Is there a coherent argument for government-controlled medical care or are slogans and hysteria considered sufficient?
We hear endlessly about how many Americans don't have health insurance. But, if we stop and think— which politicians hope we never do— that raises the question as to why that calls for government-controlled medical care.
A bigger question is whether medical care will be better or worse after the government takes it over. There are many available facts relevant to those crucial questions but remarkably little interest in those facts.
There are facts about the massive government-run medical programs already in existence in the United States— Medicare, Medicaid and veterans' hospitals— as well as government-run medical systems in other countries.
None of the people who are trying to rush government-run medical care through Congress before we have time to think about it are pointing to Medicare, Medicaid or veterans' hospitals as shining examples of how wonderful we can expect government medical care to be when it becomes "universal."
As for those uninsured Americans we keep hearing about, there is remarkably little interest in why they don't have insurance. It cannot be poverty, for the poor can automatically get Medicaid.
In fact, we already know that there are people with substantial incomes who choose to spend those incomes on other things, especially if they are young and in good health. If necessary, they can always go to a hospital emergency room and receive treatment there, whether or not they have insurance.
Here, the advocates of government-run medical care say that we all end up paying, one way or another, for the free medical care that hospitals are forced by law to provide in their emergency rooms. But unless you think that any situation you don't like is a reason to give politicians a blank check for "change," the relevant question becomes whether the alternative is either less expensive or of better quality. Nothing is cheaper just because part of the price is paid in higher taxes.
Such questions seldom get asked, much less answered.
We are like someone being rushed by a used car dealer to sign on the dotted line. But getting stuck with a car that is a lemon is nothing compared to signing away your right to decide what medical care you or your loved ones will get in life and death situations.
Politicians can throw rhetoric around about "bringing down the cost of health care" or they can even throw numbers around. But the numbers that politicians are throwing around don't match the numbers that the Congressional Budget Office finds when it analyzes the hard data.
An old advertising slogan said, "Progress is our most important product." With politicians, confusion is their most important product. They confuse bringing down the price of medical care with bringing down the cost. And they confuse medical care with health care.
Nothing is easier than for governments to impose price controls. They have been doing this, off an on, for thousands of years— repeatedly resulting in (1) shortages, (2) quality deterioration and (3) black markets. Why would anyone want any of those things when it comes to medical care?
Refusing to pay the costs is not the same as bringing down the cost. That is why price controls create these problems. When developing a new pharmaceutical drug costs roughly a billion dollars, you are either going to pay the billion dollars or cause people to stop spending a billion dollars to develop new drugs.
The confusion of "health care" with medical care is the crucial confusion. Years ago, a study showed that Mormons live a decade longer than other Americans. Are doctors who treat Mormons so much better than the doctors who treat the rest of us? Or do Mormons avoid doing a lot of things that shorten people's lives?
The point is that health care is largely in your hands. Medical care is in the hands of doctors. Things that depend on what doctors do— cancer survival rates, for example— are already better here than in countries with government-run medical systems. But, if political rhetoric prevails, we may yet sell our birthright and not even get the mess of pottage.
To find out more about Thomas Sowell and read features by other Creators Syndicate columnists and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate web page at www.creators.com. Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305. His Web site is www.tsowell.com.
COPYRIGHT 2009 CREATORS.COM
|
 |
Comments
|
2 Comments | Post Comment
|
|
Sir;...I am sure there is a coherent argument for government controlled medical care...First of all, medical care is too essential to life to be left to profit mongers, because they will always devalue our lives, our pain, and our frustration...Second of all, if government cannot manage financial relationships it should end them, since all financial relationships are begun with an unfair advantage....Third; since it is essential, medical care is a right, which the government should defend, and which it should defend best if it is paying for justice, and finds it is buying injustice... It has the authority to mandate proper levels of care... It has the authority to demand minimim levels of excellence in care.... Either government has reached the point where it must throw all those in need of care and unable to afford care off the budget, or spread the risk and cost equitably... Now it subsidizes profit, and does not govern care...It should cut profit out of the picture, and cut the profiteers off without a dime... We can have health care in this country, and we can afford it if we only take unreasonable costs and profits out of the picture.... A minimum for all, and major medical for those who need it, and no abortions or tummy tucks for the rich... Bamm; You're done, so show me the bill...Thanks...Sweeney
Comment: #1
Posted by: James A, Sweeney
Tue Jul 21, 2009 8:22 PM
|
|
|
|
If you're a Taxpayer, you should be fed up with Obama, his administration and
bragging about his healthcare! His favorite “This Healthcare isn't about me. I have
great insurance and so does every member of Congress.” Wouldn't you, as a
Taxpayer, wonder why politicians have better healthcare,doctors, salaries, and
retirements? If American Taxpayers are smart, they'll go back to “Pay as you go”
system for medical expenses, insurance, and everything else, that includes
stopping politicians and insurance companies from taking your last penny! “If you
don't work, have never paid social security, live off social and welfare programs,
why should you receive anything that Taxpayers have worked for?”
