Aches and Pains

I have not blogged in a long time due to time constraints. It's been a busy August. This does not mean I haven't been thinking or musing, but, rather, I have not had the time to organize those thoughts into a coherent post. Plus, with all of the news coverage with regard to health care, I was half-worried I'd be drowned out.

This post starts with the following announcement: I have seriously hurt my back. It hurts in a way that I've never hurt before. I can't tell if I've just sprained a joint in my back, or I've torn a lumbar muscle, or I've done something even worse. All I know is that, for the first time in a long time, I could not sleep last night. I'm on painkillers, and the pain still isn't subsiding. So, I'm afraid that this will be a prolonged injury.

If I were back in Canada, I would take the day off and call my doctor. Instead, here in the United States, I elected not to go to my doctor. Why? Because going to the doctor will cost me money. Because I'm pretty sure that the doctor is going to recommend I get some scans done on my back to make sure that I haven't done anything severe. Because I'm afraid that all of this medical treatment will cost me an arm and a leg, and I don't have the cash to throw around. In short, it costs me money; I'm electing not to seek medical treatment because of the potential price. That's not an issue in Canada.

Thus, the rationing argument of government health care falls apart. In the United States, the people elect whether or not to get certain procedures, but self-rationing is a form of rationing nonetheless. The difference, though, is that government health care will still provide a number of options, even if a particular procedure may not be offered; in the case of the private insurance system, the insurance company determines if an operation will be covered, and then the private payor must determine if he can afford it or not.

The folks in Britain are getting upset with the United States, primarily because American politicians are bad-mouthing their National Health Service. As a Canadian, I take offense to the assault on Canada's health care system for similar reasons. While government health care is not perfect -- no system is perfect -- it is an option which is better at providing health care as a public good than the American system is at providing health care as a private good. Further, government health care is more equitable, for it forces all people to pay into the system (through taxes), and cannot discriminate based on pre-existing conditions.

Take away your health care? A better system for more people will follow.

There will be a place for the Cleveland Clinic in the universal health care future, just like there's a Toronto Childrens' Hospital. There will be a place for innovation because there will be a desire to minimize costs. There will be a place for new drugs to be created because there are government contracts to be won.

The opposition is made up of "conservative" political "think"-tanks like the Heritage Foundation, or the Craig Millers of the world (31 czars? really?). Again, the United States' health care system does not stack up well against the rest of the world in life expectancy. Medicare will explode. Seniors are already in jeopardy of losing benefits.

The time to act is now. And I wish I was back in Canada to get my back looked at.