Posted on 07/04/2009 6:14:33 AM PDT by pleikumud
Medical care in the United States is derided as miserable compared to health care systems in the rest of the developed world. Economists, government officials, insurers, and academics beat the drum for a far larger government role in health care. Much of the public assumes that their arguments are sound because the calls for change are so ubiquitous and the topic so complex. Before we turn to government as the solution, however, we should consider some unheralded facts about America’s health care system.
1. Americans have better survival rates than Europeans for common cancers. Breast cancer mortality is 52 percent higher in Germany than in the United States and 88 percent higher in the United Kingdom. Prostate cancer mortality is 604 percent higher in the United Kingdom and 457 percent higher in Norway. The mortality rate for colorectal cancer among British men and women is about 40 percent higher.
7. People in countries with more government control of health care are highly dissatisfied and believe reform is needed. More than 70 percent of German, Canadian, Australian, New Zealand, and British adults say their health system needs either “fundamental change” or “complete rebuilding.”
(Excerpt) Read more at hoover.org ...
Government interference in the free market (think Medicare and Medicaid) is the reason most of us pay huge premiums for medical insurance and care. The Socialists want to expand government control until we have no choice about our own bodies. Government is not the solution, as the more "advanced" socialist countries have discovered, Government is the problem.
I forget where I heard it (Medved?) but if you take away car accidents and murder and have other countries start counting infant deaths, then we have the best mortality figures in the world.
The Socialists (aka Democrats) are determined to ruin the great medical care we have. The best way to improve it is to get the federal government less involved, not more. Government has caused disruptions in the free market, just as the government caused the mortgage melt-down.
All one needs to do is examine two or three different health care systems run by the government. IHS, VA, and whatever the system that Congress is under.
IHS, or Indian Health Service, a bit short of Doctors, facilities, and money finite number of people served.
VA or veterans administration, a good system, but limited clientele.
Congressional Health Care. Never hear of it. Never hear of it being short of funds, Never hear complaints by participants, limited number served.
If any of the above systems were to suddenly be saddled with the care of 300 million people, every negative problem they already face would be multiplied by a factor of 300 million.
Lastly, there is no provision in any founding document, that gives the US government the right, or the reason, to get into the health care business.
How would you like to reach whatever age decreed by the government, (Britain age 55)and no longer be eligible for dialysis? Open heart surgery and kidney dialysis are rationed. And that is just the tip of the iceberg.
I see government health care as mandated euthanasia.
Of the alleged 46 million w/o health care how many have opted for designer shoes or the latest electronic gizmo rather than paying for health care insurance?
Our life expectancies of those w/o health problems, for each diagnosis, is much greater than Britain or Canada.
“Much of the public assumes that their arguments are sound because the calls for change are so ubiquitous and the topic so complex.”
If the propagandist tells a big lie loud and often, the people believe it. Our side, the side against government take overs and interventions in the economy, must get the work out to oppose these big lies—tell friends, read blogs such as FR and support candidates who understand and vote our side.
How better to get control of each individual's life than to control our "meds?" As an old guy I am only too aware that the cost of medicare is largely owing to keeping us alive and functioning. My wife and I look at our blue-cross, blueshield bills and are amazed by the size of the numbers. We are on medicare,with the BCBS as secondary, and it is almost impossible to reconcile the numbers. It is all a numbers game. Back in the '60s, my familydoctor--and friend--was head of the local AmA, and he was very much against Medicare. He predicted that we would be where we are today, with bookkeepers in charge of the process. He told his fellow doctors, yes, you will iniatially get a lot more money, but you will end up working for the government after getting so ensnared in red tape you will want to quit.
So where will the Ted Kennedy’s of the world go for experimental treatment of their cancers?? Oh, I forgot, socialized medicine DOES NOT apply to them. Will Congress keep their own medical staff and research team? Obamacare will certainly penalize any other physician who goes out of the box treating the peons. It will be a one size fits all approach to health care with alot of deaths coming. Invest in funeral homes now!!
