In a leader (editorial) in the new issue, The Economist looks at the US health care system and sees the future. And it does look more like what Europe has than the US currently has.
They do not take this step lightly; they call for incremental reform and place much more faith in the insurance/pharmeceutical/institutional world than we do.
Still, it's nice to see them take this step, however grudgingly. If they can say it, then perhaps CEO's can say it...then Republicans...then Republican politicians...(maybe?).
Here is part of this commentary that most of us would have little trouble agreeing with. A link is provided; however while some of their material is free to all, this one is behind a subscription wall.
Text after the jump......
Many Americans decry the "socialised medicine" of Canada and Europe. In fact, even if much of the administration is done privately, around 60% of America's health-care bill ends up being met by the government (thanks in part to huge tax subsidies that prop up the employer-based system). Proportionately, the American state already spends as much on health as the OECD average, and that share is set to grow as the baby-boomers run up their Medicare bills and ever more employers duck out of providing health-care coverage. America is, in effect, heading towards a version of socialised medicine by default.
Is there a better way? Even a glance around the world shows that there is no such thing as a perfect health-care system: every country treads an uneasy compromise between trying to harness market forces and using government cash to ensure some degree of equity. Health care is also the part of the public sector where market forces have had the most limited success: it is plagued by distorted incentives and information failures. To begin with, most health-care decisions are made by patients and doctors, but paid for by someone else. There is also the problem of selection: private-sector insurers may be tempted to weed out the chronically ill and the old, who account for most of the cost of health care.
In the longer term, America, like this adamantly pro-market newspaper, may have no choice other than to accept a more overtly European-style system. In such a scheme, the government would pay for a mandated insurance system, but leave the provision of care to a mix of public and private providers.
Link to the entire essay:
Handwriting on the wall