Nonetheless, as I've stated before, healthcare is not the State's job, favorable anecdotes or none, incompetence or not. It is to protect human life from evildoers, not maladies.
Don't think that I'm a fan of the current American system though.
"The NHS has saved my wife's life twice, and the lives of two of my children. I owe them a huge debt of gratitude."
Good point. I sit here with questionable health issues, yet can't afford to go through with all kinds of operations. My parents face a similar issue. You definitely owe your NHS and nation much gratitude .
"If England's NHS is so great, why does it have private hospitals?"
Excellent rhetoric, but you're weakening in your application of logic. Does it follow that a perfect NHS would require the evaporation of private healthcare provision? I don't see any logical link, there are far too many other factors that would come into play.
A direct answer:Because England is not a totalitarian regime. There is freedom.
In addition to that fundamental principle, there are obviously imperfections in the NHS (as in any system) and people are motivated to jump the queue at times.
The NHS has saved my wife's life twice, and the lives of two of my children. I owe them a huge debt of gratitude.However, there was once a time when we chose to spend money to obtain non-emergency medical treatment privately because it was quicker.
Notably, we also had private healthcare insurance at the time but they refused to pay for the treatment at all! At least the NHS would have eventually got around to it.
An ironic observation is that when my wife and I travelled to the private hospital, I picked her up from the NHS hospital where she worked.We were followed all the way out from one hospital car park to the other .... by the Consultant who was working for both hospitals.
If England's NHS is so great, why does it have private hospitals?
You said "I have no health insurance other than catastrophic for if I get in a car accident.
If I really need to go to a doctor, I just pay them"
Cheryl, if I were living in your country, I would make sure I have good medical insurance. It's your decision, but you never know when you might need very expensive medical services. It can happen suddenly, unexpectedly.
As we get older, we seem to have more medical problems. It's well worth the money to pay monthly premiums for full medical coverage. Don't be caught without it.
"Why do you think it's the government's job rather than the churches' job or the families or friends or communities to help people in need?"
You are adding a new twist to what I said. Perhaps I did not make myself clear.
I agree that churches, families, communities, should help people in need. But I don't think you can leave it to them to provide necessary medical care for people. You can't expect a village or church to set up a system to provide medical care to everybody in the congregation or community. They simply don't have the resources or ability to do that.
Modern medical facilities, equipment, is very expensive and training doctors, nurses, etc. is also very expensive. Consequently medical care is very expensive.
Perhaps you meant the local church or community could pay for the medical needs of it's members. I'm not sure how they could afford to do that either. Are they going to pay $20,000 or $30,000 for surgery for people. Better to get medical insurance.
You are changing the topic a bit and are now talking about the school system. I won't get into that.
Don't you think people would build their own hospitals, schools, have charities for people that needed it, if the government didn't usurp this role, a role not appointed to it in the first place? And do a MUCH BETTER JOB?
But if people have no money for such things, then the government does it.
If churches did it, people wouldn't be "entitled." Churches would have leverage to help and influence people beyond their immediate needs, and people would say "thank you" instead of "I'm entitled."
Another example, money is taken from Christian homeschoolers to pay for education of their neighbors' children in atheism, immorality, evolution, appreciation of homosexuality, etc.
Who gets the credit for all this free stuff? The government. Did the government pay for all this? No, we did.
So it's wrong. The government is so busy trying to do the job of the parents, churches, and businessmen that it doesn't have time to do its real job -- which is to preserve and protect our God given unalianable rights to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."
I'm speaking as an American citizen of a once freedom-loving country.
Actually Cheryl, no I do not consider myself as socialist; I have actually been a supporter of the Conservative Party for quite a number of years. I don't believe in cradle to grave socialism where government provides everything. I believe in less government control of peoples lives, less taxes and government waste, but I also believe in providing for basic necessities such as medical care. I would not like to see my taxes go to pay for housing, food, etc. for people who can work but would rather let the government support them. Everybody believes in assistance from government in certain circumstances.
If you are a victim of disaster or serious illness, you would probably be the first to take any assistance. Medical service just seems to me to be a basic service that should be available to everyone, without a person having to lose their home because they need a heart operation. The problem with medical care is that to survive a person can require an operation or other treatment that is very expensive. Without compulsory insurance, what happens to them?
But no I don't believe in a kind of socialism where the government would provide everything for everybody. I believe people need to get out to work if they are able.
