Tag Archives: socialized medicine

Grasping Government Gags

Add this to the heaping mountain of evidence against the Government controlling anything:

In Network World magazine issue May 4th, 2009 (hardly the political rag), Johna Till Johnson writes “Of subways, gov’t subsidies and broadband“. She begins with a question posed, by implication, from a friend of hers:

“Governments do a good job running subways — so why not the Internet”

Johna opens the pages of history showing that the New York City public transportation systems began as private enterprises operating for profit.

There were three independent companies competing for fares and riders.

Innovation and growth were paramount and service was excellent.

The entire system was flash-frozen, as it were, by the stock market crash of 1929. The for-profit systems went bankrupt and the city bought them all out.

The subway map circa 2009 is extremely similar to the subway map of 1924.

Since the government takeover, without competition, innovation and growth haven’t occured. At all.

(M)illions of folks who live and work in New York have had access to a more-or-less reliable, more-or-less affordable form of transportation for the past 80 years.

But prices have risen, ridership has stagnated, and there is no such thing as a realistic or even probable plan for further development.

Johna is talking about the government taking over the internet:

Sanford-Bernstein’s Craig Moffatt’s conclusion? “Broadband is today’s transportation grid. … The story of the subways highlights the fundamental trade-offs between competition – and its inherent sloppiness and redundancy – and nationalization (or, in this case, municipalization), with its inherent stagnation.”

But what about medicine and healthcare? With the government controlling all healthcare costs, it will control all medicine, period.

The greatest strength in American medicine is it’s relentless and constant innovation.

With government control we may have relatively reliable (or at least an expected level of non-service) medical care for existing conditions.

But what about future conditions?

What about the disease little Johnny is supposed to find the cure for in 50 years?

With government control the urge to control all but the corrupted costs will be as relentless as the innovation is today, and Johnny will be told his medical research isn’t cost-effective.

And the conditions we currently consider untreatable but with promising new developments may soon be, will be simply: untreatable.

Government does not fix things, it breaks things.

Government doesn’t innovate, it retrogrades.

Government doesn’t manage, it controls.

Nothing government controls ever flourishes, besides itself.

You Read It Second Here: H1N1 & Big Brother Medicine

H1N1 (swine) flu isn’t all it’s cracked up to be.

Gee, it’s just aweful when the bugbear doesn’t live up the trumped up claims the media seems to want us to believe.

The Illinois Public Health Director has not drunk the koolaid:

The Illinois Department of Public Health director told state lawmakers Tuesday that it’s important to remain vigilant in the face of the H1N1 flu virus, but fears of a pandemic flu are overblown.

“We have to keep these things in perspective, look at them rationally, know what the threat is and deal with it in a rational way. We know right now that this virus is acting very similarly to the regular seasonal flu,” said Dr. Damon T. Arnold, head of the state public health agency.

“At this juncture, this virus seems to be in a mild course,” Arnold said. “We’re recommending now that for routine cases you take care of yourself at home as you would for seasonal flu.”

As ShatteredChina wrote here earlier, fear is not a reasonable response to this flu.

Yet fear is a powerful tool. Those desiring power desire a fearful populace. When someone tells you to fear, they are seeking to gain power over you.

Fear not, we are told.

An unfearful populace is a strong populace. The Christian following the most frequent admonition of God is a person who cannot be lead by whim or desire of the power-hungry.

And the kids can go back to school now.

And big brother wishes we’d die younger.

Two reasons: It’s a sure fix for the Social Security cesspool, and they can adjust the artificial, age-graded stratifications of service wherein those with greater potential determined by mathematically “fair” judgments of age and expected longevity.

