Health Care: Government vs. Private

Sometimes the advocates of socialized medicine claim that health care is too important to be left to the market. That's why some politicians are calling for us to adopt health care systems such as those in Canada, the United Kingdom and other European nations. But the suggestion that we'd be better served with more government control doesn't even pass a simple smell test.

Do we want the government employees who run the troubled Walter Reed Army Medical Center to be in charge of our entire health care system? Or, would you like the people who deliver our mail to also deliver health care services? How would you like the people who run the motor vehicles department, the government education system, foreign intelligence and other government agencies to also run our health care system? After all, they are not motivated by the quest for profits, and that might mean they're truly wonderful, selfless, caring people.

As for me, I'd choose profit-driven people to provide my health care services, people with motives like those who deliver goods to my supermarket, deliver my overnight mail, produce my computer and software programs, assemble my car and produce a host of other goods and services that I use.

There's absolutely no mystery why our greatest complaints are in the arena of government-delivered services and the fewest in market-delivered services. In the market, there are the ruthless forces of profit, loss and bankruptcy that make producers accountable to us. In the arena of government-delivered services, there's no such accountability. For example, government schools can go for decades delivering low-quality services, and what's the result? The people who manage it earn higher pay. It's nearly impossible to fire the incompetents. And, taxpayers, who support the service, are given higher tax bills.

Our health care system is hampered by government intervention, and the solution is not more government intervention but less. The tax treatment of health insurance, where premiums are deducted from employees' pre-tax income, explains why so many of us rely on our employers to select and pay for health insurance. Since there is a third-party payer, we have little incentive to shop around and wisely use health services.

There are "guaranteed issue" laws that require insurance companies to sell health insurance to any person seeking it. So why not wait until you're sick before purchasing insurance? Guaranteed issue laws make about as much sense as if you left your house uninsured until you had a fire, and then purchased insurance to cover the damage. Guaranteed issue laws raise insurance premiums for all. Then there are government price controls, such as the reimbursement schemes for Medicaid. As a result, an increasing number of doctors are unwilling to treat Medicaid patients.

Before we buy into single-payer health care systems like Canada's and the United Kingdom's, we might want to do a bit of research. The Vancouver, British Columbia-based Fraser Institute annually publishes "Waiting Your Turn." Its 2006 edition gives waiting times, by treatments, from a person's referral by a general practitioner to treatment by a specialist. The shortest waiting time was for oncology (4.9 weeks). The longest waiting time was for orthopedic surgery (40.3 weeks), followed by plastic surgery (35.4 weeks) and neurosurgery (31.7 weeks).

As reported in the June 28 National Center for Policy Analysis' "Daily Policy Digest," Britain's Department of Health recently acknowledged that one in eight patients waits more than a year for surgery. France's failed health care system resulted in the deaths of 13,000 people, mostly of dehydration, during the heat spell of 2003. Hospitals stopped answering the phones, and ambulance attendants told people to fend for themselves.

I don't think most Americans would like more socialized medicine in our country. By the way, I have absolutely no problem with people wanting socialism. My problem is when they want to drag me into it.

Walter E. Williams is a professor of economics at George Mason University.

COPYRIGHT 2007 CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.

mr williams uses crappy examples

Submitted by teetaw on Fri, 07/27/2007 - 4:03am.

"As reported in the June 28 National Center for Policy Analysis' "Daily Policy Digest," Britain's Department of Health recently acknowledged that one in eight patients waits more than a year for surgery."

This is atypical of most countries with socialized medicine. Perhaps the poster should do a little researching of his facts instead of quoting conservative think tank websites who's M.O. is to promote private alternatives to government regulation and control. They received 400,000 bucks from exxonmobile and NCPA's "experts" also are strangely skeptical of global warming, hmmmmm!

"France's failed health care system resulted in the deaths of 13,000 people, mostly of dehydration, during the heat spell of 2003. Hospitals stopped answering the phones, and ambulance attendants told people to fend for themselves."

That sounds more like an overcrowding of hospitals due to a catastrophe. Please explain how a privately run hospital would have run this better? Would they have neatly stacked the dying patients on top of each other in order to maximize profits?

"While patients were crammed into beds in hallways of facilities without air conditioning, such as the Saint-Antoine hospital in Paris, air-conditioned tents were set up to hold the bodies of the dead as the morgues filled to capacity."

login to post comments

You’re probably right teetaw.

Submitted by maximus on Fri, 07/27/2007 - 9:02am.

1 in 8 waiting a year sounds atypical to me as well in a socialized health system. It’s probably closer to 7 in 8.

As for the deaths in the world’s number 1 ranked health care system (according to the dimwits at the W.H.O.) it appears that the number was closer to 15,000.

USA Today 9/25/2003: …French Parliament released a harshly worded report blaming the deaths on a complex health system, widespread failure among agencies and health services to coordinate efforts, and chronically insufficient care for the elderly.

And as opposed to Mr. Williams “crappy examples” your well researched examples were, well, nonexistent. Good job, teetaw.

Maximus

login to post comments

Hack??

Submitted by Mixer on Tue, 07/31/2007 - 12:09pm.

Come on - teetaw is Hack...right?

Walter Williams - huff - what does he know. I guess old Walter didn't see the Michael Moore Movie or hates everyone too, huh?.

Fred Thompson:Apply Directly To The White House

Fred Facts

login to post comments