This is a topic in which I have a very difficult time gathering unbiased and straight-forward information. The supporters of each side can be incredibly inflammatory and zealous, making the truth or even the pros and cons of each very murky. Therefore, I invite anyone with expertise or general knowledge in the area to lend their voice and correct me where I am wrong.
It is my understanding that Universal Health Care is a government-run system in which every citizen possesses health care insurance. This is achieved through a higher tax rate paid by the citizens than what we in America are used to. Such a system is embraced by the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, Russia, most of continental Europe, certain parts of South America, Mexico, many areas of Asia including India, and other countries are attempting to obtain it.
The current system in America is a sort of hybrid. Government-run programs such as Medicare and Medicaid provide health insurance for the elderly and impoverished, while there is a wealth of private health insurance companies that provide services to those who can afford them.
The current political issue, which has been mounting for years, is that around 50 million Americans are without health insurance because they can not afford it or are illegal aliens. While many have cried out for health care reform, everyone has decried either one or all of the proposed reforms. Some propose a shift to the Universal Health Care system, while opponents claim that will require an unacceptable raise in taxes that Americans neither want nor can afford especially in this economic client. The recent passing of Obamacare (Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act) was meant to extend affordable and updated coverage to 30 million Americans (a good third of which are illegal immigrants). This has been met with extreme opposition by the conservative right as a drain on the economy and American people. Supporters claim the opponents would rather let those who can't afford health care to do without. Both are not entirely true in their assertions, and the truth of the matter is no clearer than it was when I began this post.
For my opinion, I'm afraid I don't know exactly where we can go from here. I agree that raising our taxes isn't going to necessarily going to help our economic state, but it is abhorrent that 50 million Americans are without basic health insurance. We are a first world country, this and other items such as discrimination, bigotry, corruption, and other malefactors should not be an issue. Unfortunately, that is not the reality. Our infrastructure is quite sizeable compared to many countries of Europe who place confidence in their Universal Health Care. The US has almost 6 times the population of the UK, and twice the population of Russia. Our issues of illegal immigration, debt, conflict in congress, and other problems wouldn't be able to handle the immediate or even gradual shift to a non-competitive system. To make such a drastic change would be risky at the least and destructive at the most, and the inefficiency of our government is not something I would put my trust into when it came to my health. While countries with Universal Health Care tend to have longer life expectancies, they also don't have our same problems, so one system does not always translate well in a different situation.
That being said, I'm also not pleased with many of our private institutions, I've been through interviews with companies that are clearly scams and should be kept in check with smart and efficient regulations. However, regulations are currently contributing to the lack of competition between insurance companies, and when there is a lack of competition, the costumers suffer. Less and less is being covered, and costs are going up. Doctor's are being forced to run larger practices just to stay afloat, but still can't attend to all their patients.
I suppose I don't object to our current hybrid system. Those that want a higher and faster quality of health care, and that can afford it, should have it. Meanwhile, the government should provide a lower cost alternative that competes with its privately funded kin. The current system, however, is not working. The issue of illegal immigration hurts everyone involved. A pregnant woman can cross the border illegally, and the border patrol is required by law to give them a map to the nearest hospital. The child is born, and they are an American citizen. This is a very delicate situation; by no means should the woman be turned away, but when she doesn't pay for the service, the hospital suffers. Multiply this by millions times a year, and the issue becomes apparent.
I now turn it over to you, the readers. What do you think should be done? Should we repeal Obamacare in its entirety? Should we keep it and move to a universal system? Should be we elaborate on the hybrid system we currently possess? I invite discussion, correction, and (hopefully) progress. I think everyone can agree, this is a very crucial issue that needs to be fixed as soon as possible.
In the Gettysburg Address, Abraham Lincoln spoke of a "government of the people, by the people, for the people". Worryingly, this ideal seems not to be the case today. And what we see today may be best summed up as a government of the rich, by the rich, for the rich.
ReplyDeleteFor the wealthy of America, healthcare is a non-issue. Those who can afford to pay the insurance premiums are covered, and will no doubt receive excellent care. However, those who cannot - the impoverished - struggle. And here is where the system seems counter-productive. Those of a wealthier lifestyle are far less likely to require healthcare. Their lifestyle will likely be better, their diet better, gym memberships, exercise and, importantly, a lot less financial stress taking its toll on their health. Of course, this is unsubstantiated speculation, but it isn't such an illogical conclusion. Those who need healthcare the most are those most denied it. And, far more baffling and distressing, if you have a pre-existing condition, insurers were (are?) well within their rights to refuse to cover you!
