The Great Debate
What the U.S. can learn from Aussie health care
By Alan Mascarenhas — the views expressed are his own. This article first appeared onGlobalPost
SYDNEY, Australia — Here’s a damning statistic: Australia spends 8.7 percent of its GDP on health care and covers everyone, irrespective of their employment status. The U.S., meanwhile, spends 16 percent of its GDP on health care — far more than any other industrialized country — yet 47 million of its citizens lack health insurance while millions more are underinsured.
Critics of nationalized health care paint systems such as Australia’s as anything but healthy or caring, with putrid public hospitals that offer little more certainty than a long waiting list. This is a point not lost on Australians, with the topic of hospital waiting lists a perennial hot-button topic at election time.
Obama’s troubles with healthcare
– Peter Morici is a professor at the Smith School of Business, University of Maryland School, and the former Chief Economist at the U.S. International Trade Commission. The views expressed are his own. –
Healthcare reform is in trouble, because President Obama and congressional leaders are not adequately addressing issues that trouble many Americans.
House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius caution Americans to ignore terrorist claims about death panels. Reasonable enough—unseemly critics on both the right and the left seek to stir up unwarranted hysteria.
Sebelius defends end of life counseling from physicians as a benefit families need when facing difficult treatment choices for elderly relatives. However, what worries people is such counseling in the context of government rationing.
Prof Morici is ignoring the real facts that the process is being blocked by every Republican in Washington. Also all the conservative radio hosts are daily condemning anything Obama is trying to do to help the country.
The system won’t be perfect. The businesses should get all employees into the public option. It is cheaper and easier for them to do that. The public option is necessary.
Other factors are changing the system from fee per procedure and emphasis on preventive healthcare.
End of life is an arguing point. The reality is senior face this every day. What to do-go to nursing home and suffer neglect and abuse, stay at home and get worse health,opt for some type of assisted suicide if terminally ill, and all related to finances.



Thank you for the reasoned commentary, Mr. Mascarenhas. The disagreements of many on the current plans in Congress are far-reaching & multifarious. On one point, most Americans do agree- our healthcare system needs reformation. Here is an excellent article which explains problems with our current system: http://www.john-goodman-blog.com/keeping -score/. Here, the ideas of government subsidies aren’t off the table, but the intent is to increase competition, not cause imbalances for the rich and connected.