Michael Ramirez by Michael Ramirez
- June 02, 2009
- From Beginning
- Previous feature
- Show Calendar
- Next feature
- Current
Editorials A-Z Navigation
Ted Rall by Ted Rall
Marshall Ramsey by Marshall RamseyAbout Michael Ramirez
Two-time Pulitzer Prize winner Michael Ramirez combines an encyclopedic knowledge of the news with a captivating drawing style to create consistently outstanding editorial cartoons.
"Editorial cartoons should be smart and substantive, provocative and informative. They should stir passions and deep emotions. Editorial cartoons should be the catalyst for thought, and frankly speaking, if you can make politicians think, that is an accomplishment in itself."
© 2009 Michael Ramirez - All Rights Reserved.
Comments (33) Jump to Comments Form
ANandy said, 5 months ago
The poor US. Thanks, Inept oBozO.
cdward said, 5 months ago
We already had the worst health care in the West. Why not try what works and emulate Europe?
BeaHave said, 5 months ago
Obamanation, this is your BEST idea yet !
petergrt said, 5 months ago
“We already had the worst health care in the West.”
What planet did you just drop in from?
Newsflash: When a European gets really sick, and assuming he can afford it, he comes to the US - to be taken care of by the ‘worst health care system’.
Indeed, after a few decades of socialized medical care, many European countries have begone allowing free enterprise medical system, while attempting to reign in the costs …
Interestingly, the same people that criticize the military for $500 toilet seats, eagerly want to cede 20% of US economy, not to mention our heath, to the same system - what’s wrong with you, morons?!?
Joseph Conlon
said,
5 months ago
Tax the rich, feed the poor,
Till there are no rich no more.
believecommonsense
said,
5 months ago
oh Ramirez! Ramirez is probably too young to remember that we privatized the healthcare industry to reduce the inefficiency of non-profit administrators and to control costs. By every measure, that was a failure.
The bureaucracy of paperwork, prior authorizations, retroactive denial of claims, etc., by private health insurers has made our healthcare system more wasteful than ever. Plus, we cover fewer people. Plus costs have skyrocketed. Plus insurance cos. routinely control medical care, often overruling the physicians, frequently to the detriment of the patient.
I’ve given many accounts of people I know personally who have suffered because of their PRIVATE insurers. But here’s just one more. My sister had an operation for a clogged artery, which makes her a candidate for a stroke. She had private healthcare, full benefits, from her employer. Her doctor recognized the symptoms coming back and recommended a test, CT scan, on her neck. Get ready for this: they said her neck wasn’t clogged enough. Surgery was only authorized when the neck artery was 87 percent clogged, hers showed 84 percent clogged. The doctor argued for her, since she’d already had this problem. The insurance co denied and denied and said she could have another scan in six months. The doctor fought back and the insurance co. agreed she could have another scan in three months.
One month after the insurance denial of the scan, my sister had a major stroke while in the ER for an emergency scan. Now, she can no longer work at all, has too many deficits from the stroke. This happened when she was in her mid-fifties and expected to work for many years. There’s a fair chance if the insurer had followed the doctor’s request, she’d ben fine today. This is just one of about a dozen stories I know personally where the insurance cos. blatant attempt to control medical care harmed the insured patient. I guess I feel lucky nothing like that has happened to me, I know of so many examples.
We shouldn’t even WANT this terrible system to continue if we think of ourselves as a country that cares for ALL its citizens.
tpenna
said,
5 months ago
Petergrt, you’re describing the kind of health care available in the US for those with means. The problem is, as cdward made reference, fewer and fewer people have the means.
Claiming that the US does not have one of the worst health care systems in the world by pointing to what those with means can access is like saying that Atlanta has the best transportation system in the world because a few people have helicopters and can avoid the traffic.
tpenna
said,
5 months ago
And ANandy, sad to see that you still haven’t grown up past name calling. Just when I had hope for you!
danielsangeo said, 5 months ago
“Interestingly, the same people that criticize the military for $500 toilet seats, eagerly want to cede 20% of US economy, not to mention our heath, to the same system - what’s wrong with you, morons?!?”
We’re also the same people that criticize private industry for $100,000 toilet seats.
We pay over 15% GDP (2nd highest) for 37th place. Is that what you want?
cdward said, 5 months ago
By nearly every standard, we do poorly. At last ranking, we were 37th in health care. If you’re rich in America, you are fine. But if you are an average Joe, you’re in trouble. Premiums are going up, co-pays are going up, and what’s covered is going down. We rank 45 in infant mortality rate. We rank 49 in life expectancy. Two small measures, to be sure, but having lived in Europe, I can tell you that they have it much better for the average Joe.
One problem is, perhaps, that we spend all of our resources on the super-duper fancy expensive procedures because they bring in more money – but we ignore the 90% who just need regular health care.
petergrt said, 5 months ago
“oh Ramirez! Ramirez is probably too young to remember that we privatized the healthcare industry to reduce the inefficiency of non-profit administrators and to control costs. By every measure, that was a failure.”
You must mean before Medicare? A government licensing for theft - the most fraud infested system thus far, it makes Madoff look like an amateur.
“Petergrt, you’re describing the kind of health care available in the US for those with means. The problem is, as cdward made reference, fewer and fewer people have the means. ”
That is simply not true. In fact, the poor get some of the best care, at university hospitals - for free. Yes there are much longer waiting periods, but they are not unlike those of socialized systems. Indeed take a visit to one of those free hospitals and you get a good picture of what it looks like in England.
There is however one major difference: If you need say an open heart surgery - you are not put on a waiting list of several months, but rather on a gurney and into the OR.
My barber, a Mexican emigre, has recently spent over 5-weeks at the UCLA MC hospital in a semiprivate room with liver ailment - all free to him.
petergrt said, 5 months ago
“We pay over 15% GDP (2nd highest) for 37th place. Is that what you want?”
Does any one of you really believe that a government run program would be more efficient than a private one? Please, look around you! Show me a single example of government efficiency. Government and efficiency are a mutually exclusive terms.
lalas said, 5 months ago
Right back atcha there Pete…
How’s about you pony up some stats on how much cheaper it is for us to pay private corporations to run essential services.
How does paying the CEO of UnitedHealthGroup $300M/yr save us money?
tpenna
said,
5 months ago
Petergrt, I’m quite happy that you (or some people you know) have apparently had such good experience with a university hospital system. Please don’t try to kid us into thinking that these systems of care are available to people all over the US.
My wife took a year and a half to drive all around Maryland and interview over 300 people without health insurance. The resulting book and film she made are eye-opening. They don’t present a policy alternative. All they do is share people’s stories. And I assure you, they are nowhere near as rosy as you have related.
To see her fifteen minute film, go to www.healtcareforall.com and, in the left column, click on “Faces of MD’s Uninsured”. Below the cover of her book, you will find a link to view the film. If you’d like to purchase the book (and film on DVD), they sell them for $20. If you look at these stories honestly, you will question your assumption that we have such a top-rate health care system.
Dutchboy1 said, 5 months ago
For a guy who goes by the name ‘believecommonsense’, he shows surprisingly little common sense. Sure our health care system isn’t perfect, but it’s still better than any other countries way of doing things, which is why they bring the really tough cases here.
When is the last time you heard of government getting involved in anything and making it better? If you have, these cases are obscure, few, and far between. Look at GM: they got BILLIONS of dollars in bail-out money, the government took over their operations, and they still filed for bankruptcy. What happened to all that money?? Who knows, the government won’t tell us. And now you want that same government to take over the health care system?!
What USED TO make this country great is government getting out of the way of the people who REALLY made things better.
