Aw, poor Toyota.
The Detroit News started an article with “Toyota Motor Corp. executives worried last summar about what it perceived as an emerging uneven playing field in the United States.”
Really? A Japanese company complaining that the United States, a once formidable and ruthless trading empire, now the wussiest of partners and free-trade ideologue par excellence, is making an “uneven playing field?”
Do they mean like Japan, where nobody buys American cars and where subtle market barriers face just about all American companies? Or like China, which buys American companies (when the government allows it) but won’t allow any foreigners to own their own factories, much less buy a Chinese company?
Do they mean the same United States that timed its phenomenally expensive ”cash for clunkers” deals so that GM and Chrysler would run out of inventory in the first weeks, leaving customers streaming to Toyota dealers? The same United States, in other words, that subsidized purchases of Toyota cars and trucks while leaving automakers which it owned shares of out in the cold?
Do they mean the same United States that actually delayed enforcement of regulations so Toyota could save money?
The same article points out that Toyota had so far avoided requirements to make flexible fuel vehicles.
Toyota whined that the government had invested in General Motors and Chrysler. Well, it’s not like the Japanese government has ever done that, right? Oh, wait, they have. Many times. Sometimes they do it through private industry, but it’s still the government interceding. Just ask Mitsubishi about that.
Toyota worried about Energy Department retooling loans. The ones awarded to Nissan, among others. Oh, yes, we’re a really closed market here in the US. Very unfair.
Meanwhile, the hearings have revealed that Toyota requires practically all decisions to be made in Japan. Interesting.
The real question here is whether the Toyota people really believe that President Obama is taking action directly against them, not because they broke the law and did so in a very public manner, not because they weaseled out of recalls and apparently lied to NHTSA officials, and not because their attitude is so arrogant it cannot escape notice, but because Obama is busy supporting GM and Chrysler. (We’re supposed to conveniently forget, again, that George W. Bush did the same thing, albeit to a lesser degree, and that the Japanese government has also arranged bailouts, and that Japan is known for being a closed market.) But it’s hard to find any serious evidence for this anywhere. Again, Obama could have made sure Cash for Clunkers stopped when Detroit ran out of cars to sell, but he didn’t. I personally think he’s as much of a tunnel-vision free trade ideologue as anyone else in Washington. (And this isn’t a case of “free trade vs. protectionism,” it’s a case of “why the $#&*! do we allow countries that do NOT have free trade policies to take advantage of our own?”)
Or are the Toyota people simply trying to trade on the bitter hatred many Americans have for President Obama, to the point where it’s acceptable to claim he was never a citizen based on his not having a paper 90% of Americans don’t have (I don’t have a “long form” either) and ignoring his birth announcement in the local newspaper?
Think about that option. Being automotive execs, they no doubt think everyone hates Obama. So they figure instead of taking responsibility, as their president is pretending to do (maybe he’s serious, who knows?), they’ll just shift the blame onto Obama. “It’s not us, it’s a conspiracy!” Many Americans believe crazier things.
Still, it doesn’t seem to be working. Yet. But as Harry Truman observed, the Big Lie just has to be repeated enough to become Truth.
Good post. I felt sympathy for Mr. Toyoda when he broke down, practically to tears, yesterday. He seems to be a decent man, and really isn’t responsible for the decisions that brought Toyota to the point of losing its way. But your post reminds me this company, despite everything that’s happened, still wants to have the deck stacked in its favor in our market, and believes we’re “unfair” when we’re finally trying to insist everyone plays by more or less equal rules. And they very much want to maintain that closed market at home.
I say to Toyota, stop whining, and follow the plans laid out by Mr Toyoda himself–get quality back as job one, get passion back in your designs, stop trying to be what GM was in 1970 or 1985.
You are right, Obama is a free trader. He will give lip service to a more rational trade policy, at times, yet the same Bush-Clinton-Bush policies will carry forward. I don’t hate Obama, I respect the man, but I wish instead of more spending on stimulous, or a 2000 page health care bill, he’d push for efforts that would make it more competitive to manufacture in the US. The plain truth is we have lost too many manufacturing jobs, and the service or government related jobs that are replacing them are not even close to matching the pay and benefits that the factory jobs afforded the middle class in the US. In the current climate who would want to open a new factory in the US, when taxes look to be going up, Global Warming fees and health care mandates and fines are still very much on the horizon, and the US is close to losing AAA credit rating because we’re spending like drunken sailors that just won the lottery and got two weeks of liberty in Subic Bay.
