My answer to health care reform

It drives me nuts about all of this health care talk and the Dems attempt to take over the entire system.

Nowhere have I seen a real discussion about what health care should be used for. The assumption apparently is that insurance just automatically pays for every medical need (and “need” needs to be defined also).

Those people that think insurance companies have unlimited resources have no clue where the money comes from in order to pay out claims. There is no willingness to control individual medical expenses because they assume the “insurance company will pay for it.” Personal control of expenses would have a greater effect on insurance premiums than governmental price controls.

Not only should there be policy options across state lines, there should be greater policy plan options. I think that if people paid for more of personal basic expenses – such as many drugs, doctor, or preventative exams – would help to bring down overall costs. Options for singles or childless couples that essentially covered only catastrophic issues would keep premiums down.

Where is my logic wrong? Oh, that’s right…it isn’t.

Loosen the bureaucratic collar

My last post raised the issue of reducing bureaucratic regulations as a means to reduce expenses to business and local government.

Here is one example of regulations that could be addressed. Various vehicle fuels are required to meet requirements for regions of the country and seasons of the year. These variations increase costs in development, storage, and transfer which are all obviously passed on to the consumer. The consumer includes me at the gas station, the trucking industry that transports products around the country, and even local government when the schools have to put fuel in the buses.

The following map gives an example of fuel (boutique blends) differences around the country.

Can you give some examples also?

A new suggestion to save some money

At all levels of government, belt-tightening is taking place. Here in Indiana, property taxes will soon be frozen as a percentage based on property values. Because of that, local government will be facing lower revenues to provide current services. Sales, business, and income tax revenues are also much lower for the current fiscal year.

So to avoid the pain, some local governments are considering new forms of local income taxes to offset revenue deficits. Other localities are severely reducing services, such as fire protection or trash pickup.

I would like to suggest a third alternative that could relieve some pressure to local governments and possibly help private businesses reduce expenses and possibly redirect those expenses to hiring new employees. My suggestion would be that all levels of government look to reduce regulatory burdens.

Even though I do not identify any specific regulations to eliminate, I do believe – if asked – businesses could easily identify which are most burdensome or costly. There are many federal and state regulations that are imposed on local governments without sufficient revenues to fulfill those policies. Some could be reduced or removed to provide relief.

This is the time and place for somebody out there to start talking. What regulations cause you the most problems that could save everybody some money??