Capitalism and the End of Health Care as We Know It
Over the next month, pick up a newspaper or open your favorite news site, and within a few pages or clicks you should find all kinds of rhetoric on the Obama administration's attempt to reform health care. If the lobbyists do their job correctly, you'll be seeing a lot of provocative words and catch phrases. To date, some of my favorites have included "...big government picking your doctors...", "socializing medicine" and the frightening specter of Canada and Sweden -- the horror! (No doubt, we're just one good speaking point position paper away from hearing how the Taliban advocate universal health care.)
In the midst of all this, it's easy to forget some simple realities. Today, 45 million Americans go without health care, and the inability to afford it is the single largest source of personal bankruptcy. Sobering as that is at the individual level, it also speaks to the grand failure to live up to the most basic of our national ideals. The status quo is simply not consistent with life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Such "luxuries" are impossible in the absence of health care. In addition, and this is where it seems to get scary for conservatives, capitalism doesn't always deliver outcomes that are good for the country as a whole.
Unlike all other aspects of the unregulated economy, health care costs rise and quality decline every year; this is projected to continue at least through 2016 according to everyone -- left, right and center. Meanwhile, many other countries spend far less (as a percentage of GDP) and have healthier populations who live longer than Americans. In the capitalist paradise, that's not supposed to happen; and yet, we're an obese, diabetic nation with an epidemic of heart disease.
As Libertarians and a few smart Republicans do point out, our current system isn't really the free market; it's a web of regulations and permitted commercial practices that have evolved over time to create a system in which a few get rich while everyone else suffers, physically and economically. Those who do benefit will defend today's failing system in a cloak of patriotism and opposition to big government. In reality, they are worried that rational change will hurt profits. If, for example, the government banded people together into national scale buying pools, we'd have real economic leverage to lower prices. That's not socialism; that's good business.
Whether you think we need more or less government and regulations, don't believe the hype about the status quo. The current resistance to change is about greed. It's time to call that out and, perhaps, do something about it.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
We've already socialized medicine. It is now run for the benefit of the Insurance companies and Medical providers. When they figure out a way to dispense with the costly expense of patients INVEST EVERY PENNY! You'll make a fortune!
I am concerned about the judgment of the majority. If the majority says (to Congress/President Obama),"we want universal healthcare and we want the 'rich' to pay for it", is the government supposed to say ", 'okee dokee, coming right up'. As I have posted in a different thread (and received no response), will the public healthcare insurance be funded by 'customers' that have signed up for the program or will it be funded, totally or partially, by tax revenue? If it is by customers, I'm all for it. Another player in the game. Competition is awesome. If it is the taxpayers, the taxpayers and the 'customers' all lose. The taxpayers for obvious reasons. The 'customers' because they will have made themselves slaves to the government. I am guessing what the answer to my question is. Please, correct me if you can.
What part of "public" do you not understand? If you're not willing to help your brother, consider moving elsewhere.
I understand what "public" means just fine. I just think the line between what is ours as a country and what is mine is getting a little blurry. We all benefit from the services that "public" institutions provides and it is in everyone's best interest to maintain some level of 'everybody pitch in for the common good'. At the same time we need to remember why people like me work 5 or 6 days a week. For the common good? - not likely. If I knew my efforts for the day would be mixed into a big bowl with everyone else's and divided up equally, I'd stay home and watch the tube.
"If you're not willing to help your brother,..
Your talking about generosity. Please consider this - YOU CAN'T BE GENEROUS WITH SOMEONE ELSE'S MONEY.
Dude, why is thIs hard to understand?
If the system is 'public' then 'customers' and 'taxpayers' are THE SAME PEOPLE.
One possibility is 'taxpayers' (all taxpayers) pay an additional tax to partially paid for the 'public healthcare insurance' and the 'customers' (some taxpayers and some non-taxpayers) paid their own premiums. In a system like, this it is possible for a 'taxpayer' to not be a 'customer' and still not use the system (they could have a private plan that they choose to keep). My question is this - Is this what the Congress has in mind? I think it is.
You're concerned about the the judgement of the majority???? You know that's what democracy is right?
I don't hear you bitching about roads, schools, libraries, the postal service, the military etc etc etc, already socialized services, ALL OF WHICH REQUIRE YOUR HEALTH TO USE.
We should have had universal health care 1st, not last. What's the use of a library if you're too sick to go?
And yeah, I want the rich fat cats who have been profiting of my labor at less than living wage for years to pay for it. You are operating under the dumbness that whatever the market does must automatically be fair which is very simplistic. Government has been very kind and generous to corporations, now it's time to spread that kindness around.
