February 25, 2010
-
Healthcare Debate
I've been watching the president's group meeting with Demo and GOP congressional leaders and find it about as I expected - a bunch of politicians taking the opportunity to spout sound bites.
The seem unable to come to grips with a few self-evident - to me at least - facts.1. The US healthcare system is expensive for a number of reasons - our attitude toward healthcare, the fact that it's controlled by insurance companies, and the lack of effective oversight.
2. To start from the point of view of what's good national health care, instead of how can we reign in insurance costs is a better way to go.
3. Just about every other solution to this problem used by other countries is both cheaper and more satisfactory as far as results go.A logical solution would be to develop a national healthcare system which covers everybody and for which everybody who can afford it pays.
Our current total expenditure on health care is over 2.5 Trillion dollars a year or about $8162 per capita. Canada, Germany, and the UK, who have the next most expensive systems each spend about half that amount per capita, yet we decry those systems as being unsatisfactory. Unlike the US, these countries have no loud political or popular demands that their systems be changed.
In the US, private insurance expenditures seems to be rising at a rate twice that of government (medicare).A government managed program, paying private physicians (as in UK and Canada) and paid for through a tax increase would result in a substantial decrease in over-all healthcare expense. Medicare expenses are, for example much less per capita than private insurance (Medicare does not pay at the insurance rate which is inflated as the higher the payments, the more the private insurers make). The increased taxes should be a good deal less than the private health insurance premiums - for one thing, a single payer system would have a far larger pool to in which to spread the tax/pay-outs.
The question remains, will the American citizens like such a system? The seniors certainly seem to like Medicare - which is such a system.
Comments (3)
As I see it Medicare is a pretty good system (I'm under it.) It would be great if such a system covered all. As to the present U.S. health system vs that of other countries, they have a big advantage over us. They don't spend jillions trying to be the world's police force, fighting wars almost continuously, and maintaining a large armed force spread all over the world. Plus, they probably don't have anywhere near the amount of waste that we do, not to mention PORK.
If we'd just stop all this insane, out-of-control "borrow and spend" foolishness, and try to balance our budget and pay down our debt, then we might afford a decent health care system. Otherwise, we're flirting with bankruptcy.
@dsullivan -
Thanks for the comment Sully, I was beginning to give up hope.
I don't think the healthcare problem is directly related to how much we spend in other areas as much as it depends on how our method of healthcare payment and supply is structured. Other developed nations spend less per capita because they either closely regulate payment to private insurers - as if they were public utilities with regulated profit margins or have a single payer "not for profit" system. these systems include pharmas and hospitals - a major source of needless expense.
@tychecat -
You don't get many comments on issues of vital importance to our country. When I post such comments, I usually get you and maybe a couple more to respond. Folks are just not interested in such things, and prefer to comment on more mundane matters. Maybe that's one of the reasons we're where we are, and nobody gives damn.