Free Universal Healthcare

[sonneti]

The free medical healthcare over here is rubbish. My girlfriend had a sore throat for 3 months she went to the doctor a few times, everytime they said there was nothing wrong etc etc. So she flys home to Latvia, goes to see the doctor and they put a camera down her throat. Turns out it was a serious issue, shes on a stack of drugs now with a special diet. The Latvian doctor said if this hadn't been treated when it was then it would have turned cancerous/she would have died.

The health service over here is in tatters, understaffed, overworked and underpaid.

[4_2_it]

Blarg,

I agree with you in theory; however, I am very doubtful that the government can actually provide healthcare more cheaply or efficiently than the private sector.

Look at Social Security. Our generation is going to end up paying a lot more into it and not receiving anything near what we put in. Originally, it seemed to be a noble idea, now it is basically welfare for old people. I'd love to be able to invest an additional 6.5% of my income for retirement purposes, but the government has decided that it can invest it better (read provide me a much lower return).

It is a good and noble thing for every citizen to have access to top-flight medical care; however, I cannot see how such a system can be fairly implemented.

I suspect most people will opt to continue paying for private insurance if given the choice. Most people desire control over their lives as opposed to leaving important decisions to government bureaucrats.

For the US, my solution would involve free health care for children and an expansion (read major overhaul) of the Medicaid program to catch the poor people who are falling through the cracks and those whose employers do not offer healthcare. I'd partner with the insurance companies to set up new groups and then cut spending on pork barrel projects to cover the costs. (Of course, if I am ever elected President, special interest groups will have me assassinated by the end of month 1 once they see my Teddy Roosevelt-like nature).

[AceLuby]

What about electible subsidized insurance? I think the US is lacking because they don't provide ANY options outside of the private sector. The point I'm trying to make is that those people with the ability to get high end health insurance should be able to keep it, but there should be some kind of option for those people that their company doesn't offer insurance, or the plans are ridiculously bad. This could also provide some competition to the private sector effectively lowering rates, in theory.

[esad]

US Healthcare is generally more expensive then other countries for a number of reasons. Here's a few:

- Emergency healthcare is government mandated regardless of the ability for someone to pay. Emergency services are usually the most expensive and hospitals and Drs often eat the cost of the uninsured. This cost gets passed on to those that can afford to pay.

- There are many govrenment hosptials that do provide some healthcare to whoever walks in. Again this cost gets passed on.

- The US is a very litigious society. You'd be surprised at how expensive malpractice premiums are for some doctors. It gets into the six figures for some. This is a problem that socialized or really any HC outside of the US has.

Those are just three main reasons.

Devil's Advocate Question - Why as a society do we feel that we must provide almost unlimited healthcare to the sick regardless of the cost to ourselves or others? If there is a $100K operation that could give something 10-20 more years of life are we under any real onus to pay for this? If so, why?

[daveT]

I have a friend from austaralia and she stands by the free health care over there. I asked about the signifigant waits, but she denied them.

America has gotten to the point that simple things like going to the dentist has gotten too expensive. I personally have broken bones that has never healed and torn muscle that has never been taken care of. I can't get these fixed becaue no insurer will pay for old conditions. Thankfully, things like contacts and glasses are cheap, but some people can't even afford that.

To add on to the employers cutting insurance. Another disturbing trend is starting. A few months back, Circut City fired everyone making above $10 per hour. These employees are allowed to return to their jobs three months later for $7 per hour.

The fact is that America is a super-capitalist country. At least that is how it now designed. The pressure is two-fold. If America is going to be at the forefront of developing the best medicines, we have to pay for the minds. It takes about ten years to develop a medication. After developing the medication the politicians pass laws decreasing the prices of medications. All of this is considered before a medication is developed. This is why no legitamate research is done for curing AIDS and Cancer.

I am torn by the current system. I think that the simplest solution would be to allow simple things to be free, such as basic dental and vision. Obviously cosmetic shouldn't be allowed unless there is something like an A on the left and a C on the right.

Our present system is losing tons of money. Our laws state that anyone who comes into a hospital must be stabilized (discounting what happened at King/Drew). Also, pregnancy in California is free. Call me heartless, but I think abortions should be too.

