|
This is odd. Usually universal healthcare threads are full of horror stories of waiting 6 months for a hospital to treat a necrotizing infection and people who really needed surgery but didn't get it in time. This time it's all butterflies and rainbows. I don't live somewhere that allows me to observe it firsthand, so I don't know what to think now.
The thing that leaves me wavering on the issue is that I want the most people covered with the least overhead. A government-run system is prone to corruption, pork, and inefficiency. On the other hand, the current system is about nickel and dimeing people to make the most money possible. In either case, frivolous malpractice suits and excessive visits drive costs up as well as hospitals getting away with overbilling because they know insurance will pay for it and the patient won't complain.
I don't see a private system providing coverage for everyone, especially the people who are genuinely disadvantaged and poor through no fault of their own. I don't see a government-run system that isn't in it for the money covering people for a lower cost than a private system. I want a happy medium, but I don't know where it lies. Single-payer with non-profit watchdog oversight? Private with government oversight? Some sort of hybrid? I don't know, I'm not an economist. What I do know is that I don't want myself or others being ripped off and I don't want to see my fellow man dying because he can't afford to go to the doctor.
|