Why health care reform makes economic sense

Most Republicans have not been swayed by moral arguments in the health care debate in the US. Some will say, “Yes, we’d like to, but we can’t afford it!” Or more callous, “They should take care of themselves.” I wouldn’t expect Christian arguments to take center stage in the national political stage, but it’s appalling to hear Christians ignore a clear mandate to care for those at the margins of society.

Back in December, I posted “Proof the US needs health care reform in one picture“. That graphic was improved upon, so here’s the sequel. It’s also today’s installment in the Festival of Infographics. This shows that, based on every Republican’s favorite measure (their own wallet), health care reform makes sense. So can we get on with it? (Click the link at the bottom to see a larger version of the graphic.)


From NGM Blog Central.

You may also like...

1 Response

  1. Phil Snyder says:

    I don’t know of any conservative who doesn’t want to reform how we pay for health care. The problem is that no one can determine the best way to do it.

    I work on the IT side of the health insurance industry (in my day job) and I’ve thought about this for a while. I divide health care into three basic categories

    1. Primary care – what 90% of us use 90% of the time. Colds, flu, annual check ups, pink eye, etc. Health Insurance only adds to the cost of delivering this health care. Can you imagine how much your auto insurance would increase if you expected it to pay for new filters and oil changes or if you had to file a claim to reach a deductible every time you put gas in it?

    2. Catastrophic care – Cancer, ER Visits, major accidents, even broken bones and such. Stuff no one wants to happen to them or their loved ones. This is what insurance was designed to cover. Things that cannot be anticipated on an individual basis and have a huge cost associated wth them. This is what bankrupts people – even people with insurance.

    3. Chronic care. This is the middle ground.
    “Normal” Care for chronic diseases such as diabetes or asthma. This type of care should also be provided because, if it is not provided, the chronic condition turns into a catastrophic one. Diabetes testing supplies and medication prevent the disease from progressing to the point of amputations or death. Asthma inhalers stop ER visits when an attack occurs.

    So, how do we pay for these types of care?

    I’ll be discussing that in my blog – the Deacon’s Slant (www.deaconslant.blogspot.com)

    Phil Snyder