@ebrown p,
ebrown p wrote:
My point is that there are some things that work better when the government runs them. I gave several examples including education, fire departments and NASA-- you could add many more to this list-- Interstate highways and the Coast Guard for example.
The point is what is one's definition of "work better"? Work better in your mind may be work worse in another's mind. Remember, we are a heterogenous society with differing levels of concern for our fellow citizens. A national health care system that is ultimately a single payer system is just the medical version of Robin Hood, in my opinion. Very expensive to take care of everyone, so tax the wealthy, and give to the poor.
If national health comes to fruition, I wonder if many of those that will benefit are past the point of gratitude, since I suspect that many believe all are entitled to medical care as part of some God given right. I would hope there would be some that would have some gratitude to the country, since there are countries that have societies that are the back-drops to Slum Dog Millionaire movies.
I suspect that there could be an unsuspected consequence of national health. That might be that people's social identity is threatened, if they have to be in a medical waiting room with people that they previously have insulated themselves from. In other words, neighborhoods may become more class conscious, as opposed to today's urban environment where many classes live within the same radius of some HMO. Going to a private doctor, based on one's better paying private insurance was part of one's social strata. If that is threatened, I would think people will just try to cloister themselves away from those that may now be at the doctor's office that they used to feel privileged in having.