countrymouse1 (countrymouse1) wrote,
countrymouse1
countrymouse1

The Ethics of Socialized Medicine

20 November 2013
The Ethics of Socialized Medicine.

Socialized medicine is really government rationing of healthcare. No country that has socialized medicine has ended up with any other solution to keeping costs down and services generally available.

What this inevitably leads to is a government entity, be it a case manager, end of life committee, or just some random buereaucrat with the power to deny care.

To someone who is for socialized medicine, they must also say "I am ok with the Government deciding who dies, because everyone dies eventually." This is the only consistent statement they can make when supporting socialized medicine.

As an answer to that statement, "If everyone dies eventually, what moral authority does the Government have in deciding when someone dies by withholding care?  After all, if every one dies, and we see that Socialized Medicine does not improve outcomes compared to private market healthcare, there is no moral authority for someone to decide for someone else that their life is no longer living."

In the (formerly) Great Britain these end of life committees must weigh the cost of the life saving (or life prolonging) treatment verses the potential future benefit to society.  That "potential future benefit" means taxes, not some sort of existential value such "well Ms. Greyson volunteers at the library three times a week to read stories to poor children."

To the government your future benefit is measured in dollars, or pounds, or yen, or euros.  When the cost of keeping you alive is no longer a good return on investment, tough luck for you.

Canada had a very interesting experiment with trying to force socialized medicine to work, they simply made private medicine illegal.  This was eventually struck down by the Canadian high court with the famous line that "access to a waiting list is not access to health care."

You see, the rich know that they can "YAHOO" their health care (You Always Have Other Options).  Rich Canadians come to the United States for care they don't mind paying for, we call this "healthcare tourism" and it is big money. 

So if you are a wealthy Londoner and you've retired, squirreled away a goodly bit of savings and develop cancer, well so sorry chum, the National Health Service has more interest in you dying quickly so that your retirement can be taxed than letting you live.

Right now we pay more for health care services in America, but so far we haven't had to sacrifice anyone’s humanity to the alter of socialized medicine.  Although I no longer believe that there are any humane or moral liberals left, after all the evidence of the inhumanity of socialized medicine only an evil person could believe the forced equality of substandard care and denial of life saving care by committee is better than the current system.

I want to be in charge of my end of life care. Yes that is selfish of me, but I lived my life for me, not so that vultures could rape my resources and redistribute them to others. Liberals will tell me that I'm a horrible selfish human being for not wanting to die so that others can have what I earned. But really the liberals are the horrible envious human beings who want to control other peoples lives and decisions by inherently limiting their freedom of choice. There is no upside to socialized medicine that I can see. If socialized medicine were really a good thing, I would want it for my country, but it comes at too high a cost for no benefits over our current “broken” system.

http://randomthoughtsandguns.blogspot.com/2013/11/the-ethics-of-socialized-medicine.html
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    Comments allowed for friends only

    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic
  • 2 comments