Great article but full of (what's that smell?) let us say some missing analysis. There is a truism to the article and that is that those who can afford better health care will certainly live longer...but does that mean sentencing the rest of us to lower standards for the sake of the few is enough reason to destroy a system that though is not perfect, works ? I'm all up for options, and if you are into it, let's bring in folks from both sides to debate it? What do you think, I'm game if you are. Short read and be sure to look at comments underneath the article, some very clever thoughts there.
I think anyone who hasn't seen the Michael Moore movie 'Sicko', needs to go watch it just to see how ridiculous some of the garbage that goes on without a system like ours. This part of the video to about part 9 or so are the relevant parts you'll want to watch if you have any interest in the difference in health care systems in a few different countries. Yes I know Mr. Moore is a very biased individual but it doesn't make what he's saying any less true.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?videos=gAJ4nL2oIpc&v=3YuHlIo06GQ
As for this fellow's argument - it's ridiculous at best. 99% of the people privy to the benefits of a 'private' health care system would be perfectly capable of flying down to America to have their problem looked after over waiting a whole [i]hour[/i] in a waiting room. boo hoo. The whole point is moot anyways - why should we waste time reforming a health care system to allow private enterprise when there is no advantage whatsoever to the majority? (ie; you and I) I would rather see a tax increase to everyone over having to see someone not get to keep their finger when they accidentally cut it off. It's bullshit.
Don't think I agree completely with an entirely socialist system of health care (or any other system for that matter). The fact is that at this time the socialist forms of health care are the most practical solution for our day in age. Prove me wrong (I doubt anyone has a desire to anyway), I dare you.
So I just read the article on two tier health care and I see where Herb Emery is coming from, but if you really think about the long term effects of that kind of system it's not worth it. I realize that our healthcare is not perfect and there are many flaws but we can't take a shortcut and try a quick fix. If we privatize healthcare yes those who can afford it will receive their money's worth but at what cost to the rest of us? If you privatize half the system it doesn't mean half the doctors, nurses, and specialists will remain in the public sector and the other half will move to private. Think about it, you are a doctor or even a nurse working over 50 hours a week and you have to be responsible for maybe 50 patients, so basically your overworked and probably under paid because of the government cuts to public healthcare. Now you hear about this new private hospital where you will have 20-30 less patients; because most people can't afford to pay out of pocket for surgery, also you will probably get paid more and on top of it all you have better equipment because this hospital is specialized. Where would you rather work if you were a doctor or nurse? Most medical professionals would move to private so now instead of 40-50% being private it will be more like 60-70% which leaves the majority of the population up shit creek without a paddle. How can anyone expect a system to work if only 40% of people can afford private health care but they have 60-70% of the doctors ?? what about the other 60% or more of us? what are we supposed to do? wait in the even bigger lines that will be created at public hospitals? No what will happen is we will end up paying out our asses to get the kind of service we are already receiving now for free! That does not make any sense at all. All a two tier system would be doing is creating huge problems in a system that is only slightly flawed. It is an unnecessary change that would be more detrimental than helpful.
ReplyDelete