Smokers, heavy drinkers, the obese and the elderly should be barred from receiving some operations, according to doctors, with most saying the health service cannot afford to provide free care to everyone.
Of course, that would never happen here, if we socialized further.  Oh, no!  Our bureaucrats are shinier. ÂÂ
Blue Crab Blvd and Belmont Club have more.
Do these altruists intend to exempt those citizens they would refuse to treat from the taxes that support the system? No? That’s pretty low moral high ground.
Altruists only expect one thing from people: sacrifice. Thus, the taxes you are forced to pay to support the system are proper because they are a sacrifice on the taxpayer’s part. Giving up smoking, drinking and eating less are also proper because they are a sacrifice. Those who resist this sacrifice will be forced into another sacrifice: doing without healthcare.
Mark Styen had the perfect line to describe socialized medicine:
“A ten month wait for the maternity ward.”
So, socialism is supposed to coddle everyone? In case you haven’t noticed, our current socialized private insurance systems give discounts for good drivers, the healthy, the young, non-smokers, people with good credit, men (sometimes,) women (other times,) non-felons, people who live in certain areas, people who buy other things from the same companies, and so on. And when push comes to shove, you can wait or be placed lower on a priority list.
I know. I know. Private companies are always our friends. Government can’t do anything right. And many other anti-socialized medicine diatribe talking points.
Socialism, in the case of medicine, is like regular capitalism, only capitalism offers us the option of opting out. That’s the big difference, not scarcity (created intentionally or not) or immorality.
In theory, always. That’s how they sell it. In practice, never. That’s how it works.
“So, socialism is supposed to coddle everyone?”
No, socialists should leave everyone alone and stop interfering in their lives using government power. No good comes from them.
I know. I know. Private companies are always our friends. Government can’t do anything right.
Don’t give yourself a hernia setting up those straw men.
That’s been the marketing line for the past few decades, yeah. The early proponents of socialism were less squeamish, saying that those who don’t get with the program will be “treated like cattle.” Of course, such treatment is inevitable regardless of the marketing push when the economic realities arise.
If our current system is already socialized, what’s yer bitch, Jon?
Remember one of the more annoying critiques of the war from the left? That the American people “weren’t sacrificing enough”?
“Sacrifice”, to them, means “giving us control over your lives”.
Uh, Jon, do you comprehend the difference between discounts and denial of service? Because that’s what we’re talking ’bout. I have no problem if someone says, “you’re overweight, don’t exercise enough, and have high blood pressure — you’re a bigger risk, so pay a little more on your insurance”, but I have a massive problem if the government says, “you’re overweight, don’t exercise enough, and have high blood pressure, so you can’t get any medical care at all“.
Mr. Crawford,
The government already denies many services for many reasons. Examples of denied care in an arena where there is a limited supply can always be argued about, but that’s the problem with limited supply: it’s limited. Just as it is with the case of the utilities trying to get some control over your thermostat, those in control are in control. Don’t want that? Get off the grid. Don’t want government agents in control of your medical care? Opt out, pay cash, or get private insurance. I haven’t heard all the details of all the plans, but I haven’t heard that any of the socialized medicine proposals ban private insurance.
But yes, even in a capitalist or a socialist utopia there’s going to be more people going after services than there are providers or resources. There hasn’t been an economic system created that can compete with that reality. And denying some people some services for some reason or another seems pretty damn sane to me, though I hope they would work to create more resources. Next-quarter capitalists aren’t as big on long-term needs as they are on their stock price, while socialized systems are too focused on control to deal with the future issues. We’re screwed either way, but socialized medicine looks worth a try if you ask me.
It would help GM and Ford, too. Competing against companies that don’t have massive medical debts to their retirees is killing them. And us.
jon – you have yet to describe one thing about socialized medicine that would make me want to switch, except for the changeyness of it, and capitalism is bad. Oh, and my taxes will go up. And the quality and quantity of service will plummet. But other than that, great plan. Have at it.
“Competing against companies that don’t have massive medical debts to their retirees is killing them”
Hmmm, lets see how the NHS is getting its’ funds….
Personal Tax 40%
National Insurance 9%
Employers National Insurance 12.8%
VAT on all goods 17.5%
Corporation Tax 25%
Capital Gains Tax 40%
Duty on Fuel 50% (and they make us pay VAT on the Duty)
and so and so forth….
Are Ford and GM going to be any better off paying massively increased corporation taxes and employee taxes than they are paying retirees insurance costs – I very much doubt it.
I can “get off the grid” and pay for Private Insurance – but I don’t get a reduction in my taxes or National Insurance.
Which ever way you slice it, somebody has to pay for health care.
You should bear in mind that the UK Gov spends 48% of GDP providing rubbish public services – trust me, a visit to the Emergency Room in the UK is not a pleasant experience.
I would take a DEEP breath before you plunge yourselves over the precipice socialised medicine.
Heh. Prepuce.
Thats Holy prepuce, Dan
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_Prepuce
Don’t want government agents in control of your medical care? Opt out, pay cash, or get private insurance.
I’d love to opt out, but I’m pretty sure you mean on the services end, right? I’m certain the Central State is going to invite me to continue paying for others’ health care.
Opt out? Like opt out of paying for NannyCare™? I don’t believe that’s an option.
List them.
I didn’t.
