Diamonds or Pearls?
Submitted by LJM on December 12, 2007 - 2:44pm.
economy | economy | Essays | Health Care | humor | primary
I watched that debate on TV, when the young woman asked that canned question of Hillary Clinton about which she preferred, diamonds or pearls? Everybody thought it was a powder puff question not unlike the boxers or briefs question Bill got when he was a candidate. Hillary told the audience that she wants both (diamonds and pearls.) In the background Joe Biden could be heard to ask they give all the candidates that question and then I could hear him saying, "diamonds." Who cares you might ask?
Well, in the health care debate, it's said over and over that only true progressives want total universal single payer health care. How wonderful that would be. It would be the diamond choice of health care. What if we have to settle for a health care plan much better than we have, covering everyone, but isn't like they have in France, single payer, but what they have in Germany, which is private insurance that covers more than we ever dreamed of, like a month at a spa for treatment of stress? Is what they have in Germany perfect? No it's not, but it's what the people there have settled for, after a history that included Bismark's socialized version of healthcare in the 1800s. Germany went through tough times in their history, that included serious economic downturns. It was one of those famous downturns, the Weimark Republic, that brought Hitler to power. Backlashes can be powerful forces. So, Germany today has settled for pearls. Pearls are still pretty nice. They aren't dimonique or some other phony gem. What we have in the US for health care is certainly not the real thing, even though it's sold as something sparkly. Everyone knows we've been had.
The question now becomes, diamonds or pearls? Can we afford diamonds? We'd all love to have diamonds. Joe Biden didn't even have to think about it. Hillary Clinton sure wouldn't turn down diamonds. She would be able to live with pearls. We may all have to live with pearls as a step to having much better health care in America. Sometimes stepping stones are a good thing when trying to get through a minefield. Running through blindly, going after the gold ring with the diamond in it, can get you blown up into bits and pieces. Hillary tried that in the early 90s and got blown up herself. So, having been blown up chasing after the diamond, going for pearls looks like a pretty good idea. Truman couldn't get the diamond when he tried to get universal health care in America. Nixon couldn't do it either.
I'm going with the Rolling Stone's song..."You can't always get what you want. You can't always get what you want. You can't always get what you want. But, if you try sometimes, you just might find, you get what you need." I'd like for us all to have diamonds. We may find out we're ok with pearls. At the moment we've got broken glass.
As someone who desperately wants the government to cover health care for all, I'll take the pearls too. Baby steps.
"The Right always knows who its enemies are" Lance Mannion
Walking on broken glass as lyrics works. I sure don't want to have to keep walking on the broken glass of our nation. It's painful.
From:
http://www.nchc.org/facts/Germany.pdf
The German health system does not meet with unqualified approval by the German public. In a 1999 poll, 49.9 percent of respondents said they were very or fairly satisfied with their health care system, while 47.7 percent replied that they were fairly or very dissatisfied with it. The German health ministry concluded in May 2003 that their health care system suffered from a lack of competition; superfluous, insufficient or inappropriate care; shrinking revenue and an aging population. Long waits for care are a particular problem in Germany; in a 1990 poll, 19.4% of Germans reported waiting more than 12 weeks between being seen by a specialist and receiving surgery.
===
Note that the Germans still are responsible for paying about 15-20% of the cost of their prescription drugs and other medical treatment.
One thing the Germans seem to have correct in their health care system is that there are no benefits paid to illegal immigrants. I saw a news story in the local paper last week that noted that 70% of the births at Parkland Hospital (Dallas) were to illegal immigrants which just gets tacked onto the insurance rates the rest of us have to cough up.
If we do decide that we want something like universal care in this country, then I think that the people paying for it have a right to demand some responsibility on the part of those consuming it. Let's start by saying that acceptance in such a plan is only open to those who have demonstrated (via testing) that they are non-smokers. Some employers like the Cleveland Clinic hospital are striving to lower their health costs by not even hiring smokers anymore and prospective employees must submit to testing to prove it.
Current health care cost to the United States from smoking is about $60 billion annually, only offset by the "benefit" that smokers will probably be less of a drain on the retirement system from early death.
Once that is addressed, we can start addressing all the junk (like high fructose corn syrup) that the food system is feeding us in the United States.
No payment system is going to be able to address/survive a population that consumes more and more medical services on a per capita basis.
n/t