalty for lacking health insurance.
While the Affordable Care Act is hardly a panacea for the many problems in U.S. health care, it does at least start to address the pressing issue of rising costs -- and it incorporates some of the best wisdom on how to do so. Health-policy experts have explored phasing out the fee-for-service payment system -- in which doctors are paid for each test and procedure they perform -- in favor of something akin to pay-for-performance. This transition would reward medical professionals for delivering more effective, coordinated, and efficient care -- and save a lot of money by reducing waste.
The Affordable Care Act begins implementing such changes in the Medicare program, and it explores other important cost-containment measures. In other words, it lays the groundwork for potentially far deeper budgetary savings down the road.
Having cleared the landscape of four stubborn spending myths, it should be easier to see straight to the stuff that really matters. Financial hardship facing millions of Americans ought to be our top concern. Between 2007 and 2010, the median family lost nearly 40% of its net worth. Neither steep deficits, nor disagreement over military spending and health reform should eclipse this as our most pressing challenge.
If lawmakers skipped the myth-making and began putting America's resources into a series of domestic investments that would spur the economy now, their acts would yield dividends for years to come. That means pushing education and job training, plus a host of job-creation measures, to the top of the priority list, and setting aside initiatives based on fear and fantasy.
Mattea Kramer, a TomDispatch regular, is senior research analyst at the National Priorities Project and lead author of the new book "A People's Guide to the Federal Budget." This piece originally appeared on TomDispatch. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author.
- prev
- no next page
2/2
Do the math...
Someone has to pay for government spending. Where does the money come from for the huge deficits?
Americans lost 40% of their net worth in the last few years. Where did it magically disappear to?
Put 2 and 2 together--our wealth is disappearing down the black hole of government spending.
Myth #1 - Even Senator Obama saw that spending by the Federal Government was unsustainable in 2006 when he voted against raising the debt ceiling and citing these words........"The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can't pay its own bills." And 'Increasing America's debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that "the buck stops here."' Seems we can have our cake and eat it too......just depends who is cutting the cake.
Myth #2 - Pretty much agree that Defense spending can be greatly reduced....but article is muddling over the fact that both parties embrace large defense spending when is suits their purposes.....and this purpose is often not for the defense of the nation but rather employers in their areas. For instance, research how it took over 3.5 billion dollars before they could finally end funding of the second engine option for F35 fighter.......the Air Force did not want this funded or need the second engine........but both Dems and Repubs both argued to retain this funding for years. Furthermore, if you research you will see that funding has been restored previously under the 'budgeting process' so whether this one single example of poor government has finally stopped is debatable.
Myth #3 and Myth #4 - The biggest myth here is that any solutions have been attained for years. Both parties keep looking at ways to shift the costs around and never address the fundamental issue of cost increases. Steadfast refusal to look at other industrialized countries systems to find out how they cover 100% of their citizens and MUCH lower rates and costs is just arrogant and stupid. But like so much policy we see 'crafted' by our Federal government - industry seems to always steer the government towards solutions that are weighted in said industries behalf. Of course health care is now over 18% of GDP soon to be even more.....so reduction in health care spending also reduces GDP, which could cause recession......o what a tangled web we have created.
And the articles statement that: 'For example, as a huge player in the health-care market, the federal government has been successful at negotiating lower prices than small private insurers can. And that helps us de-bunk myth number four.' Apparently, the author failed to acknowledge again Obama's hypocrisy to allow re-importation of US pharmaceuticals to lower costs (something he championed as Senator) or acknowledge the deal made with Big Pharm to support Obama care during the 'open door' crafting of this legislation.
Yes I can read big words and I sure wish the team mentality of politics could end so we can finally start making the country better again as opposed to simply rooting for Democrat or Republican victories.
Romneys refusal to release his tax records will destroy him. People already do not "like" him. Now, they will decide they cannot trust him. Whatever he is hiding must be really, really bad.
Ring a bell ?
by bmallen3 July 18, 2012 4:22 AM EDT
==============================================
Then quit crying about Obama and the unemployment rate.
Its not the government's responsibility to get you a job.