Misguided Quest for Universal Healthcare-NYtimes article review

We acknowledge that America’s healthcare system is dysfunctional and is need of reform. However, the answer is not to simply make it universal because the costs would be too high on the citizens. It should be made more affordable and easier to obtain.
Many attempts have been made to do this task. In the article “The Misguided Quest for Universal Healthcare”, he states “The practical case is that uninsured people raise premiums for everyone else. But such cost shifting raises premiums by 1.7 percent at most, according to a 2008 study published in the journal Health Affairs. Reforms that increase the number of people with health insurance, while stopping short of universal coverage, would presumably make that small percentage even smaller.”This describes how costs would be too great. A factor that is not mentioned however is the mere size in population. I will compare the population size to France because it was mentioned in Micheal Moore’s “Sicko” and remains a popular comparison. The population in France, according to the Encyclopedia Britannica is an estimated 61 million. The population in America is an estimated 305 million people. The countries do not compare in size of population.
Socialism can clearly work better in a smaller country such as France. America is well over that population and harder to regulate. The systems are completely different. France doesn’t tell you that your taxed nearly 2-3 times more than you are in the United States.
The article continues to say “There is no evidence that a dollar spent on universal coverage will save more lives than a dollar spent on clinics, or reducing medical errors, or nutrition, or fighting poverty, or even improving education. And if universal coverage generally reduces the quality of care or retards medical innovation, it could end up being bad for everyone, including the poor.” This clearly shows how misguided many of people’s perspective is on this issue. Micheal Moore, who has shed light on the situation, has managed to confuse the public. His presentation is very convincing however very misleading. Those who saw it for the first time were exposed to situations in a very simplified format which is clearly not the case.
There is discussion of a free market healthcare option. This would lower the costs by not being required or regulated by the government and it would force people to buy their own insurance. Even though there are many new solutions coming out to help the people. The writer simply puts the American psyche in the simplest of words on how they really would deal with this situation. He says,” Some people, of course, would still choose to go without it. But that would be their call, as it should be in a free country.”