I went to see a doctor while I was in Florida. It was a saturday morning, so I had to go to the ER since normal surgeries weren't open. It was nothing serious and required a 10 minute consultation with one of the ER doctors. For this, without insurance, it would have cost $1100. With insurance, it was a little over a hundred. An ambulance, without insurance, will cost you $10000.
This is absurd - all it serves to do is isolate millions and millions of people from healthcare. Watching my girlfriend worried and sick because she needs to go to the doctor but can't, because she cannot afford health insurance terrifies me. Forcing people to pick between seeing a doctor, and feeding their children that week is inhumane, irresponsible and barbaric. And sadly, that is exactly what happens. Indeed, I know someone who had a friend who died from an entirely treatable condition, simply because they could not afford health insurance.
Now, what do I believe to be the solution?
Easy. Universal Healthcare.
The most basic human right is the right to life. Healthcare should be a basic provision -not- a business. Run it like a business, and you put people's lives at risk, and that is unacceptable. Nobody should get to profit from the deaths of others.
Yes, taxes will go up. But surely this would be offset by no longer needing to pay insurance premiums? Furthermore, I am sick of hearing "I don't want to pay for some illegal mexican to get treated". But this is the fundamental question... is it acceptable to deny those genuinely in need, and who genuinely deserve it, simply to prevent those who don't? Do we punish the good majority to deny the bad minority? I don't think we should. Fine, some will take advantage of the system. But rather than think about that, I would prefer to think of all the good, genuine fathers, mothers, sons, daughters, husbands, wives who would finally receive the healthcare they need.
An excellent post. My response is written because it would take far too long to translate it to video.
DeleteI completely agree with you that the most basic human right is the right to life. No hospital anywhere in the US can refuse medical attention in an emergency situation, and many non-profit organizations exist that provide care as well. However, instituting Universal Healthcare can't just be done in a day. Our government is damn near broke, our debt is pretty much equal without our earnings. You are right, people shouldn't have to choose between feeding their family and getting medical care. However, if taxes went up on the poor in this country, the only thing they could afford would then be the healthcare. If they can't get a job, how are they going to now also pay higher taxes?
I consulted one hospital worker, among others, before I finished this post. She told me that if taxes went up, she wouldn't be able to keep sending the aid her family needs outside of America. How is that fair? It is tragic that millions of illegal immigrants don't have coverage, but that is quickly becoming the regular American citizen as well. Giving an extra 50 million people healthcare today could very well deprive 300 million of it tomorrow. Hospitals are already shutting down due to abuses of the system both inside and out; they simply can't afford to stay open giving health care for free. So they continue to do their jobs as doctors until they are out of said job, how is that fair? It does sound insensitive when someone doesn't want to pay for another's healthcare, but when the stakes are depriving millions of others of the same healthcare they once had before, the objection become understandable.
It isn't exactly right to think of healthcare as a business, but it's equally scary to think of it ran as a government institution. Both don't have a wonderful track record, and both can't support all those in need. Everything needs money to run, and we don't have much of it left. Where will we pull it from? Our schools are all closing down, roads are in disrepair, employers can't always afford to hire new workers, and the rich even with all their money would only amount to a drop in the bucket. Where can it come from? Even if we didn't need to pay insurance premiums, some other area of the economy is going to suffer for the raise is in taxes, and it would be substantial.
I believe the most reasonable answer would be to have a government-run insurance program that competes with other insurance companies and doesn't over-regulate existing companies. Those happy with their insurance can keep it, and those wishing to change won't have to pay extra for leaving the one the have. This way, healthy competition can promote lower prices and wider coverage. I hate to have to decide between a bureaucrat and a businessman when it comes to my health, but that's how the world works, and I'd rather have two choices instead of one.
I'm not saying Universal Healthcare is bad; I'd love for it to be available, efficient, and affordable (tax-wise). However, with the current economy and system, that just doesn't seem possible to implement without causing some other catastrophic problem. Universal Healthcare isn't without it's own criticisms. Long wait-times for surgeries are a common complaint, translate that to our over-extended and weak system, and it just might collapse.
Overall, something must be done, before the problem gets worse.
Thanks for reading.