I still don’t get what’s the beef against the current US system. Sure, some people don’t get the best of coverage — but you just admitted the same would happen under a socialized system. The difference is who decides who gets what coverage. In a market — even the distorted one of our current system — I can choose to go somewhere else, and don’t have to continue paying for another plan I don’t use. Under a socialized system, if there’s even the option of another provider (Hillarycare v1.0 banned privately contracting for medical care, remember), I still have to pay for the program I’m not using.
And, again, it’s not that bad lifestyle choices shouldn’t incur higher costs for health care, it’s who chooses which choices, and who sets how high the costs are. You want to cede those choices to the government, I don’t, yet you insist that I do so anyway.
Because let’s be honest — those choices will not be made by legislators who can be voted out of office, but rather by career bureaucrats of the sort who institute “zero tolerance” policies in schools — that end up expelling kids for drawing a pistol, or for giving another kid an over-the-counter pain reliever. The kind of small-minded, stuck-on-themselves, power-tripping busybodies who scream “racism” upon hearing the word “niggardly”, who run organizations like Canada’s “Human Rights Commissions”, who treat any questioning of their decisions as sacrilege.
And, yes, you can run into officious busybodies working in the private sector. But you aren’t required by law to do business with them, and they don’t have civil-service protection.
List of government services denied for various reasons:
1. No voting for under 18s.
2. No military membership for out homosexuals.
3. No voting for felons.
4. Mandatory retirement ages for pilots.
5. I can’t camp in a National Forest any time I want.
6. I don’t get to log our forests without a permit, either.
7. And I have to get a fucking license to kill things in it.
8. And now I’m getting bored listing this stuff.
As for opting out, I say that there’s a lot of stuff the government does that I’d rather not pay for. Do I get to not pay for a military occupation I no longer support? Can I make someone else pay for the Interstates in places I don’t drive? Et cetera, ad nauseum, blah blah, whatever.
And how come only Great Britain seems to have socialized medicine? Aren’t there any other countries that have tried this experiment? Like Japan, Canada, France, Germany, Belgium, Norway, or someplace else? It’s like saying all cars are bad because the Pontiac Aztek is fucking ugly.
That would be a great point, jon, except that none of the things you list are government services, save perhaps the parks bit. And that one is iffy.
And no, Great Britain is not alone in it’s socialized medicine. The results aren’t terribly different elsewhere.
wait, voting is a “service”? There are other countries that have socialized medicine and they’re also pretty craptacular. however, the UK and Canada are most held up as models the US should look at adopting.
throw an “often” in there somewhere.
I guess a spectacular lack of understanding og government makes the idea of socialized healthcare palatable.
Maybe it is an intense personal desire to let the government provide for him, so he does not have to do so for himself.
Okay, another list:
No Medicare or Medicaid without meeting qualifications.
No usage of government-regulated airplanes without undergoing a background check.
Business zones to encourage investment are set up in such a way that some areas don’t get special tax incentives.
Some tax incentives aren’t available to some people.
Have you even seen the tax code? If you can’t find any government services to certain industries and corporations, then you are illiterate.
And I would rather stick to private insurance companies, though my old employer in the private sector wasn’t able to give raises for many years because health costs were rising astronomically. Would socialized medicine be better? I’m not too sure, but I’m sure it wouldn’t be much worse.
And yes, voting is a service provided by the government. Just because it is written into the makeup of our government doesn’t mean it isn’t a service. Hell, I could argue that the government discriminates against political parties outside of the Democratic and Republican ones. Setting up qualifications makes running and voting into a service. When was the last privately run election?
Taxes are a government service? Good Allah, you are painful. You should have stopped at the point where we were assuming you were dense, rather than proving it.
Voting is a right.
And some people are so stupid that they should just turn in their franchise. jon, you will have to wait your turn behind KKKleo, caric, timmah, and Orwell.
None of them are medical services. Which was the point of the question.
The others have punctured the other problems with that list.
Have you bothered to look at the fates of socialized medicine around the world? The manner in which it ends up being rationed? The perverse incentives it gives government?
This desire to simply toss over what we have because of some vague sense of dissatisfaction — which you still haven’t explained — is childish.
This desire to simply toss over what we have because of some vague sense of dissatisfaction  which you still haven’t explained  is childish.
It is not only childish, but dangerous, and foolish, and a practically endless list of synonyms.
Would socialized medicine be better? I’m not too sure, but I’m sure it wouldn’t be much worse.
Vote for us! We’re not much worse. Please, please, please have Barry or Hill make that the centerpiece of their campaign. Please. I am begging you.
Clearly, jon is not in sales.
Okay, who peed in the gene pool?
Plus, the providers of health care services seem to absolutely love socialized medicine and the rationing that comes with it – which is why they keep sending patients to the U.S. for operations.
Here come the new eugenicists.
San – Can’t we call them utilitarians instead?
Dure.
Socialized health insurance will result in a much larger surrender of liberty than anyone is currently imagining. Think about how many issues currently have a health angle to them–each one gives the bureaucrats who will be in charge of national health insurance a chance to control your life. Don’t exercise enough? Insurance denied. Eat too often at McDonalds? No insurance. Smoke? Forget it. Own a firearm? Your chance of getting injured has gone up, no insurance. Sportscar? I’m afraid we don’t cover that, sir.
National health insurance will be the nanny state on steroids.