[MrWookie]

[ QUOTE ]
The fact is that America is a super-capitalist country. At least that is how it now designed. The pressure is two-fold. If America is going to be at the forefront of developing the best medicines, we have to pay for the minds. It takes about ten years to develop a medication. After developing the medication the politicians pass laws decreasing the prices of medications. All of this is considered before a medication is developed. This is why no legitamate research is done for curing AIDS and Cancer.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sorry Dave, but this whole paragraph is blatantly misinformed or just plain wrong.

1. I'm not sure what you mean by "super-capitalist," but there are a large number of regulations in place that keep the American market tightly regulated, not an open, free market like you suggest. A relevant one for example: the FDA. Companies can't just bring any drugs to market that they please. Instead, they have to demonstrate their effectiveness and safety.

2. Politicians are not passing laws regulating the prices of medications. They might regulate how Medicare, a government program, purchases medications from the drug companies, and they might pass regulations about how those costs get passed down to the Medicare recipients, but they're not mandating prices for the whole country.

3. It's well documented that drug companies nowadays spend more money marketing drugs than they do on research and development. If R&D costs were so onerous as to prohibit drug discovery, there are parts of the company's spending that could be trimmed other than, say, cancer research.

4. The fact that you say there is no legitimate AIDS or cancer research going on right now is a slap in the face to about half of all the professors, grad students, undergrads, postdocs, technicians, and more who are in the fields of biology, biochemistry, biomedical engineering, biophysics, genetics, immunology, toxicology, and others working at our nation's many research universities. Even if we assume that your theory is correct, that industry is deliberately ignoring the gold mine of gold mines that is curing cancer, you can be rest assured that there are tens if not hundreds of thousands of people working on these problems that want nothing more than publications, tenure, and grant money. These people don't need a marketable product to do their research. If, tomorrow, some guys down the hall from me discovered that if you took a mixture of 7 things you could buy in a grocery store for a total of less than $20, drink it, and cure cancer, you could bet your ass they'd publish it. Cancer and AIDS haven't been cured yet because they are HARD problems, not because of some government conspiracy, not because of some drug company conspiracy, not because of a lack of manpower, and not because it's unprofitable.

[daveT]

Mr. Wookie, by super-capitalist, I mean compare America's price of education, minimum wages, etc. to other developed countries, the division between rich and poor, and on and on.

I do believe that the people doing the research is inherently up to the challenge of beating these diseases, but when we compare the price of say a pill, and Kemo, I believe that the people with the money are going to go for what gives them profit. No matter how much you want to believe that the world will be better by medication, the condition of health care will follow stringent business and money theory when the smoke clears.

The government does regulate certain procedures and medications. I have already pointed out pregnancy. Another place is AIDS. The volunteer coorporations press for free and discounted medications for the patients.

I could be wrong with this statement, but I am pretty sure that insuline is more expensive than AIDs medication. You seem more knowledgable about this stuff than I am.

[jjshabado]

[ QUOTE ]
Please define "free". Seems like you are paying high taxes for a service that is mediocre at best.

[/ QUOTE ]

Gah! The US already pays more (per capita) for health care then most (I can't quite remember if its all) other countries, including Canada. This is just public, Government money spent. When you take into account the combination of public/private spending its WAY more than many Universal Health Care systems.

There have also been numerous studies (including one just a couple of months ago) that have shown Canada's health care system is just as effective as the US system.

So, its cheaper, fairer, and just as effective.

Edit: This isn't the study I wanted to find (its more of a news article) but I'm still looking.
Article Comparing US and Canada

Edit2: Another comparison

Edit3: (Last Edit, I promise) This references the study that looked at a number of studies and found that health outcomes were basically equal between the two countries.
Wikipedia Article Comparing US and Canada Health Care Systems

[jjshabado]

The whole "Government's are inefficient" argument against health care is [censored] when its arguing for the status quo. After a year and a half of living here in the States, I've seen first hand the inefficient bureaucracy that exists. Referalls on top of Prescriptions, Pre-certification forms, tons of paper work that just exists to give Insurance companies an out to avoid paying for treatments.

It would be extremely difficult for the Government to be more inefficient then the current system. Now you could make the argument that a truly 'free market' system might be more efficient, but thats unlikely to happen anytime soon. (Nor do I want it to happen).

[Blarg]

[ QUOTE ]
The whole "Government's are inefficient" argument

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed that this is as politically loaded a statement as you're ever likely to see get passed off as common sensical or self-evident. It is so telling of an overall belief system, though, that it is usually either applauded or ignored, as I'm about to do, because there's not really room for discussion.