In a nationalized medical care system, you need to find out who’s who – otherwise the device could never be able determine who’s entitled. The structure depends on what the device is established and designed, but with a nationalized medical care system you will soon be tracked by the state where you reside and the manner in which you relocate a manner that’s unseen in America. The nationalized medical care system becomes a car for population control.
In the event that you leave the United States and are no further a resident of the state, even although you are a resident and might maintain a driving license, you will need to report immediately if you wish to prevent the 13% medical care tax. I take advantage of the number 13% because it is in Sweden to exemplify the specific tax pressure that’s laid upon you for the nationalized health care.
Let’s say you moved and you do not want to cover the 13% tax for services you do not receive, can receive, or want to taken right out of the tax roll. The mammoth entity has no interest to allow you to go so easy. You find yourself being forced to reveal your private life – partner, dwellings, travel, money, and job to prove your case that you’ve the right to leave people medical care system and do not want to cover the tax. When you yourself have to find an appeal, your information is actually a element of administrative court documents which can be open and public documents. As soon as you return to the United States, you will soon be automatically enrolled again and the taxes start to pile up.
Public universal medical care has no interest in protecting your privacy. They desire their tax money and, to fight for your rights, you will need to prove that you meet the requirements to not be taxable. Because process, your private life is up for display.
The national ID-card and national population registry that includes your medical information is a base of the nationalized medical care system. You will see where this really is going – population control and capability to utilize the law and medical care access to map all of your private life in public searchable databases owned and operated by the government.
By operating an impeccable population registry that tracks where you live, who you live with, once you move and your citizen status including residency the Swedes can separate who are able to receive universal medical care from those not entitled. The Swedish authorities will know when you yourself have a Swedish social security number, with the tap of the keyboard, extra information about yourself than you can remember. The Swedish government has taken sharing of information between agencies to a fresh level. The main reason is very simple – to get medical care tax and suppress any tax evasion.
It is heavily centralized and only the central administration can change the registered information in the data. So if you wish to change your name, even the slightest change, you’ve to file a software at a national agency that processes your paperwork. This centralized population registry makes it possible to ascertain who’s who under all circumstances and it is essential for the national medical care system. Otherwise, any person could claim to be entitled.
To implement that in the United States needs a brand-new doctrine for population registry and control. In an American context that will require that each existing driving license must be voided and reapplied under stricter identification rules that will match not merely data from Internal Revenue Service, state government, municipal government, Social Security Administration, and Department of Homeland Security but almost any agency that provides services to the typical public. The reason why a fresh population registry will be needed in the United States is the fact lax rules dating back once again to the 1940s up before War on Terrorism, and stricter identification criteria following 9/11, has made a substantial percentage of personal information about individuals questionable.
If America instead neglects maintaining secure records, determining eligibility for public medical care would not be possible and the floodgates for fraud would open and rampant misuse of the device would prevail. This might eventually bring down the system.
It is financially impossible to make a universal medical care system without clearly knowing who’s entitled and not. The system needs limits of its entitlement. A cultural security number would not be enough as these numbers have already been passed out through decades to temporary residents that will not even reside in the United States or might today be out of status as illegal immigrants.
The Congress has investigated the cost of lots of the “public options”, but nevertheless we have no clear picture of the specific realm of the group that might be entitled and under which conditions. The danger is political. It is very easy for political reasons to give the entitlement. asthma and management Politicians could have trouble being firm on illegal immigrants’ entitlement, as that will put the politicians on a collision course with mainly the Hispanic community because they represent a substantial part of the illegal immigrants. So the easy sell is then that everyone that’s a legal resident alien or citizen can join according to one fee plan and then a illegal immigrants can join according to some other fee structure. That assumes that they really pay the fee which is really a wild guess because they are apt to be able to get access to service without having to state that they’re illegal immigrants.
It would work politically – but again – without an impeccable population registry and control over who’s who on a national level, this really is unlikely to succeed. The system will be predestined to fail as a result of insufficient funds. In the event that you design a method to supply the medical care needs for a population and then increase that population without any extra funds – then naturally it would result in less level of service, declined quality, and waiting lists for complex procedures. In real terms, American medical care goes from being truly a first world system to a next world system.
Thousands, if not really a million, American residents live as any other American citizen but they are still not in good standing making use of their immigration even if they’ve been here for ten or fifteen years. A common medical care system will raise issues about who’s entitled and who’s not.
The choice is for an American universal medical care system to surrender to the fact there is no order in the population registry and just provide medical care for everyone who shows up. If that is done, costs will dramatically increase at some level according to who’ll get the bill – the state government, the government, or people medical care system.
Illegal immigrants which have arrived within the last years and make-up a substantial population would create a huge pressure on a general medical care, if implemented, in states like Texas and California. If they’re given universal medical care, it would be a pure loss for the device because they mostly benefit cash. They will never be payees in to the universal medical care system because it is based on salary taxes, and they do not file taxes.
The difference is that Sweden has minimal illegal immigrants compared to the United States. The Swedes do not provide medical care services for illegal immigrants and the illegal immigrants can be arrested and deported if they require public service without good legal standing.
This firm and uniform standpoint towards illegal immigration is necessary to avoid a general medical care system from crumbling down and to steadfastly keep up a sustainable ratio between those who pay into the device and those who take advantage of it.
The working middle-income group that would be the backbone to cover into the device would not only face that their existing medical care is halved in its service value – but most likely face higher cost of medical care because they would be the ones to pick up the bill.
The universal medical care system could have maybe 60 million to 70 million “free riders” if centered on wage taxes, and maybe half if centered on fees, that will not pay anything in to the system. We know that approximately 60 million Americans pay no taxes as adults add to that the estimated 10-15 million illegal immigrants.
There’s no way that a universal medical care system can be viably implemented unless America creates a population registry that will identify the entitlements for every individual and that would need to be designed from scratch to a higher degree as we cannot rely on driver’s license data as the quality will be too low – way too many errors.
Many illegal immigrants have both social security numbers and driver’s licenses as they were issued without rigorous control of status before 9/11. The choice is that you had to show a US passport or a valid foreign passport with a natural card to have the ability to register.
Another problematic task is the amount of points of registration. If the registration is done by hospitals – and not really a federal agency – then it is highly likely that registration fraud will be rampant. It will be very easy to trespass the control of eligibility if it is registered and determined by a hospital clerk. This supports that the eligibility needs to be determined by a central administration that’s a vast access to data and information about our lives, income, and medical history. If a unitary registration at a medical care provider or hospital would guarantee you free medical care for a lifetime and there is no rigorous and audited process – then it is confirmed that corruption, bribery, and fraud will be synonymous with the system.
This calls for a substantial level of political strength to confront and set the limits for who’s entitled – and here comes the real problem – selling out medical care to get the votes of the free riders. It is apparent that the political power of the “free” medical care promise is extremely high.
A promise that will not alienate anyone as a tighter population registry would upset the Hispanic population, as lots of the illegal immigrants are Hispanics – and many Hispanics may be citizens by birth but their elderly parents are not. Would the voting power of younger Hispanics act to place pressure to give medical care to elderly which are not citizens? Yes, naturally, as every group tries to maximise its self-interest.
The danger is, even with an enhanced population registry, that the band of entitled would expand and put additional burden on the device beyond what it was designed for. That could come though political wheeling and dealing, sheer inability from an administrative standpoint to spot groups, or systematic fraud within the device itself.