Just a few of the many benefits of the new socialized medicine system President Obama and the Democrats laid the groundwork for in the big spending bills they’ve been forcing us tax payers to swallow since he entered office:

  • Reducing costs by “guiding” doctor decisions
  • Doctors surrendering autonomy and learning to operate less like sole proprietors
  • Establishes the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research, whose goal would be to slow down new medications and techniques because these drive up costs
  • Forcing the elderly to accept the realities of aging and surrendering certain advanced treatments

Betsy McCaughey says HillaryCare 2.0 (ObamaCare) will ruin your health, especially if you’re old.

It’s being sold as the solution to our current health care system. But with our current system, if the old were forced out of treatments that would improve their lives, there would be an uproaor. If the government says they can’t be treated, who is there to turn to?

It always starts as something good:

As elsewhere, the combination of an aging population and the increasing cost of new technologies has started to put immense pressure on the French health system. But the French system of compulsory insurance – something for which many Democratic leaders are calling in America – acted as a Trojan horse, allowing the government to seize control over increasing areas of health care.

When costs became a political issue, the government mounted a cost crackdown. But instead of eliminating inefficiencies through greater individual responsibility, broader choice and more competition, the French government did precisely the opposite: It sought to control costs by fiat – that is, by piling on more bureaucracy.

But don’t worry: the Obamessiah will look out for each of us with the personal care of his omnipotent eye.

Oh, and it’s also why Obama is for lawful, government funded, unlimited and unrestricted abortion: fewer of us the government has to support.

Insurance Overhead

Kay Mueller writing in the Indiana Daily Student supporting government-run single-payer socialized medicine claims:

“(For-profit) insurers add so much overhead to health care that we could never afford to cover everyone as long as the system is based on them.”

There are many examples of government-run, single-payer health care systems around the world: Canada, UK, most European nations. Which of these nations has a lower overhead in their health costs than for-profit insurers?

Look at any government program run by our own government and compare the overhead with that of a similar program run in the private sector.

The government won’t have any more “compassion” in dispensing health care than the for-profit insurers.

Another issue is basic economics: Health services are a finite resource (there is not an unlimited amount of health care available). Currently, the balance of insurance and medical cost work together to control who has access to what service in a fair and just manner (eg. non-necessary services such as cosmetic surgery are relatively more expensive, limiting access more than necessary surgery).

A single-payer (socialized medicine) system removes finances from the picture. Cost cannot be used to limit access to the finite resource. And so they must ration the service itself, deciding arbitrarily who has access to what service. An arbitrary decision system is less fair and, worse, more prone to corruption. You think money controls access now: in a corrupt single-payer system, those who know WHO to pay will get access and all else will be out of luck.

Yes, our current system is flawed. Yes, it needs to be fixed.

But a government-run single-payer system is a disaster and has been a disaster in each and every case where it has been tried.

It’s not a matter of it not having been done right, it’s case after case of abject failure, hurting (and dead) people, and even more limited access to a limited resource: necessary healthcare.

Getting down to brass tacks: the ubiquity of insurance is part of the current problem as much as it used to be part of the solution.

Guaranteed payment of higher prices for medical services have allowed medicine in the US to blossom into a progressive, pioneering, technological wonder. We have medication for diseases our parents shivered in fear at the mere mention of. We can pinpoint problems down to a minutiae of detail and reach in and adjust, tweak, modify, and fix problems in out-patient procedures where it used to take days of hospital stay, hours of surgery, and interminable periods of impatient waiting for a prognosis.

Guaranteed payment of higher prices for medical services have also allowed medicine to become a for-profit service. There is nothing wrong with making profit. Doctors and nurses need to eat, and organizations need a good reason to keep providing quality medical services. But we’ve come a long way from the country doctor working for love and recieving payment in chickens, potatoes, and warm cookies.

I don’t want to go all the way back. We’ve come too far and any argument forbidding access to the myriad benefits of advanced medical ability is morally bankrupt.

But a step towards the government is a leap away from sense and any who claim otherwise are either corrupt or ignorant.

Kay, your school is either failing you, doing you a disservice, or both. Your failure of logic and your unsupported arguments are harming people.

Words mean things, and ideas have consequences.