Profit, as an organizing factor for society, is bankrupt. A little bit of socialism can go a long way to fix the imbalance!

*****

When enacted in 1965, the Medicare program did not reform medical care. Instead, it provided needed single payer insurance for seniors. It did not create socialized medicine or allow a “government takeover of health care”. It did, however, socialize the way we fund care for the elderly. Which Republican or conservative Democrat will go on record wanting to dismantle this “socialist” program?

In Canada, doctors are independent and run their own practices. Only the insurance pool is socialized, enabling lower costs and universal coverage. The notion of endemic waiting is exaggerated, and for every such story from Canada, far more instances of delays, exclusions, and retroactive cancellation of coverage on technical grounds occur in the U.S. Rationing is another scare tactic used by opponents of single payer. In Canada, care is rationed according to need. Here, it’s rationed by one’s ability to acquire insurance and pay the bills.

What accident of history created our peculiar hit-and-miss employer-based insurance system? Single payer unshackles businesses from the burden of insurance costs, allows employees currently held hostage to employer-provided insurance to seek better jobs, and permits all businesses, large and small, to compete on a level playing field for the best personnel.

Nearly all revenues from broad based progressive taxation for a low-overhead single payer program would cover care and medication. Private insurers, on the other hand, spend lavishly on executive bonuses, lobbying and marketing, political contributions, and armies of workers ferreting out ways to avoid paying for care.

Short of single payer, the public option is a watered down compromise with diminished effect. The most cost-effective and compassionate alternative is a public single payer plan, providing care for all, controlling cost, and disencumbering business. It will come eventually, after years of suffering and waste. Why not seriously discuss its merits now?