American Healthcare is Already Socialized

[MarginOfError]

American health care is already socialized. - Slate Magazine

Slate is on a roll this week.

[applepansy]

This isn't news. Its been socialized for over 25 years. I remember the day my mother (and RN) called to tell me that last private practice family practice physician had retired. At the time all other family practice physicians here in the SLC area were employed. Its just gotten worse. Most internests and other Primary Care Physicians are employed. Even some specialists are employed.

The problem with having physicians who are employed and not private practice is the insurance companies dictate to the Health Care Organizations who employ the doctors. The best interest of the patient is considered AFTER profit.

I guess its finally bad enough for a reporter to figure it out?

[Dravin]

This isn't news.

It beats yet another article on celebrity fashion. :)

[applepansy]

It beats yet another article on celebrity fashion. :)

That is does!!!

[prisonchaplain]

We may feel like medicine is completely socialized, but not yet. The firestorm of an issue now is whether or not government-mandated insurance coverage must include contraception, and the "morning after pill." Apparently, the government is now saying that there will be no exceptions for conscience, accept for religious houses of worship. Thus, Catholic University, Catholic Charities, etc. will be required to provide insurance coverage for abortifacents. There is a great stir now, with both liberal and conservative Catholics calling for civil disobedience. I recently watched a clip of a show featuring a prominent Mormon, a rabbi, an Evangelical minister, and a Catholic League representative all expressing solidarity on the issue.

[annewandering]

I do not understand the logic of religious organizations having to provide services against their beliefs. In fact I can not see how it is not against the constitution. This one is going to go to the supreme court without a doubt.

[Traveler]

We may feel like medicine is completely socialized, but not yet. The firestorm of an issue now is whether or not government-mandated insurance coverage must include contraception, and the "morning after pill." Apparently, the government is now saying that there will be no exceptions for conscience, accept for religious houses of worship. Thus, Catholic University, Catholic Charities, etc. will be required to provide insurance coverage for abortifacents. There is a great stir now, with both liberal and conservative Catholics calling for civil disobedience. I recently watched a clip of a show featuring a prominent Mormon, a rabbi, an Evangelical minister, and a Catholic League representative all expressing solidarity on the issue.

We know it is really a shame and the world is truly rotten when the secular world has gotten so bad that religious peoples have to cooperate with each other, just to survive.

The Traveler

[prisonchaplain]

I do not understand the logic of religious organizations having to provide services against their beliefs. In fact I can not see how it is not against the constitution. This one is going to go to the supreme court without a doubt.

The Catholic Church seems intent on this very thing.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/01/catholic-churches-distribute-letter-opposing-obama-healthcare-rule/

Edited February 2, 2012 by prisonchaplain

[HEthePrimate]

Depends on how you define "socialized." Many Americans (especially conservative ones) define it simply as the redistribution of wealth. One problem with that is that a redistribution of wealth occurs under many different political systems, not just in socialistic states. I prefer the dictionary definition. According to Merriam-Webster:

so·cial·ism noun \ˈsō-shə-ˌli-zəm\

1: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods

2a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state

3: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done

In the U.S. today, some, but by no means all, of the money spent on health care is redistributed, but very little of the health care establishment, with the exception of VA medical facilities, is owned by the government. Medicare and Medicaid are essentially government-administered insurance programs, but there are also plenty of private insurance companies. Most doctors either work for themselves or for private companies, though they may receive payments from Medicare for certain patients, but they are also free to receive payments from private insurers, cash payments, or payment in chickens, if they so desire.

I think people use the word "socialism" a little too loosely sometimes. One lady told me that if a government uses force, it's socialistic. I told her that no, "force" means "force," and can be used by any type of government. "Socialism" is not defined as anything you don't happen to like--it has a specific definition. If we throw the word around too carelessly, it'll eventually become meaningless.

</being pedantic>

Edited February 7, 2012 by HEthePrimate

[Traveler]

Depends on how you define "socialized." Many Americans (especially conservative ones) define it simply as the redistribution of wealth. One problem with that is that a redistribution of wealth occurs under many different political systems, not just in socialistic states. I prefer the dictionary definition. According to Merriam-Webster:

In the U.S. today, some, but by no means all, of the money spent on health care is redistributed, but very little of the health care establishment, with the exception of VA medical facilities, is owned by the government. Medicare and Medicaid are essentially government-administered insurance programs, but there are also plenty of private insurance companies. Most doctors either work for themselves or for private companies, though they may receive payments from Medicare for certain patients, but they are also free to receive payments from private insurers, cash payments, or payment in chickens, if they so desire.

I think people use the word "socialism" a little too loosely sometimes. One lady told me that if a government uses force, it's socialistic. I told her that no, "force" means "force," and can be used by any type of government. "Socialism" is not defined as anything you don't happen to like--it has a specific definition. If we throw the word around too carelessly, it'll eventually become meaningless.

</being pedantic>

Some good thought but I wonder - What about health care is not currently under control of the government?

Also what you about most Doctors:

Most doctors either work for themselves or for private companies, though they may receive payments from Medicare for certain patients, but they are also free to receive payments from private insurers, cash payments, or payment in chickens, if they so desire.

was true perhaps 50 years ago but not curently. Most doctors will not schedule apointments with someone not insured - and it has been well over 30 years since I have known of a doctor receiving payment "in kind". I talked to my current doctor and friend and he said that all billing must be done through the "health provider" or he could loose his license to practice from the state. "When did that happen?" I asked and he answered that the change was quite recent. He no longer works for himself but is imployed by a provider like IHC.

The Traveler