I'm against the US adopting socialized medicine, but I don't think the current system is puppies & rainbows.
Topic: I'm against the US adopting socialized medicine, but I don't think the current system is puppies & rainbows.
December 12, 2019 / By Ichabod Question:
Why is it assumed that if you don't support socailized medicine (call it what you want, it's government mandated at the expense of the tax payer) then you naively think the current system is all peaches and cream?
Why is the "only" solution to the problem in the hands of the government?
Dude - I agree. But that kind of thinking gets you irresponsibly and erroneously equated to being a Nazi. The people deterimined to "fix the health care crisis" are going to force compromise from people like you an me. But I just don't think the government being in charge is "compromise."
Creoqu - I lived in England for 3 years - my dad was there for 10. We both had to go to NHS hospital a few times. I would not trade that for this....where'd you live?
NiC - despite the negative publicity we give ourselves, everyone in this country has access to basic health care. People are not turned down because they can't pay. But just like in your country, expensive surgeries and treatments are not just handed out. The develpment and implementation of those surgeries and prodecures cost money.....why should they expected to be "free to all."
His Dudeness - but we already have that with Medicaid. But the way our tax system is set up, the majority of the people on plan A don't pay income taxes....and the taxes they do pay is not enough to fund the program so everyone ends up paying for a service that not eveyone is allowed to use.
Best Answers: I'm against the US adopting socialized medicine, but I don't think the current system is puppies & rainbows.
Estmond | 4 days ago
I don't see what is so wrong with today's healthcare system. It is against the law for a hospital to turn anyone in need of urgent medical care away for lack of insurance. But for some reason we've got this idea that EVERYONE deserves health insurance, whether they hold a job or not. It ludicrous to burden the taxpayers with buying health insurance for everyone in this country. If you want insurance .. buy it. its a luxury. but don't expect the taxpayers to get it for you. Whether this health care is "peaches and cream" or not, you can expect it to get ALOT worse if the government were to take control of it. The government is the most inefficient system in every aspect. Healthcare should be left alone. Private sector (whether or not it cost more for the average patient) performs much better than the government, and that is a fact.
Alright here is a compromise. give me a few minutes to write it down...
We have two forms of healthcare. Plan A and Plan B .. Plan A is completely free for the patient. In order to be eligible for Plan A, you have to either unable to afford insurance, or you pay extra on your income taxes to fund it (since liberals are so keen on this free healthcare idea, and they are so much more "benevolent" than conservatives are (yea right) , then they should have no problems with paying a little extra on their taxes for universal healthcare). It is funded entirely by those people that opt to pay this extra tax (ie. the people for universal healthcare). For everyone else who decides not to pay this extra tax, they have to use Plan B, which is privately owned healthcare. the same way it has been and the superior system.
👍 116 | 👎 4
Did you like the answer? I'm against the US adopting socialized medicine, but I don't think the current system is puppies & rainbows.
Share with your friends
Originally Answered: Why do people want socialized medicine.?
They usually want it because they either disagree with the drawbacks that you list or that they believe there will be other benefits that will outweight any drawbacks. I think also that the thought of guaranteeing health care to every person seems just to socialized medicine advocates.
I am not an advocate for socialized medecine, but I think that it's important to realize that the motives are genuine for the vast majority of people who do want it. Rather than impugne their motives, I view it (usually) as a matter of honest debate.
I generally oppose the government provision of anything at all (including especially important things such as health care). When goods or services are provided through voluntary arrangements, the profit mechanism is at play to help allocate scarce resources to their best use. Firms able to earn profits in a free market (careful to differentiate it from much of what passes for business in our society) are those that are able to best satisfy the needs of their customers.
When tasks are relegated to government, the profit mechanism ceases to function. Rather, activities are guided by bureaucracy. While most bureaucrats are well-intentioned, there is no way to determine who are the best providers. More often than not, failure is rewarded by increased funding. And we haven't even touched upon the moral hazard that directs so much wealth to corrupt purposes.
Most people who want socialized medicine believe that it will make society better. I disagree. It can not work.
ADDITION: Reading other responses, it's worth agreeing that our current medical system is deeply flawed. I do want change. However, when considering what form to adopt, we should take an honest look at the current level of government intervention (from regulation to tax policies that promote third party payer systems). We should consider whether the current interventions are the real culprits for the problems. If so, will allowing further government interventions really solve anything?