I should add one thing – I would not be at all upset with NHTSA if they DID go on a Toyota-attacking rampage, because now they know Toyota cannot be trusted. A lot of the system works on trust – the government is, to a large degree, relying on cooperation of automakers reinforced by spot checks. If you show yourself unworthy of trust, you should expect much nastier treatment. That’s why automakers, as far as I know, don’t lie in their pollution and gas mileage numbers.
Mr. Toyoda needs to keep track of what is going on in his organization. Yes, he did get emotional and maybe he is truly a good person at heart. So are Jimmy Carter and George Bush. But neither of the three seemed to be able to get the job done.
Health care (and Obama still hasn’t gotten the message that the American people do not want his over-inflated bill) bailouts, etc. It goes on and on and no one in the government gets, or admits to getting, the, message. It’s time to put the country first, politics second, big government last and do some intelligent legislating.
N.Y. Times today says Obama wants to use the fact that fully 25% of American workers are working on government contracts as leverage to make their employers do his bidding. More back-room politics by Mr. Obama. The one who promised change. You know, that one. But the big news here is that number of production workers doing government work. TWENTY-FIVE PERCENT! And what percent are working service jobs? And how many workers are employed directly by our federal, state and local governments. Take those away and the see how few U.S. workers are involved in production of product to be sold to citizens both here and abroad. That is where our true economy lies. That is what we have not only allowed to go over seas in the past decades, we have encouraged almost to the point of demanding production of product outside of the U.S. Our balance-of-trade is so ridiculous that we hardly ever hear the term anymore. Our economy is a house of cards dangerously close to being controlled entirely by others, notability China in the broad sense and Japan in the automobile field.
The time is long past to start getting our economy back under our own control. Now it’s a matter of do or die. Maybe we should let our trading “partners” set our policy. In stead of us trying to come with a “fair” policy, we should set our policies with each individual country the same as their policies regarding trade with us. Then we would have the same restrictive policy regarding China and Japan as they have regarding the U.S. and who could say that it is unfair? If it’s good for the goose……
Start drilling for oil in the U.S. North slope, central park, wherever. Am I interested in saving the ecology? Yes, but not at the expense of our nation. If your father had a non-fatal heart attack would you shoot him instead of trying to cure him? That’s our current policy regarding ecology and manufacturing.
Stop being the “Big Guns” in the U.N. and NATO. Sure we are the largest but we are currently carrying way too big a portion of the expense, not only financial but also human. If the other countries in these alliances feel it is necessary to intervene in the world goings on, let them share the burden. Right now they get to talk softly and let the U.S. carry the big stick. And they all benefit by our actions. Let’s start benefiting by their actions too.
Okay, I know there will be cries of how the world has changed and we are in a world economy, isolationism is not possible, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera. So why should that make us the Free Worlds enforcer which, in turn, makes us the not-so-free worlds punching bag? Why should we be the nation that allows everyone else to dump product and steal our jobs while we sit around and tell ourselves we are being fair? We have to ask “fair to whom”? Certainly not to our own. There is a point, an equilibrium, where we can live in harmony with the rest of the free world. But we are so far off to the left of that point that right now the only ones singing are China, Japan, Korea…….
Get us back to where we can start a TRUE economic recovery and things like health care and the perceived oil shortage will suddenly become fixable.
We still have a cold war mentality–helping other economies at the expense of our own, bearing every burden, paying every price abroad in our national security policy. That was the right thing to do in that period of time. Now, we have to learn we don’t have unlimited resources. We can’t be so munificent with trade policy and so short-sighted in the way we treat foreign companies vis a vis our own.
