Wednesday, September 19, 2007

John Stossel on Nationalized/Socialist Health Care, Part 2

Part 1 was here. Part 2 is here:

Last week I pointed out that Michael Moore, maker of the documentary "Sicko," portrayed the Cuban health-care system as though it were utopia -- until I hit him with some inconvenient facts. So he backed off and said, "Let's stick to Canada and Britain because I think these are legitimate arguments that are made against the film and against the so-called idea of socialized medicine. And I think you should challenge me on these things."

OK, here we go.


I'm liking John more and more.

5 comments:

KauaiMark said...

The insurance companies are totally out of control when it comes to health care.

I shell out over $8K/year for the crappiest coverage with a $15,000 deductible and it increases by more than 10% every year.

Hillary Clinton's plan to reform the system? Require EVERYONE buy government run health insurance?

Time to cut out the middleman.
"Just say NO to HMO!"

Darren said...

What federal social program has a good track record? Are there any that aren't going broke?

Given the history, I see no reason to believe that nationalized health care is anything but yet another Ponzi scheme, like Social Security (which even FDR didn't think would continue forever).

Chanman said...

Hey Kauaimark, who do you think created HMOs? The government! Who do you think mandates that insurance companies must charge you for a bunch of crap that you probably don't need? The government! Who do you think drove up the costs of health care in the first place with Medicare? The government!

Just say no to government wrapping its tentacles around health care. Their meddling has done enough damage to our health care system already.

allen said...

We don't really have to eagerly anticipate the arrival of Hillarcare, it's here. It just doesn't have the exclusive franchise just yet.

Ellen K said...

Part of the problem is that in states such as California, the insurance coverages that they are required to supply and the pools they are required to cover make the costs higher for the average person. If you didn't have to insure people that were HIV positive, who were smokers, who had a drug history or who were alcoholics, premiums would drop precipitously. But when you mandate that EVERYONE has to be covered,then in order to have funds to apply to those claims, the premiums have to rise. And that in a nutshell is why Hillary & Co's health plan would be a financial disaster if it was enacted. People like Moore point happily to Canada and Great Britain failing to mention that Brits are moving to private care in droves and now Canada has allowed private insurance because so many doctors have left or quit the system that people are finding it difficult to have a doctor.