Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
Date:         Thu, 3 Sep 1992 16:22:40 EDT
From:         todd pukanecz <CCCS@VTVM1.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: democratic platform

> Just finished reading the democratic platform and thought I'd post a few
> of my observations.
>
> Socialized medicine.  The cost of good medical care does indeed exceed all
> justification.  The inability of persons with *existing* conditions to get
> good insurance is also a national travesty.  However, what will be the total
> cost of implementing national health care?

According to Consumer Reports, by reducing administrative overhead in using
a single payer system, reducing the number of unneeded procedures, and
eliminating fraud, enough money would be saved to give everybody health care.
The short answer is it won't cost any more than it does now.

>                                             Will medical research continue
> without the profits generated in our current system?

No reason why it shouldn't.  Many technical advances in medicine come from
countries with socialized schemes.  And just because medical care is paid
for by the gov't doesn't mean that there is no profit for the care givers.

>                                                       Will those that no
>longer
> have private health insurance be forced to see only doctors that participate
>in
> the federal program?

Under the Canadian system, any patient can see any doctor they want.  That
doctor may then refer them to a specialist, but they still have their choice
of who to see in that specialty.  The idea that you will be told which
doctor to use is a gross mischaracterization of a single payer system.

>                        If so, will those doctors be the ones that weren't
> good
> enough to go into a private practice?

All doctors will be in private practice.  They will simply receive payment
from the government according to a set schedule for services rendered,
instead of gouging you or your insurer for whatever they can get.

>                                        Would you be satisfied with a medical
> care system that provided health care with the same efficiency of the postal
> service?  Again, more taxes.
>
Again, a gross mischaracterization.  Canadians recieve health care that is
as timely and as effective as any received in the US.  The only difference
is that costs are contained, few out of pocket expenses are paid by the
patients, and preventative care is more common since everyone can visit
a doctor at the first sign of trouble.

> Drug treatment for all addicts.  Can you spell taxes?  What about free

As opposed to locking them up in prison at a cost of 20K per year per
prisoner?  Drug treatment is certainly more cost effective in the long
run, will reduce the number of addicts thereby reducing the costs to
society, and many drug treatments (ala AA) are FREE, so stop your
sniveling.

> equal rights for homosexuals.  This is just plain sick.
>
Yes, by all means, let's make them second class citizens.  How 'bout
denying them citizenship altogether.  That's a fine Christian attitude.

> VOTE NO.  DEMAND THAT BOTH MAJOR PARTIES SUBMIT ACCEPTABLE CANDIDATES.
>
Well, we agree on something....
     todddddddddddd
> ---Robert

=========== Wake up John Doe.  You're the hope of the world! ===========
--------     /^^\    ---- Todd Pukanecz ----   ----  CCCS@VTVM1  ----
-----      /      >   --- Ag. Econ. DPL --- "LSD has been known to cause
---  /\_ / @       \   -- Virginia Tech --   psychotic reactions in those
-  /________________>   - Blacksburg VA -    who don't use it." - TL
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU