A Case for National Healthcare.
by "dogs run free"


A national not for profit healthcare system would be more cost effective. We already spend more than enough to cover every citizen, yet we have 14% of the population without coverage. The reason for that is the "PROFIT MOTIVE.Ē It's as simple as that. Healthcare is not a competitive endeavor. The "competition" is not with the providers (doctors, hospitals) it is with the middle men (the insurance companies.)

A government system would have standard benefits at standard rates with no incentive (increased profits) for restricting service.

Iím not talking every medical procedure available for everybody who wants it. That would bankrupt even the government. Iím in favor of some sort of co-pay just to keep people from over using the system, e.g. Rush the kid to the doctor every time he sneezes. If you want a non-medically necessary procedure such as cosmetic surgery, you can buy supplemental insurance or pay out of pocket.

Prescription drug prices would be "controlled" because the doctors would decide what you need. Look at it this way. The market can be "cornered" from the demand side too. Not just the supply side like the drug companies have now. The government would be practically the only customer. That is how Canada can sell American-made drugs back to us at Ĺ the price and make a profit. It has nothing to do with "free market" in the "democracy" sense. Capitalism is not a form of government.

Corporations have had their way for too long and the cost is getting out of hand. Itís time for us to join the rest of the world and promote the welfare of the people, not the corporations.