Do the math: Health care tsunami not about emotion

Until everyone reviews the math, please refrain from submitting national health care letters.

This issue is not about political or moral beliefs. Emotion and religious invocations won’t resolve this dilemma. This is a simple exercise in mathematics.

Facts: The U.S. population 330 million; 16 percent over age 65; mean wage for the 63 percent working group $62,000 per person; current FICA Medicare contribution, 2.9 percent or $1,800 per year; 180 million workers contribute $330 billion toward a Medicare budget of $700 billion.

Medicaid is an “unfunded” $600 billion liability. The 2018 federal budget is $4 trillion and Gross National Product is $19 trillion. Health care and Social Security are 60 percent of the federal budget with health care expenses increasing 8 percent annually.

Forty-three percent of our population is classified as “obese” and 17 percent as “grossly obese.” Diabetes is the most common disease in our country because of our lifestyle choices. Diabetes creates additional health issues, including cardiovascular and renal disease. Renal dysfunctions require dialysis for potentially 140 million people. If 30 percent of this group consumes two to three weekly dialysis treatments at an average annual cost of $100,000, the total cost will be $4 trillion. For comparison, $2.5 trillion equals the GNP of Canada.

Do the math!

These increases are not financially sustainable under any proposed health care mandate. A universal or single-payer system will not change these numbers. Neither will Increasing FICA taxes by 500 percent.

Only a total revolution in personal health care responsibility can address this dilemma. The problem is “us,” or at least “some of us.”

Pro-Trump: Other questions for Arrington

In her primary campaign against Mark Sanford, Katie Arrington bashed Mark Sanford for daring occasionally to criticize President Donald Trump, and she touted her own unwavering loyalty to the president. So it’s fair to ask the following questions:

Does she agree with nominating Justice Neil Gorsuch ?

Does she think that signing the largest tax reduction bill ever has helped fuel the booming economy?

Does she endorse doing away with the Obamacare mandate?

Would she agree that the creation of 1.7 million jobs and bringing unemployment to an all-time low is good?

How does she feel about the Dow Jones being at record highs?

Would she agree that withdrawing from the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the Iran nuclear deal, the Obama deal with Cuba and re-negotiating NAFTA was smart?

How does she feel about new spending to rebuild the military so that we can once again have a strong defense?

Does she endorse Trump’s reining in an out-of-control EPA?

Does she stand with Trump in his efforts to crack down on sanctuary cities and illegal immigration?

Is she for Trump’s attempt to bring about a negotiated end to the conflict with North Korea?

Would she stand by Trump’s decision to do what five other presidents said they would do and move the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem?

Does she stand by Trump in his efforts to get NATO partners to pay their fair share of their own defense?

If she stands with Trump on all of the above, she has my vote.

Lindsey Graham’s flip disappointing

At one point I really thought that U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham might be the voice of strength and integrity in the GOP. A voice that would protect our institutions and act as a check on this president ... like Congress is supposed to do. A voice that would put the country above party. He is such a disappointment.

I didn’t agree with Sen. John McCain on many fronts, but our country could always count on him for honesty, integrity and independent thought. He left a legacy that reflected his courage of conviction.

Watching video of Lindsey Graham flipping on the attorney general situation is astounding and disappointing.

I think the senator has lost his moral compass. I’m hopeful that he might find it, and be a beacon of hope in that snake pit on Capitol Hill.