We have to learn form history–France kept going with foreign interventions and the resulting deficit spending until it reached crisis: the French Revolution. Almost every revolution in history was preceeded by a costly war that drained the treasury: 1905, 1917 in Russia, etc. We are doubling down–not only are we fighting costly wars, but we keep spending more at home, borrowing from China to pay the bills. And pols seem to ignore the anger of the people simmering below the surface. Not hte anger of extremists, but regular hard working folks.
We are transitioning to a multi-polar world. How we are able to accomodate that is the greatest foreign policy challenge we face. We have to be prepared to seek balance between China, Europe, India, and the middle east. It’s much more like the 19th Century balance of power international politics. And in some ways we’re where Britain was in the 50′s–still powerful, but no longer the sole superpower in the world. Clearly we’re in transition to a period where we are more or less equal to Europe, China, India, Japan, South America. Whether we will have leadership like Bismark or Castlereagh or Metternich in the 19th century or Churchill when he was PM again in the 50′s to guide us through this remains to be seen. We seem to just keep saying: keep doing what we’ve been doing, keep borrowing money, keep troops in Germany, Italy, Japan, etc. We can no longer afford to guarantee a Pax Anmericana for the world. Britain once had to learn that lesson. Will we, before it’s too late?
Toyota is acting like the spoiled child that has always gotten their own way and didn’t think the rules really applied to them. Over the last several years they’ve been drawing unwanted attention to themselves with a long list of recalls and other quality problems. This will undoubtedly mean more scrutiny from the government, the media and the consumers.
As for our trade policies, the U.S. is always going to get the short end of the stick. The WTO is quick to slam the U.S. for any hint of market restrictions and especially any mention of tariffs. Yet the WTO is silent about how other countries abuse the U.S. when it comes to trade. Japan and China in particular. I don’t typically endorse messing with the free market, but this is hardly a level playing field. The question is when, if ever, are our polticians going to do something about it?
I don’t see any point in drill, drill, drill until the average American stops using double the energy they need. I’m not even talking about cars, I’m talking about going to houses for sale and invariably seeing shiny chrome-door refrigerators whose energy ratings are worst-in-class, water heaters rated lowest in energy efficiency, uninsulated steam and hot water pipes, cheap wasteful showerheads that don’t even feel good, etc., etc. It seems that cheap energy is just wasted. If you opened every single offshore source and wildlife preserve to drilling today, oil prices would fall a little, Ford Expeditions would sell like gangbusters, and foreign imports would be EXACTLY THE SAME –if not more so.
No, what we need is reciprocal trade policies rather than “we’re open even if you’re not,” a national industrial policy like everyone else, a ban on “buying factories” from other states or cities, some leadership in “buy American” (though the free trade ideologues have gotten us to the point where just SAYING “buy American” is seen as protectionism which as we all know is almost as bad as communism), and some serious emphasis on energy conservation instead of this constant mantra to drill and mine and strip our country of its energy assets as quickly as we can.
Frankly, the low-hanging fruit in conservation is a LOT cheaper than new drilling. I for one think we should be keeping our national oil reserves intact for the day when OPEC holds us for ransom again. Which won’t happen as long as we can open our taps — but will happen if we go nuts with drilling and mountaintop mining and everything and then are TOTALLY dependent on imports, because we burned a century’s worth of oil in ten years.
You make good points about energy use. Through technology, we could maintain the same standard of living, while using far less natural resources: whether that be through solar panels, solar hot water heat, geothermal HVAC, etc. With that kind of technology, and perhaps a bit better use of insulation and ventilation, most homes could function very well entirely off the grid for days, weeks, even months of the time, depending on climate (there are many days in Fla. where I don’t have to run heat or AC with a moderately well-insulated house–obviously not in July where the AC is on most of the day). Government tax policy can encourage such technology. But, in our free society, most of it will come from people making more rational choices. Maybe we’re already seeing that. The boom in 3000 square foot “McMansions,” about as energy efficient as barns, may finally be over. The boom in Excursion-type vehicles is over.
