I’m getting tired of hearing the talking points boiling healthcare down to a “competitive market” vs. a socialist model. This argument is deeply flawed in two very serious ways:
#1 “socialist healthcare is evil“
Anyone not in favor of a government “socialist” healthcare plan should never again call 911, the fire department or the police department for help – because it would seem to me highly hypocritical to call the “socialized” police department to find your brother’s killer… but deny someone else the right (note I said RIGHT, not option if you can afford it) to find their brother’s killer if that killer happens to be cancer.
There are a million ways to make this point. Here is another one… Should we let BlackWater fight our wars for us? We don’t want a “socialized” military…right?
#2 “Healthcare now is a competitive market“
We hear the “competitive market” argument from every republican spokesman. Which apparently means no republican has ever taken a basic economics course (or has forgetten what they’ve learned). The healthcare industry is NOT considered a perfectly competitive market by economists. It is an oligopoly. Now, oligopolies aren’t per se bad, but I imagine the argument wouldn’t sound as nice if Dennis Prager was insisting on keeping his right to an oligopolistic healthcare system. Once you start describing healthcare in the same terms (and correct terms) as Ticketmaster and Oil Companies I doubt Joe the Plumber would be signing any “free my healthcare” petitions. Would you sign a “keep my ticketmaster ‘service charges’ high” petition? Do you HAVE to buy concert tickets to stay alive?
To anyone that signed a “free my healthcare” petition, could you explain to me how being locked into your “network” of providers is having totally free choice? Imagine if you had to pick what company to get your driver’s license from, and then you were limited to driving only Ford and VW (for this example imagine you’re leasing the car, not buying) and only getting gas from BP… even though there is a Chevron next door, and furthermore half the roads your car isn’t allowed to drive on at all. That doesn’t sound like a good example of freedom to me. Ask yourself this: why do you have to stay “in network?” Is it for your benefit, or theirs?
So what are our options here? It isn’t “perfectly competitive markets” vs. “socialism.” It is really a restrictive oligopoly looking out for stockholders by denying coverage to customers vs. a government monopoly giving you a right to healthcare. One places a dollar value on your life and the other a moral value. Which makes it particularly infuriating when I see these “the government will place a dollar value (rationing) on your life!” comments… What do you think the insurance company does, you dolt?! Their number one function (like any corporation) is to increase the value of their company/stock. And they don’t do that by spending as much on healthcare as possible, they do it by spending the least amount possible. That means your claim is denied. And then you can’t get coverage with anyone else because that cancer they found under Kaiser becomes a “pre-existing condition” to Blue Cross.
Imagine if you paid car insurance since you were sixteen and were t-boned at age 67, only to have Allstate (or whomever) drop your coverage and deny the claim. You can’t get coverage from Nationwide to get a new car since the accident already happened. This is how healthcare “should be” to “free market healthcare” proponents. You can stop driving, you can’t stop living. Car insurance is an inadequate metaphor.
Another point they bring up is the groaning turtle-like slowness of government services, the shining example being the post office. Mr. Limbaugh, call up DHL and see how much they want to ship that birthday card to your mother in 3 days across the country – from your house to hers. I guarantee you it won’t be 44 cents…. (oh, wait, DHL went out of business, good thing you don’t need that letter delivered to stay alive, eh?)
Keep in mind that even from a business consumer standpoint UPS can’t compete with the post office’s ability to deliver bulk standard mail – I know this because it is my JOB – and we just interviewed UPS again last week. They still couldn’t provide better service than the “bungling government socialist system” for our marketing mailings.
In a modern society healthcare should be a right. (oh yes, I said it, am I a “bleeding heart liberal” now?) I find it highly ironic that republicans, who are usually “pro-life”, don’t understand this. Apparently a fetus’ life must be protected at all costs (including the life of the mother), but once that fetus is born – F YOU, you’re on your own (unless you’ve got a trust fund, then we’ll talk).
I think a modern society should protect its citizens from things they have no choice in. I didn’t decide to have asthma or allergies. Why were my parents (financially) punished for something I was born with? My mother wasn’t a crack addict, there was nothing she or they did to cause these conditions. In fact they were the model (as far as I know) of good prenatal care providers. Neither of my parents smoked, had particularly bad diets, were overweight or unemployed. My father was laid off at the same time they found out I had these ailments. Should he have had to worry (keep in mind this same man served in the air force during Vietnam) about my healthcare? What would have happened if my mother didn’t have a good insurance plan through her work at the hospital? Would I have died from an asthma attack at some point? It happened again when my father’s company tried to deny “coverage” of the cost of my brother’s birth. My father had to threaten to sue them (because thankfully he had the promise in writing) to get the money. Is this something that a working productive member of society like my father should have had to spend his time/money on?
(dad, if any of these details are wrong please correct in comments)
Why would a modern society capable of taking care of it’s own people resist such change for the cause of keeping a few CEOs’ bank accounts large? No other first world country has. However, in America, the financial needs of the few outweigh the lives of the many. Also we don’t seem to understand that capitalism is a model for the economy, the markets, not our lives and bodies.
If Americans on principle were against this sort of thing we wouldn’t have social security, unemployment insurance, police departments, etc. We all accept these things easily because none of them put an existing trillion dollar industry in jeopardy (that’s a lot of money to “donate” to political campaigns by the way). With Blue Cross and Kaiser out of the equation I highly doubt we’d have any trouble passing universal healthcare.
TANSTAAFL
do a ctrl+F and tell me where I used “free” to describe the cost of government healthcare…
Who pays?
everyone*
chok dee with that!
I know, the citizens of all the other advanced countries have rejected it, huh?
And the French still smell bad and the English have bad teeth—free rice for everyone.
You don’t have to go to a hospital to take a shower.
Don’t believe the hype. There isn’t a shortage of dentists in Britain, only a shortage of dentists who will work on the new (emphasis on NEW) government plan. It isn’t illegal to practice outside of the government health system in Britain. The UK has more dental schools (16) serving its population (or even land mass) than the US (with 57). The UK has more dentists “per citizen” and per square mile than the US. These dentists just aren’t accepting the new deal (this is a recent problem).
The teeth of many older Americans are just as bad (what color are yours?) as the british because of improving medical knowledge/technology over the years in both countries. Also, not every country stresses that every 12 year old has to have braces. Braces and bleaching are very profitable industries in America, and in most cases are not necessary but purely cosmetic in nature. We have a tendency to think of yellow and crowded teeth as “unhealthy” – but this is not necessarily the case. After all, if dental insurance provides better coverage than a government option – why didn’t I have braces as a child to correct my bite and diastema?
Americans have “great teeth” because (most) parents are convinced that braces are a priority for children (and we put flouride in the water). The more long term issues usually mentioned in the articles about the british dental shortage are similarly ignored by adults here in the US who don’t have dental coverage (which is most of us). I work with this every day. If our awesome insurance system was so incredibly awesome the company I work for wouldn’t make money selling remedies for people who’ve lost teeth because they let a small perio infection (for example) turn into something much larger. Crowns and bridges are the biggest money makers in dentistry. Neither would be necessary (in such large quantities) if dental care/insurance “worked” in America. Crowns and Bridges are only necessary when it is “too late” to save a tooth. “Too late” means a patient went far too long without seeking care. And I don’t mean the months you’d have to wait for a free visit in London – I mean years.
Oh, and before you assume that dentists love the insurance companies just talk to one. The dental insurance codes are so complex here that dentists have to go to courses to learn how to use them. I know because we sell these courses. I’m not saying the government literature would be any simpler – but if you think the “insurance” option is easier and beloved… it isn’t. Dentists in America LOVE cash patients. …just like in Britain. However, if you don’t have the cash in Britain you can wait for the guv’munt service… here you watch your teeth fall out.
Lastly, let’s look at a qoute from the USA today article on the British dental shortage:
“(the reasons patients don’t go to the dentist) run the gamut from people who are very frightened to people for who dental and oral health is not a priority; some folks who don’t have the money; some folks who live in an area where there isn’t a dentist nearby.”
…….that is a qoute from the ADA describing American dental health.
Lastly Lastly – are we really going to say that because Britain has a problem with their system that we can’t get it right? What happened to America leading the way? I love how it is okay to “hate America” again. The pro-Blue Cross people love to point out how our government would F up healthcare. That doesn’t sound very patriotic, does it? It is A-Okay to say that we couldn’t take care of our own people, but if I say we can’t take care of Iraqis I’m “unAmerican.”
Sounds like flip flopping… remember that one?
You really, really, really need to talk to an expert on how well gubbm’nt health insurance (medicade/care) works: your mother.
I knew I could draw you in with the British tooph crack, and the “French smell bad” is the (female)logic from a “discourse” on the (british) crap & tax scam from a year ago: French rely on nuclear power; french smell bad -Q,E,D.
By the way, I do know what makes older teeth appear yellow and it ain’t lack of Colgate.
Also, you have a tendency (like Odumbo) to present false choices: Policemen and soldiers are regulators and provide general services unlike doctors/GNPs who provide specific services. Unemployment insurance is paid by state , not federal, and each state has a different set of rules. 911 is still in pretty poor shape around here after YEARS of paying the tax and not having a working system. The fire department is vol.. Do you really think those TSA people are “getting it right” at LAX? Decades on the Gov. teat and the airlines are still pretty much in a state of near chaos. And you have been to traffic court.
AAANNNDDDD, it will be another 15 years before I am “given” back all the s.s. money I paid in (with cheaper dollars–caused by “free” gov. services).
I worked for the Gov.–I know where “close enough for gov. work” comes from. (and we were the intelligent ones).
Hopey, hopey, change, change–I WON.
Yes, it was an excellent job of “drawing me in” and then not responding to anything I brought up. Using “your mother would agree with me” in an argument with her (adult) child should make one forfeit the argument. #1 I’m not about to argue against my mother #2 she reads this and had/has her own account she could use to “set (me) straight” if she wished. #3 you know as well as I do that mom’s political opinions (although closelly guarded) aren’t echoed by BillO.
So….all the government programs I referenced are false choices – but yours (the military) isn’t? I’m confused though….don’y we have the best military in the world?
Okay – that wasn’t it….but I’m reduced to doing this on the Pre and I accidentally hit send – will write the rest tomorrow (class starting soon)
by the way – yes, you win – we’ll never have government healthcare ( whether bad or good) because of the legal brib-er..lobbying system. I’m well aware my “side” is going to lose. My point is that if promises could be kept (I.e. The gov did a good job) gov. Would provide better care.
The huge huge huge problem is that the current system sucks for the doctors and patients….and instead of working together to fix it the republicans wsant to deny all rreform under the guise of preventing “socialist healthcare” which is no more plausible than a fedeeral ban on guns….
If you’re speaking for mom – please ask her if she believes the current system is the best it could possibly be (from the patient standpoint, not the insurance company)?
When I said “ask your mom” I ment “ask your mom”! I was not speaking for her or implying she would be on “my (BillO)” side. She deals with the problems every day,
And when I said “I WON” I was quoting the reasoned discourse of the lawerly president Ostupidly: giving clear evidence that the Demos want to work together to fix the problems (and I think you knew that).