Nationalized Healthcare: A glimpse into our future?
A short article published in the Peoria Journal Star on January 3, 2010, page A3 caught my eye. The tile was “Report: U.K. (United Kingdom: England and all—my addition) drinking strains health system.” Pertinent portions of the news story declared:
“London (AP)—Just as Britons brew black coffee to cope with holiday hangovers, they are digesting a new report that warns the country’s notorious drinking culture is putting an unacceptable strain on hospitals and medical staff.
The cash-strapped National Health Service (The British nationalized healthcare program is cash-strapped? Is that ever mentioned during the debates to bring the United States in line with all the other “civilized” countries that provide nationalized healthcare? If it is, I must have missed it!—my addition)—the U.K.’s taxpayer-funded medical system—now spends 2.7 billion pounds ($4.4 billion) a year treating patients for drinking-related problems, double the amount five years ago, the report said. Total funding for the health care system is currently around 100 billion pounds ($162 billion) a year. [According to Encarta, the population of the United Kingdom is “60,609,153 (2006 estimate).” Microsoft ® Encarta ® 2007 [DVD]. Redmond, Wa: Microsoft, Corporation, 2006. The current U.S. population is approximately 300,000,000—my addition.]
The report—published by the NHS (National Health Service—my addition) Confederation, a health-care providers organization, and the Royal College of Physicians, which represents doctors—warns that about 10.5 million adults in Britain drink above sensible limits, and 1.1 million people have some form of alcohol addiction.” [Using the 2006 population estimate (I know the numbers are not representing the same years. 2006 population is the most current I could quickly find.), that means approximately 1.8% of the population are considered addicted. Note: that is 1.8% of the total population. The percent of the adult population would be higher. I didn’t find a figure for the adult population and I didn’t look long—my addition.]
“One study at a hospital in Leeds, in northeast England, found that one-fifth of all emergency room admissions over four months were for alcohol related conditions, the report said.”
What happens should the United States pass and implement the proposed nationalization of healthcare now before Congress? Will America’s own alcohol cost related problems increase as it seems to have done in the United Kingdom, decrease, or remain the same. It seems that it may well increase if the United Kingdom is a precursor.
However, alcoholism and too much drinking is only one of many healthcare problems that all Americans are being asked to help subsidize unless, of course, you are the one being subsidized. We have drug addictions, obesity problems, sexually transmitted diseases including HIV/AIDS, cancers from smoking and other adverse lifestyles, gambling addictions, and the list goes on. On the one hand, the government “legalizes” immoral lifestyles such as homosexual behaviors and, on the other hand, the same government wants the entire population to subsidize the resultant healthcare costs directly attributed to these same immoral lifestyles.
As I’ve said before, under the proposed nationalization of healthcare, who pays for those who practice immoral, unsafe, and unhealthy lifestyles? The people who remain healthy by NOT practicing immoral, unsafe, and unhealthy lifestyles! How perverse is that!
I know an individual who has not had health insurance since about 1996. He says that since then, his healthcare expenses have never been close to how much it would cost him to have even a basic healthcare plan. As far as I know, he does not practice any immoral, unsafe, and/or unhealthy lifestyle. He pays cash for all his medical expenses. Last year, the only medical expenses he had were for contact lens supplies. And the government wants to force him by law to acquire healthcare insurance or pay a tax for not doing so? In his words, “I don’t think so!”
A short article published in the Peoria Journal Star on January 3, 2010, page A3 caught my eye. The tile was “Report: U.K. (United Kingdom: England and all—my addition) drinking strains health system.” Pertinent portions of the news story declared:
“London (AP)—Just as Britons brew black coffee to cope with holiday hangovers, they are digesting a new report that warns the country’s notorious drinking culture is putting an unacceptable strain on hospitals and medical staff.
The cash-strapped National Health Service (The British nationalized healthcare program is cash-strapped? Is that ever mentioned during the debates to bring the United States in line with all the other “civilized” countries that provide nationalized healthcare? If it is, I must have missed it!—my addition)—the U.K.’s taxpayer-funded medical system—now spends 2.7 billion pounds ($4.4 billion) a year treating patients for drinking-related problems, double the amount five years ago, the report said. Total funding for the health care system is currently around 100 billion pounds ($162 billion) a year. [According to Encarta, the population of the United Kingdom is “60,609,153 (2006 estimate).” Microsoft ® Encarta ® 2007 [DVD]. Redmond, Wa: Microsoft, Corporation, 2006. The current U.S. population is approximately 300,000,000—my addition.]
The report—published by the NHS (National Health Service—my addition) Confederation, a health-care providers organization, and the Royal College of Physicians, which represents doctors—warns that about 10.5 million adults in Britain drink above sensible limits, and 1.1 million people have some form of alcohol addiction.” [Using the 2006 population estimate (I know the numbers are not representing the same years. 2006 population is the most current I could quickly find.), that means approximately 1.8% of the population are considered addicted. Note: that is 1.8% of the total population. The percent of the adult population would be higher. I didn’t find a figure for the adult population and I didn’t look long—my addition.]
“One study at a hospital in Leeds, in northeast England, found that one-fifth of all emergency room admissions over four months were for alcohol related conditions, the report said.”
What happens should the United States pass and implement the proposed nationalization of healthcare now before Congress? Will America’s own alcohol cost related problems increase as it seems to have done in the United Kingdom, decrease, or remain the same. It seems that it may well increase if the United Kingdom is a precursor.
However, alcoholism and too much drinking is only one of many healthcare problems that all Americans are being asked to help subsidize unless, of course, you are the one being subsidized. We have drug addictions, obesity problems, sexually transmitted diseases including HIV/AIDS, cancers from smoking and other adverse lifestyles, gambling addictions, and the list goes on. On the one hand, the government “legalizes” immoral lifestyles such as homosexual behaviors and, on the other hand, the same government wants the entire population to subsidize the resultant healthcare costs directly attributed to these same immoral lifestyles.
As I’ve said before, under the proposed nationalization of healthcare, who pays for those who practice immoral, unsafe, and unhealthy lifestyles? The people who remain healthy by NOT practicing immoral, unsafe, and unhealthy lifestyles! How perverse is that!
I know an individual who has not had health insurance since about 1996. He says that since then, his healthcare expenses have never been close to how much it would cost him to have even a basic healthcare plan. As far as I know, he does not practice any immoral, unsafe, and/or unhealthy lifestyle. He pays cash for all his medical expenses. Last year, the only medical expenses he had were for contact lens supplies. And the government wants to force him by law to acquire healthcare insurance or pay a tax for not doing so? In his words, “I don’t think so!”
posted by Christian Gunslinger at 4:37 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home