We could be on the brink of a very exciting time, in Americans innovating and producing new technology. But it requires government being helpful, and taking real leadership, rather than just talking, or even worse, erecting obstacles through taxation and regulatory policy. For example, Obama (and I applaud him for this) has stated we need to have more nuclear power. But what real steps have been taken? The biggest single thing they could do would be to standardize a reactor, maybe one based off the hugely succesful reactors used on naval ships, or perhaps a pebble-bed type that is argaubly the safest, most fool-proof reactor we could build. But no concrete proposals have come to fruition. It still takes more than a decade to design, obtain approval, and finally build a reactor in the US. Nuclear power could easily power high speed rail and electric cars that could dramatically reduce dependence on foreign energy.
Our electric grid is outdated in the US. The slowing economy has probably masked the worst of the problems. Wind and tidal power could alleviate some of the burden, adding new power sources and distribution that bypass the old grid. But it’s an issue not being talked about. I live in a city that must think about where future energy needs will be met–but every proposal is nixed. No one will take leadership. However, we have solar, wind, and tidal energy that could keep us from tipping over into brownouts and shortages.
” But, in our free society, most of it will come from people making more rational choices. Maybe we’re already seeing that. The boom in 3000 square foot “McMansions,” about as energy efficient as barns, may finally be over. The boom in Excursion-type vehicles is over.”
I don’t know where you got that idea. Americans are buying oversized houses and SUVs again; Hummer might be down but the others are doing perfectly well.
For nuclear power I agree with you. However, the key issue there is the cost of competing energy types. The power industry WILL NOT build a plant until the government GUARANTEES 90% of the cost. Think about that. The People support that level of subsidy. We’re talking MORE money demanded to support the nuclear power industry than GM and Chrysler combined — assuming neither paid a single penny of loans and both declared Chapter 7 right now. Utilities are too smart to take the risk so they demand government do it, and the politicians who opposed the GM bailout are SUPPORTING this boondoggle. IMHO until we get adequate security for the nuclear materials, which are INCREDIBLY poisonous (if used as “dirty” weapons — I’m talking plutonium here not uranium), and we figure out how to store them safely and permanently, it’s not a viable option.
Our grid is a problem. Our approach has been a problem; NYC and other places are starting to build small natural gas plants within the city to avoid distribution losses. Of course with T. B. Pickens insistent in natgas trucks and such we’ll end up short of natgas …
Either ending the home mortgage tax break or add one for apartment dwellers to eliminate government support for practices that increase energy use would help. If it weren’t for our religious issues I’d argue for better birth control practices but I know we have church and state issues (funny though, a lot of people scream either about the government mixing church and state with religious displays on gov’t prop. at gov’t expense OR about gov’t promoting birth control, but few people scream about both. Consistency, people!)
Not to change the subject from our new political thread but in response to the idea that the media is pickin’ on poor old Toy, …
http://www.detnews.com/article/20100226/AUTO01/2260441/1148/rss25
My how Toyota has learned to do business with the government. Ain’t this the kind of thing only GM, Ford and Chrysler do?
Take that Consumer Reports.
No, they’re too smart to get THAT confrontational, AFAIK.
Doesn’t the federal DOT run the NHSTA? Ray LaHood is a Republican and is Secretary of Transportation. I get really tired of the Obama bashing. I didn’t vote for him and I don’t like a lot of his policies, but he isn’t the evil entity that inhabits the imaginations of closed minds. The President is a pragmatist in a good way. He picked a Republican for the transportation job because this country needs solutions and Mr. LaHood has some. Because of this, I don’t understand why President Obama’s detractors are playing up the partisanship on the Toyota issue.
BTW, since “drill here, drill now” was mentioned here let me add my $.02. Except for the Bakken Range, all the proposed drilling projects are funded by foreign sources. This will not help our energy dependence. If we follow the money trail of the drill baby drill propaganda, it will lead to a country that wants our oil for collateral.
Welcome to the U.S. economic system of the 2000′s. Just about anything we do is controlled by someone else, at least to some extent. Oil I’m sure is controlled by the OPEC nations and much of the remainder by China. This is not my personal ramblings. This has been in many reliable news sources in the last two to three weeks. This is not the only news site I read and respond to.
