Posted by
Steve on Thursday, May 07, 2009 1:42:40 PM
Democrats are focused on giving us socialized medicine, whether we want it or not. Based on an article I saw written by Hugh Hewitt, the Democrats have a speeded up timetable to deliver socialized medicine by the end of the year. They will meet in conferences in the House and Senate in June. Vote on the bill in July and August. Since the two bills will not be the same, they never are, they will meet in conference in October or November and vote on the finished bill in December. That would put the bill on the President’s desk before January one.
Exactly what they have planned at this time is not completely clear. You can be sure that it is a form of single-payer health care. That is the type they have in England and Canada. This is ignoring the fact that in England and in Canada, patients have to wait for long periods of time to get regular health care. If you have some life threatening illness, the wait time will probably be longer than your life expectancy. That is deliberate because the system is trying to save money. The easiest way for them to save money on health care is to not give it to you when you absolutely need it.
The most expensive time of a person’s health care life is the last six months. That is because the person is in the process of death. The person and the family are trying hard to save the life. So, everything possible is tried to try and save the person’s life. If the government gets in charge of health care, you can be sure that this type of measure will be the first casualty of the budget knife. That would save a lot of money they could then use on other health care measures.
Another problem is whether to give transplants and other expensive operations to people that are elderly at the time. These expensive operations would give that person a new life, but for how long? If you cut out these operations, you could save a lot of money to be used elsewhere. The people would die soon anyway, so who cares if they die a year or so early. That just means less population to take care of.
Handicapped people require a lot of medical attention. If you ration their health care, you could save a lot of money. I could go on, but I think that you get the point. The sick, elderly and handicapped will be the ones to feel the budget crunch first. For the first couple of years, we will probably not notice that much of a difference, if they do it right. But, over time, the system will fail just like it has in England and Canada.
The biggest problem in England and Canada is that they do not have enough doctors. Doctors are now government employees. As government employees, they unionize like all government employees are doing. They strike for higher wages and better conditions. Fewer people go into the medical field because they can make more money elsewhere. The doctors that we do get out of medical school are not as good as the doctors we turn out today. The reason is they are not as motivated to be doctors and they see it as a job, not a calling. That problem is already turning up with younger doctors. Older doctors see the medical profession as a calling and are willing to put in long hours. Younger doctors want a life as well as medicine. There is nothing wrong with that, but it means you need more doctors than we have today to serve the same number of people. We will be producing fewer doctors, not more.
I will probably not live long enough to see the system collapse like it is in England and Canada. It will take 30-40 years before the system cannot provide even basic services to the public. Canada regularly sends patients they cannot serve to the US for medical attention.
When I was in Spokane, Washington, there was an article in the local paper about women being sent to the US from Canada. The reason they were sent to the US was because Canadian hospitals had reached their quota of babies for the year. To serve the excess, they had to use US hospitals. The Canadian health service would not provide funds to allow these babies to be born in Canada like they should have. Where will the Canadians go when we have a system every bit as bad as theirs?
Socialized medicine can be stopped before it sees the light of day. Unfortunately, the Republicans are afraid to stand up to anything labeled health care reform. The AARP and other groups that should be interested in this reform are sitting on their hands. They either are hoping the Democrats are not serious or are waiting to see what the Democrats are coming up with. It does not matter what they come up with. If it is a single-payer system it will ration health care. If it rations health care, those who need health care the most will feel the brunt of the rationing.
Our current system is the best in the world. It has problems. Those problems can be addressed without throwing the baby out with the bath water. You do not have to destroy the best medical system in the world to correct some relatively minor problems. This is just madness that anyone could be serious about changing the system. But, Democrats want to control your lives. One of the best ways to control your lives is to control your health care. That is why they are changing the system from the best to the worst. They want to control the American public. You can be sure that the Congress and President will not have the same medical system as the rest of the American people. Democrats will see to that. They would never settle for second class medicine, like they are going to force down our throats.