January 17, 2009

Socialized Medicine

There are quite a few problems with Health care costs.  I do not see how Government intervention will make health care "Better" in any way shape or form.

I feel the main problems are the insurance companies, Tort Law and no consumer market controls.

This AP story makes me wonder what people think a socialized system is going to be like.

 Depending on how they go about this government takeover, it could introduce a whole new industry based on cash and carry healthcare.

Someone will open up an MRI shop you can come in and get scanned.  Cash only doctors as well. 

We could loose the ability to go to court against hospitals and doctors as well.


Tina said...

Again, Canadian healthcare example:

My mom had something on her face. She went to the dermatologist and they burned it off.

No biopsy. The doc called it 'sun damage.'

I can recall at age 16 having moles cut off and sent to biopsy, because they are moles and that's what you do. I thought that was total overkill since it was only cosmetic.

I find it interesting that a 75-year old woman wouldn't have 'sun damage' checked for cancer.

There are your two extremes - Over-the-top Lawsuit-wary US care and absolute minimal Canadian care.

Where's the happy medium?

flyingvan said...

She's in Hawaii with her crystal ball

Tina said...


Very succinct.

Stella said...

Tina, you make a good point. I'm not sure socialized medicine is the panacea that will help our national health care system, either.

On the other hand, people below the poverty has increased every year since 2000, and one-third of all Americans are without any health coverage at all—good or bad.

I want to believe that nationalized health care is a positve step towards helping others, but I am of British descent and well aware that it's not.

It goes without saying that there's no easy answer to this question. How America could build an excellent healthcare system with good oversight is a question that far better minds could answer than me.

I wish the happy medium had taken me with her...

flyingvan said...

Having worked in healthcare all my adult life, I still believe there should be a two tiered system. (Countries with socialized medicine end up with it anyway, usually not by design) Repeat after me---THERE IS NO RIGHT TO HEALTHCARE IN THE CONSTITUTION. If you don't work,never planned for catastrophic care, or choose to spend money on junkfood and cigarettes instead of insurance, you get basic care at a teaching hospital. There will be lines and lots of paperwork. If admitted, you will be in a ward with other people, and no TV. If you work, earn insurance, pay for insurance, then you can choose between competetive healthcare systems. Medicinal care should be about the same.
THis is supposed to be a free country, where you are free to work or not to work. Motivation to work shouldn't be to just get out of the house. Poverty has risen? Not really. THe definition of poverty has lowered, but even the poorest in our nation live better than most the world. Obesity is a bigger problem than malnutrition. I believe the more entitlements go up, the more poverty you have.

flyingvan said...

ALso --we have something similar to socialized medicine here---it's called Kaiser.

Tina said...

Oh yeah - Kaiser. They're the ones who couldn't figure out the reason my sister's c-section incision site couldn't heal for SIX MONTHS is because she had a skin infection.

After they finally agreed to let her see a dermatologist, it was taken care of & healed.

But in that interim, there was daily scrubbing and draining, multiple doctor visits, etc. Somewhere in there was a big breakdown. Thank you, Kaiser.

Stella said...

Kaiser=Socialized Medicine: LOL! I'm not a big fan of that facility either.

There is no legal right to health care, Flying Van, but what about a moral right? And, actually, you get better care in a teaching hospital because treatment is cutting edge. Let's consider UCLA Med Center, ranked #3 in the country, a teaching hospital, and a first-rate research facility. USC Medical Center is similar to your depiction, but their care is excellent and it's far better than having no insurance and using emergency rooms as doctors.

I am not sure that the more entitlements escalate, the more poverty you have. I cite by example the middle-class who are increasingly having trouble making ends' meet. And even if the poor have it better here than elsewhere, isn't America supposed to be better than that? You need to look carefully at the economic crisis in this country and the financial institution bailout: isn't that socialism for corporations?

It's a myth that just because you work, you get health insurance. Most Americans have health insurance through their employers. But, employment is no longer a guarantee of health insurance coverage. [NCHC.

I might add that obese and morbidly obese people can simultaneously be malnourished due to genetic abnormalities. The facts about America's health insurance completely refute your comment, Flying Van:

* Nearly 46 million Americans, or 18 percent of the population under the age of 65, were without health insurance in 2007, the latest government data available.

* The number of uninsured rose 2.2 million between 2005 and 2006 and has increased by almost 8 million people since 2000.1

* The large majority of the uninsured (80 percent) are native or naturalized citizens.

* The increase in the number of uninsured in 2006 was focused among working age adults. The percentage of working adults (18 to 64) who had no health coverage climbed from 19.7 percent in 2005 to 20.2 percent in 2006.

* Nearly 1.3 million full-time workers lost their health insurance in 2006.

* Nearly 90 million people – about one-third of the population below the age of 65 spent a portion of either 2006 or 2007 without health coverage.

* Over 8 in 10 uninsured people come from working families – almost 70 percent from families with one or more full-time workers and 11 percent from families with part-time workers.

* The percentage of people (workers and dependents) with employment-based health insurance has dropped from 70 percent in 1987 to 62 percent in 2007. This is the lowest level of employment-based insurance coverage in more than a decade.4, 5
In 2005, nearly 15 percent of employees had no employer-sponsored health coverage available to them, either through their own job or through a family member.

* In 2007, 37 million workers were uninsured because not all businesses offer health benefits, not all workers qualify for coverage and many employees cannot afford their share of the health insurance premium even when coverage is at their fingertips.

* The number of uninsured children in 2007 was 8.1 million – or 10.7 percent of all children in the U.S.1
* Young adults (18-to-24 years old) remained the least likely of any age group to have health insurance in 2007 – 28.1 percent of this group did not have health insurance.

* The percentage and the number of uninsured Hispanics increased to 32.1 percent and 15 million in 2007.

* Nearly 40 percent of the uninsured population reside in households that earn $50,000 or more.

* A growing number of middle-income families cannot afford health insurance payments even when coverage is offered by their employers.

Knee-jerk reactions tend to be inaccurate. I would think that your comment were correct, but I researched and discovered that isn't the case. I'm big on fact checking and always apologizing if I'm proven wrong.

A man should never be ashamed to own that he has been in the wrong, which is but saying... that he is wiser today than yesterday.
~~Jonathan Swift