Five Strikes Against Single-payer Healthcare

American Thinker ^ | 01/04/2015 | By Deane Waldman

[SeekAndFind]

In baseball, when you get three strikes, you’re out. There have been at least five strikes called against single payer (SP). Shouldn’t we hear from an umpire?

Whether you call it single payer, socialized medicine, universal health care, Veterans Administration (VA) Hospital System, ObamaCare, Public Option, or National Health Service, these are all different names for the same thing: government-controlled healthcare. Details vary but all single payer-type systems have one thing in common: a central authority that controls both supply of dollars and providers, as well as demand for goods and services.

Strike #1: Italy's price controls

In the early 1990s, headlines in Italy newspapers screamed about “Costo dei Farmaci!” (cost of drugs). The Italian government responded in classic single payer fashion -- they imposed strict (low) price controls. Drugs that used to cost people $300/month were suddenly and artificially priced at $5-10/month. Consumers were happy with these below-cost prices. The indigenous Italian pharmaceutical industry, which had previously had both vibrant R&D and robust manufacturing, was decimated financially and ceased to exist within three years.

As a result of government price controls, Italy now must buy its pharmaceuticals from elsewhere, pay what is charged, and then subsidize their patient population for the difference between their artificially low consumer price and the true, market-based cost. This may seem affordable to the individual, but that money must come from somewhere, and eventually “somewhere” means the Italian people.

Strike #2: Avoidable deaths in Canada

In 1998, Dr. Ciaran McNamee, a surgeon in Alberta, Canada sued his Provincial government on behalf of patients. He had scientific evidence proving that Canadians were dying needlessly while waiting “in line” for their medical care. The treatments were approved by the government but could not be provided in a timely manner.

[GraceG]

Single Payer is not “Single Payer” it is “100 million working people paying for it” system...

Ie the employed paying for the those who won’t.

[Steely Tom]

In baseball, when you get three strikes, you’re out.

In government, when you get three strikes, you're unfireable. And your power increases.

[BitWielder1]

It's "Everybody paying for Everybody Else funneled through a massive incompetent, inefficient and politically driven government system."

But don't worry people, it may have failed before, elsewhere, but THIS time it will work.
You can't really compare US with countries like Italy, after all WE have more money to plow into the ground than any nation in history.

[Diogenesis]

Willard the RINO RAT (laughing): "We have finally Grubered them all!!!"

"At the foundation of our civil liberties lies
the principle that denies to government officials
an exceptional position before the law and which
subjects them to the same rules of conduct
that are commands to the citizen."
Justice Louis D. Brandeis

[zeestephen]

Re: In Great Britain there is no kidney dialysis after age 55

If true, that is completely shocking.

But, I'm skeptical that is the whole story.

In America, there would be massive news coverage if we did not cover after 55.

And, there would be major non-government efforts to help those who were too old and could not afford private treatments.

[SeekAndFind]

FROM THE UK GUARDIAN:

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2009/aug/11/nhs-sick-healthcare-reform

“...some people with serious kidney failure are unable to obtain dialysis on the NHS and die”, said Tim Statham, chief executive of the National Kidney Federation.

“Some parts of the NHS can’t cope, because patient numbers are increasing by 6% a year, which is a huge burden. Of about 100 renal units in the UK, probably 20% are working at 100% capacity or above,”

[MrB]

For most sheeperals, it’s not about whether it works or not, but how it makes the sheeperal feel about themselves for supporting it.

[raybbr]

In America, there would be massive news coverage if we did not cover after 55.

Really? You believe that? I don't. Only if those being refused were a member of one the protected classes and not a privileged white...

[zeestephen]

I’m not sure if you agree or disagree with my skepticism.

From the second sentence in your link:

“There is no ban on anyone of any age receiving any treatment...”

That was pretty much my main point.

[Monorprise]

“The American Founders intended the States to function as idea incubators. A State would try something. If it worked, that idea could then be expanded to encompass the entire Republic through the federal government. If the idea failed, the damage would be limited, and the country at large would be spared a bad outcome.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2014/12/five_strikes_against_singlepayer_healthcare.html#ixzz3O0jxDTZy
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook”

That is not true at all, If an idea was successful in one state other states could adopt it or something similar if they wanted it. Washington is and was a Constitutional Federal Republican form of Government which had a entirely different and almost entirely foreign set of powers in contrast to states which were Almost entirely domestic in their powers.

The constitutional concept precludes the possibility the Federal copying State government programs. They were designed as entirely different and intentionally sperate. That is the point of the Constitution.