universal health care?

The debate keeps raging about universal health care in the USA.

The problem with the debate is how the questions are framed.

No right thinking person would assert that anyone should be kept from primary health care. Obviously nobody should be turned away from an emergency room because of the inability to pay.

In the USA at least, there is no shortage of emergency rooms and primary health care facilities. One could not honestly say that most of the population is not within easy reach of primary emergency treatment.

However, the ability to pay for treatment has become the crux of the issue (in my understanding).

People who do not have health insurance in the USA faces some real financial issues if they need any kind of definitive health care. Any serious medical care will cost more than the average person could afford.

Let's say for example that you step on a rusty nail and go to the ER for treatment. According to the figures released by a Consumer Health Organization the average cost for the treatment will be $1081. If I did not have health insurance, I would most likely NOT go to the emergency room for treatment. I would probably have elected to treat the issue at home until I probably developed a serious infection and then would have had some really serious financial issues. For the average person, spending $1000 on an unplanned issue is a huge problem.

In my opinion, the issue of universal health care is more complex than making sure everyone has access to affordable insurance.

In the USA, health care is a huge business. As long as health care is a profit driven business there will be no end to the ever escalating costs. It is a self fulfilling prophecy in a way. Costs will increase in relation to the need to show a profit. Altruism and the profit motive do not make good bedfellows.

Off Topic - movie review

Last night I watched a movie called Breach.
The movie is based on the true story of the Robert Hanson who according to the movie was the highest placed Russian spy ever in the history of the USA.

I had a vague memory of the Hanson affair from the press reports at the time. All I could remember was that he was a rather intense person with a penchant for a stripper who he supported. I also remember that he tried to lecture the Russians about OODA loops.

The movie portrayed Hanson as a driven man who eluded capture and exposure for many years. The movie portrays him as one of the best to elude detection. Perhaps his quirky personality and intense interest in religion and family kept him off the RADAR.

The movie is not a blockbuster but was interesting to watch and to know that a lot of what was portrayed in the movie actually happened.

It seems that Hanson was part driven to prove that he was smarter than his colleagues and part a flawed man with an inner conflict to prove that he was right.