Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Thomas Sowell: Universal health care
Jewish World Review ^ | May 6, 2003 | Thomas Sowell

Posted on 05/06/2003 4:33:18 AM PDT by SJackson

If there was one defining moment in the debates among an already crowded field of Democrats seeking their party's presidential nomination in 2004, it may well have been when Congressman Dennis Kucinich, pushing for government-provided health care, spoke with obvious disgust of the "profits" of the insurance companies and provoked a burst of spontaneous applause from like-minded members of the audience.

Insurance companies, like every other kind of institution, have to earn money in order to keep functioning. So does every individual who was not born rich. But some people react to the word "profit" with automatic responses, like Pavlov's dog.

Such prejudice against a word was far more common half a century ago than it is today. Congressman Kucinich may think of himself as a "progressive," but he is in fact a throwback to a bygone era.

Profit was defined as "overcharge" by George Bernard Shaw, one of the founders of Fabian socialism. "Never speak to me of profit," India's Prime Minister Nehru once said to his country's leading industrialist. "It is a dirty word."

Why are such conceptions of profit no longer as common as they were 50 years ago? Because of half a century of experience with economies that tried to operate without profit. Back in the 1950s, socialism was the wave of the future and countries around the world tried out one variety or another.

With profits eliminated, in theory there should have been lower prices for the consumers, who would now be able to afford a higher standard of living. In reality, countries that went the socialist route found themselves falling farther behind countries that allowed the hated profit system to continue to exist.

Naturally, political leaders with the vision of a government-controlled economy did not want to admit that they were wrong, much less have the voters realize that they were wrong. Only when decade after decade of blatant evidence from around the world became undeniable did governments begin to withdraw their suffocating controls and sell government-owned industries to private entrepreneurs.

But, just as there are still pockets of resistance in Iraq and Afghanistan, so there are still holdouts like Congressman Kucinich and like-minded Democrats. Socialism has been discredited as an explicitly avowed belief but it still lives on in a thousand disguises, of which "universal health care" is just one.

Like so many pretty words used in politics, "universal health care" is seldom examined in terms of what its actual track record has been in the countries where it has been tried.

Probably the first country to have universal health care provided by the government was the Soviet Union. After decades of socialized medicine, what was the end result? In its last years, the Soviet Union was one of the few countries in the world with a declining life span and a rising rate of infant mortality.

But that terrible word "profit" had been banished and apparently that is what matters to the true believers.

Continued......

(Excerpt) Read more at jewishworldreview.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Editorial; Government
KEYWORDS: afghancaves; socializedmedicine; thomassowell; thomassowelllist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-32 next last
Continued.....

Not all countries that tried socialized medicine went as far as the Soviet Union. But there has been a whole pattern of problems common to government-controlled medical care systems, whether in China, Britain, Canada or elsewhere. And none of the anti-profit zealots want to talk about any of those problems.

None of those who wants us to move in the direction of Canada on health care ever faces the question: Why do so many Canadians come to the United States for medical treatment and so few Americans go to Canada?

Could it be that we should look at what actually works, rather than what sounds good? Nor should we be overly impressed by words that sound bad, like "uninsured Americans." The bottom line is medical care, not insurance. People without insurance are treated at hospitals all across America every day.

Before we even consider throwing away what works in favor of something that has failed repeatedly, we need to stop reacting to words and start looking at facts. Socialism by any other name is still socialism -- whether it is advocated by shrill zealots like Kucinich or by other Democrats whose words are smoother.

1 posted on 05/06/2003 4:33:18 AM PDT by SJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SJackson
If there was one defining moment in the debates among an already crowded field of Democrats seeking their party's presidential nomination in 2004, it may well have been when Congressman Dennis Kucinich, pushing for government-provided health care, spoke with obvious disgust of the "profits" of the insurance companies and provoked a burst of spontaneous applause from like-minded members of the audience.

That's an understatement of Kucinich's expression.....I'd say he spoke of profits, it was with anger and hatred. Great article. Thanks for posting.

2 posted on 05/06/2003 4:40:53 AM PDT by nicmarlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: *Thomas_Sowell_list; *Socialized Medicine
http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/bump-list
3 posted on 05/06/2003 4:53:51 AM PDT by Free the USA (Stooge for the Rich)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
>>Why do so many Canadians come to the United States for medical treatment and so few Americans go to Canada?