America doesn't need bigger government nor anything else controlled by a radical
and socialist government, let alone National Healthcare! ‘Fair Tax', to include
property taxes, and ‘pay as you go' for doctors and hospitals, would cut theft and
tons of useless paperwork. Trillions would be saved!
At no time have Taxpayers heard the words “We, the politicians, in order to pay off
trillions we borrowed without Taxpayers consent, are going to reduce our benefits,
salaries and retirements to $12,000.00 yearly!”
This is one actual insurance/government billing. Check out your ‘Explanation of
Benefit' regarding Medicare and your private insurance. If your doctor billed for
$233.00, Medicare paid $76.20, and your private carrier said it was OK to pay
$19.05, this should tell you about hidden costs? The following was sent to me and I'm sending it along!
=====================================================================================
IT DOESN'T MATTER IF YOU ARE REPUBLICAN OR DEMOCRAT! Take Social Security for instance!
"I HEREWITH FIRMLY STATE THAT I WILL NOT VOTE FOR ANY POLITICIAN, REGARDLESS OF THE OTHER ISSUES, IF HE DOES NOT SPONSOR AND SUPPORT THE FOLLOWING LEGISLATION. THAT INCLUDES EVERYONE STANDING
FOR NEXT ELECTION. LET US SHOW OUR LEADERS IN WASHINGTON "PEOPLE POWER" AND THE POWER OF THE INTERNET. . and GET A BILL STARTED TO PLACE ALL POLITICIANS ON SOCIAL SECURITY, CUT THEIR SALARIES AND RETIREMENTS TO $12,000.00 YEARLY. You see, Social Security benefits were not suitable for persons of their rare
elevation in society. They felt they should have a special plan for themselves. So, many years
ago they voted in their own benefit plan. In more recent years, no congressperson has felt the need to change it.
After all, it is a great plan, but just for them spending more and more ot Taxpayers money.
For all practical purposes their plan works like this:
When they retire, they continue to draw the same pay until they die.
Except it may increase from time to time for cost of living adjustments..
For example, Senator Byrd and Congressman White and their wives may
expect to draw $7,800,000.00 (that's Seven Million, Eight-Hundred Thousand Dollars), with their
wives drawing $275, 000.00 during the last years of their lives.
This is calculated on an average life span for each of those two Dignitaries.
Younger Dignitaries who retire at an early age, will receive much more
during the rest of their lives.
Their cost for this excellent plan is $0.00 NADA..! ZILCH...
This little perk they voted for themselves is free to them. You and I pick up
the tab for this plan. The funds for this fine retirement plan come directly from the General
Funds;
"OUR TAX DOLLARS AT WORK "!
From our own Social Security Plan, which you and I pay (or have paid) into,
every payday until we retire (which amount is matched by our employer). We can expect to get
an average of $1,000 per month after retirement.
It's time to "Jerk the Golden Fleece Retirement Plan from under the Senators and
Congressmen!" Put them into the Social Security plan with the rest of us
Then sit back.... And see how fast they would fix it. It would be changed within the day!
America is now an enslaved nation with trillions of dollars in debt and all because
of deceit and greed. I'm quoting John Adams - “There are two ways to conquer and
enslave a nation. One is by the sword, the other is by debt.” Surely, you remember
history and the Dictator that said “We'll destroy America and never lift a finger!” If
this doesn't wake you up, nothing will!
Comment: #2
Posted by: Shirley deLong
Sun Jul 26, 2009 8:37 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
