Peter Singer, yes that Peter Singer, starts from a reasonable premise: “Health care is a scarce resource, and all scarce resources are rationed in one way or another.” But unlike Michael Tanner, Singer does not ask who should ration care and plows straight into a defense of government rationing of care.
Singer cheerfully notes: “NICE [Britain’s National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence] had set a general limit of ?30,000, or about $49,000, on the cost of extending life for a year.” Anything that costs more than the equivalent of $49,000 for a year of life isn’t worth the government’s money, sorry grandma.
So government taking over health care is a great way to save money for the nation, it just has the unfortunate but (ahem) necessary side effect that government-funded agencies will decide whether you get treatment. He has at least one supporter in North Carolina.
