Free Health Care vs Free Food and Water
Jul. 6th, 2007 08:42 amPaul Wells raises a simple question that I don't have a good answer for: if we consider food and water and health care all essential to life, why is there no government monopoly over food and water, but there is over health care?
I strongly support the idea of government-paid-for and you-can't-buy-better health care, but I'm very interested in hearing arguments that make me rethink my position. Mostly, I'm concerned that:
I haven't seen SiCKO yet, but hope to soon. I'm not really the target audience though.
I strongly support the idea of government-paid-for and you-can't-buy-better health care, but I'm very interested in hearing arguments that make me rethink my position. Mostly, I'm concerned that:
- Groups of people screw stuff up (in government we call this bureaucracy and red tape, but it exists in business too) but in government the overall goal is different than in a business (very roughly: "help" instead of "profit").
- A business is legally obligated to make money for shareholders, while governments don't have that restriction. This is not a bug, it's a feature.
- A so-called two-tier system (where the rich folk can buy faster care) would cause the better medical professionals to go where the money is, and then the care would worsen in quality and speed for the rest of the population.
I haven't seen SiCKO yet, but hope to soon. I'm not really the target audience though.
no subject
Date: 2007-07-07 03:10 pm (UTC)