btaylor022

Lately I have been hearing a lot of political talk surrounding the idea of free, universal health care. Above all else I am a rationalist, and I am quite skeptical about overhauling America's capitalistic approach to solving any real problem. I'm going to try to break down what "universal free health care" really entails.

Free health service does sound great from a personal level. I do not want have to pay, or even co-pay when I go to the doctor, get medicine, etc. Who doesn't want everything free in life? However, we all know there is no such thing as a free lunch, so we should be a bit skeptical about this idea.

I imagine, though I do not claim to be an expert in government financing, that free health service will require a huge bureaucracy. The government will need to provide free services to over 300 million people! The sheer size of the US population is the first major hurtle that the the notion of free health care needs to overcome. Sure it has worked effectively abroad. Everyone is raving about Canada's free health services, and rightfully so. Recall though, that Canada has a population of just over 30 million people, 1/10 the size of ours! France is a closer size comparison, with about 1/5 the population of US, but their most recent election indicates dissatisfaction with the socialist health care solution.

Furthermore, I think it is intuitive that a government-run health program will put downward pressure on the wages of doctors. Imagine the ramifications of wage pressure on the people keeping us alive! Our best and brightest will have less of an incentive to pursue the career, and current doctors will have less of an incentive to preform at the top of their game, so to speak. If I'm having a surgery that could make or break my physical welfare for the rest of my life, I would rather pay, yes you read correctly, pay than have the operation for free. I'm not putting my life in the hands of some government bureaucrat. Ok, this might be a stretch, but you get the point. Regardless, I see service in a universal free health care system to be quite akin to visiting the local DMV or post-office. Long lines, people who don't care, etc. etc. I am all for getting things free in life, but I would rather pay than face the above mentioned circumstances (ironically, you do have to pay when you go to the dmv or post office).

So far, I have mentioned inefficiency to be the major short-coming of a universal free health care system. I have more areas of skepticism that I would like to explore, but I do not want to bore anyone too much. So this should do for my first post on this site I suppose.

Iriemon

I agree that it should not be completely free because if it is you eliminate any incentive to use the service efficiently. But that does not mean the costs could not be subsidized.

That is true. On the other hand, we already have subsidized medicine covering those over 65 and the poorer.

If (as I have read) on average 90% of health care costs are generated in the last 6 months of life, then the vast bulk of health care costs are already covered by the government, and we are talking about an incremental increase.

Too late to be worried about that. Docs are already under huge downward price pressure, as more and more of them have been usurped into health care organizations in which MBAs are constantly putting downward pressure on what they will pay doctors to maximize the profits of insurers and HMOs.

I have a hard time imagining that a system could be a heck of a lot more inefficient than our current system.

__________________
Matthew 5:9

PeteEU

You should be skeptical, but you should also define what "free" means. For most countries medicine is not "free", while some have some sort of "free" medicine depending on age or other factors. Some nations also require a small user service fee for certain things and so on. There are many different versions of universal health care, but all have one thing in common.. everyone is covered, even the tourists and illegals.

Not really. Sure there has to be someone to administrate the money and oversee that rules and regulations are followed. Now if we look at the US, you already have a system in place to oversee rules and regulations are followed, and the administration of money can easily be simplified .. by letting the hosptials themselvs adminsitrate a bulk grant. As I have stated, there are many ways. And even in "socialist scandinavia" the bureaucracy is far from huge, and is much cheaper per person than the present US system. Hell your own Medicaid is cheaper to run than most if not all the Health insurance companies in the states...

Frankly size does not matter. Its just an excuse by opponents to cloud the issue. Germany has 80+ million people in a universal healthcare system, one rated as one of the best in the world, far better than the US on many issues. If there is a will, then there is a way... its often the will that lacks in American minds on this issue.

Whatever gave you that idea? That they voted a "conservative" into power?

Yes its a very american attitude and totaly inaccurate. I dont pity the doctors wages, as they are pretty high in Europe and they usualy get whatever they ask. Plus most countries have systems where doctors can paractice privately if the so choose to do so.

And if you are going to go into medicine because of the money, the frankly I dont want to be treated by your greedy selfish mind. And the incentive to persue a career in medicine is not and should not be driven by greed, but by interest, and not many people are interested in using 7+ years of their young adult life, with ****ty hours, *******s for bosses and so on, to gett a degree.. plus of course the pressure of having a persons life in your hands.

Recent study has showed that the US has longer lines than universal healthcare systems (and shorter in some areas). So basicly the US has the worst of both worlds..long lines, lack of universal coverage at almost double the cost. It takes for example longer for a woman in New York to get a mamogram (private or public) than it does for a woman in Germany or Denmark. Sad no?

Inefficiency? Sorry the facts speak for themselvs. Universal healthcare systems are cheaper and cover all. How more efficient can you be?

__________________
PeteEU