Five Myths About Health Care Around the World

[manasecret]

I'm glad I got one response before the bot came in.

But that's ok if I get no responses. I just think this is important information to get out there. I know for a fact that much of these myths are perpetuated as arguments against healthcare reform. I'm glad someone finally answered the questions I had (and I assume others had) whether they are correct or incorrect assumptions.

For example, I hear a lot of arguments that socialized healthcare must equal long wait times. That's apparently not necessarily true. Same thing with the statement that if the government has a large base that it insures it can then throw its weight around against the medical industry to reduce prices, which will then stifle innovation. Again, this apparently is not necessarily true, and in fact can produce quite the opposite (Japan).

While they may not all apply directly to the U.S. because of several different factors as Bond mentioned, to put them forth as arguments against healthcare saying that socialized healthcare must = long wait times, socialized healthcare must = less innovative healthcare, are simply not valid arguments.

[Professor S]

Originally Posted by manasecret

While they may not all apply directly to the U.S. because of several different factors as Bond mentioned, to put them forth as arguments against healthcare saying that socialized healthcare must = long wait times, socialized healthcare must = less innovative healthcare, are simply not valid arguments.

Ok, we'll change the argument to "are likely to hurt innovation and increase wait times" instead of "must".

Israel is an excellent example of good socialized healthcare working very well, but we also have to realize that Israel is not America in size, scope or citizenship (they have an abundance of doctors who live there for reasons beyond their profession). Thats why I think the greatest arguments against universal health insurance aren't examples from other countries, even though there are plenty of horror stories to share along with victory speeches, but whether or not America has ever been able to competently execute something of this size and scope, or even less so.

The answer is a resounding and obvious "no", but for some reason people will never stop repeating the same mantra of "this time we'll get it right"... "this time we'll get it right"...

I'd actually like to ask what people think about "risk pooling" that McCain talked about recently, where he addresses those that can't get insurance for pre-existing conditions by pooling them together and having a government agency help purchase insurance for everyone as a group to help reduce costs. This would help fill the current gap in the uninsured who want coverage, but also not force anyone to get insurance if they don't want it and wouldn't sabotage the free market and/or employer provided care the large majority of Americans currently enjoy.

[Bond]

Originally Posted by Professor S

I'd actually like to ask what people think about "risk pooling" that McCain talked about recently, where he addresses those that can't get insurance for pre-existing conditions by pooling them together and having a government agency help purchase insurance for everyone as a group to help reduce costs. This would help fill the current gap in the uninsured who want coverage, but also not force anyone to get insurance if they don't want it and wouldn't sabotage the free market and/or employer provided care the large majority of Americans currently enjoy.

It sounds like quite a good idea, and somewhat similar to the idea I posted in our other health care thread that would create a charity operated "mutual insurer." That idea would also not add to the deficit - imagine that!

McCain's proposal seems to be a proper and effective use of government power within the private sector. Having these citizens whom have pre-existing conditions pooled together as a group would also reduce their risk of being dropped by insurance companies. Most of those horror stories you hear of persons being dropped are under an individual policy, and not a group policy.

[manasecret]

Originally Posted by Professor S

Ok, we'll change the argument to "are likely to hurt innovation and increase wait times" instead of "must".

This is exactly my point. You can no longer say definitively that outside examples of healthcare show that socialized medicine/healthcare will do these things. And, not only that, but in fact someone on the other end of the debate could say just as honestly that examples from outside the U.S. show that they "are likely not to hurt innovation and increase wait times." (And just to be clear, the same goes for other such arguments brought up in this article.)

Israel is an excellent example of good socialized healthcare working very well, but we also have to realize that Israel is not America in size, scope or citizenship (they have an abundance of doctors who live there for reasons beyond their profession). Thats why I think the greatest arguments against universal health insurance aren't examples from other countries, even though there are plenty of horror stories to share along with victory speeches, but whether or not America has ever been able to competently execute something of this size and scope, or even less so.

The answer is a resounding and obvious "no", but for some reason people will never stop repeating the same mantra of "this time we'll get it right"... "this time we'll get it right"...

This goes back into the heart of the healthcare debate that I'm not armed to argue. I made my point.

I'd actually like to ask what people think about "risk pooling" that McCain talked about recently, where he addresses those that can't get insurance for pre-existing conditions by pooling them together and having a government agency help purchase insurance for everyone as a group to help reduce costs. This would help fill the current gap in the uninsured who want coverage, but also not force anyone to get insurance if they don't want it and wouldn't sabotage the free market and/or employer provided care the large majority of Americans currently enjoy.

I believe that Texas has this sort of risk pool or something similar, and I imagine it's not uncommon for some other states. If you're interested in the idea, I suggest you research risk pool in Texas. I have no knowledge about its success or otherwise.