Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by kavika411, Oct 4, 2007.
There you go. Those should answer your questions.
Socialized Medicine is basically an "American" term for Universal Healthcare.
Socialized medicine is a term designed to make you think it was conceived by Communists.
I've looked at those two web sites. What is the difference between universal health care and socialized medicine?
Universal health care means everyone has access. Some may pay cash, some may have private insurance and some people's coverage is subsidized through government programs. Generally speaking, universal health care is mandated by the government. Think in terms of auto insurance. Everybody's gotta have it, the obvious difference between the two is that auto insurance isn't directly subsidized by the government. It is however, indirectly subsidized through highway safety programs, drunk driving laws, vehicle safety standards, etc. All of those reduce the rate of damage and injuries and therefore lower auto insurance costs.
Socialized health care means that the government collects the money instead of insurance companies and then pays for health care directly. Canada is the most socialized system that I know of, however others do exist. Few countries operate this way though, most take the universal approach with a mix of private and public insurance.
Technically, the US already offers socialized health care through its Medicare and Medicaid programs along with a huge number of other lesser know programs. Ryan White Care Act for AIDS patients, any number of elderly health care programs, cancer patients, etc, etc,.
Labeling the two systems is often times a case of splitting hairs. Most western countries, with the notable exception of the US have some form of universal health care.
Oh man! I almost said that but decided against it... guess I missed my chance at being witty
With the obvious exception of the UK which invented the bloody thing.
too bad something good has to be turned evil by greedy people...
I live in Dubai, if i get sick i can go to the hospital and get treated for free, i dont have to pay for it, i dont need insurance. To some people that is socialist system, but i think it is a human system, not everyone is born rich and can pay the bills. We also have private hospitals which are better then the pubic ones for many reasons, people do also use that.
I am not sure how it works in the US but where i live if something does happen to you you dont have to worry about who's going to pay the bills.
When this subject comes up, I have noticed that there is always someone who screams "It'll be run just like the motor vehicle department!!". Oddly enough, these tend to be the very same people who absolutely believe everything they were taught in high school civics. Anyway,,
Here in MA, the motor vehicle department is knows as the "Registry of Motor Vehicles". Up until the early 90's, "the registry" as it is called by us locals, was just like any other state motor vehicle department: Rude employees, long lines, very uncomfortable waiting area, and rife with nepotism, cronyism, and poor service. Sound Familiar?
So, what happened: Governor William Weld takes office in '91, and appoints Daniel Grabaskus as Registrar. They immediately go about reforming the entire agency. Yes, it took time, but today, a trip to the registry is not nearly as bad as in the past. Every branch office was upgraded. Customers are encouraged to report any rudeness from any employee. A manager is always present, in every single office. You can now renew your registration and license by mail, so lines are usually not very long. Is it a model of efficiency? No, but it's much, much better than it once was.
My point is simply this: It could be done, if the right people were put in charge of it. I don't know why there's so many naysayers who get all foamy at the mouth and say it can't be done.
The hardest part is finding people willing to do this. I'm sure there are many leaders that would do a brilliant job in reforming and forming government agencies, but they are probably all too busy making tons of money at their job to want to go into working for the government...
Post of the day!
and the very first thing to come to mind when reading the thread title.
O.K. just to balance up your great post,New Zealands public health system was very similar and predates the UK system.
Exactly, plus the majority (if not all) of Europe. I can get free health care in any European country I want as long as I have my EU health card with me. Why is it that Americans are so against public health despite the fact that the American government spends more per head of population than the UK government does. It is utter madness.
Because we're a democracy!
Socialism and Communism = bad!!!
I'll assume that was sarcasm. But seriously what are the major arguments against it?
At the very least the US spends twice as much as the UK.
There is a lot of money to be lost for a lot of people if healthcare looses it's position as a money making industry. Sad, but true.
It was sarcasm, but at the same time it kinda really wasn't. The way I see it (let this be clear, this is my opinion) is that the America's "principles" was that people are to make their own way and not have to rely on the government to help out.
What it really boils down to is money, after all we are a capitalistic society. Businesses need to make their money by shafting the middle class. If you take that away, the rich (see people in power) people would get upset.
"Greed for a lack of a better word, is good"
I understand the American each man for himself mentality, what I don't understand is the senseless throwing away of money that could be better spent (or saved from reducing taxes) elsewhere. Seems like it is a collective "cutting off your nose to spite your face" attitude.
To be honest, I don't get it either.... and I live in the USA.
We've been forcing democracy down everybody's throats for so long that we can't possibly go the route of universal/socialized medicine. That and as I mentioned before, money. Money talks and BS talks over here. It's about who can squeeze the most money out of the consumers as possible.
I honestly have no (real) answers, only questions.
Nearly all of Europe, much of South America, Australia, Russia, and Cuba provide some form of universal healthcare.
Canada's form of socialized health care covers most doctor's visits and procedures excluding dental, chiropractic, and most forms of therapeutic treatment. Prescription medicine costs depend on the recipient, with most employers offering some form of insurance.
The NHS, which serves the UK, offers a greater degree of coverage than the Canadian system, as do most European systems, and I do believe France currently has the most comprehensive socialized healthcare system in the world.
I'd say the hardest part is finding people willing to foot the bill.
Well, there's a ringing endorsement. Sign me up!
Considering the WHO healthcare system rankings, it certainly is. I don't blame you for your enthusiasm!