If we were to react swiftly maybe, just MAYBE, we could revitalize our economic health. But there is no sign that the 535 people in charge of such things can get off their respective party soap boxes and work together in anything resembling the near future. Partisan politics have driven our country nearly to its knees. And yes, as I stated previously, it ain’t Obama’s fault. This has been brewing far too long to blame him. It’s just that he, like the many before him, certainly has failed to present any thing in the way of a resolution. The problem is the longer we procrastinate true reform the less likely it is to work. Health care? Very much needed? Yes. But can we afford it now? NO!!!! The only thing we should be working on now is our economy. Period. Everything else pales in comparison.
Is this off the topic of Toyota’s current situation? Well, maybe, except that Toyota and its Japanese/Korean pals are all part of our system.
It’s hard to get off topic on this one because Toyota’s mess is a symptom of the disease which is killing the United States. We have wrong-sized our government. Since WWII, this nation has seen many different presidential administrations and congresses. This nation had a big problem with racial discrimination that came to a head after the war. Basically, the solution that was found to this problem was strengthening the federal government to enforce civil rights laws over the states. I am not saying the civil rights movement was wrong. The states which allowed the practice of legally sanctioned discrimination violated the Spirit of our Constitution. Freedom without responsibility always leads to more external control.
The problem is that the same approach was used for other problems in succession after the civil rights struggle. The federal government took on an increasing role in housing, education, commerce, and energy. What has the Department of Energy done that really helped this nation? How did we survive before them? How about the Department of Education? Were we a nation of illiterates before that federal entity was formed? The creation of HUD by consolidating other cabinet departments has been fruitless as well.
I’m not anti-government, I can point to necessary examples of a strong federal government. The Food and Drug Administration for one. Thank God they are around. Let’s be honest, the NHSTA is needed as well. Before the creation of those entities, a lot of people died. So why do people get sick from tainted food and have cars with dangerous defects? In attempts to downsize our federal government, the wrong places got hit. We lack the people to enforce the laws. This is why Toyota is in the headlines. Big government is bad. How big is too big? Having a cozy relationship with banks and energy companies so the laws restrict fair trade is too big. The NHSTA not having enough enough personnel to properly enforce the law with vigilance is too small. Doing away with the banking laws which helped bring order out of chaos during the great depression was not a smart move, IMO.
It shouldn’t take a constitutional scholar to figure out how to reorder our government so it again serves the common good. Unfortunately, the scholars in power in Congress and the White House from both major parties fiddle while our nation burns.
patfromigh, as you pointed out, NHTSA suffers from the same shortage of personnel that the Dept. of Agriculture does when it comes to food inspectors. Seems that they very organizations that are supposed to be ensuring our supply chains are safe are hampered by under-funding and under-staffing, yet some parts of our government are more bloated than ever. The Dept. of Education comes to mind. Why not just eliminate the cost of these redundant bureaucracies and send the remaining money out to the states to spend as they see fit? Too much meddling and power grabbing.
When you’re shorthanded like NHTSA, you have to rely on faith and trust as Dave pointed out. Just like all forms of law enforcement, efforts are generally focused on the parties you trust least. IF XYZ has demostrated a good track record of compliance, you tend to leave them alone versus the habitual offender. I know that from my experience in local government enforcing everything from zoning to environmental laws. Generally, once a dirtbag always a dirtbag and the rest are usually only making an honest mistake, or misinterpreting regulations, or maybe got a little lazy when it came to compliance. You don’t tend to crucify the latter….at least until a negative trend is established. In Toyota’s case, I think we’re well beyond a negative trend being established to almost blatant disregard for U.S. law….and maybe contempt for Congress is just around the corner.
I also find it interesting that Toyota’s former lawyer is saying they violated Federal Rules of Civil Procedure when it comes to providing all documentation during the discovery phase of litigation including E-discovery of electronically stored data. Sounds like Toyota is a prime candidate for archiving software to help them unearth those documents quickly…..or maybe they have it and chose NOT to use it for the purpose it was intended. Bet those “Books of Knowledge” containing sensitive, and possibly incriminating, engineering data within Toyota could be easily found using such a tool. :)
“TM”, Toyota Motors, has replaced the “Old GM”. Now that the “myth” of the perfect Toyota has been exposed, maybe people will get back to buying American products. Toyota knew it had problems and didn’t act on it and now people have been hurt and killed. The public has reason to be outraged. From what I am reading, “their fix” isn’t working. If this is true, the government needs to halt the sales of Toyota products until they get to the bottom of this.
