01-13-2010, 07:18 PM
I think in a large part it is historical tradition. The US was founded largely on the rights of the individual and the premise that rights of the individual trump those of the collective. This basic principle, usually viewed as "selfishness" from outside, is often considered the linchpin of liberty and freedom within. There is also a touch of Puritan tradition mixed in which believes in earning what you get--and the perception that government provided services are "give-aways" and unearned. These traditions are quickly dying, so you really don't have to worry about them much longer.
You also have to remember that the US doesn't have a single health care system. We are actually a number of disparate systems. The VA system is not unlike the British NHS with 1200 government-run hospitals, Medicare is a government insurance system not unlike Canada and benefits based private insurance is similar to Switzerland (albeit without subsidies). Maybe American's don't want a one-size fits all system?
The European systems are not necessarily outgrowth of public mandate or a socialist master plan, they are more often the result of pragmatism often driven by the destruction caused in WWII. England's NHS is an outgrowth of the wartime Emergency Medical Service. The government had to supplement local services in order to meet wartime needs. The intent was to demobilize EMS at the end of the war, but the war had destroyed the status quo and the only way to provide healthcare was the tested and practical means developed under wartime conditions. No other major country has adopted the British system--not because it doesn't work, but because other countries moved to universal health care under different conditions.
Similar observations can be made about the development of the French Securite Sociale and their development of payroll-tax financed insurance post war. The United States and Switzerland escaped the wartime damage that drove health care reform elsewhere. The Swiss citizens came to rely on private insurance and similarly the US followed suit, but private insurance was provided by employers largely due to Roosevelt's post-war wage controls.
Sorry for the long monologue, but I thought a little historical perspective was in order. I don't think American's are afraid of the "European System" which is not really a single entity any way. Distrustful of Congress, yes, skeptical of their clains, yes but any fear arises from the belief a new system may bring a norming effect , and those with health plans they are happy will end up much worse off than they are now.
You also have to remember that the US doesn't have a single health care system. We are actually a number of disparate systems. The VA system is not unlike the British NHS with 1200 government-run hospitals, Medicare is a government insurance system not unlike Canada and benefits based private insurance is similar to Switzerland (albeit without subsidies). Maybe American's don't want a one-size fits all system?
The European systems are not necessarily outgrowth of public mandate or a socialist master plan, they are more often the result of pragmatism often driven by the destruction caused in WWII. England's NHS is an outgrowth of the wartime Emergency Medical Service. The government had to supplement local services in order to meet wartime needs. The intent was to demobilize EMS at the end of the war, but the war had destroyed the status quo and the only way to provide healthcare was the tested and practical means developed under wartime conditions. No other major country has adopted the British system--not because it doesn't work, but because other countries moved to universal health care under different conditions.
Similar observations can be made about the development of the French Securite Sociale and their development of payroll-tax financed insurance post war. The United States and Switzerland escaped the wartime damage that drove health care reform elsewhere. The Swiss citizens came to rely on private insurance and similarly the US followed suit, but private insurance was provided by employers largely due to Roosevelt's post-war wage controls.
Sorry for the long monologue, but I thought a little historical perspective was in order. I don't think American's are afraid of the "European System" which is not really a single entity any way. Distrustful of Congress, yes, skeptical of their clains, yes but any fear arises from the belief a new system may bring a norming effect , and those with health plans they are happy will end up much worse off than they are now.