Montrose - Daily Press

Dr. Manhart’s letter describes the fallacy of continuing our move toward a socialistic health care system. Most economists will agree that a “free” good or service will always be overused with an associated decrease in quality and requirement for rationing. “Free” medical care is not exempt from this law of economics. Whenever demand exceeds supply, some rationing must occur. Price and competition are the rationing factors in a free market, and well meaning but incompetent bureaucrats do the rationing in a socialistic system. The European experience is that the infirm elderly are the first to suffer.

Let us examine the success of Canada’s health care system as evaluated in the December 2003 issue of the Frontiers of Freedom Institute, in an article entitled, “Access Denied: Canada’s Healthcare System Turns Patients into Victims.” This article points out that Canada has abundant health insurance, but a profound lack of health care. About 10,000 doctors left Canada in the 1990s for other countries, with no plans to return. In Ontario, nearly 80 percent of its regional communities are listed by the provisional government as “under serviced “due to physician shortages. Their partial solution is to create 369 new nurse practitioner positions to take up for the lack of doctors.

Average total waiting time from a referral from a GP to treatment was16.5 weeks. Wait to see a radiation oncologist was 8.5 weeks, an eternity if you actually have cancer, 5.2 weeks for a CT scan, 12.4 weeks for an MRI and 3.2 weeks for an ultrasound. In some cases, patients died waiting as they became too ill to tolerate a procedure. Compare this with your experience with our health care system. Facilities in Canada are so limited that the hip replacement capital for Canadians is Cleveland, Ohio.

Advertisement

In an April 2003 report to the Canadian government, the Canadian Social Affairs Committee concluded “Canada’s publicly funded healthcare system is not fiscally sustainable” and recommended further rationing and increased taxes as a solution.

This is not the kind of healthcare system we want for our citizens. Our system does need to be improved, but certainly there are superior solutions within a capitalist framework. Winston Churchill said, “The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings. The inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries.” How true!

Hans Croeber

Montrose

Comments

BaldJim wrote on Mar 14, 2008 8:29 AM:

" SOCIALIZED is simply a dirty word used to disparage something disliked.
Those opposed to 'socialized' medicine really wish to return to the days of carts going down the streets with the driver crying out: "Throw out your dead." "




Report Abuse

MichaelSW wrote on Mar 7, 2008 9:50 AM:

" I am not a doctor, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night! "




Report Abuse

concerned81401 wrote on Mar 5, 2008 11:03 AM:

" That's the POINT! Your not just paying a $2000 medical bill. Your paying $2000 AND part of her bill. The money to pay for any social program run by the government comes from you and I. Socialized health care would not save ANYONE money, and it has proven to be wholly inefficient in every single country in which it appears, PERIOD. The government HAS NO MONEY! It all comes from you and I, so if we elect officials that want socialized health care WE will pay for it! "




Report Abuse

Tallgirl wrote on Mar 5, 2008 9:25 AM:

" If "Social medicine" is not the answer than what is? Is it a Mother choosing between feeding her kids or getting medication? Is it 67 million uninsured children? Is it only the poor getting government insurance, ie medicaid or chp+?
My nieghbor and I had a baby at the same time, she quailfied for CHP+, I did not. I am curently paying a $2000 medical bill, she is not. The difference between our incomes? $10,000. Is that the answer? "




Report Abuse

concerned81401 wrote on Mar 5, 2008 8:19 AM:

" Another great comment credited to Winston Churchill. "when you rob Peter to pay Paul, you can always count on Paul's support". This is also known as the DNC motto. Socialized health care is not only ineffective, it constitutes government re-distrobution of wealth. I for one would like to keep the money I earn rather than "pay Paul". "




Report Abuse

concerned81401 wrote on Mar 5, 2008 8:14 AM:

" Once again Cdr. Croeber is a voice of reason. If insurance is not affordable now to all Americans what makes anyone think socializing it will help. The "Government" does not have or accumulate wealth. I operates solely on the taxes provided to it by we the taxpayer, ergo, its OUR money. Meaning the same group of people who are now paying for insurance would be paying for it under a social system. That means for a social system to work it would need to be MORE efficient than a market driven system. I think NOT! "




Report Abuse

Tallgirl wrote on Mar 3, 2008 9:29 AM:

" I am from Canada and spent 25 years there. This article does not mention that for critcal cases you do not have to wait for treatment. Sure there is abuse in the Canadian Health care system, as there is in the U.S. People without insurance can walk into any emergency room and recieve free care even for something as minor as a cold. I pay just as much taxes as I did in Canada and recieve no social benifits. I am middle income were there are no tax breaks and no benifits. "




Report Abuse

Southside wrote on Mar 2, 2008 3:01 PM:

" The government run system in Canada does have major shortfalls. I occasionally watch CTV news from Halifax/St.John. Recently the waiting time for a pregnant mother to be admitted to OB was increased to 10 months. Anything wrong with this picture?
When a province runs out of funds, they shut down hospitals. Our system, with greed, over-regulation, etc., is costing us much more than it should. A good portion of our health care dollars are lining the pockets of lawyers, insurance executives, bureaucrats, and even television ads. Deal with these issues and we solve part of the problem. "




Report Abuse

BaldJim wrote on Mar 2, 2008 9:30 AM:

" >there are superior solutions within a capitalist framework<
We wait breathlessly for them to be expounded.
Setting up straw scare-crows, hanging a socialist label on them, and then burning them doesn't add much to the debate.
Why doesn't it occur to anyone one that there is a huge, pent-up demand rooted in the disparate delivery system that we have. There is no accurate, scientific measure of the quantity of health care needed. The demand is unknown. The supply is half accidental and half greed based.
And chauvinism puts up the answers. We have the best in the world. "




Report Abuse

BaldJim wrote on Mar 2, 2008 9:09 AM:

" Winston Churchill also said something to the effect that Americans can always be trusted to do the right thing, after they have tried all the possible alternatives.
Churchill wrote so much that his stuff is like the Christian Bible. If you look long enough, you can find a quote to prove anything. "




Report Abuse

BaldJim wrote on Mar 2, 2008 9:01 AM:

" >Whenever demand exceeds supply, some rationing must occur.<
That is only one way of expressing a rudimentary rule. Actually, there are several alternative adjustments when demand and supply are not in balance.
Supply can increase to meet demand.
Monitary pricing can be recognized as a crude rationing mechanism. Formal rationing also can be instituted.
Suppliers can become enraged that demand has increased and quit supplying, and that makes the imbalance even worse.
Frustrated demand may be redirected or just fade away.
In health care, more people will die sooner, as in a plague.
That too is a kind of rationing. "




Report Abuse

BaldJim wrote on Mar 2, 2008 8:41 AM:

" >a “free” good or service will always be overused<
This is a deeply rooted characteristic of American culture. It particularly applies to anything that the government provides. Everyone feels it is essential (patriotic) to get their share of government freebies.
Here in Montrose it is well known that the best way to get the public to attend a function is to offer free food.
Routine, daily meals at a free soup kitchen are a different matter. Humiliate and degrade people enough before you give them a freeby, and you end 'overuse.' "




Report Abuse

BaldJim wrote on Mar 2, 2008 8:20 AM:

" >socialistic health care<
It's really sad that many people call anything political that they don't like 'socialist' or 'communist' without regard to any actual connection with those political theories.
An 'insurance' based system to provide any kind of protection has nothing to do with socialism.
Insurance is to spread the cost of unintended but statistically predictable losses (such as fire); the concept doesn't work for routine maintenance. The barn burning down vs painting the barn every five years.
There is more to the issue than flinging around the tar-brush of 'socialism.' "




Report Abuse