HOW TO PAY FOR HEALTH CARE -
The Moral Case For Private Health Care
by Dr. Lawrence Wilson
© August 2019, LD Wilson Consultants, Inc.
Some
Democratic Party politicians are offering ÒfreeÓ health care for all Americans.
Some nations already have what is called nationalized or socialized medical
care. This article discusses
exactly what this means and how it works.
ONLY TWO WAYS TO PAY FOR HEALTH CARE
In
reality, there are only two options to pay for any service, including health
care. These are:
1. You pay for it directly. This
is called fee-for-service, free market, or
private health care. It
includes buying health insurance if one wishes.
2. You pay for it indirectly. This
is called socialized, nationalized,
universal or single-payer.
In this case, the government forces everyone to pay a high tax. Then they set up a bureaucracy to
administer health care that costs millions of dollars a year to run. Then the bureaucrats pay the medical
people and the hospitals, and control everything.
Note that there is no free health care. Doctors, nurses, administrators
secretaries and many other people must be paid for their time. In addition, buildings must be paid
for, drugs must be paid for, and much more. Thus, any politician
that offers free health care is lying.
ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGS OF EACH
METHOD OF PAYMENT FOR HEALTH CARE
Advantages of private payment are:
- You choose what you buy. This
includes the kind of health care, the amount of care, who will be your doctor,
when you get the care, and where you get the care.
- There are incentives to save money. It is
your money and you can oversee exactly how your money is spent to be the most
efficient and cost-effective.
- Innovation. Competition in the
marketplace between health care providers tends to continuously improve the
quality and types of services available in order to attract your business.
- Control. Most important, you are in control of
your health care.
Disadvantages of fee-for service care are:
- Uneven. Some people have more money than
others, so they can spend more on health care than some other people.
The
ways this problem is handled in America and other nations are:
1. Private
charities, churches and foundations are available to help those who have less
money.
2. Some
doctors, clinics and hospitals will adjust their fees to accommodate those who
have less money.
3. In America,
the government forces all hospitals to provide basic care for everyone at no or
little cost if they cannot afford to pay.
Advantages of single-payer or socialized health
care:
1. In theory, everyone is treated the
same. However, this is not really true. In Canada and Europe, for example, wealthy people can go to
a few private hospitals. This is
true around the world. In fact, in
all nations with socialized medicine, there is a two-tier system – one
for the wealthy and one system for everyone else.
2. Health care seems free or almost
free. This is illusory, however. Nations with socialized medicine such as Canada, Europe,
Australia and others all must have high taxes to pay for their health care
system.
3. Easy. You donÕt have to think about or shop
around for health insurance, for doctors or other health care options. You get what the government gives you.
4. More buying power. When
there is only one payer, they have more control over the price of some
items. For example, a single payer
can often negotiate a cheaper price for drugs. Insurance companies sometimes do the same thing in a private
health care system.
5. No profit motive. The
fee-for-service system allows medical personnel and hospitals to charge as much
money as they wish. Some say that
this drives up costs and this factor is not present in government-run health
systems.
In reality, however, if there were a free market in health care, there
would be plenty of competition between care providers and hospitals, so they could
not charge whatever they wish. This
was the case in America for 120 years.
The problem is that the medical and hospital licensing laws, passed
about 100 years ago in America, get rid of the competition in doctors and
hospitals. This destroys the
mechanism that can control prices.
For fee-for-service to work properly, these laws have to be repealed.
These laws certainly do not protect the public, as they claim to
do. In fact, they were put in place
in America expressly for the purpose of helping doctors make more money. If you do not believe this, read about
the history of the American Medical Association in a book called Patient
Power by John C. Goodman and Gerald L. Musgrave (1992).
Disadvantages of socialized medicine:
1. The incentives are scary. For
example, it is in the governmentÕs financial interest to offer as little health
care as possible in order to save money.
Also,
the government has no need to treat you kindly and compassionately because they
are not trying to win your patronage or get repeat business. You are just a burden to their system.
2. All government programs are very
inefficient because they are subject to waste, fraud and abuse. These
are serious problems of all bureaucracies. The cause is difficulty policing the system from a far away
office, and there is little incentive to police the system well.
Waste. This means
the waste of money and resources.
Bureaucracies have no incentive to save money. If they run out of money, they just raise taxes on you to
get more of it.
Fraud. This
means cheating. It is easy to
cheat the government and again, the bureaucracy has little incentive to stop
fraud. They just ask for higher
taxes to pay for it.
In America, for example, experts estimate that cheating by doctors,
clinics, hospitals and others adds at least 15% to the cost of Medicare and
Medicaid. These are socialized
programs for the elderly and the poor in America. If my math is correct, this amounts to about $225 billion
dollars every year in America alone.
Other abuse. This means incorrect practices and other things that go on, again
because there is little incentive to check and because it is difficult to check
everyone from a central office that can be thousands of miles from the site of
health care.
3. You are out of control of your
health care. This is the worst problem and it is a
primary moral issue. With
government-controlled health care, the government controls everything –
how much, where, when and with whom you will get care.
The people are completely out of control and make very few, if any
decisions about their treatment. This
is a serious moral issue because being in control of oneÕs life is a basic
value. None of the other arguments
for socialized medical care are nearly as important.
4. Rationing. All
socialized, nationalized or universal health care systems ration health
care. This is part of their
budgeting process. What it means
is they decide that, for example, if you are over 55, you donÕt qualify for
organ transplants, or surgeries, or tests, or whatever they decide. It is an important way that they throw
the people out of control of their lives.
Politicians
routinely promise that their proposal for single-payer care will not ration
care. This is always a lie. They all do it and they must to control
their budget.
5. Getting rid of the profit motive
is also a problem. The profit motive is an important part
of economic liberty. It helps
those who work hard to earn more money and it motivates people to learn more,
to innovate, and to work harder.
It is an essential part of the way a modern society evaluates its goods
and services.
Without it, there is much less motivation for people to excel and to
work hard.
In fact, government health care is always
really just a way to control the people. It is very effective for this. If you donÕt go along with what the
government wants, they can scale back your health care and let you die. This sounds cruel, and some will say it
cannot occur. However, it does
occur in all nations with socialized medical care.
WHAT ABOUT THE ÒRIGHTÓ TO HEALTH
CARE?
This
is another confusing political issue.
There are two
possible ÔrightsÕ to health care.
Right #1. The right to choose your
health care. This is what occurs in a free market,
fee-for-service, or private health care system. You have the right to choose what, where, when and who will
provide care.
This
right is very good, costs the taxpayers nothing, polices the system to stop
waste, fraud and abuse and puts you in control of your health care.
(You donÕt totally have this right any more. In the past 100 years in America and for even longer in some
other nations, medical licensing laws forbid many people from offering
care. You only get to choose
between the licensed personnel.)
Right #2. The right to some amount of
goods and services. This is what the Democrats and
socialists offer. The problem is
that you cannot predict what you will get and the government always decides how much care you will get, and
where, when and with whom you will get it.
This is actually an inferior ÔrightÕ that takes away the first right
above. It is often just the right
to stand in line.
Canada is experiencing this right now. The government is cutting back on the amount of staff at
their hospitals and offering less and less care.
So
please do not vote for anyone who promises ÒMedicare for allÓ or ÒuniversalÓ
health care.
Home | Hair Analysis | Saunas | Books | Articles | Detox Protocols
Courses | About Dr. Wilson | The Free Basic
Program