|
 |
 |
|
| ||||
          | |||||||
| |||||||
| |||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||
 |
« Previous Entry | Main | Next Entry » Student Questions: Health Care and Education
Editor's note: This week and next, the Business Desk will feature questions from students in three high schools around the country. Question: If every other major economy in the world has universal health care why doesn't the United States? -- Kavion, senior, Central High School, Phoenix, Ariz. Paul Solman: The excellent health economist Victor Fuchs gives four reasons: 1. Many organizations prefer the status quo. (Insurance companies, drug companies) 2. Machiavelli's "Law of Reform" suggests that a determined and concentrated minority fighting to preserve the status quo has a considerable advantage over a more diffuse majority who favor reform. 3. Our country's political system renders Machiavelli's Law of Reform particularly relevant in the United States, where many potential "choke points" offer opportunities to stifle change. 4. Reformers have failed to unite behind a single approach. I can't do any better than that, except to add that health care's opponents have spent a lot of money scaring Americans about "socialized" medicine, suggesting that government health care is simply not "American" because it doesn't rely on the "free market." The vulnerability of Americans to such appeals was apparent when protesters at a Congressional town hall meeting on health care said: "Keep your government hands off my Medicare!" But Medicare is a government program for all Americans over 65. It does not rely on the free market at all. Question: If education helps to increase economic growth, why don't politicians pay more attention to and spend more money on K-12 schools? -- April, senior, Central High School, Phoenix, Ariz. Paul Solman: Because economic growth is a long-term and iffy thing. Human beings don't love giving up something today (money) on iffy outcomes years down the road. I'm not sure how appealing the politics of education spending would be even if it could be shown persuasively to increase economic growth. Since the results aren't blindingly clear, the appeal is even less than it might otherwise be. -- Posted November 4, 2009 | Comments (2) | Permalink
 TrackBacksListed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Student Questions: Health Care and Education. TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/mt4/mt-tb.cgi/1759 2 CommentsLeave a comment |
|
|
 |
||
|
 |
 |
|
ABOUT US |  |
FEEDBACK | |
SUBSCRIPTIONS / FEEDS: |  
| |
|
        |
|
| Support the kind of journalism done by the NewsHour...Become a member of your local PBS station. | ||
| ||
| PBS Online Privacy Policy Copyright ©1996- MacNeil/Lehrer Productions. All Rights Reserved. | ||
| ||
Paul,
Universal health care is difficult to achieve in the US for one reason: The "insurance" industry is an offshoot of Wall Street, and politicians refuse to stop throwing money at bankers even though the function of health care can be completed with lower cost.
Insurance companies pay the bill an average of only 3 times for every 10 perfectly documented patients. If you ever wondered why your bill at the emergency room is so high, blame nobody but insurance. Hospitals must therefore charge (10/3) = 333% of the "actual" cost. But it's not as simple as blaming hospitals, because hospitals have a margin of under 2% of revenues.
The reason this situation exists is because no government regulator is willing to FORCE health care insurance companies to actually pay their bills. Thus, when they cash your monthly premium, they are in fact simply taking money and not paying out even when services are performed.
Each and every Republican talking point on this issue is a lie.
As to spending money on college.. welcome to another scam. I completed my undergrad degree in 1999, and the cost per year since then has DOUBLED yet the salaries available upon graduation have not risen even 3% per year.
Bush's No Child Left Behind is an epic fail.. metrics are better if set by the states rather than the Fed.
I am an insurance broker in Canada. We have Universal health care, and make no mistake, it has it's ups and downs. Our income taxes are higher to pay for it,our wait times are negligibly longer for service, however I never have to worry about writing a cheque after a visit. Group insurance benefits are nice, depending on the plan. However, costs are difficult to manage to keep plans in force. Make no mistake, Insurance companies are for profit. Too often insurance companies are made out to be the villain. For every bad story, there is a good story. I carried a program for years, was excellent in paying claims. So, I can tell a lot of good stories where insurance benefited the customer. Only the government would be interested in running a not or profit insurance company. There are some not for profit insurance companies still out there, look around.