>got onto the subject of the inefficiencies of government as a monopolistic
>firm. I am in no way experienced enough to have a sufficiently informed
>debate on this topic-- could someone more learned please help me poke some
>holes in his argument(although some points of his are very convincing).
>Especially, how do I argue against his statement that public healthcare is
>40% cheaper than private!?!
>
>Note that Canada offers the same level of healthcare as
>the US but at about 40% lower costs.
Countries like Canada and Britain save so much money partially because
the cash cow of privatized health care in the US finances the lion's share of
development of new pharmaceuticals and techniques, which then benefit
public health care systems worldwide.
I read an article a year or three ago that asserted that wealthy Canadians
were happy to use public health care for MOST things, but that when they
needed a cutting-edge technique, or an especially skilled surgeon, they quite
commonly flew down to America and paid cash.
In general, health care you pay for is better than health care through the
state. Even the current near-equivilance of quality of care between countries
like Canada and the US is only possible because the R&D burden is unevenly
carried by the US. If all health care systems were public, the quality
of healthcare worldwide would decrease.
-k.
<bold>___________________________________________________________
</bold>Kristen Brennan
codewarrior princess
brennan@jitterbug.com
http://www.jitterbug.com/pages/brennan.html
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GO d? s+:+ a-/a? C++ ?U W++$ K- M+ PS++ PE Y+
t+['60s only] 5? X+ R++[recovered] !tv b++++ DI++++
D--- G e* h+ r++ x++/z**
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
The child says, "Give me what I want because I desire it."
The teenager, "Because it is ethical." And the adult,
"Because I am holding a gun."
<bold>___________________________________________________________
</bold>