Video: The real lessons of Europe’s nanny-state health care system
posted at 12:55 pm on November 3, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
As Barack Obama and the Democrats attempt to remake the American health-care system into the European model, a European economist warns the US that they have fundamentally misunderstood the lessons of EuroCare. Universal coverage is not the same thing as universal care, Elina van den Broek instructs, and that the only equality we can expect is equally long wait times and equally unresponsive providers. The Center for Freedom and Prosperity offers this as part of its continuing series on the high cost and damaging distortions that come with heavy government interventions:
Ms. van den Broek makes the same point here that I have made all year. We actually have a model of low-cost, high-availability health care in our system right now, and not coincidentally, it’s the markets without third-party payers: cosmetic surgery and Lasik. Providers compete to keep prices low, consumers pay out of their own pockets without interference from governments or employers, and as a result we have rational pricing and a plethora of providers. If we wanted reform that lowered cost and improved accessibility, we should be pursuing the lessons of the markets that actually produce those results, rather than models which result in the exact opposite.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Finally. Someone with a pleasant voice.
lorien1973 on November 3, 2009 at 12:57 PM
Obamacare never has been about healthcare. They don’t really care if more people are insured, if costs go down (or skyrocket), or if care improves or declines. They want the control, and the power that goes with it.
Socialist healthcare is the cornerstone and the bedrock of imposing socialism.
wildcat84 on November 3, 2009 at 12:58 PM
It is the nature of government and lawyers to make matters needlessly complicated.
If the government got the hell out of the way, health care would be affordable for the vast majority of people, just like every other mass consumed product or service currently is (that the government hasn’t screwed up).
The few people who couldn’t afford the care, would get taken care of by charity.
All we would lose is the ability of politicians to demogauge the issue.
NoDonkey on November 3, 2009 at 12:59 PM
Just look for all that is hidden in the 1,900+ pages.
publiuspen on November 3, 2009 at 1:00 PM
Love the quote under the picture of the Capitol:
Would be great to get to her solution, along with tort reform and free competition of insurers across the U.S., but that seems a long way off. Keep pressing.
Christian Conservative on November 3, 2009 at 1:02 PM
Pelosi’s bill creates 111 NEW government bureaucracies to administer the plan at a cost of 1.2 trillion dollars. We cannot afford free government healthcare.
Whiskey, Tango, Foxtrot!
Dukehoopsfan on November 3, 2009 at 1:12 PM
I love your posts! You hit the nail on the head again. It is less about “affordable care” and all about more power.
search4truth on November 3, 2009 at 1:12 PM
This woman is absolutely correct.
My experience of the National Health Service in the UK was dire. It was expensive, treatment was heavily rationed and generally of poor quality. With no competition how could it be otherwise? They had zero need to do any better than ‘just about ok’ – and sometimes that wasn’t an option.
Anders on November 3, 2009 at 1:14 PM
Maybe this is true now, Ed, but a few years ago my girlfriend wanted lasik surgery on her eyes. We wound up going to Vancouver BC for the procedure because the difference in price between Canadian providers and US providers paid for our trip, with some money left over. We flew to Vancouver, rented a Lincoln, stayed at the Four Seasons, chartered a boat to do some salmon fishing out in the Strait of Georgia, went to the aquarium, my girlfriend had the surgery and post-op checkup, and we flew home; all for less than to have the lasik here in the US.
jaime on November 3, 2009 at 1:15 PM
What a load of crap. The system is way too expensive and the results are poor compared to just about any other industrialized country. If you think the current system is successful and efficient you are nuts. Truth is, our system’s costs are undermining our competitiveness. If providers were really competitive we would see more efficiencies but we don;t and even elective treatments are cheaper in other industrialized nations with using private plans. It sucks… clearly. I’m not happy with the planned reform but if your starting point for discussion is ‘things are great’ you are pissing in the wind.
lexhamfox on November 3, 2009 at 1:19 PM
Obama/Obamacare reminds me of this guy I went out with in college. He was good looking and seemed pleasant enough but I spent the whole date fighting him off. He finally cooled down and asked if we could go out again when he dropped me off. I was so tired and resentful of having to fend him off that I never went out with him again and this is what O is doing with Ocare. We keep saying no and he keeps trying to force it on us and we are tired and resentful and we Amercans are going to say no to another date by making him a one termer…
CCRWM on November 3, 2009 at 1:19 PM
As Cavuto is so fond of saying, “IT’S A COOKBOOK!”
