Skip to comments.
Unsocialized Medicine (Single-Payer Health Care Delivers Scarcity Of Care Alert)
Opinionjournal.com ^
| 06/13/05
| Wall Street Journal Editorial
Posted on 06/12/2005 9:50:04 PM PDT by goldstategop
But it does say in effect: Deliver better care or permit the development of a private system. "The prohibition on obtaining private health insurance might be constitutional in circumstances where health-care services are reasonable as to both quality and timeliness," the ruling reads, but it "is not constitutional where the public system fails to deliver reasonable services." The Justices who sit on Canada's Supreme Court, by the way, aren't a bunch of Scalias of the North. This is the same court that last year unanimously declared gay marriage constitutional. ...
The larger lesson here is that health care isn't immune from the laws of economics. Politicians can't wave a wand and provide equal coverage for all merely by declaring medical care to be a "right," in the word that is currently popular on the American left.
There are only two ways to allocate any good or service: through prices, as is done in a market economy, or lines dictated by government, as in Canada's system. The socialist claim is that a single-payer system is more equal than one based on prices, but last week's court decision reveals that as an illusion. Or, to put it another way, Canadian health care is equal only in its shared scarcity.
(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...
TOPICS: Business/Economy; Canada; Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Editorial; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: canadasupremecourt; georgezelliotis; healthcare; jacqueschaoulli; privateinsurance; quebec; scarcity; singlepayer; socializedmedicine; wsj
The laws of economics can't be suspended - not even for health care. Just because you declare something a "right" doesn't mean it will be one. Canada's single-payer health care system delivers scarcity of care. Its much vaunted claim to providing equal access is an illusion as Canada's Supreme Court ruled last week and its justices are no Northern Scalias. Something for those who would like to bring it here to think long and hard about.
(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
To: goldstategop
2
posted on
06/12/2005 9:58:06 PM PDT
by
endthematrix
(Thank you US armed forces, for everything you give and have given!)
To: goldstategop
We cannot afford "free" healthcare. Socialised medicine is bloody expensive, it is just that the cost is paid from your paycheck before you get it (regardless of whether or not you ever use the service).
3
posted on
06/12/2005 10:05:54 PM PDT
by
Army Air Corps
(Four fried chickens and a coke)
To: Army Air Corps
More to the point, its not a bargain if you can't get health care when you do need it. In that sense, its not really "free." The costs simply show up down the road.
(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
4
posted on
06/12/2005 10:07:45 PM PDT
by
goldstategop
(In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
To: goldstategop
Have you noticed how much publicity this ruling has received (sarcasm on). The believers in socialized medicine just lost their best example. It used to be Britain until their system fell apart. Milton Friedman noted in 1980 that Canada was the new panacea because it was new enough to have not yet developed its problems. Looks like Uncle Miltie was right again as usual.
To: Honestfreedom
The best decision this country ever made was to say "NO" to HillaryCare. Yet the Democrats seem determined to prove there's virtue in stupidity. Here in California, a bill that would establish a government-run health care plan has just reached our Governor's desk. It needs a veto. Incidentally, such schemes have been rejected by voters whenever they've been put to a vote.
(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
6
posted on
06/12/2005 10:11:56 PM PDT
by
goldstategop
(In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
To: goldstategop
Didn't Davis sign a bill to require employers to provide and pay for 75% of health care if they had more than 20 employees?
To: Honestfreedom
Yes - and voters repealed the mandate in a subsequent referendum. People are realizing none of this is really free. The costs are the same and the only question is how they're paid.
(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
8
posted on
06/12/2005 10:20:08 PM PDT
by
goldstategop
(In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
To: goldstategop
9
posted on
06/12/2005 10:22:52 PM PDT
by
TASMANIANRED
(Democrats haven't had a new idea since Karl Marx.)
To: goldstategop
It's probably already a done deal. Businesses are no longer willing/able to pay the costs. The number of insured workers is shrinking. When it eventually reaches critical mass the AMA along with corporations like Wal Mart will back a compromise proposal that offers a health care safety net.
10
posted on
06/12/2005 10:23:19 PM PDT
by
durasell
(Friends are so alarming, My lover's never charming...)
To: durasell
Of course corporations would be too happy to shift their health care costs onto the taxpayers. We better begin thinking about paying high taxes for second class health care like they do in Canada if we want to ignore the lesson our neighbor has learned. You can't expect a monopoly to deliver a good product because it has no incentive to provide it. The money's always in the pipeline. DUH.
(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
11
posted on
06/12/2005 10:26:55 PM PDT
by
goldstategop
(In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
To: goldstategop
My instinct -not study of the problem -- tells me that there should be a way to use a kind of tax payroll that would not be applied if the person had private coverage.
However, Wal-Mart is already shifting some of the burden on to the tax payer by telling employees to go to clinics, etc.
12
posted on
06/12/2005 10:33:00 PM PDT
by
durasell
(Friends are so alarming, My lover's never charming...)
To: goldstategop
13
posted on
06/13/2005 3:38:20 AM PDT
by
traviskicks
(http://www.neoperspectives.com/charterschoolsexplained.htm)
To: goldstategop
Let's hope Hillary Clinton and Ted Kennedy were sitting down when they heard the news of the latest bombshell Supreme Court ruling.... The court's decision strikes down a Quebec law banning private medical insurance and is bound to upend similar laws in other provinces. Canada is the only nation other than Cuba and North Korea that bans private health insurance.... "Access to a waiting list is not access to health care," wrote Chief Justice Beverly McLachlin for the 4-3 Court last week. Canadians wait an average of 17.9 weeks for surgery and other therapeutic treatments, according the Vancouver-based Fraser Institute. The waits would be even longer if Canadians didn't have access to the U.S. as a medical-care safety valve. One of the main problems with adoption by the US of a "single-payer system" is that there is no where else to go (easily) to find quality healthcare when the system fails.
14
posted on
06/13/2005 5:27:29 AM PDT
by
OESY
To: mvpel
15
posted on
06/13/2005 5:53:02 AM PDT
by
mvpel
(Michael Pelletier)
To: goldstategop
"Hey, like there's nothing wrong with our hosehead health care system, eh. Like we are both on a three year waiting list for alcohol detox, and this works out really, really great!"
16
posted on
06/13/2005 7:34:08 AM PDT
by
FormerACLUmember
(Honoring Saint Jude's assistance every day.)
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson