What if Government Ran Health Care?

10 Comments

• Joe Markowitz

  July 30, 2009
  9:24 PM

  Ever heard of Medicare? Here is how it works. You go to your doctor. You get treated. Medicare pays the bill. It is not perfect, but most people that have Medicare would not trade it for the misery that the rest of us have to go through.

  Instead of scaring people with fictitious cute videos about how government-run health care would work, you should talk about how your plan would deal with the more than 40 million people who do not have health insurance; or how you would deal with the people whose bills are rejected because they exceeded the insurance company’s limits, or failed to disclose a pre-existing condition, or whatever other reason the private insurance company has come up with for denying payment; or people who cannot change jobs because of their health insurance; or who cannot afford adequate coverage for their families; or the people whose medical bills have driven them into bankruptcy. None of that happens in the countries that have government-sponsored health insurance.
  .-= Joe Markowitz´s last blog ..Lily Burk =-.

  Reply
  • Harrison

    July 30, 2009
    9:33 PM

    My “plan” is to find a way to insure people who currently do not have insurance but want it not to force everybody into a single payer system that will ration care as happens in every country that has this type of scheme. Why not let people use the same types of healthcare our elected officials enjoy? Why did the Democrats kill the proposal to make them join the same system they want to become law?

    And as to medical bankruptcy this is a myth:

    “A study by the Department of Justice examined more than 5,000 bankruptcy cases between 2000 and 2002. It found that 54% of bankruptcies involve no medical debt, and more than 90% have medical debt of less than $5,000. Even among the minority of bankruptcies that report medical debt, only a few have enough to cause personal bankruptcy.”

    http://togetrichisglorious.blogspot.com/2009/07/medical-bankruptcy-myth.html

    Reply
• Forgotten Liberty

  July 31, 2009
  5:21 AM

  Joe, How many of those 40 million uninsured people make plenty of money or eligible for good employer provided coverage but choose not to have health insurance? How many are temporarily uninsured and have health insurance again within a few months? When my wife and I first got married we chose not to have health insurance so we could have a little more money in our paychecks to help pay off school debt. We were both young and healthy and decided to take our chances that nothing major would happen. Did you know that if this health care monstrosity gets passed people who choose not to have health insurance will be fined $2500 a year? Why don’t we focus on ways to make health care cheaper instead of trying to make the government pay for it (actually, we’ll pay for it through taxes)? One major components of the high cost of health care is that the government doesn’t fully compensate doctors for their procedures when the patient is on Medicaid or Medicare. That means those of us who aren’t on these programs have to pay more to make up for it. Why doesn’t the government perfect Medicaid and Medicare (which cover nearly half of Americans) and the VA system before they try to get the rest of us sucked into a bureaucratic, rationing, waiting list mess like we see in England and Canada? Fix those problems plus Social Security and then maybe we can talk about adding more to government’s plate!

  Reply
• jd

  July 31, 2009
  8:38 AM

  i may be a little dim on the subject, but isn’t the government run medicare failing?

  if the government program is inefficient on a relatively small scale, what makes people believe it wouldn’t be a burden when its size is greatly increased?

  this might be an incredibly broad statement, but like i said, i really do not know that much on the subject.

  Reply
• marie

  July 31, 2009
  12:34 PM

  Joe, I have not been following the healthcare problem in detail but common sense tells me that single payer system would be bad, and…

  since Medicare is non-miserable as you suggested.. why can’t the 40 million uninsured be put on that plan?– while leaving those who are satisfied with their current insurance plans, alone? I am wondering, if Medicare was free for anyone who simply desired it, versus, those who would rather stay with their current plan.. how many would choose medicare instead? Has their been any studies done on this? Also, couldn’t Medicare be set up as a supplemental insurance for those who may need it, for example, when one exceeds their limit with their primary insurance? We should be able to arrange something else besides a single payer system?

  Reply
• vulcanhammer

  July 31, 2009
  2:20 PM

  Adding to Harrison’s post of the medical bankruptcy myth, the Fraser Institute (a Canadian think tank) concluded that Canada’s single payer health care does not prevent Canadians from going bankrupt.
  Joe: Governments are just as likely to deny medical procedures as the private insurance companies that you mention; government run plans have to ration care because there is such as thing as a budget and resources are finite. Also, I’m sure that many seniors do indeed like their Medicare. Why shouldn’t they, it’s free to them and the alternative is no care at all. Additionally, Medicare also has the advantage of being able to draw upon the innovations created in the fledging private market–i.e. designer drugs, medical devices, etc. If we do get ObamaCare, those innovations may not be as forthcoming.
  .-= vulcanhammer´s last blog ..Happy Birthday, Milton Friedman!! =-.

  Reply
• Joe Markowitz

  July 31, 2009
  9:24 PM

  Marie, Medicare is a single payer system, and the idea of a public option is similar to what you are suggesting.
  .-= Joe Markowitz´s last blog ..The Professor and the Police Officer =-.

  Reply
• marie

  July 31, 2009
  10:31 PM

  Right Joe, but we can’t have “only” medicare, this is what disturbs most people for obvious reasons.
  Ps.. was there any kind of study done about who would rather medicare? Just curious. Thanks.

  Reply
  • Harrison

    July 31, 2009
    10:33 PM

    Medicare has grown by huge leaps and bounds and the “trust fund” has been emptied by both parties. So much for the 15% we all pay into it.

    Reply
• Burro

  August 3, 2009
  11:44 AM

  Notice how Joe, aren’t you a lawyer Joe, does nothing to indict lawyers in his claim that working with private insurers is miserable. Hmmm… I wonder why lawyers, huge contributors to the dysfunctional state of health care, are so suddenly out of the picture? Hmmm… I also wonder why lawyers, huge contributors to the democrat party, are so in favor of government run health care. It’s all about deep pockets, isn’t it Joe?
  .-= Burro´s last blog ..Strong Horse, Weak Horse =-.

  Reply

Leave a Reply

Click here to cancel reply.

Name (required)

E-Mail (will not be published) (required)

Website

CAPTCHA Code *

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail