Economics and Reducing Abortion?

[jlw]

This:

If I have to pay an extra 50 cents so for my Taco Bell Burrito or a few extra dollars for those jeans because employers have to pay their employees more, so be it.

doesn’t quite jive with

There are a lot of needs an individual has no control over. The cost of health care. The cost of decent housing. The cost of bread, milk, and eggs. The cost of gasoline.

But, if WAGES are important (they are) then you should be voting for the candidate who in dedicated to reducing the OTHER COSTS associated with doing business–Regulatory (you name it), taxation (federal, state, county, property, payroll, sales), liability (thats huge!), and you will see the money there to not only LOWER prices, but increased benefits to employees given by employers.

You got to start looking at the COSTS of business before looking at the PRICES of business.

 

[Philip_P]

jlw:

But, if WAGES are important (they are) then you should be voting for the candidate who in dedicated to reducing the OTHER COSTS associated with doing business–Regulatory (you name it), taxation (federal, state, county, property, payroll, sales), liability (thats huge!), and you will see the money there to not only LOWER prices, but increased benefits to employees given by employers.

You got to start looking at the COSTS of business before looking at the PRICES of business.

Ok, I’ll respond to this, but then I really do have to cut myself off. Work to get done. Costs of business, huh? I’ve worked in an HR office, and I can tell you that the single BIGGEST expense per employee is…healthcare (come on, you knew this was coming). This is, of course a gigantic thread on its own, maybe I’ll start a thread on it after my break. I have to say, though, considering how expensive this is, I’m surprised there’s not a greater push from the business community comprehensively adress this…

 

[Lisa_N]

Philip P:

Ok, I’ll respond to this, but then I really do have to cut myself off. Work to get done. Costs of business, huh? I’ve worked in an HR office, and I can tell you that the single BIGGEST expense per employee is…healthcare (come on, you knew this was coming). This is, of course a gigantic thread on its own, maybe I’ll start a thread on it after my break. I have to say, though, considering how expensive this is, I’m surprised there’s not a greater push from the business community comprehensively adress this…

Oh they’re pushing Philip but there isn’t much give. Employers have very little ability to influence health premiums. Most are decreasing benefits, no longer paying for dependents, or requiring increasing amounts from employees.

As an accountant for a large medical clinic I see both sides and I know the dirty secrets of the insurance companies. They INCREASE premiums constantly and DECREASE what they pay to doctors. Our doctors receive about 40% of what the received in l987 when I started in this field. HOw would all of you like to have your salary DECREASE by 60% while facing increased expenses both for medical malpractice and staff. Oh and thanks to our government we have HIPAA which is an expensive nightmare and seems to serve mostly to employ attorneys to give seminars and prevent people who need to know about a loved one’s medical condition from doing so. HIPAA alone has added BILLIONS to the cost of care and has not improved anything for patients. Dont’EVEN get me started.

I see more companies going to HSAs and other non standard approaches to health care. The insurance companies are pricing themselves out of their best market.

Lisa N

 

[jlw]

Lisa N:

Oh they’re pushing Philip but there isn’t much give. Employers have very little ability to influence health premiums. Most are decreasing benefits, no longer paying for dependents, or requiring increasing amounts from employees.

As an accountant for a large medical clinic I see both sides and I know the dirty secrets of the insurance companies. They INCREASE premiums constantly and DECREASE what they pay to doctors. Our doctors receive about 40% of what the received in l987 when I started in this field. HOw would all of you like to have your salary DECREASE by 60% while facing increased expenses both for medical malpractice and staff. Oh and thanks to our government we have HIPAA which is an expensive nightmare and seems to serve mostly to employ attorneys to give seminars and prevent people who need to know about a loved one’s medical condition from doing so. HIPAA alone has added BILLIONS to the cost of care and has not improved anything for patients. Dont’EVEN get me started.

I see more companies going to HSAs and other non standard approaches to health care. The insurance companies are pricing themselves out of their best market.

Lisa N

To continue on the “cost influences price” thought, what costs are affecting insurance company premiums and lower payouts to doctors??

 

[Brad]

chicago:

Brad,

How do you reconcile these two statements? Afterall, if what is truly important and valuable is to “be all that you can be”, then why should one accept something seemingly less (by those standards) because of some intrinsic unique value of purpose and meaning appropriate to your being and your task?

I didn’t make both of those statements so my responsibility for reconciliation does not exist. However, I will comment.

