Wouldn't a government-run health care system be something like...?

Question

Doctors providing the same level of customer service as the government-run DMV?

Answer 1

I just heard Nathan Lane on the Ellen Show telling how he was injured in England but wouldn't get the surgery he needed till he got home because "their Doctors are butchers!"

And the recent terrorists in England have brought to light the doctor shortages in England due to socialized medicine.

Patterning our healthcare system after theirs would be idiotic!

But we do need some serious changes!

Answer 2

I see this analogy a lot and the best way to describe it would be to say that you can call it the same name as what you call the stuff that comes out of the back end of a bull.

In Canada, where I live, each doctor is essentially in business for him or herself. The difference is that they get paid by the government for treating someone, rather than by an insurance company or the patient directly. As each doctor is essentially a businessman or businesswoman, they all have the same incentives to give good "customer service" as any other businessperson. As doctors, medical staff, and medical facilities are, to some degree, in lower supply than the demand would warrant, they do have waiting rooms and waiting lists, but this is hardly different from the American situation. How many Americans get to see a doctor right away? With the Canadian experience, at least, there is no dickering and arguing with an insurance company that is trying to deny care to pump up profits.

As for the waiting lists at the DMV, you get what you pay for. If Americans wanted deluxe super service from the DMV or any other government agency, they would have to pay for it. Americans don't like paying for government (something known as "taxes") and they get what they pay for.

How about asking some intelligent questions about universal health care? Slogans like this don't advance discussion; as the other answers here indicate, you just get more slogans in reply.

Answer 3

Yes.

Here's the deal. Private insurers absorb over 25% of each premium dollar on administrative costs; the governement running medicare pays only 2% of its premium dollar on administrative costs. Perhaps it is only because the government does not need to advertise but, right there is a 23% savings.

Here's the deal. The insurers current make contracts with health care providers to provide services for a certain fee. The government does the same theing with medicare.

Here's the deal. In other countries, there has been a brain-drain. Doctors have fled (usually to the US), because they can make far more money here than they can in Canada or Europe, or Asia (which universally have gvt healthcare). There would be no brain-drain here, because there would be no place for the doctors to go to make more money.

Here's the deal. There is a fear that some physicians would get out of the practice because they could make more money doing something else. Some might leave. However, if there is not a genuine "need" to be providing medical services, and simply that you are doing surgery to make a buck, I am not sure that such a physician is all that good anyway. Most physicians started medical school because they wanted to "help people." Universal coverage would bring us back to the health services being about healing professionals, not just a profit center.

Would there be waits? There already are. Look at any urban medical center emergency room, where the sick wait for hours for treatment. Look at the situation in Los Angeles, where the uninsured are, literally, put in cabs and put in the gutter -- because the hospital knows it will not be paid. Universal coverage makes such a practice economically stupid -- the healthcare provider will get paid for the necessary treatment of all.

There would almost certainly be far less red-tape and beaurcracy for the health care provider. INstead of having different coding and billing requirements for the myriad of health insurers (much less plans), there would be one standard billing system, thus decreasing the need for excessive support staff at health care providers.

Finally, the DMV is a state run program. So, I guess it would be more like ... well, medicare. You would need to apply. You would get a card. You would be done. But, that would really be too easy. Maybe we ought to stay with the current system.

Answer 4

I'm just fine having the government control infrastructure. I surely know that private companies won't do a better job or could handle the volume of work. Have you worked in large corporations before? Like more than 10,000 employees? Trust me, they aren't any better than the government!

I'm not sure where you live, but where I live, health care sucks. You have to wait 15 months for annual exams, 6 hours for emergency/urgent care and 3 months or more for a specialist.

And, I pay a fortune for coverage - over $500/month for a family of 3 with two full-time working parents.

Some plans actually sound great, assuming they get passed. I'm not for Edwards' "mandatory" plan where it becomes a criminal offense to not have coverage. I'm also not for a giant government plan that gives identical coverage to everyone, creating a huge bureaucracy.

I like Obama's plan allowing private carriers to compete for a single-payer plan providing the best savings for Americans. Americans can choose the coverage they want based on what is best suited for them, but the cost to Americans in general will be considerably lower. It has a better chance of being passed on a bi-partisan basis than any other one out there.

In the end, whatever plan means that a sick person will die because they can't afford treatment, or a child or a senior will have to forego medication over food, I'm for it. How can you not be?

Answer 5

I keep seeing everyone saying the same thing, "Why should I work to pay for health care for people that don't"

Quite a few of the 46 some million people without health care
do work but there employers do not offer insurance.
for the avg Joe to go buy health insurance for a family your looking at 600.00 bucks a month or more.

and the ones that don't work we already do pay for there health care as most are covered with state health insurance.

What pisses me off is that my insurance goes up every year
and I keep seeing all the Blue Cross TV Ads
so they jack the prices so they can advertise. What a joke

Answer 6

I believe it would. Anytime you have accountants or attorneys, which is what the government is, running a business you will have problems.

From what I have been told by health care providers in Canada and the UK, it is very much like that there. At least on the administrative side. The doctors and nurses do the best with what they have, of course.

One friend in the UK was amazed when I was telling him about some of the tests a family member had done during his short hospital stay. The friend claimed that it would take a month to get through all the bureaucratic junk for him to get the same done.

Answer 7

Response and efficiency varies by government department. We depend on ours for emergency response, power, running water, police, education.

Why is health care better left solely to private companies that consider profit before the health of their customers?

I don't know that a purely government subsidized and run health care system would be best, but the current state of privatized health care is an embarrassment.

Answer 8

In every country there are cases of bad medical care, the U.S. has millions of those kind of stories. But overall most canadians and british, french, etc. like their systems. As a doctor once said to me, if he needed surgery he would go go the UK because the hospitals are much more sanitary there.

Answer 9

The elected officials, which includes all the hypocritical Republicans, don't seem to be getting that kind of customer service with their government paid health care system.

Answer 10

Who's asking for a government run health care system? I've never heard of that one before.

The people are DEMANDING a National health care INSURANCE program.

Answer 11

It wouldn't have to be run by the govt., it could be run by the doctors and patients....not the insurance companies. All western countries except us have national care. We should be able to glean the best aspects of their programs and make ours no. 1. As it is the U.S. is #37 in health care. Just as our police and fire services are run and paid for by taxes, so should our health care....it's a necessity. Hilary along with Gingrich sponsored a bill to cut health costs by becoming more efficient and Hilary wants to reduce the cost of health care further.