ADDITION 2: I had another thought. I honestly believe that systems in other countries are aimed at maximizing the availability of health care to their citizens. For every report of how "brilliant" (to borrow a term from our U.K. friend above) their systems are, there is at least one horror story. I only have personal experience with the U.S. system and must be careful to account for my biases when considering what I hear about other systems. An interesting question to consider is whether their systems are superior to our's. In answering this question, it should be remembered that our corporate/government run system is aimed largely at enriching special interests. However you answer the question, you must look carefully in society to find instances of free market health care solution. Most comparisons sadly are debating fascism (the U.S. system) with socialism (European and Canadian systems).
EDIT IN RESPONSE TO lavidasigue40:
You touch on the moral aspect of this question whereas I have only dealth with the economic aspect up until now. Wanting to provide for your child's care does not automatically equate to asking government to force society to pay for it. A person who stands behind what Christianity preaches will not require theft (what you call forcefully taking wealth which is what taxation amounts to for a great many people) to meet their needs. The Christian response would seem to warrant seeking voluntary solutions to getting your child the care he needs and deserves.
I can sympathize with the desperate parent who steals to provide for his child. I can even understand the sentiment that goes toward condoning taxation to relieve you from the risk of personal crime or the shame of pleading for charity (leaving out for the moment the prospect of personal industry - yes I know sometimes the chance of immediate success seems remote). But can you not see the moral hazard that you introduce when you establish an institution of theft?
Paying for health care (no, health care is not free no matter how you fund it) by taxation is theft. When you identify the threats of violence behind taxation and recognize that as theft, can you wonder why corruption seems so rampant among politicians? What kind of people do you think will tend to seek to seize the power of massive institutions of legal threat? Can you not see that such an institution is a primary cause of the inequality that you see?
Yes, you are right to protest the material inequality of the world. Voluntary human association does not lead to such massive inequality. When wealth must be earned by honest contract, a person may only become wealthy by trading great amounts of value. Many fortunes are seized (not earned) in cooperation with the institution of theft that you wish to establish to care for your child. Do you picture the horrors these institutions have visited upon humanity? Why do you want to prop up these institutions? We can do better through voluntary institutions!
My objections to socialized medicine lie both within economic and moral realms. While I recognize the honest motivations of most people who desire it, I strongly believe that they are misguided.
Not living in the US I can't speak from personal experience but living in Australia, we have a medical system which is funded by tax payers, I have to say that everyone, whether employed or not, should be entitled to health care. Of course, getting the latest cutting edge treatments is another story, but why shouldn't everyone be given the best treatment available? If it was someone you knew, who was mentally ill and couldn't work, maybe spent a lot of time living on the streets, would it still be okay for them not to recieve the care they need? We (here is AU) when on Medicare, have to wait for surgery and other specialist treatment but we get it and having to wait is a small price to pay.
👍 40 | 👎 2
I say for the people that like the system as is, make no changes. Tucker Carlson from MSNBC made a great point; if you like the coverage you have the government should not force their coverage on you. If the coverage your employer provides or that you pay for out of pocket works for you, keep it. Let the government provide alternate coverage for people that are really struggling or have no medical at all. As Americans we like to make up our own minds. Give us options, not ultimatums. Not everyone in this country wants Hillary to put on a red cape & 'save' us from from all of our difficulties. If the free government sponsored health care is good maybe critics will make the switch but don't force it down our throats... this is isn't Cuba. (thank God)
👍 37 | 👎 0
You're right, government has enough to do. The problem is that medical care for all fails against the face of capitalism. The truth hurts that we can't be everything that's good all rapped up in a blanket of democracy.
To truly be a true capitalist democrat, we must realize that we are leaving people out of what we want for ourselves. A majority of the people all collectively feel they want to take care of themselves first.
It's a price to pay, if we want to be free to succeed, it means that success will be at the expense of somebody that isn't ourself.
Isn't this what the American ideal has become, if everybody was truly equal, than as a society we wouldn't be collectively saying, "Me first."
👍 34 | 👎 -2
Many of these people who want the government to "fix" health care are the same people who want the government to "fix" everything else.
They don't believe in personal accountability for their lives. They want someone else to foot the bill for their lives.
The government has no business taking a citizen's money, and giving it to someone else - Whether it be through social programs, or cash payments.
Any other organization who forcibly took money from another would be called a criminal organization. And that's what the government is.
👍 31 | 👎 -4