There are always restrictions to freedom. License does not equal freedom. All of the people that I mentioned understand this. The basic restrictions on freedom are that whatever you choose to do is moral, legal, and ethical. Because our society has accepted that it is ok for mothers to leave their children with strangers starting at 2 weeks does not make it moral and ethical. On the other hand, there is nothing wrong with a mother “working” when they are not caring for a child. The child may be in school, at a friend’s house, sleeping, or with dad. The point remains that you can set your mind to something and accomplish it. Our society generally looks down upon women that stay home for the first 5 or more years of their child’s life. Many of them have accomplished great things in addition to raising great children. You can stay home with your children and you can find a cure for cancer. It can be done.

 

[fix]

Brad:

The 2 postings have many differences. How interesting. In any event, the Vatican document is the correct one.

Indeed. The Vatican doc has no paragragph 65 and the wording is different fron the other site. Wonder why?

 

[Brad]

fix:

Indeed. The Vatican doc has no paragragph 65 and the wording is different fron the other site. Wonder why?

Either I’m missing something or the American Catholic Church is in full gear and racing from Rome.

 

[Lisa_N]

jlw:

To continue on the “cost influences price” thought, what costs are affecting insurance company premiums and lower payouts to doctors??

Extremely high pay to executives, extensive computer costs due to new electronic filing requirements (thank you HIPAA) and I understand that at least some insurance companies made money on investments and in the days of declining stock market suffered unexpected losses. Drug costs increased dramatically. In fact our agent said that was a major reason for premium increases. Further there were several state mandates requiring the companies to cover things that had not been covered in the past. Suddenly the insurance companies had unexpected expenses that had not been factored into premiums. THere were several years where the companies were undercutting each other and they are making up for it now.

We get reports on how much money insurance companies earn. They really are not earning great sums for the most part.

Lisa N

 

[jlw]

Lisa N:

Extremely high pay to executives, extensive computer costs due to new electronic filing requirements (thank you HIPAA) and I understand that at least some insurance companies made money on investments and in the days of declining stock market suffered unexpected losses. Drug costs increased dramatically. In fact our agent said that was a major reason for premium increases. Further there were several state mandates requiring the companies to cover things that had not been covered in the past. Suddenly the insurance companies had unexpected expenses that had not been factored into premiums. THere were several years where the companies were undercutting each other and they are making up for it now.

We get reports on how much money insurance companies earn. They really are not earning great sums for the most part.

Lisa N

What, in keeping with conservative principles, can be done?? I do not advocate government getting involved (ie state mandated coverages. Ouch!). How can the marketplace correct things??

 

[Listener]

Well, it seems to me that economics definitely has to be a factor. If you’re pregnant and the father has run off and you have no money, this situation certainly might tempt someone into having an abortion. Outlawing abortion is only part of the answer. If we could outlaw abortion, women would probably just go to Canada or find a doctor who was willing to break the law.

I believe that a lot could be learned by studying the abortion statistics in various countries. The trouble is, I have no idea where a person would go to get reliable statistics. If you found a “pro choice” country that had a very low abortion rate, you would want to figure out why that was the case and then maybe make some changes in our country to make conditions more conducive to raising children.

If Europe or Australia has a lower abortion rate, it is probably because you have medical care because of your citizenship. They don’t have an out-of-control medical system like ours. Some countries also have a family allowance given by the government for having children.

I have not seen the statistics, so I have no idea which countries have the lowest abortion rate. However, I do believe that decisions based on facts usually work better than a bunch of emotional arguments by people who always know that they are right.

The reasons that women give for having abortions could be analyzed (assuming such statistics exist). We might be surprised as what we learned.

 

[Lisa_N]

Listener:

The reasons that women give for having abortions could be analyzed (assuming such statistics exist). We might be surprised as what we learned.

Yes there are a NUMBER of statistics that were actually quoted at the beginning of this thread. THey may well be on the original thread that was on the Pope John Paul II forum.

Basically approximately 20% of abortions were for economic reasons. The majority of abortions in this country anyway were for convenience’s sake. Woman ‘isn’t ready for a baby’ or ‘partner doesn’t want a baby’ or ‘will interfere with work or school.’ A tiny percentage is for health of the mother or due to some kind of defect in the child. I suspect this is increasing as apparently more and more doctors are suggesting abortion of babies that are diagnosed in the womb with Down’s. The sad part is that some of these babies do NOT have Down’s. In our medical practice we are seeing doctors suggesting babies be aborted for what are repairable genetic defects. But everyone wants a perfect baby and the doctors rationalize this by saying “The baby will have to go through surgery and he’ll have pain blah blah.” (Not my docs but the pediatricians).

If you want to see statistics just google “Abortion Statistics” and there are a number of published studies.

Lisa N