Cheap Medicine: Part One
Written with guest writer LRM
POP QUIZ—NO CHEATING!
How is a hospital bed like an airline seat?
A) They are both uncomfortable.
B) You may not like your neighbors.
C) No two people pay the same price.
D) All of the above.
Yep! “D” is correct. Free market forces do have some weird effects on our health care system and there’s no question that it is less than perfect. Despite being, arguably, the best health care system in the world, it could, never-the-less, be improved. And, it’s for this reason that Democrats, desperate to find some platform to to campaign on, have decided to take up health care reform and run with it. Although the Democratic Party has a broad candidate pool, it is, none-the-less, a VERY weak one (Joe Biden, ladies and gentlemen, is the FRONT RUNNER!) and they know they are going to need SOMETHING to generate voter enthusiasm.
“Medicare for all”, together with a number of other “pie in the sky” promises (free college for all, guaranteed income for all, reparations for slavery, etc!) are the bait with which they hope to ensnare a gullible populace (yes, America, Democrats will NEVER overestimate your intelligence). The source of funding for all these programs, however, is NEVER made clear. Recently, the State of Vermont (no bastion of conservative politics) has abandoned its plan to socialize medical care, concluding that they just couldn’t afford it. They realized that the numbers just don’t add up. Proponents mumble things like “downsize the military” (in this day and age of terrorism and increasing international conflict, is downsizing defense really such a good idea?). Or “tax the rich”; 70%—no wait, make that 80%— no, maybe more than that!” Unfortunately, people are just NOT going to work hard only to give 80% of the their money to the government. Taking away the incentive for hard work will transform America from its current position as an economic powerhouse into the equivalent of the cold war era Soviet Union. And we all know how well that worked out.
Currently the cost of medical care in America represents approximately 18% of our gross domestic product (GDP), (Source: Centers For Medicare and Medicaid Services, cms.gov). A major portion of our economy, to be sure. Size alone would be a very cogent reason not to let the government get total control. If you like the Department of Motor Vehicles, you’re sure to love government run health care. (Stand in line to take a number to stand in another line to take another number, etc).
Now, critics of American medicine frequently claim that not only is our medical system too expensive, but it’s substandard to boot! They point to certain international studies that rank us below a number of other developed countries in parameters like life expectancy, infant mortality and “overall health”. “We should be like Europe or Canada where health care is free“ goes the cry. “If our system were working, we’d all be healthier!” While it is true that such studies exist, the methodology of many of them is misleading. Often, they are comparing apples to oranges, if you will. The United States is a large country with an ethnically diverse population. Many chronic diseases are more prevalent in certain ethnic groups. It’s no one’s fault, but it is a fact. Comparing us to a small genetically homogeneous population of six foot tall Scandinavians is not a fair comparison. And, aside from genetic challenges, it must be recognized that many Americans have less than ideal health habits (lack of excercise, smoking, drinking, over eating, etc). Blaming the consequences of both heredity and poor life style choices on our system of medical care isn’t just unfair – it’s ludicrous. Furthermore, the way in which health statistics are generated is not the same in every country. In many of the countries with purportedly better infant mortality statistics, for example, very premature babies born alive are counted as stillbirths because they are not expected to survive and are not necessarily even treated. Contrast this with the US, where extraordinary attempts are made to save these infants. If babies born at less than 24 weeks are excluded, our data on survival improves considerably (Source: Washington Times 10/3/2015). So, if a reform advocate denigrates the quality of American medicine on the basis of one of these duplicitous studies, take it with the proverbial grain of salt.
In the second part of this essay, to follow, we’ll discus rationing, delay of care and the collapse of private practice medicine.