An analysis of an element within a health care debate
The debate about national health care always seems to trivialize some very important considerations yet highlight the very capitalist and free market economic system that once seemed to be the fabric and infrastructure of American society. Let's be clear that no one should be denied any free enterprise goods and services, if subsidized, sponsored, or supplemented by the federal government like Medicaid, Medicare, or like now with prescription care and like most comments in response to this article, I believe that this national incentive for government-paid health care is an extraordinarily complex and social issue. I have been fortunate to have moderately good health but also keep in mind that the prevailing scientific/experimental/research/medical community could possibly examine and evaluate a countless number of ailments or conditions that would perhaps benefit me less than contribute to the overall or prevailing and current science of the day. I guess what I'm really trying to say is that without adequate accountability and other safeguards within the industry, again likely to be provided by the federal government or some other type of oversight, hundreds of millions of people will still be at the mercy and caprice of a medical system which may be more concerned with monetary and profit motives. Socialization of health care seems to be just that; a provisional or drastic replacement of a corrupted free enterprise economic system in which the needs of a few outweigh the benefits to the many. I still believe that this is a profound social issue if only because many people will debate the purpose and letter of freedom, if told what to do, how to live, what to eat, or how best to preserve and maintain good health. Yes, nationalized health care will and does entail these concerns unbelievably. That some people would like their medical bills, regardless of authenticity, validity, or necessity paid by the federal government really means that American society would like to double or even the triple the three prevailing tax rates or even the property tax rates across the nation. I, again, like some other commenters to this article, was convinced that millions of dollars a day spent for the war in Iraq, in addition to reports of a trillion dollar national debt was sufficient to kill any notions of a national health care with or without low affordable premiums for the American public until the latest economic reports indicated that there was, indeed, a federal surplus and that the national debt had declined significantly. So it is affordable. From my experience within the healthcare and insurance industries, I have reviewed and anaylzed those not so rare and increasingly prevalent cases of the rare ailments and instances in which parents must incur six figures, hundreds of thousands of dollars for the care and well-being of an infant. But these are rare and are testament that health care would still have to be meted and administered upon a case by case basis. If the American people truly believe that even routine medical care or otherwsie known as well-care visits can and should be afforded by everyone at federal expense, then perhaps that will be the direction that we follow as a nation. Maybe if not for NAFTA and other global economies of scale that necessarily export jobs, American industries, labor and wages, I would believe that the free enterprise system supported the wave and movement for a nationalized health care system. DOES ANYONE EVER ASK THE QUESTION IF WE AS AMERICANS ARE STILL COMPETENT TO PROVIDE AND ADMINISTER HEALTH CARE? Why does it seem as though we neglect this question in favor of reaping the benefits of a socialized or nationalized system? Admittedly, I chose accounting, law, and possibly even my own creative writing as careers instead of medical or engineering school. What will we choose when we lose so much faith and confidence in American health care and medicine that we prefer to rely upon foreign care if still within North America? It is entirely too personal and social an issue to be debated entirely upon a political forum. I prefer holistic remedies, natural herbal and mineral remedies, osteopathic treatments. Will these too be afforded by the federal government? With whose approval? And at what cost? Reasonable and customary? Or capitated, let's say, for some notion of a doctor's and hospital's formulary? If socialization is within our future, let's vote for universal military service, a universal bill for human and fundamental rights (to include more than just health care provided at government expense), mandatory universal education beyond secondary school, universal volunteerism, and universal preservation of economic markets that provide jobs and income.