A few weeks ago, the newspaper published my letter, asking why certain contributors to this page felt a universal health care system would not be acceptable in America. I asked this in response to the many letters that it should never be considered in America, etc. -- but no one seemed able to explain in simple terms why.
To date, two contributors have responded. The first felt that our political masters in D.C. on either political side could not administer such a program. The other was more direct -- it would be yet another give-away program like Medicare and Social Security that the writer felt was wrong. There was a more recent letter talking about a year's wait time in Canada for health service, but I won't bother to reply to that! If such small countries as Belgium, Holland and New Zealand can operate successful universal programs, I fail to see why it would be too difficult here in the most successful country in the world.
I know that the recent experience with Obamacare has not been an outstanding success. But when the presentation is too complex for even the originators to explain it, that should be no surprise. The second comment regarding Social Security, etc., did not enlighten me on the pitfalls of universal health care, and I wonder just how many readers of this page who enjoy Social Security would agree with such an analysis?
At some point in the not-too-distant future, Americans who led the world with such programs as Medicare and unemployment benefits will have a universal health care despite what a few may say today. If nothing else, it will reduce the cost of emergency services in our hospitals.
Hilton Head Island