I agree with most of what you say. But the questions about Obama’s background are actually pretty sound. His college education was paid for by “aid for foreign students” grants, for example. Either he got that money illegally–or he is actually not a US citizen–you can’t have it both ways. Not that it matters anymore; he’s in and “that ship has sailed”. The issue is just as dead & irrelevent as the question of voter ballots in FLA. Most importantly, I think our friends in Washington are pretty gulible when it comes to trade issues. Not to mention patent infringement (maily by the Koreans & Chinese; but somewhat by others as well.) Too bad washington can’t FOCUS on regulation and keep it’s nose out of trying to micro-manage everything from GM & Chrysler to Health Care, Insurance, Drug Companies, Hospitals, Banks, Financial services, etc, etc. As for Toyota, there’s a reason they so easily penitrated the US when they’re STILL trying to establish themselves in Canada, South America, and most of Europe. It’s called an ignorant, incompetant & enabeling US Government.
Toyota will come forth with the “books of knowledge”, you’ll see. And those books will prove Toyota to be ethical and competant. They just need a few days to do a little “editing”, thats all.
His college education was paid for by “aid for foreign students” grants, for example.No, it wasn’t. As factcheck.org said: ” This chain e-mail is a transparent April Fools’ Day hoax. It fabricates an AP news story about an nonexistent group, and makes false claims about Obama and the Fulbright program.”
Most importantly, I think our friends in Washington are pretty gulible when it comes to trade issues.We agree there. And they have been for decades, in both parties – I think equally.
Too bad washington can’t FOCUS on regulation and keep it’s nose out of trying to micro-manage everythingWith health care, I think they have good reason. Have you SEEN the profit margins for the insurers? The lack of competition in most states? The rules regarding pre-existing conditions?
With regard to Toyota, you can’t blame the government. The Canadian government doesn’t ban Toyota and Honda; but the citizens have enough pride, sense, and true patriotism to mainly buy from those who invest in Canada.
PS> http://www.factcheck.org/2009/05/was-obama-born-in-the-usa/
Ya know, I’m as tired about hearing the conspiracy theories about Obama’s legitimacy as a U.S. citizen as I am about the 9/11 truthers and their theories. He’s our President. The election was as fair as any other. Accept it and move on.
As for health care and the insurers, I guess that varies by state. Here we have several non-profit providers and yet they have some of the highest premiums in the country. Why? Because the cost of delivering health care in Massachusetts is 15% above the national average. And that, in part, has to do with Massachusetts own little experiment in Obama-care. You see, when the state-run health care plan was established it was designed to cover the uninsured and under-insured that couldn’t afford those “Cadillac” plans like most of the working people have via their employer. The problem is that despite the $2-3 billion (already 10% of our state budget and growing) that the taxpayers in Massachusetts already foot the bill for, there was still a $96 million short-fall. How did our governor Deval Patrick (Obama’s buddy and identical twin philosophically) close that gap? By forcing the 8 insurers to each swallow it….or $12 million a piece. Now you know why my premiums went up 12% last year!
So,what’s the lesson? My taxes are going up because the state has to subsidize this turkey to the tune of $2-3 billion per year…..all on top of the modest premiums the plan’s participants pay into it if they can afford it. Some get a free ride. Because the plan is already insolvent (and it’s only a few years old), the deficit was forced upon the other insurers (half of them non-profits) to absorb. Their only choice was to raise premiums…..and my premiums ALREADY included covering the cost of the uninsured showing up at the Emergency Rooms for “free” care. Oh, and if you don’t have some kind of approved health care in Massachusetts, the fine for being uninsured is you lose your $4,400.00 personal exemption on your state income tax and pay a percentage of what you would’ve paid for coverage as a fine.
There is no hope of my premiums ever going down, only up, just like my taxes. Because every year this form of Obama-care is taking up a higher and higher percentage of the state’s overall budget with no end in sight. Now, take the disasterous effect of this Massachusetts debacle, a state with a population of only 6 million, and scale it across 50 states and 4 U.S. territories totalling 305 million people…..give or take.
