Through so many iterations, we have had none that have made any sense. Perhaps it began in 1974 with the Federal Health Planning Act, when government got into health planning in a way that made business decisions in health care decisions to be made not in the free market but instead through regulation. The mastermind of Richard Nixon dwells here. The same man who brought you the last price controls was often against the free market when it came to remedies for competition.
Of the most extreme facts, the one that is the most telling is that we spend so much on health care and get so little. Why? Because unlike any other system in the world, our system is a failure of the free market and a failure of government control. As if some hodgepodge worthy of The Fifth Element, we seem to think that if we get the stones together in some decent way, we will get what we want. Instead, we get a pathetic mess unworthy of any system in the world.
Republicans fight against universal care as if it is some problem. It is a solution that must be implemented. Not the many claims against health care handled in an over a thousand page bill most of Congress had not even read. But something that really makes sense.
It will change our system forever. But there seems no way out. We have two sensible choices.
The first is to leave the free market open to work, with payments made in that system when those of us who cannot afford health care have no other alternative. A form of payments that really will not divorce the government apart from the system involved, but will allow the market price to dictate what is done.
The other is to say that we have had enough, and the cost should be borne by the government.
When examining systems abroad, many lies and anecdotal comments have arisen about how bad health care is in national health care systems. This is nonsense. And unlike the claims made, this will still allow you to seek physicians and others to provide private health care services. You can still have private hospitals, and private physicians. They just will not be available to those who do not want to pay for their services.
What is nonsense is that we have the best health care in the world. A complete lie.
More women die in childbirth than in many other countries. More children die before they are five than in many other countries. We have a lower ranking in so many areas it is hard to decide where to start.
Of fourteen wealthy nations - - Australia, Belgium, Canada, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Japan, Portugal, The Netherlands, South Korea, Spain, the United Kingdom, and the United States - - we are dead last in infant mortality. Our rate is about 2.5 times that in Japan, according to the work cited in the preceding sentence.
We are even worse in maternal deaths.
The U.S. has the highest maternal death rate of any industrialised nation and lags behind 30 developed countries for mothers’ well-being, a damning report says. An American woman is more than seven times as likely as one in Ireland to die from pregnancy-related causes and her maternal death risk is 15 times that in Greece. Only three developed countries - Albania, Russian and Moldova - had a worse maternal mortality rate than America's 1 in 2,100, a Save the Children report said.
We have had a number of studies that try to show that US life expectancy is higher than any other nation when taking into account fatal injuries, such as by firearms in underprivileged areas of the country. But the problem is that this does not support our current health system.
Taking a Forbes article as a good example since this publication has constantly supported our health care system over universal health care, it uses the contention that we live longer both under the challenge of cancer and in life expectancy as support for the view that we do better than these other countries.
But countries like Japan have had far greater cancer-related problems, from pollution to atom bombs to smoking (which continues fairly unabated). So even if we have longer life expectancy, this cannot be laid at the feet of our system.
Moreover, the analysis is not provided, including whether the deaths due to accident were due to an inferior health care system.
What we need is to stop the nonsense and develop a national health care system. No one need to suffer under such a system.
After all, we are entitled to the "life" along with "liberty and the pursuit of happiness." Except for the Canadian basic government documents, many if not most other countries do not even mention life as pointed out by Wikipedia.
Other tripartite mottos include "liberté, égalité, fraternité" (liberty, equality, fraternity) in France; "Einigkeit und Recht und Freiheit" (unity, justice and freedom) in Germany and "peace, order and good government" in Canada It is also similar to a line in the Canadian Charter of Rights: "life, liberty, security of the person" (this line was also in the older Canadian Bill of rights, which added "enjoyment of property" to the list).
For life, we need universal health care at least for those who cannot afford it. And "affording" is a matter of some difficulty. To be fairest, should it not be available to all?