Why not government run hospitals?

Why is it that the Left likes single payer system so much? Is the left against government run hospitals?

 

Nothing to do with government hospitals - it's got everything to do with providing health care to everyone on a rational and sane basis without the interruption of profit-based industries forcing up the price of health care.

 

If the government wants to take my tax money to pay for their hospital, I think I should have the option of being reimbursed if I want to go to a private hospital. Otherwise the government is basically forcing me to use their hospital, heavily taxing me if I do not use it.

I would not be against it if the government wanted to provide their own health insurance plan option, so long as the money they collect from voluntary participants is close to the same amount it costs them. (in other words, it would not really be fair for the taxpayers to be heavily subsidizing this)

A government hospital would be a good way of treating the poor. I imagine the quality would be rather low

 

Anders you know that taxation doesn't work that way. My government takes my taxes and does things I don't like either but no reimbursement for me because of it. However in Australia if you have private health insurance you do get a bit of a rebate on the money you pay into it which encourages people to get private if they can afford it. Our system, Medicare, only works because the overwhelming majority of taxpayers here have to pay the levy (tax). If it was voluntary I doubt if there would be sufficient money to run the show. And because it is compulsory to pay the tax government-run hospitals which are usually the teaching and research hospitals give excellent cares so the poor get excellent care and not second-rate care.

 

to answer the question in the thread title: "VA hospitals" is the answer.

 

So then why doesn't for profit businesses drive up prices in other industries?

 

Too expensive. Unlike the UK and other places that have them, the US is simply too big geographically to be able to afford to do that and still have emergency/trauma care available to the masses.

 

Simple reason they are the only industry that if there is an emergency use of its services you can charge what you want to the client after the fact even the ambulance to get you there has a fee schedule and you can make an educated guess as to the cost.

 

I am all for them. There are two in San Francisco that I can think of- maybe three if the VA hospital is still open. The problem is that someone still needs to pay the bills. The government run hospitals rely upon insurance money just like everyone else.

Personally I think they make as much sense as government run fire departments and police departments.

 

I'm not sure what the left thinks about that, but I don't think hospitals should not be a for-profit-venture. Either make them non-profit or let the government run them.

 

So a government run hospital won't do that. If the service is for free or small fee they won't charge an arm and a leg.

 

I think it is a great idea. It is a reasonable compromise for both Liberal and Conservatives. I never see a tea party guy complain about the public library. Nor do they complain about the free municipal water fountain at the local park.

A government run hospital is like the public library. You can get free books at the library or buy from Barnes and Nobles. The choice is yours. You are free to choose.

In my opinion a government run hospital is a good choice. Completely American and it preserves freedom, liberty and choice.

Thanks for your post SF Jeff.

 

Because they don't have insurance companies between consumer and provider of goods and services.

 

this may be an answer:
[video=youtube;vdnY8r7_fLw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=vdnY8r7_fLw[/video]