Monica on November 3, 2009 at 1:20 PM
True, mostly because providers are exposed to incomparable liability in the tort system, and because of lack of competition between insurance companies across states.
jaime on November 3, 2009 at 1:23 PM
1. Plastic surgery and lasik aren’t mandatory.
2. They’re still pretty darn expensive.
I’m not sure the comparison works.
TheUnrepentantGeek on November 3, 2009 at 1:23 PM
That is incorrect as has been shown here a few dozen times on EVERYONE of these threads. Our care is top notch. It is expensive. Our results are fantastic and our innovation is second to none. Drop that BS from your argument, b/c you don’t back it up and you are wrong.
JAM on November 3, 2009 at 1:29 PM
jaime on November 3, 2009 at 1:23 PM
Tort reform would help… a little. Mitigating those costs will not bring us the savings that will make a difference to the consumer, however. It needs to be part of a wider overhaul.
lexhamfox on November 3, 2009 at 1:29 PM
If our plans were decoupled from employment and people actually saw the cost of their care, it would go a long way to reducing expense. There are so many different ways to make it better and more efficient, but when you start w/the argument that our current system “sucks” and something, anything HAS to be done, then you fall into the Pelosi trap. Scrap this bill and do it right, or don’t do it at all.
JAM on November 3, 2009 at 1:34 PM
I’m sure she made some good points, but I couldn’t pay attention to a word she said.
Jim Treacher on November 3, 2009 at 1:35 PM
Healthcare and insurance is expensive because of past government interventions. Medicare passes costs onto all of us, making stuff we get more expensive in an effort to save the government some money.
The unintended consequences of tax laws give hospitals an incentive to jack up prices on care, while letting insurance companies pay a much lower rate.
lorien1973 on November 3, 2009 at 1:35 PM
Ms. van den Broek’s statement that “The right to universal health care in Europe often means the right to get into long waiting lines.” reminded me of Winston Churchill’s comment on socialism in general:
Trafalgar on November 3, 2009 at 1:37 PM
And don’t forget, the only reason Europe & Canada can afford their nazionalized healthcare system is that they rely in great part on the US to provide their national defense. Western Europe could essentially not do anything about Kosovo — not the whole of Yugoslavia, but Kosovo. It would be the equivalent of the US not being able to handle a civil war in Rhode Island.
Of course if Dear Liar’s plan is to enfeeble the US, then that fits right in.
rbj on November 3, 2009 at 1:41 PM
my pants are tight…
abobo on November 3, 2009 at 1:43 PM
Ms. van den Broek is DUTCH, or maybe even BELGIAN. Make of that what you will, but I do not trust the swamp Germans.
Apologetic California on November 3, 2009 at 1:43 PM
It is typical of the liberals to obfuscate and confuse. Health care and health insurance are two different entities.
The claim is that poor people are denied access to routine and preventative care because they do not have insurance.
This results in higher costs of treatment for conditions not discovered early.
The truth is though that even people with insurance put of visits for routine care and tests. Will they mandate yearly exams based on age, race and lifestyle?
It seems they will not only have to lead the horse to water, they will have to force it to drink.
Jvette on November 3, 2009 at 1:44 PM
But mostly it’s because we do most of the research for new medication and medical technology, and they refuse to protect the patent rights unless US companies sell to their socialist programs for less than cost.
