The American Health Care Dilemma

I tend to disfavor universal healthcare for several reasons.  Imposing a government run command and control economy upon the healthcare sector will by definition distort incentives within the system and thereby render it less efficient; also, it will probably increase the corruption which is already pervasive in the Medicaid/Medicare programs and associated health programs. In addition to this inefficiency and corruption, individual liberty and rights will certainly be constrained by the massive bureaucratic machine managing the system. And if private care is squeezed out altogether, as may well happen by one means or another, we will be deprived of a basis for comparing the efficacy of the governmental sector with that of the private sector. I have long assumed that the private health care sector has one other major advantage: it provides a much more fertile soil for all types of innovation, from the development of new procedures to the creation of new pharmaceuticals and the invention of new medical devices--it provides ample rewards to the innovators and sufficient flexibility to experiment with new ideas and opportunities.
 

There are also arguments of consequence that may be set forth for the other side. There is the moral argument that citizens ought to have a right to decent health care provisions regardless of income. Also, certain specific efficiencies can be achieved more readily under a government controlled system than under our hybrid model (esp. more thorough preventive care and a greater emphasis upon it, elimination of private companies' bureaucracies, and reduction of pay for some health workers).  Another substantial advantage, one which sways many intelligent Republicans, is the disburdening of our corporate sector of a major obligation not faced by their international competition--this is a problem which will only worsen without some type of reform in future.
 

As an interim solution I favor raising the age of Medicare eligibility to 70 by 2025. Also, I would impose rationing upon Medicaid recipients and initiate a program to emphasize preventive care. Those in government programs may simply have to accept rationing at some point--otherwise there may be a tax revolt or the possibility of governmental bankruptcy. I think tax deductions for private health care and health insurance costs should also be increased for both corporations and individuals--this to increase our international competitiveness.  I realize this encourages more health care spending as a whole and merely shifts the burden of spending away from the export sector. Already the government pays for 60% of health care costs in this country when tax benefits are accounted for.  But, all of these contingencies are interim and the future of scientific progress cannot be forecast. Probably we will do what we usually do with problems: we will exchange old ones for new ones.