Now do you see what Obama, Pelosi, Reid & Co. are about to do to us? You don’t hear them referencing the Massachusetts plan, do you? There’s a reason for that. It’s because it shows that everything you fear about Obama-care is true and has been validated in the REAL WORLD. This is an entitlement program we cannot afford regardless of its good intentions. The costs rise exponentially and rapidly. Then they scramble for revenue sources (code for taking money out of your pocket by any means necessary) to pay for it as it spirals out of control.
The math shows it just doesn’t work the way Obama says it’s going to. It’s a lie. A fallacy. A scam. Don’t believe it.
On another subject, yes, bravo to the Canadians for figuring out that it’s beneficial to buy your own home-grown products. Americans should wake up and understand which side their bread is buttered on……and it’s not buying Japanese and Korean vehicles…even the ones made here.
Scott, New Jersey did NOT do that, and my premiums jumped over 20% last year, and this year I was hit with another 30%. You have to compare apples to apples. The MA plan may have been as badly implemented as most MA government things seem to be, but here in New Jersey, we have BIGGER increases with NO extra coverage that I can see!
My personal thought: the high cost states should send delegates to the low-cost states and see what’s different. Why is health care in Wisconsin so cheap, even in the state plan for high-risk people? Why are taxes so low in Wisconsin with higher service levels? What gives?
(In case you’re wondering I don’t qualify for Wisconsin’s high risk plan because I’d have to live in the state for a while before getting it, and then I’d lose my continuous coverage, so any insurance company from then on could claim anything that happened to me was a “pre-existing condition.” It takes a long time to fight that… as in years… and not everyone wins.)
Dave, one thing we can agree on, and that is the difficulty in trying to identify what elements of health care are causing costs to rise. One thing I don’t hear from anyone in Washington is the answers to that. Do hospitals have too much capacity? Are the over-equipped in expensive technology? Is it the cost of pharmaceuticals? Malpractice insurance? Greedy doctors/administrators/insurance execs? I’d like a clear and concise answer and have been waitng for one since Hillary-care a decade or so ago. No one can seem to nail it down….or if they can, won’t reveal it because they’ve been bought by some lobbyists.
By all accounts, the physicians my family uses will tell you their personal earnings are going down each year, as are the reimbursements they are getting from the various insurers. Now they fear the government is going to cut reimbursements as well. Meanwhile, their costs are going up. They need more staff to handle the bureaucracie they interface with and have to make investments to comply with things like HIPPA.
My kids’ pediatrician and my wife’s OB-GYN have both decided to retire early because they only see things getting worse. My personal doctor hasn’t been accepting new patients for years unless they are relatives of existing patients. He’s in his late 50s so I’m waiting for him to announce his retirement as well. They’ve all had it. They say all the good reasons they became doctors have been stamped down by the B.S. they have to deal with on a daily basis. I don’t feel TOO sad for them.
The OB-GYN is especially concerned about the cost of malpractice insurance because, as he puts it, if someone’s kid doesn’t come out absolutely perfect, no matter what, it’s the OB-GYN’s fault and they file a suit. Forget the fact the mother was a chain smoker with a drinking problem. He can’t win. When my first was born he had a heart issue that was purely caused by the development cycle and he finally out grew it. The OB-GYN told me later he was afraid we were going to sue him. Why would I sue a guy for something the cardiac guy said was a natural occurence in some kids? No harm done. But, a different set of parents with a brother for a lawyer and who knows.
I keep hearing that costs are rising faster than we can sustain them. I don’t disagree. However, I have YET to see a plan that actually attacks those rising costs. Instead, I’m being asked to support a plan that suppposedly reduces health care costs by subsidizing the system with taxpayer money. Oh wait, that’s my money too. So, instead of paying through the nose for health care premiums (and that’s if you believe they’re really going to shrink or even level off), you going to be paying it in taxes. So, instead of sucking me dry out of my right pocket, you’re going to take even more out of my left pocket and filter it through Washington? The place where the biggest bunch of crooks and know-nothings hang out? The place where a $20 item suddenly costs the taxpayer $200? You want me to give my money to THEM instead of the “greedy” insurance companies? No thanks, I’ll take my chances on the insurance companies.
