Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
5Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Five Myths of Socialized Medicine, Cato Cato's Letter

Five Myths of Socialized Medicine, Cato Cato's Letter

Ratings: (0)|Views: 31|Likes:
Published by Cato Institute

More info:

Published by: Cato Institute on Jun 17, 2010
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

10/10/2013

pdf

text

original

 
I
n the United States there are about 14 million peo-ple—more than a third of the uninsured—who are,in principle, eligible to get free medical care by  joining either the Medicaid program or the StateChildren’s Health Insurance Program. And yet they don’t bother to enroll. To understand why they don’t, you might go tothe emergency room of Parkland Hospital in my hometown of Dallas. The uninsured and Medicaidpatients come there to get their medical care. They all see the same doctors. They get the same treat-ment. If they’re admitted to the hospital, they stay inthe same beds. From the patient’s point of view,there is no real reason to join Medicaid, because they get the same care whether or not they are formally in-sured. The doctors and nurses get paid the same re-gardless of who is enrolled in what plan. The only people who really care whether or not someoneis enrolled in Medicaid are the hospital administrators, be-cause that determines how they get their money. So they actual-ly have paid employees who go through the emergency room andtry to get people to sign up for Medicaid. Over half the time they 
Five Myths of Socialized Medicine
John Goodman
WINTER 2005
 VOLUME 3 • NUMBER1
C
ato’s 
 L
etter 
A QUARTERLY MESSAGE ON LIBERTY
 John Goodman is the founder and president of the National Center for Policy Analysis inDallas. This is an excerpt from his remarks at a September 29Cato Policy Forum, based on his new book,
Lives at Risk: Single-Payer National Health Insurancearound the World.
 
 Toronto and London people have a “right” tohealth care, whereas in Dallas they donot. That is just not true.If you’re a citizen of Canada, you don’t really have a right toany particular health care serv-ice. You don’t have a right toheart surgery. You don’teven have a right to a placein the waiting line.If you’re the hundredthperson waiting for heart sur-gery, you’re not entitled tothe hundredth surgery. Otherpeople can and do get in aheadof you. From time to time, even Americans go to Canada and jumpthe queue, because Americans can dosomething that Canadians cannot—Ameri-cans can pay for care. Canadian hospitals loveto admit American patients, because thatmeans cash into their budgets. The British government says that, at any one time, there are about a million people waiting to get into hospitals. According tothe Fraser Institute, almost 900,000 Cana-dian patients are on the waiting list at any point in time. And, according to the NewZealand government, 90,000 people are onthe waiting lists there. Those people constitute only about 1 to2 percent of the population in those coun-tries, but keep in mind that only about 15percent of the population actually enters ahospital each year. Many of the people wait-ing are waiting in pain. Many are riskingtheir lives by waiting. And there is no mar-ket mechanism in these countries to getcare first to people who need it first.
M
 YTH
: “H
IGHER 
Q
UALITY 
 Another myth has to do with the quality of care that patients receive. British minis-ters of health have told British citizens for years that their health system is the envy of fail. Then they literally go hospital room by hospital room, trying to get admitted pa-tients to enroll in Medicaid. And even thenthey don’t always succeed.Now, it’s not that unusual for people togo to hospital emergency rooms for theircare. It’s a common feature of health systemsaround the world. It may not be an efficient way to deliver health care, but the samething happens in Toronto and London.Canadians take pride in the fact thatpatients who get free care in Torontoemergency rooms are “insured.” But inDallas, we’re ashamed to say that our pa-tients are “uninsured,” even though thecare they receive in Dallas is probably better than the care they get in Toronto.
M
 YTH
: “A R 
IGHTTO
H
EALTH
C
ARE
People who believe in socialized medicinehave come to believe many myths. One isthat socialized medicine gives you a right tohealth care. If you ask the head of ParklandHospital and his counterpart in Toronto orLondon what the difference is in these sys-tems, I think all three would say that in
Cato’sLetter 
to
Friend
Send 
 2
www.cato.org
To give free gift subscriptions tofriends who will enjoy receiving
Cato’sLetter 
 , please fill in the attachedsubscription form or enclose a list of individuals (holiday card list, etc.) inthe envelope. Or visit www.cato.organd click on the “subscriptions” tab.
 
M
 YTH
: M
ORE
B
ANGFORTHE
B
UC
 Yet another myth is that although theUnited States spends more on health care, we don’t get more. That argument is oftensupported by pointing to life expectancy, which is not that much different amongdeveloped countries, and infant mortality, which is actually higher in the United Statesthan it is in most other developed countries. What do we get for our money? Thefirst thing we need to do is separate thosephenomena that have little to do withhealth care from those that do. In theUnited States, life expectancy at birth for African American men is 68 years, while for Asian American men it’s 81 years. We find wide differences in life expectancy among women, too. Nobody thinks that those dif-ferences are due to the health care system. What, then, would we want to look at if  we really wanted to compare the efficacy of health care systems? We would look atthose conditions for which we know med-ical services can make a real difference. Among women who are diagnosed withthe world. Canadian ministers of health say much the same thing. In fact, Canadian andBritish doctors see 50 percent more patientsthan American doctors do, and, as a conse-quence, they have less time to spend witheach patient. In Britain, the typical generalpractitioner barely has time to take yourtemperature and write a prescription. Andeven if they discover something wrong with you, they may not have the technology tosolve your problem. Among people with chronic renal fail-ure, only half as many Canadians as Amer-icans get dialysis, and only a third as many Britons on a per capita basis. The Ameri-can rate of coronary bypass surgeries isthree or four times what it is in Canada,and five times what it is in Britain.Britain is the country that invented theCAT scanner, back in the 1970s. For a while it exported more than half the CATscanners used in the world. Yet they bought very few for their own citizens. Today, Britain has half the number of CATscanners per capita as we do in the UnitedStates. A similar problem exists in Canada.
CATO’S LETTER
 3
 VOLUME 3 • NUMBER 1
87203388466581274151Dialysis Patients Coronary Bypass Coronary Angioplasty
U.S. Canada U.K.
Use of High-Tech Medical Procedures (per100,000 people peryear)
Sources: Gerard Anderson, et al.,
“It’s the Prices, Stupid: Why the United States Is So Dif-ferent from Other Countries,”
 Health Affairs
21, no. 3 (May/June 2002): Exhibit 5.

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->