The idea that a government run medicare system is evil is ridiculous; it's propaganda."
I don't agree. Sounds like you are a committed socialist.
I hate socialism.
I'm not interested in trading freedom for "security."
And I'd rather trust in God than the government.
And in fact I don't trust the government. I see the government as an oppressor who eventually is going to round me up and ship me off to a concentration camp, if they don't kill me first.
Ronald Reagan said it. What are the eleven most feared words in America? Answer: "Hello! I'm from the government, and I'm here to help you."
You say a medicare system is socialism. Of course it is, but all democratic countries in the western world, including good ole U.S.A. have a certain degree of it. Did not your federal government provide millions of dollars in aid to the victims of Hurricane Katrina? What about the tidal wave in southeast Asia and other disasters around the world. Did not your government provide relief? Is this not socialism? Don't forget the command to love thy neighbour. I'm sure your government has welfare for people who have nothing. Your country may already provide a certain degree of medical care for people who do not have insurance; I don't know.
The idea that a government run medicare system is evil is ridiculous; it's propaganda.
The doctors in Canada are still independent and run there own business; they just claim reimbursement for services from the government run medicare system. Furthermore their medical association, whom they elect, freely negotiates their rates for services with the government medicare system. They are free to leave and go somewhere else if they don't like it. Most of them have stayed because they know they have a good thing.
Wayne, This is socialism. It's not the government's job to raise our children, doctor us, feed us, or give us a house to live in. The government's job is to keep the criminals out of our homes and protect our shores from attack.
People can buy what they need for themselves if they have any money to do it with -- if the government's not taking it all to provide these "free" services.
It causes people to look to the government as God Almighty.
I have no health insurance other than catastrophic for if I get in a car accident.
If I really need to go to a doctor, I just pay them.
I take vitamins and supplements. Pills now being paid for by taxpayers, I wouldn't take anyway.
If I get cancer, last thing I want is a diagnosis from a doctor. Once that diagnosis is given you're no longer free to choose your own therapy, and no alternative practitioner will dare to treat you.
And you live longer if you get no treatment at all than if you let the doctors radiate, poison and cut.
I don't need the government to nanny me.
The best way to have medicare for everyone is to have it mandatory through the employer, otherwise if it were optional, many, many people would not bother paying for it. I think that is the case in your country where apparently a significant portion of the population does not have coverage. The problem with that is in an emergency when someone needs serious medical services and do not have the money or insurance coverage, they either do not get treated or the existing system must provide it. This means the ones who do pay for insurance will pay for medical care for those who do not have insurance. The best solution is for everyone to pay for coverage one way or another (if they are able).Those who are unable to pay should receive medical care anyway in a civilized society. That is the philosphy behind Canada's medical care system. Nobody should be turned away.
Glad to hear you were born again. Praise God for His grace and salvation in Jesus.
Yes, it is hard to understand what Premier Klein is doing in Alberta. He is a threat to the national health care system. The system is in need of major improvement but we do not need a user-pay private system which will undermine the public system.
Consider writing your MLA, MP, and Provincial Minister of Health. I will do the same. Actually I recently wrote our MP about it and he agrees that Premier Klein is doing the wrong thing.
I pay $96 per month for the public system for the two of us plus $107.24 for extended benefits (prescriptions, etc) and $64.16 for dental. It is a good system. I have received great benefit from it. I received medical services that I would probably never have received under a private system.
Did you see the Story of Tommy Douglas on CBC recently? It was quite enlightening. I am not NDP, but I think Tommy Douglas did tremendous good for Saskatchewan and Canada by starting medicare. His government in Saskatchewan in the late 1940s had to wage a war with the doctors in Saskatchewan, who went on strike.
The modern NDP is not the same as he was. Today they are too ideological and radical, supporting gay marriage and abortion.
Jan, that's a good point. It's a rediculous and discriminatory system relegated to employers. In some countries you can flip burgers or program computers and still get cared for, but not in "the best country on earth," or so some folks here call the U.S. Hopefully it will change, or I'll change--as in move out, which is probably more likely to happen.
Those other life insurance and health insurance things never seem to work, at least not the ones I've seen. I had a friend who paid for it, he even got their best "plan"... but he died anyway.
Today, it is always easier to bill the innocent than punish the guilty. The latter make more noise and get more sympathy - it starts at childhood.
As for the poor who genuinely need assistance, there once was, a century ago, a broad system of private charity.