TrickyPickle said, 5 months ago
Maybe the problem is one of competition? Too few practitioners keep costs high? If you could develop doctor factories like Cuba does, spitting out well-trained doctors by the ton, wouldn’t the laws of demand and supply lower health care costs? Quality doesn’t seem to be a problem as the doctors Cuba produces are held in high regard. I’m certainly no expert on this topic, but it makes a loose kind of sense to me.
lalas said, 5 months ago
Pickle – that’s if you incorrectly assume that the Drs are the most expensive part of medical costs.
http://www.bcbs.com/blueresources/mcrg/chapter1/ch1_slide_7.html
tpenna
said,
5 months ago
Dutchboy said: “Sure our health care system isn’t perfect, but it’s still better than any other countries way of doing things, which is why they bring the really tough cases here. ”
This statement ignores international ranking of empirical factors to the contrary. Other people here have pointed out (and I have heard similarly) that we are, in fact, ranked thirty-seventh in the world. So we can logically presume that what we have here is not, in fact, “better than any other countries [sic] way of doing things.”
Unless you make this assumption based on criteria other than the empirical facts of health?
As for your supplementary point about foreigners bringing their “really tough cases” here, I have already answered that point. (See my first comment on this page in answer to petergrt.)
danielsangeo said, 5 months ago
petergrt: “Show me a single example of government efficiency.”
dutchboy1: “When is the last time you heard of government getting involved in anything and making it better?”
FDIC
curiosity1 said, 5 months ago
Here’s another example. My employer seems to change health insurers on an annual basis, for which we get new insurance cards and so on. My husband (who has a hole in his heel resultant from an injury 16 years ago), recently wanted to get some information about updated wound care treatments available. The insurance company stated he was ineligible because he has no history of treatment for said injury. So, no we have to go back and request records from each of his previous doctors, and provide that information to the insurance company in order for them to consider his request.
This is inane.
I’m all for centralized recordkeeping and single payer. It is much easier to provide efficiency in a single system than in 500. All private healthcare manages to accomplish is to produce bonuses for management and minimize actual healthcare where possible.
Plus there is no incentive to fund preventative medicine, as there is much more profit to be made from open heart surgery than from a gym membership.
petergrt said, 5 months ago
How can you measure the efficiency of FDIC, or IRS for that matter? And those organizations will have to be government run. But, look at something as simple as elections, as compared to credit card processing - that is I think pretty fair comparison.
There is one government run program that was incredibly efficient - German extermination camps. Now that was a work of management art.
mytinytown said, 5 months ago
For all you who do not know…
Socialized health care does not work.
As well anything in Europe does not work.
You all who want Government run health care suffer seriously from class envy!
lalas is spouting about how much someone makes. ONLY because lalas is not that person.
danielsangeo said, 5 months ago
“How can you measure the efficiency of FDIC, or IRS for that matter?”
I don’t know. You’re the one that wants to know about “government efficiency” so I assumed that you had some measure or standard that you would go by.
“And those organizations will have to be government run.”
Why?
“But, look at something as simple as elections, as compared to credit card processing - that is I think pretty fair comparison.”
Apples to oranges is not a fair comparison.
I will not dignify your second paragraph with a response.
“Socialized health care does not work.
As well anything in Europe does not work.”
Must be why France is at the top of the game and that, out of the top ten countries, eight of them are European countries.
“You all who want Government run health care suffer seriously from class envy! ”
What does “class” have to do with health?
petergrt said, 5 months ago
““But, look at something as simple as elections, as compared to credit card processing - that is I think pretty fair comparison.”
Apples to oranges is not a fair comparison.”
Well, both require crunching of a lot of data, but while the credit card transactions involve $$, and have to be precise, and mostly are, the voting involves a simple counting and tabulating, and the government, in virtually all of the US, can’t seem to be able to get it right.
The point of my ‘second paragraph’, is that governments tent to be incredibly efficient if employing fascist methods, which is why Mussolini made trains run on time - as the saying goes.
Come to think of it, it is not unlike the cases of Chrysler and GM bankruptcies.
mytinytown said, 5 months ago
lalas
Wow, nice name calling. You all insult ANandy for doing the same.
I did forget how much you like to call people names.
Should people profit from health care? You say no, so a Dr. should not get near what they do to save someones life? Should the CEO of UnitedHealthGroup make that much money, probably not, but instead of the government taking control like you want Obama to do, do something about it yourself. No, that is not what you want, you want a country that works for you, not you work for it.
