Wednesday, January 03, 2007

Democrats Want Socialized Medicine

Since Democrats are socialists, it stands to reason they would want to socialize the medical profession. They believe by guaranteeing government sponsored medical care everyone will get good medical treatment at a reasonable cost.

That is, the tax payers will wind up paying the tab like they have to pay for everything else that the Democrats in congress dream up to even the playing field. Such nonsense.

It's just more of the same clap-trap from people that have everything and feel bad that everyone else doesn't have the same advantages that they do, especially with health care.
To make this work. the liberal Democrats will have to raise taxes on the middle class. What this is called is Income redistribution. Carl Marx would love this.

What the Democrats want to do is tax those that have worked all their lives to have security in their later years. Tax anyone that has initiative to get ahead and prosper. Tax everyone that takes responsibility for their own lives. It's a plan that the Democrats will try and ram through the congress.

Hey, you voted for them - so get out your wallets and be prepared to move into a nice trailer park with what you have left over - and you will probably die there waiting for medical care that won't come.

This article gives just a hint to how socialized medicine would work in America.

Reality strikes British Socialized Medicine

Ethel C. Fenig

So, still believe that socialized medicine is the cure for all that's supposedly wrong with the US's health system? Tired of smug Europeans crowing about their supposedly cheap, comprehensive health care system? And now that the Democrats are about to control Congress, do you need a snappy reply to their belief that government funded health care in the US can defy basic laws of economics?

If you answered yes to any of the above why read this on the most recent health care crisis afflicting England's vaunted (by certain advocates here) socialized system.

Hospitals in Britain have been told to hold off operating on some patients until they've been on a waiting list for 20 weeks, documents show.

The instructions for delaying treatment as long as possible were included in letters sent to hospital managers, who also were told how many operations could be postponed until after the new fiscal year, which starts in April, the Telegraph said Tuesday. The instructions indicate the seriousness of the health services financial crisis, observers said.

Patients were having their treatment artificially delayed because the trusts that provide local medical care for National Health Services had to ensure they would break even, political leaders said. The trusts are in the throes of a $2.6 billion deficit.

In one letter, a health manager for East of England trust, outlined a plan to ensure hospital operations were "restricted to the minimum required to meet required access targets" regarding elective activities.
Why in those 20 weeks the patients could fly to India, have the surgery and return to England. And maybe have a vacation in the process as a little extra. Yes, that is what some will do.

And the others? Some will notice their health will actually improve. As for the remainder, why they'll probably just hang out for those 20 weeks mudddling through in their own British fashion all the while hoping their health won't deteriorate forcing elective surgery into complicated emergency status.

No comments: