Some thoughts on Universal Healthcare.

There is certainly waste in any large organisation. But there is also economy of scale and an efficiency that cannot be achieved by privatisation and fragmentation. Privatisation merely allows investors (the wealthy) to control operations for a profit. They cream off a percentage. How can anything be more effective if the wealthy investors are running it for profit?

No – I do not believe that competition can be effective. Running something for the people instead of the investors has to be the cheaper option. Ploughing profits back into the system has to make more sense than them going into the pockets of the wealthy.

Perhaps one has to ask why these people want this system so badly?

While one needs to be vigilant of waste and inefficiency a large organisation can be well managed through close scrutiny, stringent inspection and good accountability. If that is the case the efficiencies of scale far outweigh any loss through waste.

The States has a system where many people have no health care, many have insufficient healthcare and spend their lives worrying in case something major happens, while the top end have exclusive healthcare. It is a highly unjust system. And it costs twice as much as the UK healthcare where everyone is covered for everything and nobody is left out or has to worry.

I do not believe that a centralised system cannot operate on a large population. I do not believe that Europe would find it difficult at all.

Even if it was considered too big each State (all of which are considerably smaller than the UK in numbers) could operate its own system.

No – the problem is not that; it is propaganda. The American public have been brainwashed by the people who are bleeding them dry – the American Health Insurance Companies.

Socialism is subject to a huge negative publicity. Why? Because the wealthy want to milk the population for every cent they can get out of them. That is why rampant capitalism and privatisation are promoted and socialism is vehemently decried.

The answer to me is found in controlled capitalism as you get under democratic socialism. It is more compassionate and more moral in my opinion.

14 thoughts on “Some thoughts on Universal Healthcare.

    1. Rag – a good society cares for all its members. A bad and callous society turns its back on the unfortunate.
      I believe in fairness, justice and caring.
      I wouldn’t walk past somebody who had fallen over and hurt themselves. I’d help them. I wouldn’t allow anyone to be sick, in pain or die without doing something about it. Society is there for the benefit of everyone. We work together. We look after each other.
      I think health-care is a basic component of a society.
      Health, education, energy, infrastructure, food and shelter – I believe those are basic needs that any caring society should meet.

      1. I would argue that all rights are made up rights. They are no more than what a group of well-meaning people believe to be right.
        In reality we have no rights at all.
        The UN Charter of Human Rights is a document thought up by people which encapsulates the best of human thinking. It affords basic rights to all people and is something I agree with 100%.
        I would contend that any decent society would take care of its weak and sick. A society that doesn’t is a bad society.
        Everybody deserves healthcare and the richest country in the world can easily afford it.

      2. We all pay for it collectively. It is a lot cheaper that way.
        Why pay some wealthy investors to take a big slice of profit off the top to start with?
        One only has to look at the US Health system. It is run for profit, not people. It is hugely expensive. It works great for the wealthy and terribly for the poor and millions are left uncovered. The people who love are the ones making a fortune out of it.
        The UK Health system is universal. It treats everyone from Queens to paupers, nobody is left short and is is a fraction of the cost.

      3. Opher, is there any discrimination as to what the government says it will pay for? Some patients will take priority over other patients in a single-payer system based on the urgency of a medical problem, however, does your system give preferential treatment as to what procedures and/or medications it will pay for?

      4. Very little. There are some drugs or treatments that they say are not effective and will not fund – but very few. The treatment is always based on priority needs and is thorough and excellent.
        At present it is being underfunded by the present Tory government which is causing some delays in non-essential treatments.
        But anyone and everyone receives free treatment – including visitors – such as Americans visiting the country – no questions asked.

I'd like to hear from you...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.