I gotta run, I’ll be back tomorrow to read more of your insults.
Oh and thank you for the entertainment!
danielsangeo said, 5 months ago
“Well, both require crunching of a lot of data, but while the credit card transactions involve $$, and have to be precise, and mostly are, the voting involves a simple counting and tabulating, and the government, in virtually all of the US, can’t seem to be able to get it right.”
Probably because we contracted it out to private corporations.
“The point of my ‘second paragraph’, is that governments tent to be incredibly efficient if employing fascist methods, which is why Mussolini made trains run on time - as the saying goes.”
Sometimes, they tend in that direction. Other times, they don’t.
Remember, in Mussolini’s Italy, they had a different government than we do. It was a monarchy. It was not a constitutional democratic republic. Let’s stick to comparing apples to apples next time?
lalas said, 5 months ago
Just responding to you flaming me there buddy. Maybe a little heavy-handed, but you should stop putting your narrow thoughts into my mouth. You seem to think you know a lot about me… but you don’t.
Your false dichotomy is typical and typically flawed.
If you read what I said, I didn’t say nobody should earn a paycheck… I said the industry shouldn’t be for profit. The NYSE shouldn’t be able to reap a profit off the top of health care. My disclaimer for HQ kind of applies to you too.
If health care should be profitable, then so should drinking water or breathing. (Yes, I understand that Coke makes a profit from water, but there is at least a non-profit source of water.)
“No, that is not what you want, you want a country that works for you, not you work for it. ”
I don’t even know what that means. Please, tell me what this means.
ChukLitl
said,
5 months ago
The only times in my life that I’ve had decent health coverage, it was provided by the government, specifically the U.S. Navy.
Otherwise, I have to live on beans & rice while I save up enough to go to a doctor. Often, that diet solves the problem & I no longer need the doctor.
Socialized medicine for broken bones & gaping wounds, beans & rice for everything else.
believecommonsense
said,
5 months ago
sigh ….
some of these posts are why we may not get real reform in healthcare and the insurance industry’s control over people’s medical care may be protected
sigh
tpenna
said,
5 months ago
Seriously, though. Go check out my wife’s video about the uninsured in Maryland. http://www.healthcareforall.com/HTML46.phtml
mytinytown said, 5 months ago
lalas
OK I will say I did get on you a little hard I apologize, but I am truly sick of all the liberals screaming that people make too much money!!! Then expect the government to take control and fix it all. If we have a problem, we are the consumers, we CAN change things IF and ONLY IF we work together.
lalas said, 5 months ago
And where did I say the gov’t should “fix” people making too much money? I was also only griping about CEO of a health care company making too much money, because I feel it is morally wrong.
Make no mistake, we the consumers cannot change the current health care system. We the VOTER can. We the consumer are hostages in this currently broken, bloated and expensive system. (still the best quality in the world, no doubt) The only thing worse than emptying your pockets for the premiums is having no coverage at all. Great choices eh?
Acknowledge the irony here:
A CEO is rewarded for cutting costs (ie firing people, denying coverage or services) and then that money is given to him/her. So now the CEO salary is a huge drain on the company too. How does that make sense?
Is it right for that guy to enrich himself at the expense of so many others (employees and patients)? It’s a back-scratching game between shareholders, boards and CEOs. Hence my assertion that health care (which is essentially life and death) should NEVER be for-profit.
believecommonsense
said,
5 months ago
^ i’m with lalas, healthcare is so intertwined withe life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness that it’s wrong to treat it as just another bar of soap on the shelf that is promoted, produced purely for making ever larger profits.
And you know you get choices about which soap to buy — with healthcare and healthcare insurance, you don’t have choices. You get what your employer signs up for, you can only see the physicians on your health insurer’s list of contracted physicians and you’re stuck with what they’ve decided they will cover.
If you work for a small firm or work for yourself, lotsa luck getting insurance that you can afford that will actually pay for anything short of being hospitalized.
we’ve got a sick system, I’m with you lalas.