Edit: This is a thread on how it would affect the economy..and not about any moral issues.
For the Obama and Clinton supporters. Since the economy is in a shit storm how would implementing UHC actually do anything other then harm the economy? Could ending the war be the answer? South Korea isnt at war (well..technically I guess they are..), neither is Japan and the UK's economy shouldnt be taking too much of a strain from what they are doing over there..so I doubt thats the answer.
Any suggestions or ideas?
The UK healthcare system:
1. http://thetyee.ca/News/2006/03/08/UKCrisis/
2. http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...uk.topstories3
"Labour's flagship health service reforms were in disarray last night, as the head of the NHS, Sir Nigel Crisp, quit in the face of increasing deficits which the government admitted would breach its forecast of ?200m... Estimates of the final deficit suggest it could rise to as high as ?800m."
"The current crisis...predicting that the year-end deficit for the NHS could run as high as $1.6 billion dollars."
South Korea http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/art...?artid=1447690
"After 1996, Korean NHI began to develop significant deficits. From 1996 to the present, total health expenditures have exceeded total income... Although government continually raised the mandatory insurance premiums to make up for the deficit, many health policy experts predicted that increased governmental funding would not solve the problem."
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...oryId=89626309
"The Japanese Health Ministry tightly controls the price of health care down to the smallest detail." "But 50 percent of hospitals are in financial deficit now."
__________________
Last edited by KidRock on Jun 1st, 2008 at 08:02 AM
if everyone had access to health care, there would be fewer sick people.. and fewer people therefore off work through illness.. it would also be easier to find out who is pretending to be sick so they can claim any sickness benefits which you may get over there... if the system was run properly! fewer sick people means more workers, which means greater production which means greater profitability which means less reliance on government money.. etc etc...
Despite your desperate edit, I think the deal with universal health care is that it helps the people, not the economy. A more pressing issue for the economy would be something like...ooo, I don't know...maybe a never-ending war with spiraling costs creating huge deficits.
Good try, though.
__________________ Full fathom five thy father lies;
Of his bones are coral made;
Those are pearls that were his eyes:
Nothing of him that doth fade
But doth suffer a sea-change
Into something rich and strange.
Gender: Unspecified Location: With Cinderella and the 9 Dwarves
Obviously wrong in practice.
Cute theory though.
I am sure we all agree that the US is ****ed beyond believe though. National Health Care would actually be an improvement there. Kinda how trading AIDS for Brain Cancer might be an improvement
Gender: Unspecified Location: With Cinderella and the 9 Dwarves
Nah, even then it would go contrary to market forces, thereby doing more harm. I suppose if the government was all knowing it might work, just don't know any government that is.
Well that might have been your point, but that wasn't actually what kidrock was asking about. He's asking how it would help the economy, the simple answer is that it isn't meant to.
__________________
"We've got maybe seconds before Darth Rosenberg grinds everybody into Jawa burgers and not one of you buds has the midi-chlorians to stop her!"
if it's run properly then it's not a problem...the problem with the UK NHS is that there is a huge amount of money spent on bureaucracy rather than so called "front line" care....there was at one point, in one hospital in England...4 admin staff for every one medical staff...
alot of this is because when things go wrong...the every increasing demand for compensation drains the resources...so hospitals hire legal teams and administrators in order to limit the damage...and then there is less money available for front line services...and thus more mistakes are made...etc etc
the argument, from a UK perspective, that ending the involment in the iraq and afganistan would increase money available for the NHS is spurios because the NHS is the single biggest budget in the UK economy...
roughly they are 102 billion for the NHS and 36 Billion for the M.O.D
I don't know how free you need the market to be for healthcare to be completely free market; I don't know if one exists at all. But the most highly privatised healthcare system in the world (as far as I'm aware) the US, was compared to other nations: http://www.commonwealthfund.org/pub...m?doc_id=482678
And their not particularly getting their value for money.
The WHO study is far more comprehensive comparing something around 190 countries, but is also more dated I think it was the WHO annual report from 2000.
Gender: Unspecified Location: With Cinderella and the 9 Dwarves
Oh, but as you rightly pointed out the US spends the most out of any country on their health care. It's hardly a free market at all, in fact, by standards of free market supporters it's probably the least free...
One of the things about National Health Care, in England at least, according to that **** Michael Moore at least, is that if doctors get only paid like 30 000 (random number, whatever it is), what really stops the good ones from going to the US or maybe even Germany to make 5 times that? Just strikes me as odd. Also, the waiting times for not absolutely urgent issues is just mind boggling to me.
Point is how does Obama plan to get out Economy back on track and stabalized with programs like UHC..which shown by the links obviously hurts the economy even more.
Sure it may be something "for the people", thats all great and jolly, but at what cost? Should we go into a great depression with people living in hoovervilles on the streets but chanting "At least we have healthcare!"?
Desperate edit? The edit was done before anyone even posted in the thread..thanks though.