Last week when we talked about Obama’s proposed health care reform, there were more concerns about the government running the program than the core initiative of every American obtaining medical coverage. Certainly, this is sparked by our experience of government wastes and inefficiencies but why do we have to feel that way? Why do we settle for mediocrity? Why can’t we change this?
Thicken My Wallet writes:
I often find dragging Canada as a comparison to proposed reforms in the U.S. to be a bad comparison… Ultimately, Americans should adopt a system suitable to the American political system and stop trying to use Canada either pro or con for proposed reforms.
I feel a bit native typing this, but instead of creating a system that fits, why aren’t we trying to change our political system so we can create the best government run programs?
Health care is a huge industry where many companies are MAKING money, but why does it have to COST taxpayer money for the government to run?
Many have reported that our stimulus money hasn’t trickled down to the businesses yet, but why does it take that long? China’s stimulus have already done wonders for their economy, and the stimulus was just as big (if not bigger).
There are tons of negatives about communism, but you have to admire their efficiencies. Remember the SARs scare a few years ago? China built a hospital in eight days. A typical U.S. hospital can’t even approve a change of pencil brands within eight days. Could we adopt some of that in our political system?
I know what you are thinking – we need to debate and make sure that our policies are sound. It’s great to have multiple layers of cross check, but all that happens within our system is for politicians to add more favors for their supporters. Banning excise tax on toy bows and arrows in our bailout bill? Give me a break.
Obama talks about reforms and changes all the time. Perhaps it’s the political system he navigated so well that needs the overhaul. If you could have it your way, what would you like to change?
This is the Government Improvement Series, which are discussed on Friday. Join us next Friday for more, or look through the link above for previously discussed topics.
Promote or Save This Article
If you like this article, please consider bookmarking or helping us promote it!
Print Post | Email Post | Del.icio.us | Stumble it! | Reddit |
Related Posts
- Government’s Opportunity for Improvement – Intro
- Best of Personal Finance Blog by MoneyNing – July 2009
- Severe Fraud Punishment – Government Improvement Series
- The Huge Bag of Debt – Government Improvement Series
- Tax Law Changes – Government Improvement Series
Subscribe! (and Get a Mini-Course with Free Registration)
Follow me on twitter! In addition, subscribe to grab free amazing content or take advantage of the newsletter to have content delivered to you. For starters, a 7-part mini course to help you spend less and be happy will be delivered to you when you subscribe!(Don't worry about spam, because we hate it as much as you do!)
Twitter
Facebook
Subscribe
{ 7 comments… read them below or add one }
I’d like to see elected officials only allowed to talk to the constituents who elected them. Committees can hold hearings (seminars) where special interest groups and lobbyist can present their case, and where facts and information can be gathered, but all in the public arena where it is supposed to be.
Give the president a line item veto.
And the only way to make this happen — term limits. And not a 10 or 20 year limit either. One or 2 term limit. 5 year max. If you can’t get something done in 5 years it’s time to give someone else a chance.
Thanks for the quote. Certainly, you hit the nail on the head. I agree with Steve about term limits but isn’t the over-arching issue that government has gotten too distant?
The level of government closet to the people, cities, towns and counties, have the least money and power while the level of government furtherest from the people, Washington, has the most money and power. It is hard to make good decisions when the decision-makers are so far away from the actual problem. I am not sure that a bureaucrat in Washington would know how to best apply stimulus money to, say, Rochester as opposed to empowering the local Rochester community and elected officials to spend the money as it best sees fit.
Obviously, you need co-ordination but that is what senior levels of government are supposed to do; co-ordinate efforts rather than dictate decisions from far away.
Have a good weekend.
I currently live abroad in Hangzhou, China and had to go to the hospital there recently about some chronic pain I developed. For $100 out of pocket, I was able to see both a general and a specialist physician in the international section of the hospital and receive an ultrasound — all with no appointment or long wait.
HOWEVER, I was told that I “definitely” needed to receive a 3-day inpatient surgical procedure. I flew back to the U.S. to get a second opinion, and was told the procedure (which would be outpatient in the U.S.) actually had several possible side effects (including making the condition worse) and might not even improve my condition in the first place. The doctor here suggested several more conservative measures instead that I’ve decided to go with. I’m very glad I had the choice choose which health care system I went with.
Yes, China is wondrously cheap, (and I have had good experiences with their health care for minor issues, like tonsillitis), but I wouldn’t hold up their system as model.
What’s ironic is that it’s legal for me to get health care or medication in China — or anywhere else in the world — but it’s not legal for me to buy health insurance outside my home state. It’s also easier for me to deduct mortgage interest, a new home purchase, or a “cash for clunkers” car trade in from my taxes than it is my health care expenses. If the government truly cared about the uninsured, why can’t they just cut them health care checks directly? There would be no bureaucratic infrastructure to build, and the needy would still have the right to decide who and where they were treated.
Ning, you’ve spoke out the truth here. In many cases, U.S. should learn and adapt the ways from China, especially on how to overcome the economy and pandemic crises!
I like Dave’s idea to simply cut health care check directly. I heard a quote from a lawmaker over the weekend. I believe he was a congressman. He said, “We need to go slow on Health Care reform. This is a complex topic and the American people need time to understand all the implications” (I paraphrased). Bull! I need to see professionals and occasionally get lab work done related to my health. My doctors and the lab need to get paid. What’s complicated about that?
Wilson, the major thing we need to learn from China is how to save money, which is something Americans used to be able to do. This is part of the reason their economy is still chugging along — people have savings with which to keep paying their rent, mortgages, etc.
And China isn’t an expert on handling pandemic crises. During the SARS panic, they covered up outbreaks and censored doctors and reporters that tried to report the truth. With the current swine flu outbreak, they’ve been arbitrarily quarantining people to the point where the general population is terrified that foreigners and returning overseas Chinese will spread disease throughout the country. AIDS is the leading killer among infectious diseases there, in part because of faulty blood transfusion screenings that have help spread it around.
China is making fantastic strides every day, but they shouldn’t be idolized just because their one-party government is able to cram “progress” through at a faster clip.
One word: Transparency.