A recent Letter to the Editor encouraged the government to damn the torpedoes and forge ahead with creating a National Health Insurance (NHI) Scheme.

Like the prime minister and the minister of Health, among others, he attempts to turn the discussion into an "us against them" scenario, castigating those that have concerns as begrudging health "coverage for the poor".

Implying the National Insurance Scheme was/is a great success as a reason to proceed with NHI, the writer seems to ignore successive actuarial reviews of this scheme that predicts, without dramatic changes, the fund will be insolvent in another decade or so. Not to mention a bureaucracy that is reported to absorb over 20% of the "contributions". Four times the admin costs of other similar schemes in the region.

One can't imagine the burden to Bahamians in the future as the population ages and wants access to the  funds they paid in to the scheme.

As Dr. Duane Sands noted on Jones & Co recently, promising people to expect what privately insured patients get is misleading. These expectations cannot be fulfilled as "institutional capacity" is one of the biggest problems being faced in the public health care system today.

Contributing to this, we have "14 non-clinical staff per doctor instead of the normal 5". And we have "far too many patients per nurse".

The now infamous Sanigest Report that was "leaked" to the press – note the ire a report paid for by the taxpayer released to them five months after publication raised – reportedly says 690 plus more beds are required to meet present day needs. And if there are issues with shortages of Doctors, nurses today as Sanigest reports, how will they be resolved when there are more hospitals and clinics to be staffed?

Instead of clouding the debate with red herrings like "rich doctors don't care about the poor" shouldn't legitimate questions being raised be answered?

The government and the taxpayers might also consider with, as Frédéric Bastiat put it as far back as 1848, "What Is Seen and What Is Not Seen".

"In the economic sphere an act, a habit, an institution, a law produces not only one effect, but a series of effects. Of these effects, the first alone is immediate; it appears simultaneously with its cause; it is seen. The other effects emerge only subsequently; they are not seen; we are fortunate if we foresee them." Frédéric Bastiat

The letter writer and many in the political class might wish that society ignore these truths and simply accept that, what seems a good idea is worth pursuing at any cost – if only because the government MIGHT just get it right this time.

These utopias, like National Health Insurance, sound great in principle, but a little research into these schemes in the UK and Ontario, Canada to name a couple places, should make us sit up and take notice – and not drink the elixir.

Cynical? You bet. The argument that we all just need to pay more taxes and the public health care system will be sorted out like magic just doesn't sit well.