From: rjr004@acad.drake.edu
Subject: nationalized health care
Organization: Drake University, Des Moines, Iowa, USA
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 02:16:34 GMT

In article <1992Dec12.185055.1@fnala.fnal.gov>, dallagata@fnala.fnal.gov (Michele Dall'Agata) writes: 
> I know, that's an hard point. What's better? The USA health care system or 
> a social one? I mean, the Italian health care system is nationalized, it 
> does not work fine. But at least, if you are poor and you break a leg, you 
> do not have to go to burglarize a bank just to pay the hospital bill, as 
> it happens on USA. The USA health care system is the most expensive in the 
> world. 30% more expensive then the comparable european systems. And they 
> are nationalized (Germany, France, and so on). 

   30% more than comparable european systems?  Where the hell did you read
that?  PER CAPITA, the United States spends 12.4% of our G.N.P. (granted our
G.N.P. is 6.4 trillion), Italy 7.7% (Source:  O.M.B. 1990).  Granted, there is
more coverage in Europe, but is it the best coverage available? 

>You know, I am glad to be in 
> the USA for this reason, I have benefits, the hospitals work, if something 
> bad happen, I do not have to pay big money and I get a good service. But what 
> about the poor people? What happen to poor people here? Who pays if they 
> not have any insurance? You know, Princess, health care is a big business, 
> if you have enough money and you are sick, you do not care, you spend the 
> money. But here is to much expensive. Absolutely not affordable for low 
> level class people. And, sorry, but I think that they are not poor only 
> because they do not like to work, or because they are stupid or other 
> bullshit like that. They are poor because we are rich. And they have the 
> right, like we do have, to go to the hospital if they have a problem. I am 
> not sure that *everybody* on USA can afford it.
> In Italy, people with no money had a *free* hearth transplant. And I am 
> glad that it happened. I am not communist, I belive on the free-market 
> economy, but I also belive that there are not differences between people. 
> We are just humans, we HAVE TO HAVE the same rights. And the health care is 
> a right. 
> 
> 	Michele
   The problem with our health care system is that it was jerryrigged over many
years with a patchwork of different objectives, conflicting demands, colliding
interests, and confused incentives.  Our system is bad, per say, it is just
expensive (on this point I agree with you).  However a nationalization of the
United States' health care system would prove disasterious.  It would mean a
collapse of our multi-billion dollar insurance industry, throwing thousands of
white-collar PMC (professional middle class) workers out of a job.  Also, as
mentioned previously, Canadian patients and doctors migrate to the U.S. because
of the fact of superior technology and wages (for doctors).  Our technology is
undisputibly the best in the world (the price we pay...), if not for the costly 
U.S. health care system many new health care innovations would have a slower
genesis.  You speak of the rights of people, are rights being truely denied? 
Our medicare system, while terribly beurocratic and expensive, does help many
poor people.  The right to life is granted and protected in the U.S., anyone in
critical attention gets INSTANT response from all available medical
facilites--no matter how much money they have.  Granted the right to good
health is not one granted by our consitution, we try to protect it via several
federal, state, and private institutions; as well as socio-economical 
structures.  I don't believe that the right to unconditional good health is 
granted by the Italian goverment, nor do I believe that there are no people 
who fall through the cracks of nationalized medicine.  While the U.S. health
care system does need beurocratic restructuring, it does not need
nationalization.  

---The Doctor