Sounds great, doesn't it? Do you think that the patient received "compassionate" health care from its brokers in Canada (aka, the government)? Just how compassionate do you think it is to make someone with a life-threatening brain tumor wait months for basic diagnostic examinations when time is critical to save his life?
Anyone with a piece of brain in their skulls should realize that so-called "universal" health care is neither universal nor compassionate. More than anything else, it is rationed. Much like food has been in times of famine. That means that everyone gets some, but generally not enough. That means everyone suffers, just like when Sir Winston Churchill said,
The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries.
You want affordable health care? Improve yourself and spend less frivolously and/or vote for politicians that refuse to allow government to meddle in health care.
The United States has perhaps the greatest health-care system in the world, because it is driven mostly by individual responsibility (= freedom). This means that those who refuse to take responsibility for themselves will not receive proper health care. A single-payer system removes that individual responsibility component. Is that the kind of environment we want to foster? One where government-provided security supplants freedom?
Some people like to crow that, "every other industrialized nation has universal health care." Even if this is truly so, just because an idea wins a popularity contest doesn't mean that it's the best idea out there. This is exactly why our nation is a republic and not a democracy. Besides, there have got to be reasons why our health care system is the best as is.
BTW, who do you expect might be proponents of rationed health care systems? How about Democrat presidential candidates Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton?
No comments:
Post a Comment