Quote:
|
Originally Posted by loquitur
Willravel, I suspect there is a very big state to state difference in health care costs, and that the differences will be very closely related to the degree and kind of regulation. This isn't my area of expertise - I'm more of a well-read amateur here, so I can't get my fingers on my sources quickly - but I seem to recall that here in NY, where Local 1199 pretty much owns the Legislature, it is pretty much illegal to offer low-cost, few-featured health care policies. IIRC, the justification is that it's not right for some people to get significantly better coverage than others for something as important as health care. In other words, rather than offer choices of Chevys, Buicks, Toyotas and Audis, everyone has to drive a Mercedes or BMW whether they want to or not. Typically asinine NY law, with the result that Medicaid is now out of control, because the slack has to be picked up somewhere. I wish I could remember where I read that.
|
I suspect that a vast majority agree that the current system should not continue. It's the solution we disagree on. I'd like everyone to be able to get a Mercedes and BMW at the price of a Kia. I can't see that happening in a capitalist system not only because they're profit driven, but more specifically because there are 45 million people who have no car who would still be running the risk of not being covered under a more free market-esque system. A lot of why I'm fighting so hard for single payer has less to do with those who are covered and more to do with those who aren't.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by loquitur
Part of the problem with the claim that we can do French-style health care here is that the US has a different culture. We are very individualistic, and all of us think we're important enough to deserve the best. There's nothing stoic or fatalistic about Americans. That means many denials of benefits will result in litigation, with the results that there will be lots of settlements, and ultimately costs will go blasting through any estimates. You'll have everyone travelling business class in no time, because no one will feel they are footing the bill themselves.
|
I can think of 45,000,000 people alive right now and 18,000 people a year who aren't alive who may be able to look past their philosophical views on individualism in order to get what they need. It'd be nice if profit driven corporations couldn't get politicians in their back pockets, or couldn't turn down people who needed life saving treatment, but the reality is that our health is too important to risk on corporations, even the non-profits. And when you do cross the pond and take a look at the French system, they're all flying first class for less than we're paying over here and are shocked that we aren't riding first class, too.
I'm not saying it's going to be an easy transition, but if there's a reasonable chance we can have a system on par with France for every man, woman, and child in the US, isn't it worth giving a shot?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by loquitur
It's the convergence of a bunch of factors that makes single payer health care problematic in the US. And that's before even considering the philosophical issues, which I think you and I will probably disagree about, but which ultimately are matters of taste more than anything else.
|
I'm willing to throw my philosophy out if it has no place in reality. I'm not religious about my philosophy, after all. I only hope that other people would make the same claim.