I'd be interested in what statistics you have to backup that statement...sounds good, but is it true(and I am not saying its not, just never seen any proof)? If you count the number of people in the US that buy prescriptions in canada, I bet more americans use the canadian system than the other way around...except perhaps for the wealthy canadians...how many canadians really can afford expensive medical care and the travel costs to come here and pay out of pocket?

4 posted on 05/06/2003 5:15:13 AM PDT by freeper12 (Republican president, republican senate, republican house...where are the spending cuts??)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freeper12
The canadian system is a disaster. I lived here before medicare so can compare the new to the old. I have also lived and worked in the US. There is little comparison. Up here once you get a doctor you cannot change. If you find you do not like him/her, too bad!
Doctors used to be graduates of canadian and US medical schools. Today the majority of doctors come from third world nations.
Come on up and try it. The drugs are cheap because we make generics and rip off your patents. It's cheaper that way but there are few new drugs developed here.
5 posted on 05/06/2003 5:32:20 AM PDT by BillM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: freeper12
Drugs are not the same class as medical care. CANADUH by law, PROSCRIBES the amount that drug companies profit from their goods. So what Happens ? The US Consumer pays overinflated prices here.....(Hence the rush over the border for those that can.)

Medical Services OTOH, are not manufactured goods to be exported. They Are SERVICES provided on a local (relatively) basis.

Can you see the Apples in the Basket of Oranges now?

6 posted on 05/06/2003 6:15:38 AM PDT by hobbes1 (ike him even more since he's come Hobbes1TheOmniscient® "I know everything so you don't have to" ;)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: freeper12
P.S. The U.S. Government should close our market to any Drug Company that gouges Americans, by doing business in Canada.


7 posted on 05/06/2003 6:19:17 AM PDT by hobbes1 (ike him even more since he's come Hobbes1TheOmniscient® "I know everything so you don't have to" ;)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: freeper12
My sister-in-law sat next to an ex-practicing nurse from Canada on a plane. She was down-sized when the Canadian flubberment took over health care. Guess what her job is now?

She lives in Florida and for three months a year she goes to different hospitals around the U.S. verifying claims by Canadian citizens who come here on "vacation", are then stricken with some affliction and use our system for treatment. A claim is them filed with the Canadian flubberment and they reimburse the health care facility here.

She told my s-i-l that people up there use someone else's name to go to a doctor and get diagnosed. Since the wait is so long for non-emergent procedures they take this info with them on vacation. When they get here they get taken care of.

Want to here the best part. The ex-Canadian nurse still gets her full salary from before the down sizing.

Great system, eh?

8 posted on 05/06/2003 6:36:02 AM PDT by raybbr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: freeper12
Each province has its own health care system so when you reference details of Canadian socialized medicine, make sure you reference the province. The one big misconception about Canadian health care is prescription drugs. They are not covered by the system in Ontario. Unless you have third party insurance, you pay full retail on the price of drugs. The reason prescriptions are cheaper is that the government sets price caps. They don't allow patent rip offs and have a similar patent lifespan as drugs do in the U.S. Canada and Britain are unique in the industrialized world in that doctors work foir the state. It is against the law to operate outside (i.e. as a private physician) the system. No doctor can go into business for himself independent of the health care system.

I can offer you anecdotal proff since I am Canadian and lived in the Windsor area. People were dying on waiting lists for heart surgery (waiting times being 18 to 24 months) back in the early '90's. So people that needed surgery went to Detroit and had it paid for by the provincial health care system. Since so many people were electing this option, the provincial government, under Bob Rae and the NDP (extreme socialist party, far left of the Liberals) changed the system so that coverage would be for the max allowed under OHIP. THat maxiumum was about 25-30% of what the cost was outside Canada. So now only people with money could go to the U.S. and the average Canadian got stuck in the long waiting lists. There is a two-tier system in Canada: the government run system and the U.S. system for the wealthy.

9 posted on 05/06/2003 6:48:10 AM PDT by doc30
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: hobbes1
The US consumer must bear the development costs and overhead (profit) for every new drug that comes along. The folks in Canada are given a free ride, because the drug companies are limited to a small profit over the manufacturing costs.

Fortunately for the Canadians, the US drug market exists, so there is something to freeload off of. If the US institutes a Canadian-style system of drug price controls, where will we go for innovations and new drugs? Mexico?

