American Health Care Is More Equitable Than Canada’s Universal Health Care

• December 8, 2009

When liberals lecture us the need for government health care the need for equality of health care is an argument they routinely make. “Access to health care shouldn’t hinge on ability to pay.” That’s a nice sentiment, but the simple truth is that we cannot provide an unlimited amount of health care to whoever wants it on a finite budget. It’s impossible. At some point rationing has to come in to play, and the question is how should we ration health care.
Should the government ration health care for us? Or should the laws of supply and demand ration it for us?
I know where I come down, and as it turns out America’s health care system (while not exactly free market is still supply and demand orientated than other places in the world) has more equitable outcomes than Canada.

While Canadian health care is certainly cheaper than its U.S. counterpart (health care spending in Canada is about 10 percent of GDP versus 16 percent in the United States), it is not necessarily better or more equitable. As a recent National Bureau of Economic Research comparison concluded, “Americans are more likely to report that they are fully satisfied with the health services they have received and to rank the quality of care as excellent.” Not only do Americans have far greater access to basic diagnostic tools ranging from mammograms to CT scans, the researchers found “the health-income gradient is actually more prominent in Canada than in the U.S.” That is, wealthy Canadians receive far better care compared to low-income Canadians than rich Americans versus poor Americans.

I’m shocked that the (relatively) free market health care system in America, consisting of free people making (relatively) free decisions, would be more equitable than a top-down health care system where bureaucrats decide who gets what.

Tags: Asshats, Domestic Issues, Politics

http://Array sayanything-45

Maybe I’m not a liberal after all because I don’t have much interest in equality of outcomes such as making sure that everybody receives the same amount of health care services. I am interested in seeing that everybody has access to health care services and that the inability to pay doesn’t exclude folks from the service that they need. My opinion may not be typically liberal, it’s probably not even typically Canadian for that matter, but I think it’s a reasonable and practical approach.
Equality of health care sounds positively utopian to my ears.
sayanything-15427

Currently only a small percentage would be unable to get the healthcare they need to save their life. They just end up paying huge sums of money for it.

If you run up large bills at the hospital then in the future they might start to limit the amount of care they give you. If you need a heart transplant or brain surgery for cancer but it is not currently life threatening you may get turned away for lack of funds but that really is not any different than it would end up being under government health care.

Where are the masses of Americans who are dead from lack of health care due to not being able to pay? Choosing not to go to the emergency room because you have the flu but can’t afford the trip is different than showing up at the emergency room and being told they wont give you an IV for your dehydration because you can’t pay. That simply does not happen in this country.
sayanything-12

Mike:

. I am interested in seeing that everybody has access to health care services and that the inability to pay doesn’t exclude folks from the service that they need

The adequacy of the health care isn’t a factor?

So what if you gain audience with an MD if he’s not willing to do what it takes to keep you alive.
sayanything-15427

You mean Rich people STILL get better care? Well we can’t have that! Everyone MUST have the same crappy healthcare! If the state wont pay for the homeless guy to get a new liver then the person who makes money and creates jobs CAN NOT BE ALLOWED to get a new liver!
HG

Everyone in America already has access to healthcare regardless of their ability or inablity to pay. Go into an American hospital with a broken bone, or sickness and see if you are refused. It won’t happen.
Besides this, we have medicare available to the poorest among us. The nonsense in this debate is incredible.
On top of that there are numerous, almost countless organization and monies available through charities for medical needs within and without the medical community.

What America are you libs living in? Where do you come up with these empty lies you pass off as arguments?
sayanything-2361

“Not only do Americans have far greater access to basic diagnostic tools ranging from mammograms to CT scans…”
I’m pleased with what’s available but would like cost reduced *without* reducing availability (price controls and rationing.) The laws being considered take the worst aspects, bureaucracy and high prices, and make them worse. Yes, price controls and rationing reduce cost but it’s like reducing the cost of college education by killing your child.

A few tweaks like allow interstate insurance competition, reform patent law, limits on jury awards. There’s a price fixing between ins companies and doctors that screws people that pay cash, end that.
http://sayanythingblog.com robport

I am interested in seeing that everybody has access to health care services and that the inability to pay doesn’t exclude folks from the service that they need.

That’s still equality of outcome.

Equality of opportunity is everyone being free to take care of themselves.

What you want, Mike, requires that the government administer the care. And inevitably that means the government picking and choosing winners and losers.

I’d rather that be done by the market.

SayAnythingBlog.com

American Health Care Is More Equitable Than Canada’s Universal Health Care

Create a SAB Readerblog

Recent Comments