bryan_machine
Diamond
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2006
- Location
- Near Seattle
The front page of today's Wall Street Journal has a rather well supported article which can be summed up as "The Indian Health Service is a tragic disgrace, and indeed embarrassment"
If you grovel around the web for stories on the veteran's administration, there's no shortage of stories of their issues, and it's a recurring political crises.
Various studies of medicaid suggest most recipients value it at far less than it costs.
(Medicare does have very broad support from those it covers.)
So of the 4 "single payer" health care systems in the US (one of them among the largest in the world, medicaid for example covers more people than the population of Canada or the UK), 2 of them "single provider" - one can say:
1 of the 4 is tragic disgrace and embarrassment - and since it's a program meant to serve some of the poorest residents, who have at least some rights due to treaties dating back a very long time, why would anyone have any faith at all that a national program would serve the poor or disadvantaged?
1 of the 4 serves veterans, a generally esteemed group in our society, and its still quite problematic.
1 of the 4 in theory covers the poor, but with rather mixed effect - and alarmingly, at least one large study suggests it has no positive effect at all on health or mortality.
So, basically batting 0.250 and we can start arguing about medicare too if you want - WHAT SANE PERSON GOES BACK TO SUCH AN AWFUL PROVIDER FOR A NEW SOLUTION TO A PROBLEM?
US government has DEMONSTRATED OVER DECADES that it is utterly incapable of doing at least some of the things advocates for single payer health care wish for.
If you bought 4 tools from a supplier and 3 of the 4 broke or caused a lot of problems, would you look to them for the next batch?
If you grovel around the web for stories on the veteran's administration, there's no shortage of stories of their issues, and it's a recurring political crises.
Various studies of medicaid suggest most recipients value it at far less than it costs.
(Medicare does have very broad support from those it covers.)
So of the 4 "single payer" health care systems in the US (one of them among the largest in the world, medicaid for example covers more people than the population of Canada or the UK), 2 of them "single provider" - one can say:
1 of the 4 is tragic disgrace and embarrassment - and since it's a program meant to serve some of the poorest residents, who have at least some rights due to treaties dating back a very long time, why would anyone have any faith at all that a national program would serve the poor or disadvantaged?
1 of the 4 serves veterans, a generally esteemed group in our society, and its still quite problematic.
1 of the 4 in theory covers the poor, but with rather mixed effect - and alarmingly, at least one large study suggests it has no positive effect at all on health or mortality.
So, basically batting 0.250 and we can start arguing about medicare too if you want - WHAT SANE PERSON GOES BACK TO SUCH AN AWFUL PROVIDER FOR A NEW SOLUTION TO A PROBLEM?
US government has DEMONSTRATED OVER DECADES that it is utterly incapable of doing at least some of the things advocates for single payer health care wish for.
If you bought 4 tools from a supplier and 3 of the 4 broke or caused a lot of problems, would you look to them for the next batch?