All I hear is freedom from government, your taxes will go up...yada yada yada. US taxes are probably the lowest in the world, stop complaining. Instead what we have now is a system that only cares about profits and that's not healthy. We could look at all the failings of universal healthcare from other countries and implement fail safes to avoid them but don't fall for the drivel coming from the protectionist "free market" advocates that we have. This is probably one of the wealthiest yet sickest societies on Earth.
Now that truly says it all. If Capitalism is so great, how come we're so low on the totem pole of happy, healthy societies. Isn't that the real litmus test?
Copy that
And that says it all. We're at the bottom of the totem pole of happiest/healthiest societies on earth.
it's sickest because of people's behavior, not because of the care we receive. Don't ask me to pay for YOUR behavior
But that's what you do now, when poor people use the ER.
My Great Uncle died from inoperable liver cancer. He was a Mormom who never smoked cigarettes, never drank caffeinated beverages and never drank alcoholic beverages. Now you tell me how his behavior contributed to his condition!
Copy--no taxation without representation! And vice versa!
This debate is about freedom, freedom from the government. No matter how you slice it our taxes will go up if we institute socialized medicine. My taxes are 25% Federal, 15.5% FICA, 8% sales, 3% property, state, county, and fees. How much will it change with new legislation?
Wow, and the top 400 people in this country are paying 17% in taxes....t
If so, then you are smart like them and cannot be bothered to look out for the rest of us working slobs who get 2 weeks of vacation no sick leave and no healthcare
so close the loopholes and keep the taxes where they are
Your total dollar outlay will probably go down because your health insurance costs will decrease..
What if everybody felt this way about automobile insurance! Or what if some people refused to support public schools... or the police and fire departments? Those activities are all subsidized by the goverment (us) because they all benefit the public welfare? Do you want the freedom to not contribute to them, too?
By the way, in a democracy the government are the people... (you know... "We the people of the United States" etc., etc...) and it's time for us to take care of our own. It's not about freedom from the government, it's about protection from the greed of big corporatio
I disagree about public, government run schools. I don't believe they serve our welfare.. They serve the government as a vehicle for propaganda and to dumb down the people so they don't fight back.
I also don't believe insurance should be legally forced on people. For-profit insurance of any kind is nothing but a scam and a racket to funnel money to the wealthy.
it is not THE job of the govt. You have to also use your own common sense
our government is not a democracy but a democratic Republic and thank God for that or else we'd have mob rule
Perhaps it's time to look beyond the tax rates and look at the full reality of the grave situation our country is in?
It depends on what else they spend your tax money on doesn't it and whether or not it is providing value. Perhaps if the country spent a bit less on "defence" than all other countries combined some of the money could be invested in better health care. Perhaps if there was less expensive health care for employers costs of goods and services you buy might be a bit less.
Yep.
The sine qua non of a capitalist society is greed and profits. The problem is that with healthcare, the change required so that everyone is covered and has access to healthcare delivery is inimical to greed and profits. Constituents of those elected officials in Washington are those who need and require healthcare at affordable prices and those who are greedy and want to line their pockets with as much profit as possible. While there is nothing magical about this, maybe for once, the "good guys" will come out on top - - - that means every single American who can't afford healthcare services or who cannot access what Members of Congress presently have (to quote our president).
We all should have what the congress has! Their system would work for all US citizens!
The House of Reps just voted for Federal employees to get Family leave PAID. The rest of the country is S.O.L. Isn't government grand?
Yes.
What's eating health insurance money? The ongoing medical payments paid by medicaid for those who do NOT have insurance. There is a rise all over the country in every state of people who never applied for medical assistance who are suddenly asking the state to pay their bill. These are hardworking people, illegals (cause they don't get welfare or ongoing medicaid) and those who lost their jobs. B. Braum Medical makes hospital equipment such as IV's. It takes 10 cents to make and it is sold at 250.00 each to the hospitals! Prescription drugs is a GIMMICK. over 1/4 are placebos and the rest are all priced at highway robbery fees just to keep others in business with a great salary. The biggest scheme of them all are the middlemen who do not belong in the business of making medical payment decisions or existing in the first place. Millions could be saved if these people get out of the way and find another line of work. We need to revise the system, get rid of the corporate greed and let the doctors and hospitals deal directly with the bills. There is nothing wrong with national healthcare. Only a fool would think so. Don't let the Rethugs, who only want to keep their corporate friends in business so they can get more money for the next election, lie to you anymore.
bingo many excellent points including the one about the drugs...I am hearing that the drug bill in this country is 10% of the total healthcare costs....a
Republicans and some conserva-dems seem to be against the people getting our fair share.
They defend the big corporations and wall street, sneak AIG bonuses by us....
