A look to our own future in the U.S.?

 

“and you’re wasting the resources of the National Health Service.”

So says Baroness Mary Warnock of people suffering dementia, suggesting that these people should be euthanized, put down, killed, according to an article today at Al Mohler’s blog.  This article sheds light on a frightening development in Great Britain and their nationalized health care system, more accurately described as “socialized medicine.”  Frightening because, given our apparent passion for the concept of national health care in the United States, we could be looking at our own future as well, both as a nation and as individuals.

The reality of any insurance program is that the payer of benefits (that is the insurance company), and not the payer of premiums (that’s you and me) determines the type, amount, and degree of service that will be covered by the benefits of the policy.  If you have private health care insurance now, that is the case.  For example, most insurance plans that I am familiar with have different levels of coverage (direct payment or reimbursement) for services provided within their so-called network, and lower levels of benefits for services provided by clinicians outside their network.  This is done according to contractual relationships that the insurance companies have with providers, and to some degree I am convinced on the whim of the insurance company itself. 

Such will be the case with any form of national health care that is being discussed in this current presidential election season.  Don’t believe me?  Just take a look at Medicare today.  And that is just a dip of a toe into the waters of socialized medicine.  The government already does, and increasingly will determine the type, amount and degree of service that will be provided.  And you can rest assured that when there is the least strain on the system, as will doubtlessly be the case with the aging of our U.S. population, diminished coverage will be a reality.  And it seems inevitable that the type of dialog taking place in the U.K., will take place here as well.  Will it be within 10 years of the implementation of socialized medicine in the U.S.?  I don’t know.  Maybe it will be 15 or 20, or even 30.  But I can say with virtual certainty, that it will happen, and with that eventuality, everyone reading these words today could be subject to being euthanized under the sort deranged system of social engineering that will be an economic consequence of socialized medicine.

Socialized medicine, which I fear will be a reality as our republic slips ever closer to Marxism,  is just as great a farce as the Ponzi scheme normally referred to as “Social Security.”  In fact, as the elderly become more and more expensive to maintain in the economy of our increasingly socialist society, the demands of both of these systems may converge and meet at the point in which the catheter meets the vein delivering the Euthanyl. 

Welcome to our future.

Advertisements

2 Responses to A look to our own future in the U.S.?

  1. Brandon says:

    I have talked with several persons aged 60 and above who have told me point blank, “Social Security will be non-existent for you.” I guess they clearly see what you’re speaking of here: It won’t work.

    As for socialized healthcare, that’s just scary. Perhaps our current system isn’t the best, and no system will be perfect, but the solution is most definitely not socialized healthcare. Bethan’s grandmother in England is under such a system. It seems great in one way; that is, you can go to the doctor without worrying about how you’re going to pay for it. But it’s terrible in myriad other ways.

    Seems like we could come up with some new ideas instead of trying ones that we know already do not work.

  2. Chuck says:

    Yeah, one of the definitions of lunacy would have to be trying the same thing over and over again, expecting different results. We need look no further than your grandmother-in-law’s experience (if I may call her that), or virtually every other European country, or Canada for that matter, to see the dissatisfaction with the “free” services provided by their nationalized health care systems, both in terms of the timing of the delivery of those services and to an increasing degree their quality, as well. When we lived in Houston, EVERY ONE of our medical providers was from the UK, or South Africa. All had fled the prospects of practicing their professions under the nationalized health care systems in their native countries.

    The fundamental issue is the culture of entitlement that seems to exist in the United States. Ironically, it is this mindset that is driving us DEMOCRATICALLY toward socialism. Politicians of both parties seem to exercise a political strategy of securing support by entrapping people in a condition of government dependancy. Make the people more dependant on the government and then keep promising more and more in return for votes. This among other considerations simply scream out for term limits.

    When you have professional politicians, their “production” is aways geared toward securing votes so as to remain in office. And sadly the sin of slothfulness is culitivated by politicians who are all to delighted to spend someone elses’ money.

    Thanks for your comments. And please take the advice of the other people you have spoken to and do NOT count on receiving any social security benefits. If they do materialize, it will be a nice surprise.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: