Public health insurance is the most essential element of social life

There is much debate about the sort of insurance proposals which will be required within the new health system currently being negotiated in Congress. President Obama has just begin in support of a public health plan, which is opposed by private insurers who say that they might not compete with a public health plan that did not need to make a profit. Supporters of the general public plan proposal correctly say that it might give people more choices and make more competition. Opponents argue that non-public health plans would leave of business, leaving only a completely government-run health care system.

Of course all sides are exaggerating and taking over extreme positions. they're going to beat time compromise and hopefully reach some sort of agreement. The sad part is that at the present they do not seem to be thinking of the person at the middle of all this - the patient. it's widely acknowledged that health care costs far an excessive amount of during this country, while at an equivalent time a minimum of 47 million Americans are uninsured. So, from a patients perspective, if you are doing have insurance , you're paying way an excessive amount of for it, and getting poor value, and if you do not have it, then you only still suffer. What a dreadful choice. What an indictment of America.

Where can Congress begin to compromise, and why is it that Republicans especially , believe that public health plans are likely to be so dreadful. what's the evidence for this belief beyond their own philosophical ideas. they frequently mention the supposed ogre of "socialized medicine" whenever public plans are discussed, but there's no evidence whatsoever that countries with more federal control over their health systems, 

As a physician who has lived and worked within the USA, Australia and Britain, and who has an interest in how health services are organized, i feel America could move forward during a relatively simple way as long as we always keep the patient at the middle of any health system we plan. it's essential that we don't design a health system primarily to guard profit levels for a few or all of the varied constituents, whether or not they be providers, health insurers or pharmaceutical companies. we've the chance of picking the simplest parts of other health systems from round the world and including these within the eventual decide to reform American health care, and that we should learn from other countries.

What should we do?

Firstly we'd like a public-private partnership philosophy. Australia may be a exemplar where this works excellently. meaning public and personal , not just private. American core business and social philosophies are supported capitalist principals so any new approach to health care must combine the necessity for profits in certain sectors of the health system, with the necessity to develop variety of core public health services which will be less likely to ever achieve a profit. Funding for care has got to involve choice and will be provided in many instances through payment for annual or episodic whole of person care,