Now before you judge me...

First of, I'd like to state that I am NOT a member of the tea party. Nor do I consider myself Republican, Libertarian, or any other right-wing organization. Neither am I liberal. I wrote that report a few years ago, when I admit, I was much more conservative. Since then, my political musings have died down considerably. Seeing the zealots on both sides of the fence has placed me comfortably across the street, laughing at the sheer absurdity of it all. However, as I said before, many of the facts I stated are still relevant to today's political climate. I'm willing to accept my past thoughts as objectively wrong if the nation does indeed become better through a national health care plan.

Part 2

Among the 16% of Americans without health care, nearly a quarter is eligible for some sort of government assisted service such as Medicare or Medicaid, but does not act due to ignorance or torpor. Another fifth is able to afford health care, but simply chooses not to buy any. Indeed, the situation for more half of Americans without health insurance is only a temporary setback in their lives, such as people in between jobs, or changing health insurance policies. This brings the estimated 47 million to a much more manageable 7.8 million.

According to a survey taken by the World Health Organization, the US leads the world in responsiveness to patients. Cancer patients in Canada and England frequently have to wait from three to six months for an MRI treatment. Even minor injuries make patients spend hours in the waiting room. The long lines and waiting lists are forced upon people due to the basic economic law of supply and demand. Since people in those countries do not have to pay, more show up in hospitals, not caring how minor or insignifcant their problem is. They go for brand name drugs and the most expensive, cutting edge procedures, burdening everyone else with taxes and wasted time. Even Claude Castonguay, considered the father of the Canadian health care system, agrees that a socialized system is flawed.

"We thought we could resolve the system's problems by rationing services or injecting massive amounts of new money into it," says Castonguay, "We are proposing to give a greater role to the private sector so that people can exercise freedom of choice."

Private clinics are currently popping up all over Canada at a rate of one per day. The strange thing is, these clinics are technically illegal, and yet people still flock to them, because they provide better treatment, better customer service, and better care.

If you want more evidence, look at the current state of Europe. They've been advocating a socialist health-care system for years. And now, thanks in part because of the subject of this report, their economy is in the gutter. A conservative sweep is flowing across the continent, and the people are voting for less interventionist care because of the toll it has been slowly but surely taking across Europe.

Old report I did...

Just been thinking about the health care hot-button issue right now. I did a paper a few years back about it. Some of the information is old, but none of it is outdated.

Part 1

The medical, free market model of the United States is unquestionably the world leader in the health care industry. Despite growing cries for reform and socialization as done in other nations, the US health care system is efficient, effective, and fair. More new treatments and cures for deadly diseases such as HIV/AIDS, cancer, malaria, etc. are developed in America more than any country due to our capitalistic system. The US is also number one in responsiveness to sick and injured patients. Socialist systems would inevitably bring long waiting lines in the hospital for emergencies and consequently a lower chance of survival. Although critics complain about how millions of people in the country are uninsured, they fail to examine the situations of these people. A variety of reasons exist on why they don’t have coverage, from thrift, to ignorance, to pure laziness. Even then, patients can’t be turned away from treatment, due to the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act. A socialized medical system will undoubtedly lead to poorer care, higher fatality rates, and a step closer to tyranny.

Hospitals charge exorbitant amounts to uninsured patients just so they are able to afford medicine and equipment. A large factor of these outrages prices are the government mandates we force on them.  Due to a number of regulations and mandated benefits, hospitals are forced to make patients pay much more than they would normally charge. Medical procedures with very little government involvement or coverage by insurance agencies, such as plastic surgery, is relatively affordable to most Americans, while much simpler operations such as near-fatal gunshot wounds typically charge far more. The government affects more than just the price of treatment; it also takes away the amount of time a doctor can take away with his patient. The amount of paperwork required for doctors is simply preposterous, turning them into mindless bureaucrats and pencil-pushing zombies.

The medical innovation of the US is the highest in the world. In most other countries, drug research is mainly sponsored by their respective government. In contrast, although the US supports drug research through the National Institute of Health, most come from private drug corporations. The vast majority of drugs for diseases such as HIV/AIDS, cancer, and malaria come from American drug corporations. Indeed, 45% of the world’s pharmaceutical market belongs to the US. Of the fifty-six drugs available for AIDS patients in 2002, only five came from the National Institute of Health. The rest came from the drug corporations. When the Canadian government decided to provide universal health care and place price limits on drugs and hospitals, their drug research and output dropped by more than half. Part of the reason why hospitals have to charge so much for treatment is that drug research is a painstaking and highly unstable business. The average cost of developing a new drug is $802 million, and most of those drugs fail halfway through the actual development. Less than a third of drugs created make enough profit to make up for the cost of research and development.