From: Rafal Smigrodzki (rafal@smigrodzki.org)
Date: Fri Aug 08 2003 - 14:40:43 MDT
Randy wrote:
> "Terry W. Colvin" <fortean1@mindspring.com> said:
>
>> The Dallas Morning News, 7 August 2003
>> By Guest Columnist Diane Barnet, Arlington, Texas
>>
>> [COMMENT: Frankly, it is outrageous that the same President who does
>> not want "socialized medicine" in America is planning to use American
>> taxpayer dollars to pay for health care for all Iraqis. America is
>> the only major nation in the world that does not provide some form of
>> national health care for its citizens. Even lowly Cuba and North
>> Korea provide national health care! Vote For Howard Dean For
>> President! RS]
>>
>> Part of President Bush's plan for rebuilding Iraq is the provision of
>> health care for the Iraqi population. Meanwhile, Americans lacking
>> access to health care now number more than 40 million.
>>
>> The average American is just a layoff or divorce away from losing
>> health benefits. Many workers remain in jobs they loathe in order to
>> provide their families with medical coverage. The uninsured crowd
>> emergency rooms. Even for the insured, co-payments, premiums and
>> deductibles continue to rise meteorically and unpredictably. And
>> don't even try to buy individual health insurance if you have a
>> pre-existing condition.
>>
>> Yet our congressmen enjoy a lifelong govenment-run health care plan
>> similar to the Canadian system. But mention Canada's health care,
>> and shrieks of "socialized medicine" and "rationed care" reverberate.
>>
>> Canadian-style health care has much to recommend it. I should know
>> -- I grew up in Canada and have worked as a registered nurse in both
>> countries. The beauty of the Canadian system is that no one has to
>> buy private insurance -- all are covered, cradle to grave.
>>
>> In each of Canada's 10 provinces, the health department periodically
>> hammers out a global budget with the hospitals. Wasteful duplication
>> of services is eliminated through the establishment of centers of
>> excellence that specialize in treating certain diseases, such as
>> bone cancer.
>>
>> Doctors are reimbursed by the government on a fee-for-service basis.
>> That means not only that they are paid promptly, with a minimum of
>> paperwork, but also that no third-party insurance companies insert
>> themselves between doctor and patient. All Canadians over 65 get
>> prescriptions free.
>>
>> Since all 28 million Canadians have access to preventive care and are
>> spared the stress of worrying about how to pay for medical treatment,
>> they are -- you guessed it -- healthier than their U.S. counterparts.
>> Rationed care? No more than our HMOs and lack of coverage limit
>> care, and Canadians can choose their own doctors.
>>
>> Americans aren't well served by the present "system" of health care
>> delivery. Hardly a system, it is a crazy quilt of competing
>> entities, including insurers, hospitals and other "providers". And
>> the operative word is "competing", since earning profits for
>> shareholders is the bottom line. Health care has become just another
>> commodity that is bought and sold. It has become a privilege for
>> those who can afford it, not a basic human right.
>>
>> Maybe Americans would be better off seeking medical care in Iraq if a
>> comprehensive system is to be established there. But I suggest
>> taking a look at Canada first, especially when it is time to vote.
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
> Great post! I cannot imagine a more extropian goal than the citizens
> of a particular country providing universal healthcare for themselves
> by leveraging their collective tax payments, their ability to control
> and regulate commerce within the borders of the country, and their
> collective market size in a way that maximizes their own good, and
> not that of profit.
### Do you think that "good" is something else than "profit"? Experience
seems to indicate that regulation and taxation of free markets decreases
both profits, and social good, however you measure it. The Canadian system
is a pitiful example of bureaucracy running amok, with deplorable
consequences for the citizens (both financially and in terms of health
care).
Rafal
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Aug 08 2003 - 11:50:38 MDT