In other words, we pick up the cost and they reap the benefit. And still they can barely keep their heads above water.
jaime on November 3, 2009 at 1:46 PM
Too funny dude.
abobo on November 3, 2009 at 1:48 PM
i think she learned the wink from Palin :)
deidre on November 3, 2009 at 1:53 PM
another gem of conservative wonkery… yes, if only it was like plastic surgery, everything would work wonderfully, and our healthcare costs won’t be many times higher than any other country in the world. because people choose to get cat scans and cancer treatments, just like boob jobs.
how do you guys still win elections is beyond me.
sesquipedalian on November 3, 2009 at 1:53 PM
I know what you mean. Kind of reminded me of Gunilla Knutson, the Noxema Shaving Cream girl.
And that dates me.
Tennman on November 3, 2009 at 1:57 PM
Well, do the math. Divide 300 million, as it’s around only 50% that pay the taxes in this country. Now , take the 1.2 trillion Pelosi bill costs, and divide that among the half that pay taxes. Could you survive on only about 30% of what you currently make, (assuming you work) because the only people that will truly benefit from this, are those that won’t lift a finger to help themselves, and rely on the other 50% who chose freedom, and self reliance, to make their way thru life.
capejasmine on November 3, 2009 at 1:58 PM
She said she wanted me to go with her to meet her sister and friends in The Netherlands.
TXUS on November 3, 2009 at 2:11 PM
People don’t “choose” to get cat scans and cancer treatments in other countries, the government tells them “yes” or “no”.
And guess what? It’s usually “no”.
Or wait until you are dead to get the treatment.
Which is a way to hold down costs.
That and the nasty infections you get if you go into their hospitals. I’ve seen hospitals in Europe and most of them have open windows without screens.
Having medical standards that are post-1955 costs money, I know.
NoDonkey on November 3, 2009 at 2:12 PM
The reason health costs are lower in other countries is that the rate of obesity in the US is far higher than in other developed countries.
pedestrian on November 3, 2009 at 2:13 PM
We know. Whatever you do, don’t wise up.
Jim Treacher on November 3, 2009 at 2:15 PM
This is at best an imperfect analogy as these are elective, relatively simple procedures that can be understood by lay persons and comparison shopped over time — unlike the kind of procedures that eat up most health care dollars.
When someone runs a red light and smashes into your car, when your kid has a seizure after a football game, when the tissue sample is malignant, you are not in a position to act as a traditional consumer and thus oncologists and emergency room physicians don’t behave (economically) in the same way that boob-jobbers do.
Bleeds Blue on November 3, 2009 at 2:19 PM
Because shockingly, a good many people won’t vote for a corrupt, incompetent, criminally ignorant Democrat?
NoDonkey on November 3, 2009 at 2:30 PM
I wonder how inexpensive medical services would have to be to satisfy people. We want highly trained doctors and nurses, the availability of the latest medicines, procedures and equipment, we want clean hospitals, we want all the billing and inconvenient stuff to be handled for us, and we want it all now. All that, and cheap too?
This is a great way to drive talented people out of medicine.
And I want a Mercedes for $500.
jodetoad on November 3, 2009 at 2:32 PM
I had dinner last night with an Australian who spends tim ein Canada and Europe.
I mentioned how I was going to lose my insurance and be forced onto the government dole if they took over the US health system.
This guy is totally leftwing, and he thinks it’s a good idea for the US to join Canada, AU, and Europe in their healthcare stupidity.
I said “But aren’t your taxes awful? I know Canada’s sales tax alone is incredible! I don’t want to live in that kindof economy because my standard of living will go down”
He says “Yes the taxes are higher, but European standard of living is much better than US”
WITH A STRAIGHT FACE!!!
I almost laughed in his face!! YEAH RIGHT! I’ve been to Europe! The real estate is unattainable, nobody can afford a car (but then there’s state-run metros), and expendable income is way lower it seems to me.
People on the left not only live in a fantasy, they are total snobs. They really think Europe is so much better than the US.
CambellBrown on November 3, 2009 at 2:35 PM
Of course.
Because I didn’t ask to be sick.
And I have to pay my cable bill, for a luxury car, designer clothes, a blackberry, a 65″ plasma TV, etc.
Who can afford health care after they pay for the necessities of life?
