is Socialized health care bad or the Bureaucracy that runs it?

Question

People in here always talk of privatization, but if there is one thing that we Americans should realize is that "Private" doesn't mean what it used to... it generally means price fixing and market control.. Socialized medicine is the obvious answer ..problem is in socialist countries people wait ridiculous time for important tests and procedures.. I have a friend in North Ireland, you have to wait 12 months for an MRI even if it's an Emergency, much the same In Holland, Sweden Canada..
but is that a bad policy or bad management? I think if you look you will see that there is a stagnation in these places that could easily be addressed ."IF" someone wanted to

Answer 1

Thank You so much for your insight and view point. You have a really good question and I think you've answered it correctly yourself. Bad management is the key here and there is so much money in Insurance that they've declared a global war, (Jihad) to discredit socialized medicine. Part of the blame must rest on outside influences. Insurance sees how Iranian assistance inhibits peaceful progress in the Mid East and has capitalized by implementing the same meddling tactics/techniques to influence the world populace to embrace their corporate structure and positions. Still there needs to be a choice and those wanting privatized Insurance should be able to choose so.

Answer 2

First fact, anything socialist is bad and is doomed to fail
Has the government ever done anything better than what a solid business person can do?

Second fact
In AMerica today we have national healthcare. You will not hear about it because the government does not control or run it and they want to real bad, big money in this business and they want a bigger cut of the pie.

You can receive medical care, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year.... REGARDLESS OF YOUR ABILITY TO PAY, I hope that one sinks in to some. We have healthcare for everyone in AMerica today, we do not need any more government intervention in the business, because they will screw it up and the costs will skyrocket and the quality will drop like a rock.

In the UK, someone has a life threatening aneurysm, they go in for the National Healthcare plan and are admitted to a hospital, they are placed in a ward and they are monitored for five to seven days, assuming they live for that long they will then get treated for the aneurysm, but of course they might be a mental vegatable by then. Is this what the government wants for AMerica, the socialists want it of course, it gives them more control ofyour lives.

How would you like to be against socialism and know that they control your health care? Do you think you would last long in that situation?

Answer 3

There are tradeoffs no matter wether you go with socialized or privatized medicine.

Privitization allows for competition which should, "theoretically" lower prices. But this works only if there is sufficient competition.

There's also a problem with health care being for profit in general. Medical treatments make more money by treating the symptoms than curing the problem. So while driving prices down, you may actually end up paying more in the long run as companies look for ways to have "repeat customers" as opposed to "fix it once" customers.

There would have to be oversight to make sure abuses weren't taking place, and ensure the monopolistic, oligopolistic practices weren't taking place.

Then there is the whole "balance" of treatment. Low prices does not mean best care, so those with cash get the best treatments while those without get the Walmart treatment

Now for socialized medicine. Socialized medicine means everyone gets equal care "theoretically". But in order to manage such a system takes a alot of overhead. It's fairly complex, and is tricky to implement efficiently. It's prone to error, and beaurocratic tangles.

Then of course, is the complaints you'd hear from the upper class basically funding everyone in the country off their taxes.

The doctors and other professionals would hate it as prices would become more fixed. On the other hand they would love it as it would probably end up dropping malpractice insurance premiums as the government would basically be subsidising their practices.

Socialized health-care would take a significant effort to implement correctly. Think interstate level type of engineering. Any system deployed without that type of effort would end up being mediocre at best.

~X~

Answer 4

That is a big "IF"

The key to me is simple. Make health care a STATE run program as opposed to Federal. Also do not eliminate private health care rather use the state program to compete with the private sector for health care premiums. In this way, the hospitals are still privately owned but the insurance becomes Socialized. This will force the private insurance companies to become more efficient and lower their rates to make it more affordable.

Answer 5

When ever government gets involved, you find a great deal of bad management. It is just a simple fact verifiable by anyone that has had to deal with any government function.

The idea of socialized health care is tempting but the administration of that health care will quickly devolve into the mess you mentioned.

The problems of price fixing in the private sector can be addressed by encouraging actual competition. We already have methods in place to assist business getting started in the Small Busiess administration. That should be applied to health care as well.

Answer 6

Socialized anything is bad and bureaucracy is only part of the reason. Private industry means competition. Competition means doing things more efficiently and at a lower cost to the consumer. Socialism is just status quo with no incentive for improvement.

.

Answer 7

Almost nobody is saying government should run our health care. Under Obamacare (or any national health care) YOU and YOUR DOCTORS will run your health care. Just as it is now. You are sadly ignorant and misinformed. Medicare IS being run more efficiently than private insurance. That's a proven fact. Administrative costs for Medicare WAY below that of private insurance companies. Medicare doesn't pay outrageous salaries and bonuses to greedy executives. Social Security is a wildly SUCCESSFUL program. It doesn't add one penny to our deficit or debt. "If Canada's health care is so good, why are there so many Canadians coming to the US for their care?" - one has nothing to do with the other. I can argue the opposite - why are Americans going to Canada to sign up for their health care system? Mitt Romney just praised Israel's system of NATIONALIZED health care because of its lower cost and greater efficiency than ours. IF Canada's (and just about every other developed nation) socialised health care systems are so bad, why do they still have them? BTW: the Canadian system is WILDLY popular with Canadians. As is England's, Sweden's, Israel's etc, etc, etc. You'll note than NONE of these countries are moving to the ridiculous system we are clinging to.

Answer 8

bad policy, not a bad idea.

some countires handle it better than others. canada has a 'which is more pressing policy' where emergencies are taken care of first. this is bad for people who need care but could wait without endangering their health.
France is said to have the best. I don't actually know how they run it or which country they are similair to.

Answer 9

I could agree with Mymadsky if he added the caveat that States had the right to decide for themselves whether they wanted it.

Here in Tennessee, we had a program called TennCare. It was instituted in the early '90's to provide healthcare to low income and uninsured Tennesseans, in additional to the Medicaid.

It was disbanded by our Democratic governor 2 years ago, and stripped down to basic Medicaid, because it was sinking the entire Tennessee economy.

I think the program could have worked if it had been opened to all Tennesseans without private coverage, and paid for by them based on standards that encouraged them to not abuse it. In other words, not paid for out of the general fund, but at group rates for the insureds.

Answer 10

Socialized health care and Bureaucracy is one in the same.