From: Randy S (cryofan@mylinuxisp.com)
Date: Fri Aug 08 2003 - 12:13:45 MDT
Rafal Smigrodzki <rafal@smigrodzki.org> said:
> 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
>
Rafal, do you believe that people and entities composed of people act in
their best interests on a regular basis?
-- -------------- -Randy
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Aug 08 2003 - 12:23:29 MDT