The Morality of Healthcare Financing

MP US Exceptionalism continues to drive excellent discussion.

"Maybe, Just Maybe: The power of the presidency has been so downsized by an ineffective congress that realistically, change just might suggest a tyrant could soon be in control? 

Let's say if all candidates or at least the major two, pass by the concept of a free society, then all credibility; hope for a functioning democracy is a dream ending...who knows?
Sleeping at the gate: The 'people' are left out...and rather than ever being the recipients of positive change like universal health care etc..and if major parties are content with or zeroing into those false gods like money and power and greed, downsizing the people who seem at times to be in a catatonic state of denial? Better wake up Joe B and Joanna too eh?" Beryl 

"Left Out? "The 'people' are left out...and rather than ever being the recipients of positive change"  Now you do realize that a large portion of US citizens consider that changing to Single Payer would be a negative change...   Gallup Healthcare Poll Results

My point is that people's voices are being heard, but their voice opposes your view of "positive". Maybe because they will be paying more and getting less. 

I work with people from many countries, there are definitely pros and cons to single payer plans. That is why most countries have Private Options on top of the public system. Personally I am against single payer for several reasons:

• Patient does not bear the costs. Little incentive to live healthy.
• Rationing and long waits for some services.
• Price controls do not work well, something is going to slip.
• other

So I am happy that my voice is being heard." G2A

"Rationing of health care under single-payer systems isn't caused by the fact that they are single-payer. They're caused by other policy decisions -- specifically, the desire to limit health care spending. Need proof? There's a single payer system very near to us that doesn't ration care in the way that, say Canada or Britain do -- it's called Medicare and it serves every American over the age of 65. 

We should also acknowledge that our current multiple-payer system also rations care -- by the ability to pay. Every system will ration care to some extent, what we need to decide is on what basis we choose to ration." Sean

"People in America who go to school, learn, work hard, make good choices, work hard, etc get the best medical care in the world when they need it. The disabled and old get the best medical care in the world when they need it. 

Those who do not fit into either category struggle and are handled on a case by case basis. Makes sense to me." G2A

"Really? Ask a doctor if she decides who gets the best care based on their moral worthiness. 

If a disabled or old person did not go to school, learn, work hard, make good choices, work hard, etc does he or she still get the best medical care in the world when they need it?" RB

"Moral Worthiness: I am not sure this is a moral issue, I think this is more of a capitalism and person financial management issue. Thankfully the USA's systems reward the smartest hardest working saving /investing people very well. This is one reason why we are such an exceptional country. 

And yes the best hospitals / Doctors would like to get paid. Thankfully we do live in a society that believes in charity and caring for the old, disabled, so they get good care." G2A

"Pay to play health care is inherently immoral: The idea that people who fail to meet someone or another's moral standard (such as a work ethic) are rightly doomed to suffer injury illness and death is morally bankrupt. 

The idea that financial incentives are (or should be) the primary driver of individual health care, safety, or lifestyle decisions is simply daft. People don't exercise or eat healthy diet because it saves them money, on the contrary many people pay an incredible amount of money to exercise and eat healthy food. 

Nor do people seek to avoid injury for financial reasons... pain avoidance and fear of death are basic biological mechanisms. 

Furthermore we've seen time and time again now financial priorities distort health care and safety decisions frequently producing increased injury and illness. We never had millions of uninsured Americans because they were all lazy an "unproductive" members of society. 

I hate to say but the idea that people who fail to meet some standard of work ethic deserve their fate of death and suffering looks a lot like "final solution" logic." Paul

"Immoral: No system is perfect, however I think ours is best. Pretty much everyone gets some care, but the most responsible citizens get the best care.

The Liberal view that citizens have a right to food, housing and healthcare just because they are standing on American soil is also flawed and doomed to cause disaster. And I would say that it is also immoral because it allows "free loaders" to live as parasites on the efforts of others. (ie drain on society) And if you doubt that there are a significant number of freeloaders within our society, just take part in a group activity, look at our crime statistics, look at the academic failure within our schools, our large welfare roles, etc.

I am actually living proof that money can be a good incentive to living healthier. My company implemented a two tier premium system and I will be paying an extra $180/month for family coverage if I do not lower my sugars and triglycerides. Therefore I am changing my diet somewhat. Now I wish more programs would do this, I mean why should my co-workers need to pay more for my bad choices?

Why should our society have to pay the huge healthcare costs in part created because of sky rocketing obesity, etc?

G2A Healthcare Cost Drivers