One of the most polarizing issues in American politics leading up to the 2020 presidential election is that of American Healthcare. Liberals make the case for needing universal healthcare, while Conservatives in line with their economic beliefs are fighting to keep healthcare privatized.
The average American surely looks at this topic as a no-brainer. What could be wrong with providing healthcare to everyone who wants it? That question is what I’ll be discussing with you today.
First; “Medicare for all,” as Bernie Sanders has called it, will not come without a cost. You may ask, “Who will bear the burden of paying the medical charges that come with universal healthcare?” It will come from increased taxes placed on you. Effectively making a universal healthcare system more expensive than a private one for the majority of Americans.
Second, the main argument in favor of healthcare for all is that it will save more lives. That notion is entirely false.
Universal healthcare will overburden healthcare system. This excess amount of work put upon medical professionals who are trying to get many more people in and out of offices leads to more grave errors, simple mistakes that would not have been made in the private healthcare scenario.
A 2013 study found that death rates in the National Health Service (NHS) in the U.K. were 45 percent higher than in American hospitals. A large number of those deaths could have been avoided, according to the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, which concluded that 750 patients a month or 1/28 die from lack of care or mistakes that could have been prevented within the NHS.
A universal healthcare system causes an overwhelming amount of people to be scheduled to the same doctors, creating a situation where the doctor can be booked out for months and unable to see patients for that length of time. This problem also causes even the best doctors to make mistakes as they try to make their appointments go more quickly.
Another note that follows this thought, is that no one with a life-threatening condition will ever be denied treatment. All emergency rooms are required to treat any condition that threatens the life of a person, regardless of their ability to pay. So rest assured, no one is being turned away and dying on the streets because they cannot pay for treatment in the United States.
Third, against everything the left has told you; health care is a commodity provided by a third party, not a human right. The sooner governments and people realize this, the better.
A human right has been available since the creation of Adam and Eve. The right to speak your mind, the right to defend yourself, the right to pursue happiness and to live. These have all existed for the full existence of humanity. Healthcare did not formally exist until the last century.
Healthcare is like food: humans need it to survive, but even though it can be a necessity, you still can’t morally steal food. If everyone who needed food stole it, there would be no incentive for businesses to produce and provide food.
Universal Healthcare disincentives the medical professions. As soon as it becomes a human right, then the people can demand treatment at any price they see fit. This will lead to many hoping to practice medicine to search for more lucrative careers and professions.
One real argument that many have put against the private healthcare system is that of pre-existing conditions. I, as a diabetic, find myself thinking about being denied healthcare because of the reason I need it. Fortunately upon closer inspection. This is not the case. As in many economic situations. The capitalistic concept of Laissez-faire has worked this out. The free market has thusly created a system by which those with employer-based coverage don’t need screening for pre-existing conditions because the insurance we get will be purchased in bulk by the employer. For those with employment-based coverage ( roughly 50 percent of those with insurance), pre-existing condition exclusions can only be triggered if the client has had health insurance for less than 12 months. This encourages and rewards those who buy long-term medical coverage (which promotes good life choices and planning) as opposed to those that only buy insurance when they get ill.
If what we are seeking is a short-term, low quality, but available health care we could opt for a universal system of coverage. But if we want a long-term, affordable and high-quality health care system that relies on personal responsibility, protects individual rights and incorporates basic supply and demand economics, then privatization is the way to go.
So, if you seek affordable and effective healthcare, know that what you’re seeing from the democratic debates is not true. The best form of healthcare is private, not universal.
Daily Dose of Drake 