my take on the healthcare debate in the US

[tocqueville]

My take on all this that a private financed healthcare system is doomed to fail, even with a "public option". It can work to a certain extent in a period of time when a nation like the US has a wealthy middle-class, but it still will let out the poor. And when bad times come it will turn into a catastrophy. Because there is a basic contradiction in making profit in a good capitalistic manner and providing expensive services to "non-profitable" people. It applies to other sectors too. If roads and other transportation means were only left to private interests, there would be only roads in certain profitable areas. Same goes for energy, post-offices etc... Imagine if fire brigades were private : only the buildings of the rich would be protected.

That's why most European healthcare systems are primarily single-payer tax-based systems where the private part comes as a complement, using niches of "comfort" medicine, while all the primary care is ensured for everybody. BTW the European private insurance companies are a flourishing market, "despite" the public service. The claims that "government-run" systems are expensive and inefficient is purely a myth : they cost half what the US system does.

All this bottoms (despite all claims of patriotism) in a complete US misunderstanding in what a national interest is (BTW relating to the old Christian concept of "common good" !). The belief that the private interest is always sustaining the national one is basically flawed (what's good for GM, etc... we saw what happened...).

A modern nation (all human aspects set aside) should be interested in a healthy population even on pure nationalistic grounds. Healthy people produce more and more efficiently. They are keen into improving their situation for everybody's benefit. Sucking their blood will give short term profits, but no sustainable solution in the long run.

Slave societies collapsed because they weren't sustainable, due to the enormous toll it took on forced labor. Neo-conservatism creates a new slave society (work or die), a thing that both Republicans and Bue Dog Democrats haven't understood. It's doomed to fail, like the Roman Empire. But of course they prefer to fiddle when America is burning.

[ipaint]

1. 2/3 rds of the people want a canadian style system or

expanded medicare for all. We lack the leadership in government and the will, despite lack of leadership, to insist that the least of us should have what all of us need as human beings.
We need to collectively stop settling for less.

[Cresent City Kid]

2. Health is bad for business

Certain health problems are self inflicted like diet, exercise, and imitating stunts from jackass. Just eliminating these would hurt a system designed to benefit from pain and illness. The incentives are completely backwards. I imagine that in a national health situation like in Europe, wellness and pollution reduction are seen as positives for society instead of negatives for industry like they are here.

[tocqueville]

4. the same fight has been going on here...

and still does to a certain extent. But "the positives" as you say have mostly prevailed. This is mostly due to a dominating ideological trend of christian-democrats like in Germany, social-democrats like in Scandinavia and of "social-conservatives" like in France. But maybe one of the major reasons is that eligible people cannot be financed for their campaigns by private interests (in France it means jail and "uneligibility" for 10 years if proven). So it's far more difficult for the pharmacy industry and insurances companies or medical lobbies to "own" politicians.

[elocs]

3. Thank you. I was waiting for your take. I was fearful it would be lost

in the many other healthcare threads.

[MarjorieG]

5. How much would a public option begin to take over, even if restricted at first, giving us that basic

single-payer with specialty private plans who can and must buy.

[Karenina]

6. K&R!!!