As we all know, Obamacare is expensive and will not come cheap. When she was speaker of the house, Nancy Pelosi claimed that we would pay "ten year" costs of $940,000,000,000.00 which as far as I am concerned is already very expensive. However, is that the real story? You will surprised to find out that it is not. For several reasons the Democrats' costs do not match up to the real cost. The CBO (Congressional Budget Office) found that Obamacare may cost around 2.5 to 3 trillion dollars in the first ten years alone and costs would continue. In the current system, 1.1 trillion dollars is spent to assist medicare, but that is not enough to cover Obamacare so only two options can happen; raise the debt or raise taxes. For more information I will place a link on how the CBO found this out.
On my previous essay on Obamacare, one or two people commented saying that the United States of America was ranked 37 in a list of 191 countries. This list was done by the WHO (World Health Organization) in 2000. Why was the US ranked 37 in terms of health? The countries were evaluated by five factors, including the overall health of the population and distribution of health services. In categories such as responsiveness and expenditures, the U.S. ranks number one, showing a commitment to deliver speedy health care to our citizens regardless of cost. Many factors such as obesity and smoking have lowered the health of Americans and, thus, lowered our ranking with the WHO. So the only reason we were so low would be because we have a large population of obese people and smokers while our healthcare was again ranked number 1 in terms of expenditures. Since 1997 the United States has in fact made improvements, but the WHO has not done a new study.
Someone also talked about infant mortality rates in the US and how they are higher than countries in Europe. This is false. The US infant death rates are not high, infant death rates are just low in Europe because of more restrictive definitions of live birth. That same person (I am not presenting their usernames as not to humiliate them) talked about how death rates in general are higher in the US than their Canadian and European neighbors. While the overall life expectancy of Americans is lower than that of people in other nations, it is the result of higher rates of homicides, accidents, and obesity, factors that are at best tangentially related to the health care system.
Other people believe that the government-run progressive healthcare would help workers get more access to healthcare than the employer-sponsored system in the US. Well did you know in Canada a person waits an average of 17.8 weeks from general practitioners' referrals to treatment by a specialist. Most provinces have a Web site to calculate a patient's wait time based on type of procedure and area. At the time of publication, the wait for breast cancer surgery in South West Ontario could be as little as 24 days or as many as 110 days. Another study has shown that according to 2/3 of the Canadians that were asked as well as 85% of the doctors that were asked people would be treated faster if they were allowed to buy private insurance.
If any liberals are confused right now just follow this simple equation: Universal Healthcare = Bad.
Now if you are still not convinced lets do an investigation of some of these nations that have Universal Healthcare besides Canada. We will give three points from two nations:
UK: 1) In the United Kingdom's Health Care System, patients are denied access to medicines that could save their lives. 2) Medicines are available in some parts of the United Kingdom for patients, but not available in other areas. 3) Thousands of NHS patients are failing to receive appropriate care due to waste, inefficiency and postcode prescribing, according to Sir Liam Donaldson, the chief medical officer for England.
France: 1) Patients pay around 10 percent of household income, before taking into account additional costs for mutuelle coverage, co-payment costs, and costs of treatments that are not covered. 2) France spent 11.1 percent of its GDP on health care in 2005 the third highest percentage in the world and more than every other country in Europe except Switzerland. 3) In some regions, France has a shortage of advanced medical technologies, including CT scanners and MRI machines. This has resulting in long wait times for important diagnoses for some patients.
Here are some stories from people in nations with Universal Healthcare:
"This country would be nowhere without its elderly population. We have always worked and paid our taxes. It seems most unfair that we've got nothing at the end of it."
- Dawn Ford (Eye disease patient, UK)
"I wouldn't like to see Americans make the same mistake Canadians have made
Patients in Canada are treated like Third World citizens. Our health-care system is like Cuba or North Korea."
- Lindsay McCreith (Brain tumor patient, Canada)
"There should be somewhere closer. No one with breast cancer should have to go on such a long journey, particularly when we are not feeling too good anyway."
- Muriel Buckley (Breast cancer patient, UK)
Here is a story for you all:
Gerald Carroll, 46, of Kalgoorlie, Australia had chemotherapy for tumors in his jaw and behind his eye. After that treatment, he had a three-month wait for radiotherapy. "But in the three months it took to get the stereotactic radiotherapy I needed, the tumor had grown too large to treat," Mr. Carroll said. "The radiotherapist referred me back to my oncologist. I've been on chemo since February and now's it's reduced the tumor to a point where I can have the radiation. I'm on the waiting list for stereotactic radiosurgery at this time."
So are there any questions?