But if we want to be treated fairly and get our fair share they feign outrage and start lying.
I hope the American people aren't gonna buy the campaign from the lobbyists.
We won't listen to anything but Medicare FOR ALL, plain and simple, no ifs ands or buts about it!
You are so right, these are the same people who would not rescind the Bush TAX CUTs for the HAVE MORES.....
think about it, the top 400 people in this country earn $40,000 every hour of every working day....and pay 17% because Bush and HIS REPUGs gave them a 25% tax cut....WHE
A public option is a REQUIREMENT of any successful health care reform, that said, lets talk about the way to do it.
Offer it as "catastrophic care," allow anyone who pays more than $250 per month for health insurance to enter medicare for, say, 5% of their income.
Only, forget to index the $250 per month for inflation, so every year more people will be able to use the private option...
Oh, another good idea, allow insurance co-ops again!
3% of the income, we are already paying taxes for healthcare in our income taxes, our state taxes and our payroll taxes....T
The latest issue of AARP's magazine lists 8 myths about health care reform. Here they are 1-8
http://www
Wow, very very effective.
Too bad Bill Gates and Warren could not figure this out, or maybe they did and decided to stiff us....
Mitch MCConnell is very upset because private insurance cant compete with public health care cost..He says public is 1. Is more efficient;
2. Less expensive;
3. Offer better coverage with less hassle
. . . than private health insurance. The cons do not want us to get one dime of our money ..I want the same health coverage at no cost to us as congress has.. As long as we pay the bills then...I want the same good insurance we give to our congress justice and military..
They always have money for weapons and war. Just like welfare israel is given our money, to buy unending weapons to bully its neighbors, able to give themselveds free higher eductation, and free health care while denying those services to us..Its got to stop......
Don't you love it, Mitch McConnell is upset because private insurance can't continue to rake in big profits and still compete with a public helath care plan. Gee Mitch, thanks for setting us straight as to whose interests you are representing in the sentate! Lets see, government is for the insurance companies, by the insurance companies.
Isn't it strange, and yet a typical and familiar sight among republicans these days, to see Mitch McConnell, Senate Minority Leader of the Republican party, standing in the Senate basicall saying he has just spoken with his clients, the big insurance giants and they have instructed him to oppose any plan that has a public option.
I mean, he isn't even subtle about it.
Why are we not recalling these OLIGARCHs???? Why did Arnie kill the suit against ENRON for the 50 billion dollars in overcharges, price manipulation, racketeering????
Some of these arguments are so foolish.
My favorite though is the argument that the gov't shouldn't be deciding your health care. But a for-profit, non-medically trained insurance provider should?
In any case, the gov't won't be making those decisions, you and your doctor will. The only thing that will change is who your doctor bills. Buying wholesale is cheaper than buying than retail. Same product, different price tag.
yeah that one gets me too as if government is making decisions on your healthcare instead of just paying the darn bill with your tax dollars. There is no need for insurance companies to make any decisions. When they do it is only to not pay a bill and nothing more.
GOP. Party of the middleman.
Well they certainly were not for the working class or industry..
REMEMBER EACH REPUBLICAN SUPPORTED BUSH's TAX CUTS of 25% for the wealthiest 400 individuals in this country!!!! while we were at WAR......a
Considering that the average American is one health crisis away from bankruptcy (even with full coverage), something tells me they won't be too scared by these petty tactics.
We Canadians are getting pretty annoyed at the lies that are being told about our Health Care system. I have a lot of American customers, and the lack of knowledge among Americans about the Health Care situation in one of the closest trading partners, with which it shares the world's longest undefended border, is nothing less than ridiculous. The number of times that I have had to correct incredible misapprehensions about our system is beyond count - ESPECIALLY WHEN THE INFORMATION IS READILY AVAILABLE ON GOVERNMENT WEB SITES!
But I guess that actually checking the lies that your commentators are telling, is too much work.
But you notice how the people who tell the lies are always either "from Canada myself," or talking about their "sister from Canada."
They know that saying "Rush Limbaugh told me that..." would not be believable, so they make up the personal part.
I read one ladies comments, and she had posted over 100 comments about how bad health care in Canada was, only she forgot to change her profile which said she was in Detriot, MI...
lolll those can be figured out easily. They're not in detail nor do they make any sense.
I remember her. If it is the same one I'm thinking of, she also claimed to have lived in and/or experienced (or relatives of hers) the health care system in Canada, Great Britain and Sweden. I'm surprised she forgot to include France. The real LOL moment was when she referred to the Fraser Institute as the source of her information. As for you ConradMazian, relax. Such profound ignorance on their part is so mind-numbingly surreal all you can do is shrug it off and laugh.
