That's a big deal here that's lost: innovation will go down as the US moves towards socialized medicine. Right now the rich come to the US because the US invests most heavily in medicines, treatments, and equipment. Without the profit motive, innovation will (IMO) crawl and the progress that has, essentially, been paid for on the backs of Americans will slow down. Bummer. Ed O.
Exactly right. We talk about how we have to invest public monies in green technology to lead the green job future. However, the market for medical technology for people that live longer lives will be larger than that market. Yet we blow off private investment in that area. Hmm, it's almost like there's a political component to what should be an apolitical area...interesting.
Responding to a few posts, in no particular order. The Internet was a DARPA project, indeed. It consisted of email and usenet news and ftp/gopher and not much else. Only after it was commercialized did things like the WWW browser (Netscape, Inc.), streaming audio (RealAudio Inc.), streaming video (Broadcast.com), etc., come into being. Nor was the Internet very popular, just a bunch of nerdgeeks (like me). There were regulations against the Internet being commercial for too long, or we'd be that much further advanced than now. I'd also point out that then VP Al Gore, inventor of the Internet, was running around in those days talking about an "information superhighway" that had nothing to do with the Internet (technologies). Go figure. Our poorest of the poor live under overpasses and eat from dumpsters. Obama's making a lot more of them than any of us would like (or some are willing to admit). The distribution of wealth is something like a bell curve - a very few have more than most dream of and a very few have less than most consider humane. It doesn't cost $1T to help the very few who need it. The outsourcing of health care is a relatively new thing. Lots of people in the USA do go overseas to have elective procedures done, and they're even covered by their insurance and encouraged to go by the insurance companies. It is a hellofalot cheaper to have surgery in India, of course. But you get what you pay for. I personally wouldn't want surgery in a developing country, would you? The flip side is that Indian doctors are getting a lot of practice and they'll only get better with that practice. So it's quite disingenuous to make a big deal about Americans going overseas - the people with money from overseas absolutely come here, and the people with money here stay here. However, there's a lesson to be learned in all that. Those who are responsible for paying their own medical bills shop and pay less and reduce the overall cost of care in the process. When you're out to dinner and mook is paying the check, you order the filet mignon, but when you have to pay for yourself you order the grilled cheese sandwich.
The place with the best doctors I'd assume. The United States. Good news. None of us will have to travel.
I have no idea how you have come to that conclusion. Are you under the assumption that doctors will stop caring about money? Are you under the impression that American doctors are the only ones who innovate? Fame, ego and money will not being going anywhere in the medical industry. Secondly, lets say I agree with you. What difference would it make to me if doctors are innovative if I can't be treated by the innovations because I can't afford it?
You may not have to travel, but you'll have to wait if you're allowed to see them at all. You're making two assumptions: 1) You assume doctors will stay doctors just to work for less and take orders from bureaucrats; 2) You assume that the best and the brightest will still wish to become doctors. Countries that transition to socialized medicine demonstrate neither is the case.
Walgreens is the latest chain pharmacy to stop taking medicare payments/patients. Do you need more evidence that doctors will stop seeing people? Or they'll get out of the business altogether and get into banking or stocks where the govt. throws real money at them. http://www.contracostatimes.com/california/ci_14734180 If half the doctors (it says the profession is split!) quit, there's going to be an even more serious shortage of doctors than there already are. If you think waiting at the clinic takes a long time now, it's got to get 10% worse (we're insuring 10% more people).
They might be split, but that doesn't mean half of all doctors are going to just quit. Sensationalize much. Come on.
Doctors aren't the ones that innovate. Corporations do, by funding research. And I believe that it's quite likely that the supply of doctors will go down because the profit motive would be markedly reduced. The brain drain from other countries will slow and doctors who are motivated by money rather than merely helping people will do other things. With the reduction in doctor supply but the cap on costs and the fixed demand, a shortage seems inevitable. So everybody waits... which is one of the pretty consistent unintended consequences of socialism. I don't care about you as much as I care about the world overall. Further, I'm healthy in large part because of steps I take myself to remain so. I accept that some people aren't going to be covered and that's too bad, but it's not worth destroying the system that works well for the rest of the world. Ed O.
Whew, 40% decided to stick around in the last minute. Good to hear. Have you heard 10% of doctors polled saying they're going to quit? Try their hand on wall street instead, perhaps.
Right/left is too easy for people to throw around. I definitely have elements of either, depending on the issue. Sometimes right/left doesn't apply... Ed O.
