A Short Case Against Socialized Medicine & Corporatism

If you want to know what full-blown socialized medicine would look like in the United States then simply look at the health care systems in places that now have it, such as Canada and the United Kingdom. Anyone with “eyes to see” has to admit that in terms of “cost effectiveness” and “quality of health care,” such systems are a miserable failure.
Researching about living foods and nutrition for health reasons has really been an eye-opener with regards to understanding how certain big players in certain industries … especially the food and pharmaceutical industries … influence public policy and laws. Being a lover of truly free markets myself, I’m amazed that other supposed “free market proponents” fail to see anything wrong with corporatism.
By “corporatism,” I’m referring to the anti free market definition found in Wikipedia, which says, “Political scientists may also use the term corporatism to describe a practice whereby a state, through the process of licensing and regulating officially-incorporated social, religious, economic, or popular organizations, effectively co-opts their leadership or circumscribes their ability to challenge state authority by establishing the state as the source of their legitimacy, as well as sometimes running them, either directly or indirectly through corporations.”
In other words, when big, politically connected corporations are essentially one entity with politicians and government bureaucracy … where “laws and regulations” favor their activities above competitors in the marketplace … then a truly free market environment has been removed; there is, in fact, no free market. Even though there appears to be a free market (with choices still technically available), the conditions, circumstances, products and services that would exist in a truly FREE market are not available because existing government laws and regulations prevent them from legally existing.
If you begin looking into the large entities that WANT national health care, and are LOBBYING HARD for “socialized medicine,” you’re going to discover the names of many BIG, POLITICALLY CONNECTED corporations. Why? Because each of them think they’re going to somehow profitably gain from such a system. And some of them would actually get big government contracts to SERVICE such a system.
Are health consumer’s interests (i.e., sick people in need of health care) paramount in such a system? NO! What is paramount in such a system? The profits of the politically connected corporations. The elimination of their competitors … who can potentially offer health consumers something different than the status quo.
The ability to keep health care costs down, by allowing competitors within a truly free market system to innovate and offer new and different products and services for paying customers, is non-existent within socialized health care systems. In addition, those who favor “statism” and state programs always dismiss the fact that once a new bureaucracy is established, the chief concern for those who work inside that bureaucracy is the continued perpetuation of that bureaucracy.
This creates a perfect atmosphere for “make work” jobs that actually accomplish very little. The chief goal of state employees is to continue getting their paychecks and other government benefits … not serving customers.
Those employed within government agencies are virtually unaccountable to the public they serve too. After all, if government has a de facto monopoly in the health care market, then where will sick folks be able to turn if they’re fed up with the care they’re getting in the government system and want an alternative to “the system?”
Most will have nowhere to turn.
If national, government-run health care is passed, there will, in reality, be no competing system – except, of course, for wealthy folks (including politicians and state-corporate heads) who have the means to go outside of the system and PAY for truly first-rate health care from doctors and facilities that are providing it.
Socialized medicine is truly evil for other reasons too. Not the least of which is inefficiency. Most workers within state systems care little about achieving results. Most government-employed bureaucrats primarily care about fulfilling the mandates of “higher-level” bureaucrats. This is a fact! Just ask anyone who lives under socialism in Europe now (or lived under Communism in the old Soviet Union).