Indeed. Medicare costs projections in 1965 was based on the fallacy that the Americans alive then would have the same life history as the people born , say. in 1900,people like my mother. Well in five years she was gone, and by 1980, all the ladies in her old bridge club, except for a somewhat younger one who was still alive when we visited her three years ago. But begging with the greatest generation, we have received and come to expect, medicare care that
is so good that 75 will soon be the new 65. But the costs of keeping alive old people who do break down are staggering. The temptation will be to write off more and more. The Netherlands is the future, where people are “put down.” for reasons of expediency. More and more the question will be—unstated, of course—is he/she “worth it.”? I anticipate the equivalent of Roe v. Wade that makes the “right to die,” a government mandate.
Very well said! I don’t think those who can’t wait to get ‘free’ medical care realize that it will probably mean at best ‘palliative’ with a mandated death by the rationing of services and procedures.
Dear gibbering gods! Did you really mean that!?!
Lets see, more than 50 veterans (so far) infected with Hepatitis C, 7 (so far) by AIDS, a fair number of others of other less, ah, dangerous diseases. All due to improperly cleaned colonoscopy equipment.
And when this was discovered, some smarmy legal type in the General Council's Office of the Department of Veteran Affairs piped up that 'there's no way to prove whether these infections were even contracted in the VA system, rather than by the veteran's life-style.'
Prostate Cancer 'seed' treatment errors (deadly?) at the Philly VA, incompetent Doctors, over-worked nurses, 3 to 6 month waiting times for tests or to see a GP; sometimes one can't convince them to let you see a specialist. (Assuming they have a specialist in what you have...)
Don't believe me?
Ok; just visit your nearest Veteran's Administration Regional Hospital (not the clinics, they're usually run by third-party contractors, and therefore relatively good.)
Walk around, look at the waiting rooms, stroll down the wards and the various facilities. Talk to the veterans and see what they have to say about their care. Better yet, speak to the wives who may have driven three or four hundred miles to bring a sick spouse for treatment. Ask THEM what kind of treatment they get.
I'm dead serious; confirm for yourself the level of care given our veterans by a grateful federal government. Then tell ME it's a 'good system'.
Then imagine it will apply to all of us. (Non-government individuals, of course...)
I think it obvious that where the government gets involved, economics goes out the window, Just look at public education. Just look at higher education. Federal loans for college tuition have caused the universities to raise their tuitions higher and higher. I recall that in 1980, we began to put aside money anticipating that she would go to Duke. We invested the money and got a good return. But by the time she graduated from high school in 1989, the cost of going to Duke was out of sight, so she went elsewhere.
I think it obvious that where the government gets involved, economics goes out the window, Just look at public education. Just look at higher education. Federal loans for college tuition have caused the universities to raise their tuitions higher and higher. I recall that in 1980, we began to put aside money anticipating that she would go to Duke. We invested the money and got a good return. But by the time she graduated from high school in 1989, the cost of going to Duke was out of sight, so she went elsewhere.
A thought to ponder as Obama and Congress gear up to give us FREE health care-—
Why is it that we only read anecdotal stories about Canadians coming to the United States for immediate medical care?
Since the Canadian system is supposedly so good that the United States should emulate it, it seems Americans would be standing in line to get into a Canadian hospital.
If medicine had taken the path of technology in the last few decades, we would have far lower prices, easier access, and higher quality medical care. Compare the 1981 IBM PC for $3,300 to today’s iMac for $1,500. The old IBM PC is now the Stone Age, and iMac’s are hundreds of thousands of times better for half the price.
In other words, medicine should have been left to the private sector, to free enterprise and competition. The monkey wrench thrown into the gears by LBJ & Company was Medicare/Medicaid. Right now, the federal government’s role should be reduced, not increased. The Demo-Socialists have it jackass backwards. Medicine should be returned to the private sector, where competition always produces higher quality, lower prices, easy access, and many choices.
So where will the Ted Kennedy’s of the world go for experimental treatment of their cancers?? Oh, I forgot, socialized medicine DOES NOT apply to them. Will Congress keep their own medical staff and research team? Obamacare will certainly penalize any other physician who goes out of the box treating the peons. It will be a one size fits all approach to health care with alot of deaths coming. Invest in funeral homes now!!”
What we need is Zero federal government involvement in medicine. Free enterprise and competition would take care of prices, quality, access, and the ability to make individual choices. The Demo-Socialists are about to destroy the excellent medical care we already have.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.