Think again.
In addition to all the horror stories about what this abominable concept will do for the quality of health care, this quote hits the mark regarding the costs:
"As for importing universal care, author P.J. O'Rourke said it best: 'If you think health care is expensive now, just wait until it's free.'"
well, let's try this on for size.
ReplyDeleteHere is a false statement:
In Canada, where private medicine is illegal, this could have meant death.
This is a reasonable description of Canada's medicare system.
Private medicine is not illegal in Canada.
The US spends 13.9% of GDP on healthcare while Canada spends 9.2%.
On a per capita basis, we spend over $4000/year while Germany (the next closest industrialized country) spends about $2300/year.
Finally, life expectancy in The US is 76.7 years, putting us 2nd to the last of G7 countries. Canada, for example is 2nd best at 79. And infant mortality for the same countries has the US dead last (7.8 deaths per 1000; Canada is 6, Japan is 3.7)
One can make a case for anything using a few anecdotal references. Let's talk about real results here. There is a serious systematic problem here and the profit margin doesn't help the sick person. We have a system that is the most free-market in the world with the best paid doctors and millions employed, but the results are not what one would expect.
Do the Republicans have any better ideas or is it more of the same-old same-old.
Oh, and I love the quote here:
ReplyDeleteAccording to a Populus survey, 98 percent of Britons want to reduce the time between diagnosis and treatment.
Apparently, the other 2% think that they should have to wait longer...
In other news, 98% of people wish that they never had to stand in line.
"One can make a case for anything using a few anecdotal references."
ReplyDeleteTell that to the anecdotal mourners of those who died because the "system" wouldn't accommodate them soon enough.
Outside of an oblique reference to child mortality rates, I notice you did not discuss the quality of health care in regard to the US in comparison to these other marvelous systems. All you can do is throw a few meaningless numbers around in a weak response to the important numbers the original story described.
Why is that?
Her's some certainties about so-called socialized medicine. The points are still as valid today as they were 10 years ago.
Since you like to sluff off the information as "anecdotes", here's a story with real world lessons we need to learn.
Excerpts:
"To paraphrase Thomas Sowell, there are no solutions to modern health care problems, only trade-offs."
"Infections in hospitals are, of course, a problem everywhere. But in Britain, hospital-borne infections are getting out of control. At least 100,000 British patients a year are hit by hospital-acquired infections, including the penicillin-resistant "superbug" MRSA. A new study carried out by the British Health Protection Agency says that MRSA plays a part in the deaths of up to 32,000 patients every year. But even at lower numbers, Britain has the worst MRSA infection rates in Europe. It's not hard to see why."
"But Cornell and New York University hospitals (both of which my wife has been using since we returned) have ready access to technical equipment that is either hard to find or nonexistent in Britain. This includes both diagnostic equipment and state-of-the-art equipment used for physical therapy."
Go ahead and continue to talk about the "numbers" you like. You will continue to totally miss the point.
I will continue to talk about quality we currently enjoy.
THAT'S the better idea than the poor quality system you want everyone to suffer under.