Health care confusion

The triage of money - the cost of free
Whose numbers?

2013-01-03 health care

It seems that my comments on the Rasouli case hit some nerves. Off-blog, unfortunately, one nasty commenter was missing not only the ability to understand my point but also the balls to do it in public. Maybe it was my fault, so let me try again so that even leftists can comprehend it.

The issues are indeed difficult to separate mostly because they are so emotional on every level. Not only the cases and the actual decisions related to it but also the politics that is handling it and the very foundation of the whole system. It is very important to sort out what is it that we are talking about.

The point is not the Rasoulis. They are just the poster case of a much larger problem. As David pointed out, there are several similar cases around the province. Considering my own experience, I must believe it. A friend of ours died due to incompetence/negligence another spent over a month in intensive care due to a post-operative mishap.

The point is not the who these patients are. Their status, background, religion does not really matter. Their having unreasonable demands on the system are not the issue. They were given unreasonable promises. They were told that they will be taken care of for free forever. For immigrants, from the moment they are accepted.

The point is not the death-panels (whatever way they are actually euphemized). Neither are any of the other rationing mechanisms. These are necessary parts of the system. I made the point that limited resources require a rationing mechanism. If it is not money, it must be politics. Canada collectively decided that it prefers politics over money as a rationing agent. I made the point that this is exactly what we got, but the point was secondary.

The point is not whether this is or is not malpractice. It is an extremely important question, but it was not the point of my post. I absolutely agree that the politics behind this case is disgusting, the media’s handling of it is disgusting (where do you think I got the devout Muslim idea??); the way this case is used as a power-grab attempt by the system is disgusting, yet we should still treat it as a separate issue. We could talk a lot about malpractice and the general quality of care in a socialized system, but this would be a distraction from the point I was trying to make. Even if it was not malpractice, even if this was the result of a well-known risk, the question of rationing, the question of the death panels, the question of the decision making authority would still be with us.

The points again (for those who missed it) are:

That in a socialized system the problems brought to light by this case are not only predictable but completely, absolutely, entirely INEVITABLE.
Rationing is inevitable.
Death panels are inevitable.
Lousy service is inevitable.
Corruption is inevitable.
Abuse is inevitable.
That a system without prices is a system without values.
That giving up responsibilities is always a slippery slope; that giving up responsibilities ALWAYS results in giving up rights.
That we cannot have our cake and eat it too.
That nothing is ‘FREE’, that the cost of free is freedom.

When people are debating these issues, they tend to focus on the problems closest to them emotionally and few things can be more emotional than the thought of a person affected by it. What I tried to point out is not what I think of any particular problem or element of the system but the fact that the system itself is destined to rot, which leads me to the point of this post.

Probably the most emotional issue of these debates is the very existence of the socialized system. It is a sacred cow for most Canadians, especially those left of centre.
The worst part of the socialized Canadian Health care system is the irrational, highly emotional attachment of its supporters to it. The religious-like faith in the superiority of politics over the free market. Faith that is impervious to logic, experience and evidence.

I must admit that I am also very emotional about this issue; for two reasons:

  1. The system is inconveniencing me already today and my very life may depend on it one day. I do not want to end up like Mr. Rasouli or my friends.
  2. Unlike those who would call me a nit wit, I KNOW WHAT I AM TALKING ABOUT!
    I am coming from a communist country. I know where this road leads and I wish to warn those who do not have the benefit of my experience.

Maybe I am hoping for too much. Leftist never learn, never understand. They have only feelings, I shouldn’t wonder why they don’t get reason.

Does that make them nitwits?

2 replies on “Health care confusion”

  1. EimaiSkorpios says:
    From the day I reached the age of reason it has been my contention that socialism can only lead to the demise of freedom and our Western culture. Competition is the life’s blood of democracy. The best thing you can instil in a youth is the fear that someone might come up with a better idea than his; someone might beat him to the brass ring if he allows himself to fall into sloth and ignorance.

    If we remove the contest for the rewards and replace it with the promise that he is entitled to them, the youth won’t say, “Oh please, no! Let me continue to work my ass off for everything I get!” You won’t have university students clamouring for knowledge or eager to experience the thoughts and ideas of others. Population will plummet with the decay of the family structure and a sense of pride in our achievements and our offspring.

    That’s where we are today. We aggressively promote ignorance and we viciously beat down opposing views. I can provide endless examples from the anti-plastic-bag teacher who wins accolades from the Prime Minister for leaving here young students sorely ignorant, to the treatment received by those who simply cherish babies at Carlton University in Ottawa (or any university for that matter).

    And … we are becoming extinct.

    Socialism is a path to it’s own destruction. Contrary to how democracy works with open-minded discussion and the acceptance of ideas for positive development, socialism requires the suppression of intelligent and rational thought and discourse. That means that socialists have no mechanism to look critically at things when they have gone terribly wrong and formulate an intelligent course for correction. So, socialism can only go in one direction … toward a catastrophic end.

    In short, this tragically under-funded healthcare system can only come crashing down around our ears and leave us in dire misery before there can be the slightest hope for change. However, if one takes even a cursory glance at the failed radical socialist state of Putin’s Russia, one sees little hope at all.

    In a couple of decades from now euthanasia will be old hat for us. Folks won’t even bother to go to Health Centres because they will have become little more than “Death Houses”; places you go into and never come out. Palls of sickeningly sweet acrid fume will hover over the edifices we once called hospitals. Healthcare will be all but a vague memory while back-alley physicians ply their trades for black market goods and cash. The Baby Boomers will have pretty much all been disposed of and their leavings will be ransacked by a dying population of zombie tweeters.

    The Rasouli case may even be recalled in folklore, “Once upon a time there was an age of compassion and caring … damn that Justin Trudeau.”

  2. […] The comment to my last health care post has a very dark tone. I perfectly understand and sympathize with the sentiment, but I think on the one hand that it is not that sinister and on the other that there is a ray of hope. It seems that the services covered may actually shrink. […]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.