What can we learn from the Swedish Finance Minister Anders Borg?
Anders Borg has a message for those who look to government to take over health care, rescue the financial system and run troubled corporations: I have seen the future--and it doesn't work.
As the finance minister of Sweden, Borg is the chief financial officer of a country long known as a walking billboard for a social welfare state.
"Like many societies, we went too far in our welfare-state ambitions," say Borg (pronounced "Bor-ee").
These days President Obama is overseeing the largest increase in the U.S. government's share of the economy since it was conducting a world war almost seven decades ago. Economic stimulus, bailouts and expanded health care will all have to be paid for someday with either taxes or inflation. Borg is pushing Sweden in the opposite direction, encouraging the legislature to cut taxes, cap spending and privatize parts of health care.
"If you're working yourselves upwards in taxes and deficits, we're working ourselves downwards," says Borg. (FORBES recently interviewed him in Berlin, where he had delivered a speech.)
But wait a minute! I thought that we were going to spend ourselves to prosperity. Obama said that we have to spend in order to get out of this current economic situation. I thought that I could go out, assume massive debt, with no plan to pay it back, and somehow end up on top. That's what we are being told.
Next year Sweden's government is projected to be on the hook for gross financial liabilities equal to 57% of GDP, which is up from 48% two years ago. The debt of U.S. government entities, by contrast, is expected to nearly equal GDP by next year, versus 63% in 2007, says the Organization for Economic Cooperation & Development.
As the U.S. takes over some corporations outright, and offers others financial lifelines, Sweden is unloading scores of industries. It is selling state-owned pharmacies and plans to put its remaining 37% stake in telecom incumbent TeliaSonera ( TLSNF.PK - news - people ) on the block when market prices improve. Last spring it unloaded Absolut Vodka. A distillery, Borg notes drily, is not a core function for either a welfare state or a night watchman's state.
Swedish health care is getting a whiff of free marketeering, too. The government's abolition of the "Stop Law" is expected to give a green light to hospital privatization, and starting next year local authorities will have to offer private primary care options.
I wonder why this didn't make the major news in the U.S. This is a big deal! We have a traditionally liberal country coming around to a traditionally "U.S." way of thinking. I wonder why other countries government's are starting to see the flaws inherent in socialist systems? Meanwhile the U.S. government seems hell bent on passing new legislation insuring that we take steps BACKWARDS.
Am I the only one that thinks that this is patently absurd? Do the U.S. politicians have any "real" idea what they are doing? I know the American people do, and the American people want the government to stop. This administration's falling approval numbers are proof of this discontent.
Note: You DO NOT need to register to leave a comment.
Where's the dough? Dealers have received only 2% of the"Cash for Clunkers" money.
I hate to say it, but I predicted this. I wonder how many dealers were wise enough to question the program?
Dealers could; reduce prices on new cars by as much as $4,500, then not enroll the used cars in the program, thus avoid having to junk them.
http://winduprubberfinger.com/blog1.php/2009/08/02/cash-for-clunkers-another-example-of-the
With the government making the down payment, new vehicle prices will remain artificially high. This current increase in auto sales does not reflect actual market forces.
Banks will have a much harder time selling repossessed cars. The CARS benefit DOES NOT apply to used cars.
There will be huge vacuum when the program expires. New car sales will drop.
Dealers are now on the hook for more than 1 billion dollars, and there is literally no clear plan to reimburse them. It's not sure when and if the government will make good on the reimbursements; how long can the dealers hold out?
The federal government has only reimbursed auto dealers for 2 percent of the claims they've submitted through the popular "cash for clunkers" program, a Pennsylvania congressman said, calling on the Obama administration to help speed up the process.
Rep. Joe Sestak, D-Pa., called for "immediate action" to address the problem in a statement Sunday, after writing a letter to President Obama Saturday expressing his concerns.
In the letter, Sestak said only 2 percent of claims have been paid and that four of every five applications have been "rejected for minor oversight."
To understand this dilemma; one has to understand the Obama administration. The cars program started just over one month ago. Since that time the administration has moved on. Now it's health care... Never mind all of the unfinished business. The CARS program was an attempt to create "stimulus that can be seen", because most Americans are showing disgust with the 700 billion dollar stimulus bill. There was obviously not much thought behind the implementation of the CARS program.
Note: You DO NOT need to register to leave a comment.
The Health Care Debate is NOT over yet.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601070&sid=aBg_98uzqkyo
Aug. 16 (Bloomberg) -- Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said providing citizens with the option of government-run insurance isn’t essential to the Obama administration’s proposed overhaul of U.S. health care.
“What’s important is choice and competition,” Sebelius said today on CNN’s “State of the Union.” The public option itself “is not the essential element.”
Asked if a cooperative plan is a possible replacement, Sebelius said she didn’t know what alternatives Congress would settle on among competing versions of the health legislation now under consideration. The Senate Finance Committee is discussing cooperatives, or networks of health-insurance plans owned by their customers, that would get started with government funds.
The co-op option does seem to be the most likely alternative. Why would the co-ops need to be started with Federal Government funds? Traditionally co-ops have been created at the state level. Why would the Federal Government even be involved in something that can be done on the state level?
Opponents at the meetings “are not really representative of America,” Senator Arlen Specter, a Pennsylvania Democrat, said on ABC’s “This Week” program. “We have to be careful here not to let those town meetings make the scene that influences what we do on health policy,” he said.
Of course all of these concerned citizens are paid to be there, right? I haven't received my check yet! Arlen Specter is a disgrace.
White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said today on CBS’s “Face The Nation” that the danger of not acting outweighs any downside of Democrats’ proposals.
