Doctors take the Hippocratic oath and have taken it for hundreds and hundreds of years. As a result of their oaths, doctors have adapted to taking care of the nation's elderly on a sliding scale basis. Doctors have always expected to contribute at least 10% of their work to charity cases. That charitable ethic has not subsided:
The history of the middle class and its tax burden reveals the reason for the distortion caused by the unwelcome and inappropriate role of government persons who have seen it necessary to suck more and more in taxes from the American people.
Looking at the tax creeo over the ages indicates clearly why Americans can no longer afford health insurance or to afford health treatment and care for their elderly relatives.
In 1913, the tax rate on 98% of Americans was 1% max. Today, the middle class tax rate averages 22%.
In 1937, the first Social Security tax on working Americans was 1%. Today it is 6.2%
In 1966, the first Medicare tax was 0.35%. Today, it is 1.45%.
https://www.ssa.gov/oact/progdata/taxRates.html
When the matching portions are added from employers, the tax creep above is doubled.
When federal, state, and local taxes are added up, Americans are paying half of their labor in taxes. This overtaxing of American families has forced mothers into the workforce, elderly people to seek dependence on government, and a larger license for government persons to take over. It's a vicious cycle.
The problems with caring for the nation's elderly are clearly seen in government persons getting accustomed to taking over vast portions of the lives of people because that drives new taxes, thus forming a vicious cycle. The business of government is based on tax revenues, the natural inclination of any person, whether government or private, is to increase their revenue.
History of tax creep illustrates conclusively that government persons seek to suck more and more of the revenue of the private sector for themselves. This trend has continued to the point that government persons now present their wages as being far above the average for the private sector and with pensions that can only be dreamed of in the private sector.
Medicare was but one more step in the forced evolution of American society along a path towards socialism. It had nothing to do with principles of insurance. It has everything to do with robbing Americans of their ability to pay their way achieving independence and freedom.
Another point missed in your argument is that the introduction of government into caring for the elderly by its trade name 'Medicare' causes hospitals and clinics to request reimbursements from the government. This process of reimbursement has over the decades been so onerous as to take up to 50% of a physician's time. Today, physicians often have a nurse or themselves spend 50% of working hours on the phone or typing justifications for granting coverage for care. In other words, 50% of the time is spent on the phone arguing about coverage with government bureaucrats. This has caused a patient's time with a doctor to fall from well over 30 minutes to about 6 minutes. Doctor's exams and care have become a factory line as physicians have had to increase the number of patients seen from about 15 to 35 per day. Attention to a person and their health has become a charade.
In Direct Pay Care that operates without insurance, a patient's time with their doctor can be well over an hour so the patient benefits not only from examination, testing, treatment but also from becoming educated by the physician about lifestyle and prognoses. Such Direct Pay plans are available for $150 per month to $350 per month. But the physician is always available and for much more time than a physician on the insurance factory line.
The last remaining point missed in this sort of thin, almost ethereal argument of "government has to do it because no one else will" is that the rates of reimbursement set by government and the difficulty and delay in reimbursement cause many distortions in price discovery causing health markets to become inefficient. President Trump is well aware of this phenomenon as he talked about it on the campaign trail. Government drives up costs in the health market in turn causing health insurance premiums to increase greatly, not the other way around.
The same prime driver that caused income taxes to grow from 1% to 22%, social security taxes to grow from 2% to over 12.4%, Medicare taxes to grow from 0.7% to 2.9% has driven the cost of healthcare and health insurance similarly.
The problem is socialism.
SOCIALISM ALWAYS ENTERS SNEAKILY.
Socialism always starts out at a very small rate and with a very low profile presence so as to 'acclimate the population' until dependence and votes are cultivated.
SOCIALISM IS A CANCER.
Socialism leads people to think they cannot take care of themselves without government. It leads people to think they no longer need family, churches, or a work ethic.
Medicare is a socialist tool. The antidote for the socialist poison of Medicare is to make Americans rich again. Rich does not mean wealthy. Being rich simply means Americans can take care of themselves, their relatives and the disadvantaged in their community. When Americans are rich, they are the most generous people on the planet. When they are rich, the government's presence fades. Government people don't like that, just ask them.
Thank you for your well reasoned reply. I do agree that government involvement has increased the cost of medical care, however I would argue that advances in medical science have also increased costs.
As far as socialism being a cancer, all societies have some form of socialism. Nobody but the most hard core libertarian would argue that police or fire-fighters should be a pay as needed service. Heck, the military(which I spent 20+ years in) is a form of socialism.
You may be right that even without Medicare elderly patients would still receive care, with no drop in life expectancy. I have my doubts though.
I am a firm believer in the free market and capitalism but I believe there are situations where the free market will not work. Two examples being where you cannot have competition or where there is no profit incentive. I would argue that insuring elderly people falls into the latter.