Why exactly are President Obama and various leaders in Congress trying to push the United States further down the path of big government health care? After all, when you actually look at what health care is like in nations with socialized medicine, it’s not pretty.
The June 9 Wall Street Journal published an important piece by Dr. David Gratzer, a physician, titled “Canada’s ObamaCare Precedent.” The entire article warrants reading.
But here are some key points made.
• Gratzer, born and raised in Canada, believed in the country’s single-payer system. Until, that is, he went to medical school and saw that patients in Canada pay a steep price in terms of having to “wait for practically any procedure or diagnostic test or specialist consultation in the public system.” He offers a couple of scary examples.
• He notes that the Ontario government sent 160 patients to the U.S. for emergency neurosurgery between 2006 and 2008.
• ER patients do not receive the care they should.
• Canada suffers from a severe physician shortage.
• He also notes studies that find superior care in the United States, including for the poor.
• And what is growing in nations like Canada, Great Britain and Sweden with nationalized health care? Private hospitals and care.
The push for ObamaCare rest on two mistaken assumptions. First, that government will run health care more efficiently, and therefore, money will be saved. Any economist worth his or her salt will tell you that is a preposterous assumption. Second, the quality of health care will rise. Again, economists will note that government lacks the incentives to do things well. That is backed up by evidence about socialized medicine from around the world – in particular that care is rationed.
Costs do not just come in the form of dollars. They also come in terms of waiting periods and reduced quality.
Raymond J. Keating
Chief Economist
Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council
No comments:
Post a Comment