The best argument for Health care reform (and single-payer) with moderates is competitiveness

[andym]

The USA spends 16% of GDP on health care. Competitor nations pay almost half as much-- Japan = 8.1%. http://www.pbs.org/newshour/indepth_coverage/health/hea... The worst part is that costs are estimated to increase about 6.5%/year (one of many projections).

How can our products and workers be competitive, when our health care is costing us so much more. Single-payer has been estimated to be fairly effective in reducing costs (see http://www.calnurses.org/research/pdfs/ihsp_sp_economic... ). Other proposed solutions need to reduce our spending to be viable. If spending is not controlled the USA will become less competitive with each passing year. Ask how much each solution proposed by congress will save? Less competitive = loss of wealth, economic power and jobs.


Simple argument. Difficult to refute for a fiscally conservative or politically moderate citizen.

[Cleita]

1. It works as long as you don't let them stick out their straw men and

red herrings. Keep them narrowly to the topic and they will collapse into jello. Recommend.

[Captain Hilts]

2. It's a HUGE tax on business that makes them less competitive with overseas companies. nt

[andym]

5. I like your idea that private "taxes" exist

This should be mainstreamed. A very strong counter to the anti-tax crowd.

[WeCanWorkItOut]

3. But would our fellow citizens be willing to do what they do in Japan?

Doctors in Japan make less money, as do nurses.
The imaging equipment manufacturers make less money.
The hospitals are quite different. The Japanese take
fewer drugs. And they are healthier (partly because
they have fewer cars, and so they have to walk more).

The problem is that I don't hear anyone talking
about being more like Japan. Hardly anyone
mentions that our doctors are overpaid, for example,
or that we could bring down the price of MRIs.
I hear few people talking about educating Americans
about health, or trying to extend vacations.

So maybe we might save something on single payer.
But I'm not sure. I certainly don't trust Steffie Woolhandler,
who sort of started the single payer movement,
because in my opinion, she may not be disinterested.
In fact, she seems to approve of the growing power of
doctors' groups, which are actually responsible for
a share of rising health prices in the past decade.

[andym]

4. One of the great advantages of single-payer

is the creation of a large group to negotiate rates with providers and suppliers. In theory this large group could force reduction of physician compensation and prices paid for drugs and equipment. That doesn't mean paying doctors low salaries or forcing companies to sell below cost-- that won't happen, because the folks involved would reject it, but serious cost containment is possible.