Even One of England's Own Disagrees With Government Run Health Care

Here is video of British Member of the European Parliament Daniel Hannan talking with Sean Hannity recently where he discussed the danger of socialized medicine. He said to Americans, "please do not make the mistake" of nationalized health care. He said it is bad for doctors, bad for patients, and bad for taxpayers.




Grits4life Grits4life
46-50, F
7 Responses Mar 28, 2009

Now that is an interesting comment because maybe the reality is that Government run health care won't work in America simply because of the level of corruption but can and does function elsewhere because in other countries it is not the case.

Since you seem to be in the know, why don't you tell me where you researched that statement and I will just read it for myself. I just said America isn't the only country producing innovations in medicine and that would be a very difficult statement to dispute.<br />
I'd also like to see the research that says that wait times are far greater with a public system for "complicated" services.

The US has produced more innovations in medicine than anyone else in the world over the last 30 years. You may want to do a little research in regards to that. You want the argument against government health care. How about two major insurance programs (i.e. health care programs) in the US: Medicare and Medicaid. Two poorly run/administered programs that waste billions of dollars a year. Reality is that for basic care, universal health care can be advantageous. However for more complicated services the wait time, overall, is far greater than what you have with private insurance.<br />
I won't get into the discussion that in the US people don't like to see their primary physicians (when they have one) and opt out for urgent care clinics. Won't get into the discussion that people in the US are lazy and overweight. Both of these have a major problem on the health care system in the US.

Do you honestly believe that? That is a beyond ridiculous statement. America certainly isn't the be all and end all of medical research.

you might want to consider that though france may give good health care, their research funds are zero and there is nothing new coming out of there- this means that no matter how much u complain about the american system, at the end of the day- if it weren't for how they run their system- no one in the world would even know how to transplant a kidney or which medication to give you...

He is one man and he is wrong. I have seen the American health care system up close and personal and I would take Canada's over it any day of the week. The whole argument is silly. My brother lived in France for five years and their health care system is even better than ours. Lets face it, no matter what system is in place you will always be able to dig up someone who says it is bad. My ex had kidney problems last year and if I had to pay the associated costs with that it would've ruined me. The argument against government health care always seems to be because so and so says its bad. Where's the hard evidence that its bad?<br />
I wouldn't trade it for anything. Anyone who doesn't have it isn't even really qualified to state their opinion because the reality is, they don't even know what they are missing. The first thing people against it always say is that Canada has long wait times. This is rubbish. When I was in Cincinatti with my girlfriend (who has a really good U.S. plan) it took forever to get looked at and then an entire day to schedule surgery for her. It certainly wasn't faster. It seems to me like there are very many Americans who are looking for any reason to continue believing that universal health care is bad. A couple of years ago Canada ran a program where we could vote on the greatest Canadian of all time. The winner was Tommy Douglas, the guy who set up our health care system. That says it all as to what the majority of Canadians think.

well, the downside to govt. health is that the money is going into giving everyone basic care, instead of toward developing better care--> a good example is to compare US and Cuban health care systems.<br />
The thing is that in principal, I am opposed to it as well. I think it's important for research to get a lot of money and for the health system to prosper privately and not in the hands of the govt. so that people can get the best treatment possible. On the other hand, I have to say, if for 5 years the world's funds went into equalizing living conditions for people all over the world, and then after 5 years, when no one is hungry and everyone is above poverty line- then research will be renewed and health care will be taken over by private organizations- that, for me, would be the best solution.