Which is the lie? That socialized medice works and the people are happy with it?
Or that Canadian medicine is bad and gives poor quality healthcare?
I'm just making sure I understand if your argument is for or against Canadian healthcare.
I am in Australia, and 'socialised medicine' (we don't call it that) is not perfect here, but it is a million times better than what you have. We are taxed 1%-1.5% (depending on income level and wether you also have private health insurance) as a contribution to Medicare and can then either get free medical treatment or pay a gap between the doctors / public hospital bill and the amount reimbursed by Medicare. The unemployed / low income earners pay no gap. Higher income earners usually also take out private insurance(most of our private insurance companies are not for profit), which covers the gap and treatment in private hospitals and optional treatment. There are waiting lists in public hospitals, but if you are in critical need of treatment you get it, and it is no different from those who have insurance. I have a friend whose child had leukemia - they did not see a bill from the hospital / specialists throughout his treatment, including a bone marrow transplant. It did not cost them a cent more than the 1-1.5% income tax. Nobody needs to be bankrupted in this country to pay for essential medical treatment. You are being mislead and short-changed by your government and health insurers.
Glad your around to debunk the lies. Sometimes as Americans they embarrass me in public with the ignorance they spew.
I do believe that we need some serious changes in our health care field but I strongly disagree with the idea that national healthcare is the way to go. First of all, the healthcare industry in this country is not opperating under free market forces and this is proven by the fact that the US government accounted for over 45% of all healthcare expenditures in 2006. Programs such as medicaid and medicare force doctors to raise prices on individuals who pay privately because of those who dont pay i.e. those who the government pays for through taxes.
Second, Many people including myself believe that the Insurance company's are to blame for many of our problems. But then I asked myself how the Insurance agancies got so powerful in the first place? I discovered something called the HMO Act of 1973 which solidified the term HMO and gave HMOs greater access to the employer-based market, providing for the rapid expansion of HMOs in later years. This is proof that the "free market" isn't to blame for the growth of insurance companies and in fact HMO's were on a decline just before the act was passed due to strong competition. Since government intervention is the main reason for the problems in healthcare I just dont understand how giving them full control is the answer.
You need to do some serious reading, as your position is informed by peiecemeal data points provided from a conservative POV [the same conservatives responsible for the HMO act cited].
lol I am a Ron Paul Republican, so I dont listen to anything most conservative's have to say.
And you are right about the Conservatives being responsible for the HMO act.
Why are you such a thug? Do you have any thing constructive to add to an argument besides insults and insinuations?
Your very first HuffPo post, is that right?
Which insurance company do you work / lobby / shill for?
lol no I'm actually starting Medical School in a couple months. I just think it's sad how we have given up on a system that at one time worked very well.
Because it was Nixon's government that put the fix in for Kaiser and the other HMOs, totally corrupt. Hopefully we can finally fix the menace that Nixon created so long ago and get back to taking care of our citizens.
I agree... But the only way to do this is to allow market forces to work in the healthcare industry without ANY government intervention. More government will not solve a thing.
I'm curious about the system that you are recommending. Is there any country today that is currently operating with the sort of system you're discribing? If so, how well does it work?
Our Healthcare system was once the best in the world because it operated under this system. I am not supporting anything new here. Free market healthcare was once our system and it was this system that made us the envy of the world. We were ahead of every other nation in medical discoveries, and technology. Insurance in the past was only used for catastrophic problems not for routine exams and such. Hospitals used to compete for your business and so the all tried to provide the dest quality service at the lowest prices.
And no one was turned away. if you speak to any older doctors who worked in the past they will tell you that doctors never turned people away because they could not pay. It was there moral obligation to provide help to whomever needed it.
Free market forces are very interesting when it comes to healthcare
1. selecting a doctor is not like going to McDonalds
2. selecting health insurance is not like going to McDonalds
3 paying for healthcare is not like going to McDonalds.
I dont understand the point here...
People today dont select there doctors, insurance companies do that and it is wrong. In a free market system doctors would compete for your business the way any other service provider does... by offering you the best possible service. They would know that if they didnt provide good care, you would simply go to the doctor next door. In the free market service providers (hospitals, and doctors) have to listen to you and they need to please you just like any other business.
Oh and if you want to how free market forces can work in healthcare just take a look at what Walmart has been doing. They are starting to lease store space to private healthcare clinics which will serve millions of people with no insurance for a flat rate of arround $45. Oh and there $4 prescription drug program has already saved consumers about $1 Billion dollars. The AMA is outraged about this and is turning to the government to put an end to it.
Good point. In the UK you can choose your doctor with a clear head.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
