There are a lot of people who are against a single payor system, however they generally have a vested interest in the current system
staying as it is. They use terms like socialized medicine and point to the inadequacies of socialized systems in other countries.
Socialized medicine would never work in America for many reasons. The United States is fortunate, however, in that we already
have an insurance system in place that functions well and grants universial health care coverage to its clients. What is
Medicare except guaranteed health care for those 65 years and older and by a single payor? No one tells me how to treat my traditional
Medicare patients. No one is constantly looking over my shoulder telling what to do. In fact, traditional Medicare insurance
requirements are the least intrusive to my practice.
Medicare is not considered a socialized system by the
patients participating in it, nor by physicians in general. There is nothing magic about 65 years of age as a starting
point. Since the system functions well already, it would be simple to expand it incrementally until all persons are covered.
As new ages are incorporated, the money they are now paying to their current insurance plans would be paid into Medicare itself through
payroll deductions. For others, such as welfare recipients, money would be deducted from their monthly welfare checks. Premiums
could be standardized away from uncontrollable risks factors, such as cancer, while persons with controllable risk factors, such as
smoking and medical non-compliance, could be assessed a higher premium.
Since there is currently a massive amount
of money being paid into the insurance industry and since waste, redundant functions, and huge profit margins would be eliminated,
Medicare could again be solvent and self- sustaining. Futher details are available. As stated above, the majority of people voicing
an opposing opinion have a strong financial interest in the current system. As examples, consider insurance and medical plan
executives and investors, employees of those plans, practitioners who make large salaries from the system as it is, stock brokers,
investment lawyers, bankers, retirement plan advisors, and many other people, many who are simply fearful of change.
If we had a one payer of health care benefits, we could standardize coverage and extend it to all Americans, regardless of age, sex,
race, disease, or disability.We could analyze the unified system for medical errors and waste, and we could eliminate the patchwork
of coverage, and non-coverage, that exists now. Do we not deserve this as Americans?