NoDonkey on November 3, 2009 at 2:36 PM
LOL
jaime on November 3, 2009 at 2:39 PM
She’s Dutch. Love the accent!(e.g. Unifersal) Along with Geert Wilders, two of the most brilliant NL politicians these days.
There is some hope for Europe.
mile66 on November 3, 2009 at 2:40 PM
succinct + accurate = Bullseye!
hoakie on November 3, 2009 at 2:40 PM
she is absolutely correct. found 3 ,ups while doing self exam 6 months ago, my mammogram is not until May of 2010. I waited over a year for an MRI finally got one when I was rushed into emergency with encephalitis and had to have a spinal tap too.
Am Amerrican living in Europe here. You don’t think that can of soup really costs 2.59euros do you?
pabo on November 3, 2009 at 2:43 PM
Hey…she winked! Who else do we know that winks?
crazywater on November 3, 2009 at 3:04 PM
Unfortunately, the libs in this county suffer from low esteem and view Europeans as UberIntelligent.
GarandFan on November 3, 2009 at 3:04 PM
I lived in Italy for four years and, yes, health care in Europe does suck. Going into a hospital in Italy is like stepping into a 1960s Dr. Kildare set. They are antiquated, not only in their facilities but in how they treat their patients. BTW, has anyone else taken a look at European death rates? I just checked the death rates as listed by the CIA factbook listed here:
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/peo_dea_rat-people-death-rate
It looks to me like European annual death rates are all higher the the US’s. The US rate is 8.27 deaths per 1000. The wonderful socialist paradise of Sweden has an annual death rate of 10.24 deaths/1000! That’s amazing to me. Just consider if the US had the same rate as France (whose health care is rate #1 by the WHO BTW)at 8.48 deaths/1000. That would come out to about an extra 70,000 deaths per year. Why do Democrats want so many Americans to die? Why, Alan Grayson? Why?
WarEagle01 on November 3, 2009 at 3:11 PM
Oooooh I know, I know!!! Remember Obama winked at the young lady at his town hall? She got all giddy, and well…..stupid over it, and said in a groupie sort of way….”he winked at me” *giggle* *giggle*
capejasmine on November 3, 2009 at 3:31 PM
Funny how a Dutch accent sounds like a New York accent.
Afterall, they used to call the place New Amsterdam.
There are some real good Dutch and Danish conservatives.
That’s because they see there nations drifting away in a slow motion Blizkrieg of Islamazation.
RobCon on November 3, 2009 at 3:56 PM
She is like a conservative Lara Logan. I’m in luv.
RobCon on November 3, 2009 at 3:58 PM
they dress funny in europe
tlynch001 on November 3, 2009 at 10:52 PM
Smart, sexy, and a cool accent. What’s not to like?
UltimateBob on November 3, 2009 at 11:59 PM
I agree. And I’m sure they think the same thing about us.
UltimateBob on November 4, 2009 at 12:00 AM
lexhamfox: do you understand the cause of everything you have mentioned?
“What a load of crap. The system is way too expensive and the results are poor compared to just about any other industrialized country… Truth is, our system’s costs are undermining our competitiveness.”
The problem is not quality or quantity. The problem, as you clearly point out as the only issue, is cost. And why do we have the costs that we have? Because of government intervention, mandates, and regulation at federal and state levels. The truth of the matter is that we haven’t had free markets in the health industry since the 1940′s and with each decade more regulations were put in place. The point of the video is correct: get the government out of that industry and let, cut the middle man, and let the market balance the costs out.
ptcamn on November 4, 2009 at 5:29 AM
More hard info in a few minutes, making the most cogent points on this problem, than all of Obama’s fluffy speeches rolled into one.
Middlemen are a main moocher’s method to siphon off money invisibly.
Cut these paperwork and redtape leeches- set between consumer and provider -and that alone will be a good start at lowering costs.
Then tort reform, transportability, and across state lines insurance sales.
(Was that a Palin wink there at the very end from Elina van den Broek?
Goed zo!)
profitsbeard on November 4, 2009 at 10:29 AM