06-17-2007, 06:59 AM
Quote:Now that I've seen Moore's slanted take on why America should adopt a universal government-run free health care system, I really need to see the rationale for the opposing view. I also want to move to France.
For some strange reason (economic profit of the rich most likely) the previous right wing government of Holland changed our health care system so that everybody can chose his own insurance company.
There uses to be a general insurance for lower incomes and a more or less private insurance for people that earned more.
Anyway, great fun everybody can choose his own insurance company. So of I course I went for the one that pays my hospital bill and not for the one that sells one of my organs for every time I need medical help. duhh
Of course everybody is obliged to take an insurance.....so you can do everything yourself....as long as you take an insurance.....which of course is a good thing, people with low incomes get financial support for this...which is also a good thing.
The thing is that finally we end up with a more or less the same system with as problems:
--tens of thousands of people that are not insured, and that now will be 'fined'. (we have a policy that anyone should get necessary medical help...so if you are not insured you will have to pay a fine once you are going to need help)
--the whole plan was done to cut costs, but at the same time our choices (of which hospital you want to go to e.g) are limited and the monthly payments are higher.
--the choices go down even more because most insurance companies are being bought by the competition leaving only 4 companies (there used to be tens of them)
So what this plan gave us? 1.More very nice and expensive commercials for insurance companies on TV (great this is something I really need) 2. less choice 3. higher monthly payments 4. hospital that are busier cutting costs than helping patients 5. a group of top managers that receive very nice salaries.
so state health care good: private health care bad