This is something I wrote on Friday after seeing some protesters. I am not posting this to start an argument on the merits of national healthcare (we already have that thread
) and yet I do want some feedback on my thoughts. So, if you disagree can you limit your comments to "I disagree" instead of posting pages and pages of counterarguments? Am I making sense here? If we want to debate healthcare, we can do it in the politics section
. These are just my thoughts. I'm not saying I'm right or that the program will work amazingly well, just what I think about it.
So today, I was at the press conferencing announcing that the first stage of the Univest Grand Prix will be held in Allentown, as a team time trial. As I'm watching, I see people with signs approaching from across the street. My first thought was "Oh Good Lord what now?" Thankfully, they didn't disrupt the conference, but I did get to see their signs. There were about 5 or 6 of them, but there were more grouped in front of Sen. Bob Casey's office, which was (conveniently enough) across the street.
I did however get to read some of their signs. They sported slogans such as "No Socialism! No socialized health care" "Don't ruin Doctor-Patient relationships!" "Vote No Universal Healthcare" "Hands off my healthcare!" "We don't trust government!" I later heard that they are the disciples of Bobby Gunther Walsh. I saw a bit of them on the news. Turns out they were protesting in front of the offices of Sens. Casey and Dent. I saw them coming and felt brain cells die.
Then I started to think about their arguments. A couple of the protestors seemed close to or at Medicare age. I dearly wanted to go over and ask the group "Are any of you recipients of, or do you know anyone who is a recipient of Medicare? Or Medicaid or SCHIP?" Because if they ARE in fact against government involvement in Healthcare, then they wouldn't mind if those programs were cut because they are forms of the government attempting to provide healthcare for citizens who may not be able to get it on their own; which we naturally can't have. I also wanted to ask "I am going to be graduating college in 4 years, and will therefore be in student debt for about 10. Suppose I can't afford my own health insurance, or the plan offered by my employers. Do you suggest I should be left to rot?" Also, holding a sign saying "Vote No to Universal Healthcare" just makes you look like an asshole. The phrase "universal health care" sounds like everyone has access to healthcare, saying "vote no" makes it look like you don't WANT people to have healthcare. It makes one look like an evil self-centered bastard.
So, I'm now going to go through the most common anti-healthcare arguments.
• "It's a multi Trillion dollar program that we don't have the budget for at this time" -- they're so quick to play the budget card, and yet the massive black budget that goes into questionable government programs through the Department of Defense or CIA/FBI/NSA/etc. At least with this plan the money is accountable
• "It will ruin the Doctor-Patient Relationship" -- How?
• "You won't be able to choose where to go" -- Hello! (Channeling Mrs. Stangherlin here) insurance companies already restrict your choice of healthcare provider!! How often do people have to look around town to find somewhere that either will accept their insurance or be accepted by their insurance?
• "Quality of Care will go down" - How? The quality of care isn't in how much we pay here in America. It's in the people/hospitals/technology we go see. Regardless of how much their paid right now we still have some of the best medical technology and doctors in the world. That quality will not go down if for once someone is paid for what they need or use as opposed to (gasp!) paid so they can make a profit. This is personal opinion but shouldn't ensuring the health and welfare of humanity be more of a public service than a business?
• "Waiting rooms will be crowded and there will be a long wait for service" - Well, some emergency rooms are already crowded with waits for service. Also, (people seem to like to attack Canada for this) waiting times are not terrible in Canada. In 8 out of 10 provinces, 75 % of cancer patients receive treatment within 4 weeks, bypass surgeries, hip replacements and knee replacements within 26 weeks and cataract surgery within 16 weeks. If done on a Triage premise, "those with most immediate need go first" a nationalized health care system can be successful.
• "Our Taxes are too high already" - Our taxes are only a fraction of what they are in most European countries, and as with anything it seems, you get what you pay for. We pay a fraction of the taxes for a fraction of the service and a fraction of the efficiency.
• "The Government should keep their hands off my healthcare!" -- Alright, fair enough. I believe if you say that, it should be an all - or - or nothing proposition. If the government should keep their hands off healthcare, then they should keep their hands off healthcare. If money and taxes are really such an issue, we should also cut Medicare, Medicaid, CHIP (health insurance for un-insured children). I like the way you think, leave the elderly who have retired from their job, and the children who CAN'T have a job off to their own devices. Also, while we're allowing people to fend for themselves we can also drop social security and/or welfare.
Who's willing to bet that if any of those changes I recommended in the last bullet were made, people would be screaming bloody murder anyway?
And one final note, Canada, the U.K. and various other European Nations all have some sort of national healthcare service, and none of them have collapsed into the economic chaos (at least, they haven't collapsed into economic chaos because of their healthcare) or third world medical conditions some are saying would happen here. Just something to think about.