I agree with you regarding the need to isolate costs. It’s interesting regarding malpractice; that seems to be a very very serious issue for Ob-Gyns though not so much for most other docs (apparently it’s something like .5% of all costs). There needs to be a balance; because there really is malpractice and doctors do NOT police themselves.
I have no idea how hospitals can lose money at their rates. But you’re right, the plans are to help us pay for insurance to keep on paying. It’s like tax breaks for tuition instead of just working on lower tuition.
I will say that most doctors I see are NOT hurting (except Ob-Gyn) as you mentioned. One rarely sees a doctor without their Lexus or Mercedes or BMW and a huge house.
There’s very uneven distribution of wealth. Anesthesiologists can charge whatever they want, it seems; you’re in the hospital, what choice do you have? Everything in a hospital now seems to be part of a separate LLC. That adds up.
Last I heard one third of the medical costs we have are due to marketing. From what I saw in pharma I believe that. Frankly I think we should just ban ads for pharmaceuticals that are not run in journals 80% or more ready by doctors. Doctors end up prescribing inappropriate drugs at patient request rather than fighting. Also, the sales practices of pharma and equipment makers needs to be examined. Some of these people are experts who help train the doctor in appropriate usage. Others are models and in some cases prostitutes. It all adds up. But how do you address this kind of issue without overregulation?
I’d rather take my chance with government at this point. I like my own insurance company but they’ve applied for for-profit status. Have you seen the profits of for-profit health insurers like Anthem? Even a lot of the “nonprofits” are pretty lavish.
I’m with you on banning advertising for prescription drugs. Totally unnecessary. It shouldn’t be the consumer driving the demand for them as a result of being influenced by advertising. The doctors should be prescribing them based on real need.
We also have hospitals advertising to compete with each other. I know there has been some discussion pro and con about the Determination Of Need process some states have to regulate hospitals. The general idea is not to have two hospitals right across the street from each other both investing in identical technologies such as MRI, etc. There may not be enough demand in the community to let both hospitals ever see a reasonable utilization rate of the equipment so it drives up costs. Now some hospitals use donations to make improvements/investments in technology, but I often wonder when I walk into a hospital whether the cost of that fancy lobby atrium is buried in my bill somewhere. Is that why a single aspirin costs $10 while you’re in their care?
Some of my clients are pharmaceutical and biotech companies and none of them are exactly slumming it when it comes to their real estate or other perks. And, as you pointed out, despite the pressure on doctors, they’re still living pretty large…..but most of them work their butts off 70-80 hours a week. I just hope someday we actually get to the bottom of it all. In the end, the cost of health care may reach the breaking point where demand will start to drop off because people can’t afford it and the providers will have to make some concessions.
Sometimes I think the best way to get there is to have companies and the government stop subsidizing the system and have everyone pay 100% of their own insurance premiums. Just have my employer give me the $12,000 a year they’re paying toward my insurance and let me shop around for the best deal. The employers could then control their costs by rolling it into regular payroll with 3-4% increases rather than 10-20% for the health care portion. Plus, if people we put 100% in charge of their own health care, most of them would make better decisions when it came to coverage and selecting who and where to get care from. The truly poor could still rely on Medicare.
I’m with you there regarding the advertising of hospitals; I find it amazing that they buy full page color ads in the newspaper, bus signs, even TV spots.
Yes, with doctors, it’s an interesting group; some work 80 hours and some 9-to-5, income seems to be largely unrelated to their skill and effort and more associated with their specialty. In that way it’s a microcosm of a greater society where the pot of gold waits for bankruptcy attorneys and those who defend ordinary people against serious crimes get sod-all. (Public defenders, I mean)… and where accountancy leads people to the CEO’s chair.
I agree with you that splitting the health care from employers is probably a good idea. It only started because the government didn’t tax benefits, just salaries. I also agree with you regarding coverage decisions.
I also think that in general, the best plans are the ones with fairly high co-pays because it makes people think.
Ending subsidies for sugar and beef producers would also help by reducing the difference in cost between healthy and unhealthy foods.