As relayed by John Goodman of the free-market National Center for Policy Analysis...
Posted on 03/25/2008 8:26:33 AM PDT by bs9021
Academics Downgrade Socialized Medicine
by: Malcolm A. Kline, March 25, 2008
Throughout the Twentieth Century into the new millennium, academia has been the incubator for a flood of ideas on how to nationalize health care. Now, it seems, academics themselves are admitting that it doesn’t work, even as various presidential candidates still float ideas to provide “universal health care.”
The National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) at Harvard recently compiled a survey of 20 developed countries. As relayed by John Goodman of the free-market National Center for Policy Analysis, the NBER concludes that:
1. There is no general relationship between the way in which countries pay for health care and their ability to control costs. Public v. private financing, general revenue v. payroll taxes, third-party v. out-of-pocket spending - nothing seems to matter very much.
2. Government provision of health care is only modestly progressive. In Canada, people in the bottom two income quintiles - with 40% of the population - get about 50% of the health care benefits. Moreover, relative to health care needs, Canada's health care spending may not be progressive at all. For OECD countries generally, among people with similar health conditions, “higher income people use the system more intensively and use more costly services than do lower income people.”
3. Marginal increases in health care spending may actually be regressive. This is especially true if extra spending buys specialist services and elective procedures. “In Canada, high income people make disproportionate use of elective surgical procedures, such as hip and knee replacements.”
4. Government provision of health care has little impact on the distribution of well-being in society. When economists assign a monetary value to health care and add it to money income, national health insurance has very little impact on overall economic inequality....
(Excerpt) Read more at campusreportonline.net ...
Not to worry. The Democrats will say simply that all of these controlled with universal health care haven’t executed the plan correctly as yet; nor have they spent enough money on it.
Socialism does not work. But at least some of the tweed coats at Harvard are beginning to get it.
“controlled” s/b “countries”
That's because those elite jackasses realize they are getting old and they don't want to have to go down to Mexico for their hip replacements in some dingy little shack of a hospital.
Democrats are in a hurry to get socialized medicine and global warming initiatives past, because it won’t be long before both are proven scams.
What will Canadians do for health care if the US socializes its health care?
Think supply side. There is nothing you can do with health insurance to fix the problem because health insurance is purely demand side. All you’re doing is redistributing the health care.
As relayed by John Goodman of the free-market National Center for Policy Analysis...
Elective? Well, I guess they are elective if it doesn't matter whether people can walk or not. I suppose if walking doesn't matter, then a wheelchair would be elective as well.
Socialize medicine only “works” if you LIKE the DMV.
referanceping
Very true!
Ted Kennedy certainly isn't going to get on a indefinite waiting list for his new liver.
bookmark for later
They'll go to India, Ecuador, Thailand, Mexico, New Zealand, Costa Rica, etc. like everyone else.
UHC is not about health care, it is about government control of you, by restricting access to treatment. Smoke? Eat meat? Vote conservative? - Sorry, no treatment for you...
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.