The truth about socialized medicine

How many times we have heard this topic being discussed in this election year?
The one in favor always argue: "Human life is not a commodity in capitalist market. It has a value that only the society attaches to it, So health care is something that should be VERY carefully regulated by the government "

Here is what NY Times says:
ATLANTA — A nationwide study has found that the uninsured and those covered by Medicaid are more likely than those with private insurance to receive a diagnosis of cancer in late stages, often diminishing their chances of survival.

Isn't Medicaid carefully regulated? Than why this Government run insurance is not good? or that it is as good as not insured.

Here are my 2 cent on this topic:

Health Insurance is the product that helps you pay the medical expense in case you need one. it’s the service by choice. if you do not take the service you have to pay yourself. its no different than car insurance. if you don’t take it and you need it you pay for it. not having insurance should not be excuse for not taking medical help. and Health insurance is like any other contract you make. and you get what you pay for. so you should have choice to pick the plan that suits your need.

Here is the deal: One who propose universal health care are trying to fix wrong problem. the real problem is the cost of insurance has gone high and solution to this problem is to find ways to reduce cost of health insurance and not abolish the private health care. Being Indian I know the quality of health care we receive in Government run hospitals and Private Hospitals in India. Here is how the circle goes. Government takeover some field like health care, they will not do good job at it, ultimately people ends up going to Private providers and pay them high anyway.

Solutions to real problem could be add more competition. companies will fight for quality, services and price and ultimately it will benefit the people. and that is exactly what capitalism is all about.

I came across an interesting article while reading "The Week" Aug 22-29, 2008
Source: "The Week" Aug 22-29, 2008
Libby Purves - The Times

Face it: Britain is rationing health care, said Libby Purves. In an ideal world, the National Health Service would offer every patient every treatment invented for every illness or condition. Of course that’s impossible. The truth is we have limited health-care resources, and doctors make decisions every day on how to allocate them. Yet because they do so without any guidelines, the rationing of care is “muddled, irrational, and inconsistent.” Doctors’ groups have pleaded with successive governments to make a list of “core services” that would be available nationally, so that local health authorities could then choose which of the less-vital services—stomach stapling, say, or in vitro fertilization—they wanted to cover. But every government has avoided the topic. Who wants to be “the hardhearted monster who rules that under-50s, breadwinners, and parents of young families get formal priority with new cancer drugs, or that there is an age beyond which heart surgery is not offered?” This reluctance is understandable, but it comes at a price. Right now, certain local health trusts won’t give liver transplants to alcoholics, or knee replacements to obese people, while others will. What kind of treatment you get shouldn’t depend on where you live. “As a nation we really do have to sit down and agree on what is in the core national entitlement and what is not.”

Do you want to decides your health care needs or some one sitting in government decides if you need some health care or worse, if it's in national interest to give you open heart surgery or lever transplant? At least with private insurance, you know what you have contracted for. Choice is yours...