I disagree entirely. I fear the total shambles that will most likely result from a hodge podge of incremental modification of what we currently have into only god knows what. I would prefer that a study be done of the worlds different systems and the least objectionable one selected and then do exactly the same thing. Most certainly this will not result in an "ideal" system but such a thing doesn't exist and at least we will have something that has been proven to basically work. Once something like that is in place then I'm fine for "tweaking" it to deal with unique idiosyncracies that we face versus others elsewhere.
Whoa whoa slow down there. I never said anything about a hodge podge of incremental modification of what we have now into something else. I can only assume you got that impression from my 'growing pains' statement, but that's not at all what I meant by it. I just meant that switching healthcare models will be extraordinarily difficult and will have to be phased in (and the current model, as well as much of the industry built around it will have to be phased out). People will lose jobs, other people will get jobs, and quirks will have to be worked out. I'd much rather do it right the first time, rather than doing it quickly and poorly, just to have to do it again soon after.
I completely agree that there should be a major study done of the world's different systems, but I don't think we should pick one. Just because something works in another country does not mean a direct copy will function in the US. I think we should pick the best and most fitting aspects of the various healthcare systems, and possibly add new innovations of our own. The whole thing has to be mapped out and phased in as a whole. The current trend of making tiny modifications here and there will at most by a few years before the current system completely collapses; I just hope our politicians get their act together before that happens.
I believe a system determined by committee is doomed to failure.
How do you think the healthcare systems of all the other countries you want to copy were created? They were all created by committiee. That's what legislation is.
The problem is that more and more people can no longer afford it.
That was my point, really. If most people could afford it, then the US healthcare system would actually be pretty good. It'd still suck to be at the bottom, but if most people could afford it anyway then it wouldn't be that hard to support the small percentage who can't through taxes and selective government help. But the fact is that our current model has already collapsed - it's just taking time for the pieces to hit the ground.
Why compete? why not just make the doctors work for the Government? theres no disadvantage in Universal Healthcare, it is basicly the single most important public service beside the Police and School.
The philosophy behind privatized healthcare is that the private sector can usually do things more efficiently than government. We've convincingly proven that this philosophy doesn't work for healthcare if we want everybody, or even most people, to have access to good quality healthcare. I'm still skeptical that a 100% socialized healthcare service is the right way to go, though; the only countries capable of sustaining such systems are the ones with magic money wells, as kryo put it.
Yes Norway's system is probably not a good candidate because of the points you make. OK what about France, don't like France then what about the UK. If that's no good then how about AU, NZ, Canada, even Cuba for god's sake. Like I said, throw a dart, you can't really do worse than what we have.
Every one of your examples has major problems. The UK and France (especially France) aren't going to be able to afford their current healthcare systems for very much longer. Cuba's healthcare isn't really as good as Michael Moore made it out to be, in general; not to mention that being a dictatorship does open some doors that aren't really available to us. I don't know much about healthcare in Australia or New Zealand. Though a will mention that the problems of logistics and beaurocy involved in governmental institutions are exacerbated in larger countries. Canada's system isn't so bad, but elias001 pointed out some reasons why a lot of people are wary about switching to a system like theirs.
