Thursday, May 03, 2007

Life, Liberty and Free Health Care

Apparently T.J. and his associates had it all wrong.

Health care is not a right in the United States,” she said. “... You have the right to the pursuit of happiness and whatever, that’s all written in there, but there’s no place that says ‘health care is a right.’”

Whew! I thought they were going to say that health care IS a right, as guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.

Smith said that in the U.S., instead of a being a right, health care is a business with a bottom line

Apparently Ms. Smith believes health care is NOT a business in other countries. Wonder which government class taught her that?

She said hospitals raise health care costs because of the money they lose treating large amounts of uninsured citizens, causing the insurance companies to charge more for those who are insured in order to cover the higher costs.

At least she got that part right.

The proposal that stirred the most discussion in the audience was WHSA, a single-payer system that is much like what is found in countries like England. Andrew Robson, the associate dean of the College of Letters and Science, was the second speaker of the night. He told of his first-hand experience with England’s universal health care system.

He said that the single-payer system is less stressful, cheaper and simpler than the United States’ current system.

Less stressful to whom? (Or is it who)?

Somehow I doubt the folks in a queue for extensive testing or elective, but necessary surgery will agree.

Burnett said that she disagrees with the health care system in Great Britain and thinks that it is not a good solution because it limits people’s choices and causes lower quality care.

Looks like a counter-point to me.

She said there would be great benefit in a form of universal health care that resembles the Medicare system, which she described as universal health care for seniors.

Ahh, yes. The Medicare for all proposal.

Methinks she does not understand just how poorly Medicare works and how expensive it is for both the taxpayer and the beneficiaries.

Granted, to receive Medicare you do not have to qualify from a health standpoint, but you still must have the funds to fully take advantage of the system.

Only Part A is "free" and even that comes with a price in the form of deductibles & coinsurance. Parts B and D require a premium payment. Then if you want coverage to SUPPLEMENT what Medicare does NOT pay, you pay again.

Another concern was that hospitals would be overflowing with people who were not covered by insurance before, but now want to get care because they are able to.

When something is perceived as free, demand outstrips supply.

Just offer free tickets to the World Series and see how many folks show up.

Next up, free cars for everyone.
blog comments powered by Disqus