“What happens if we do nothing? That’s the riskiest option of all,” Gibbs said. “Your premium will double in less than nine years if we do nothing,” and tens of millions of Americans will lose their coverage altogether, he said.
Gibbs said that Obama believes “the option of a government plan is the best way to provide choice and competition.” Still, he added, if an alternative plan offers consumers choice and competition to health insurance industry plans, “If we have that, the president will be satisfied.”
O.k. two key things here. First, Gibbs states that there are downsides to the "Democrats' proposals". After all of the fighting and making as if anyone who finds fault with the bill must be crazy (or paid) -- the White House press secretary admits to downsides in the legislation!
Second, Gibbs says, "Obama believes “the option of a government plan is the best way to provide choice and competition.” However, Obama will be satisfied if there is an alternative that offers, "choice and competition". This implies that there must be government involvement to boost competition. The opposite is true. The government is, 9 times out of 10, the reason for limited competition. Competition is often government regulated to provide a... what was it, "level playing field". Deregulation of the insurance industry would lead to more competition.
The Thomas.gov website is down so I can't look through the legislation. When I can I will give specifics on options contained within the bill.
Note: You DO NOT need to register to leave a comment.
From the 1961 Operation Coffee Cup Campaign against Socialized Medicine as proposed by the Democrats, then a private citizen Ronald Reagan Speaks out against socialized medicine.
Just take 10 minutes, and learn something you will never forget...
Please leave a comment, like it or hate it... You DO NOT need to register to leave a comment. Email addresses are NOT used. Just make one up "someone@somehost.com"
Who will be the new Health Choices Commissioner ? A very important question if the proposed health care bill passes.
Didn't know that we have a health choices commissioner? We don't, at least not yet.
http://www.thomas.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.3200:
Here's the PDF from the Thomas.gov website downloaded 07/19/2009. I found in 2024 that the Thomas.gov website is gone. 😑
SEC. 141. HEALTH CHOICES ADMINISTRATION; HEALTH CHOICES COMMISSIONER.
(a) In General- There is hereby established, as an independent agency in the executive branch of the Government, a Health Choices Administration (in this division referred to as the `Administration').
(b) Commissioner-
(1) IN GENERAL- The Administration shall be headed by a Health Choices Commissioner (in this division referred to as the `Commissioner') who shall be appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate.
(2) COMPENSATION; ETC- The provisions of paragraphs (2), (5), and (7) of subsection (a) (relating to compensation, terms, general powers, rulemaking, and delegation) of section 702 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 902) shall apply to the Commissioner and the Administration in the same manner as such provisions apply to the Commissioner of Social Security and the Social Security Administration.
SEC. 142. DUTIES AND AUTHORITY OF COMMISSIONER.
(a) Duties- The Commissioner is responsible for carrying out the following functions under this division:
(1) QUALIFIED PLAN STANDARDS- The establishment of qualified health benefits plan standards under this title, including the enforcement of such standards in coordination with State insurance regulators and the Secretaries of Labor and the Treasury.
(2) HEALTH INSURANCE EXCHANGE- The establishment and operation of a Health Insurance Exchange under subtitle A of title II.
(3) INDIVIDUAL AFFORDABILITY CREDITS- The administration of individual affordability credits under subtitle C of title II, including determination of eligibility for such credits.(4) ADDITIONAL FUNCTIONS- Such additional functions as may be specified in this division.
(b) Promoting Accountability-
(1) IN GENERAL- The Commissioner shall undertake activities in accordance with this subtitle to promote accountability of QHBP offering entities in meeting Federal health insurance requirements, regardless of whether such accountability is with respect to qualified health benefits plans offered through the Health Insurance Exchange or outside of such Exchange.
(2) COMPLIANCE EXAMINATION AND AUDITS-
(A) IN GENERAL- The commissioner shall, in coordination with States, conduct audits of qualified health benefits plan compliance with Federal requirements. Such audits may include random compliance audits and targeted audits in response to complaints or other suspected non-compliance.
(B) RECOUPMENT OF COSTS IN CONNECTION WITH EXAMINATION AND AUDITS- The Commissioner is authorized to recoup from qualified health benefits plans reimbursement for the costs of such examinations and audit of such QHBP offering entities.
Under the proposed health care legislation, there will be a new government oversight agency called the "Health Choices Administration" headed by the "Health Choices Commissioner". The Health Choices Commissioner will determine what constitutes "affordable, quality health insurance coverage". The Health Choices Commissioner will set the standard for ALL levels of coverage public, and private.
The word Commissioner is referenced in the bill 203 times. Nearly every time the word Commissioner is used, there is a variable to be determined, or a definition to be defined by the Commissioner. The Commissioner has broad sweeping power to shape nearly the entire health care industry. This is crucial to understanding how this legislation works. There are only a few exclusions by which State Law can override the decisions of the Commissioner. Also the Commissioner, "shall be appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate." The democrats have unchecked power with control of both the House and the Senate. There will be no way to stop the appointee for the position of Health Choices Commissioner. I guess we had better hope they pick someone who doesn't want to destroy the current system.
In the proposed health care bill, the government will require all private insurance providers to offer plans which meet a specific government standard, yet to be determined.
Think about this for a minute... There will be a "HEALTH CHOICES ADMINISTRATION"? Choices need to be administered? Sounds like a limitation on choice to me, or will the government simply say, "take what we give you, and shut up!"
Please leave a comment, like it or hate it... You DO NOT need to register to leave a comment. Email addresses are NOT used. Just make one up "someone@somehost.com"
XML Feeds