Drug company profits are the engine behind an explosion of new drug therapies. Yes, the drugs are expensive. But they are cheap compared to the cost of hospitilization or illness and death that they prevent. Compare the cost of a maintenance prescription of Zocor to the cost and risk of a Cardiac Bypass operation. Sure it's a lot to pay for a little pill, but it is more expensive to live without the little pill.
10 posted on 05/06/2003 7:09:49 AM PDT by gridlock (If you want cool snowmobiles, buy from Canada. For innovative drug therapies, buy from the USA.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
Profit margins which kill Americans are not appropriate.

I challenge you to explain why an HMO needs to have protected profitability while doctors, nurses, and staff are consistently put into bankruptcy.
11 posted on 05/06/2003 8:11:21 AM PDT by bonesmccoy (Defeat the terrorists... Vaccinate!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bonesmccoy
>>I challenge you to explain why an HMO needs to have protected profitability while doctors, nurses, and staff are consistently put into bankruptcy

Good point, not to mention the patients who are driven into bankruptcy because they cannot afford the care they need...
12 posted on 05/06/2003 9:24:02 AM PDT by freeper12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
anti- socialized medicine BUMP
13 posted on 05/06/2003 9:50:20 AM PDT by Ferret Fawcet (Trust God's authority, not man's majority.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freeper12
If you count the number of people in the US that buy prescriptions in canada, I bet more americans use the canadian system than the other way around . . .

This isn't a valid comparison, so you can't include the people from the U.S. who buy prescriptions in Canada. These people are going to Canada to buy something that is identical to what they would buy in the U.S., but at a price that has been artificially reduced in Canada through government regulation.

When it comes to things that are truly different in health care, Canada doesn't come close to the U.S. If you go through any medical specialty that you can thing of (neurology, cardiology, orthopedics, etc.) and rank all of the hospitals in the world for each of them, I'll bet 95 of the top 100 hospitals for these specialties are in the U.S.

14 posted on 05/06/2003 10:31:50 AM PDT by Alberta's Child
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: gridlock
Fortunately for the Canadians, the US drug market exists, so there is something to freeload off of.

I can accept that arrangement. They get cheap drugs at our expense, and we get their best hockey players.

15 posted on 05/06/2003 10:35:01 AM PDT by Alberta's Child
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
ping for later read.

Don't know about Canada...but my German and French friends have repeatedly told me that high-end medicine for the wealthy is much better in the U.S., but the situation is reversed for the average person.

Surprisingly, average people in small rural communities seem to have better care than poor big-city dwellers.

16 posted on 05/06/2003 10:36:27 AM PDT by liberallarry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
They get cheap drugs at our expense, and we get their best hockey players.

Well, since they don't play pro hockey in Canada anymore, all those players have to work somewhere!

17 posted on 05/06/2003 10:47:37 AM PDT by gridlock (They don't, do they?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: freeper12
I'd be interested in what statistics you have to backup that statement

Not prõf, but an indicatio, nevertheless. My town has historically bên a beach resort with a tremendous summer tourist season and economic depression for the rest of the year. When Canada cut off the last of private health care we suðenly got a winter season consisting mostly of Canadians coming to the coast. The ones I talked to and that my friends dealt with came here to get their major health needs taken care of along with a nice warm weather vacation. These visitors were notable for aðing nothing to the local economy outside of rõm and fõd and the local hospital entered a period of prosperity it had not before known. After a few years Canada disallowed insurance payments to foreign entities and the Canadian tourists declined radically in number but did not stop.

The visitation has been increasing steadily since and at least one couple says their visit is because they simply could not get things taken care of in Canada without waits that would preclude successful treatment of the problem. Getting that bypass now costs more than ever because they have to paythe government "insurance" and still have to travel and pay the uninsured rates for the treatment. Some have purchased American insurance using their winter aðresses and are paying two large insurance rates.

18 posted on 05/06/2003 11:17:24 AM PDT by arthurus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: liberallarry
>>my German and French friends have repeatedly told me that high-end medicine for the wealthy is much better in the U.S., but the situation is reversed for the average person.

I don't doubt that for a second.
19 posted on 05/06/2003 11:34:24 AM PDT by freeper12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: freeper12; All
There should be no cases of bankruptcy due to the cost of a physician's time.

In fact, I challenge you to cite references in this matter. The reason I know there are no such cases is that the patient has recourse (Medi-Care/AID).

The physician's offices have no such recourse and doctors are being consistently driven out of the market by the predatory practices of hospitals (which are in collusion with HMOs).

So, before you go trying to spin my statment, PROVE yours.

What patients have gone bankrupt from physician fees?
20 posted on 05/06/2003 4:19:42 PM PDT by bonesmccoy (Defeat the terrorists... Vaccinate!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-32 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson