Nonsense. I sell health insurance. We’ll be just fine.
2 Likes
Yes it is, for an ‘infinity good’ standard of healthcare. You don’t get that quality of healthcare now, and you won’t under universal healthcare. Nobody gets that level of health care. Even the richest person in the world, who can pay for the absolute best standard of care possible today,will still get ill and die.
Universal healthcare means everyone gets the same standard of care, regardless of income. That standard of care is likely to be somewhere around the average level of care you currently get in the US.
The only part you’re somewhat correct about is that spending on elderly patients would go up because universal healthcare would somewhat increase the average life expectancy (maybe even life the US up to par with other first world countries). I’m not sure how that’s a bad thing.
12 Likes
This gets at one of the things that I find infuriating and frustrating about healthcare in the US. My treatment eligibility seems to be determined by a doctor somewhere, paid by my insurance company, and not the doctor who’s actually seeing me for my ailment. This faceless bureaucrat determines whether my MRI, ordered by my neurologist, will be covered by my insurance company, or whether I’ll have to shell out $4K on my own.
2 Likes
Um…You do realize most other nations on the planet utilize single-payer health care systems? And the percentage of GDP other countries spend on health care is published? The cost to you will most definitely not be “infinity”. Whatever you’re paying out-of-pocket for premiums would be very likely be more than the necessary tax increase to make single-payer a reality in the US (unless you have that golden unicorn of an employer that pays all of your insurance premium). If you employ yourself, would you rather your taxes go up a couple percentage points to pay for full medical coverage, or keep shelling out $10k+ a year for insurance that doesn’t actually cover much of anything and has a deductible you can never reach without befalling some medical catastrophe?
12 Likes
I understand, although your ‘treatment eligibility’ is a financial issue related to your coverage, premiums, and so on. It is not a clinical evaluation, in principle. However, that is a fine line, often crossed, seeing as your doctor may be an overcharging fraudster and someone at the insurance co has to prevent exposure to such fraud, by making medico-financial decisions about suitability (not the same as eligibility).
I know, our hearts bleed for the insurers. /s
There are so many much better ways of achieving the same outcome.
2 Likes
Disagree.
There is no civilized country that would consider our defense expenditures anything but immoral. There is no 1st world country that would be anything but appalled by our roads, schools and most other infrastructure. Have you seen it? It’s crumbling. We are paying 1st world taxes and we have 2nd world services, goods and standard-of-living to show for it.
5 Likes
Your defence spend may be immoral. I was not commenting on its morality. It does defend you, and rather well/luxuriously (though how well may also be open to debate, I guess). Many countries’ citizens would love your level of defence capability. You may not like that your tax dollars are spent (so heavily) on it, but it IS something solid you get in return for them.
Some parts of US may look a bit like 2nd or even 3rd world countries. But on average, it fexceeds even 2nd world countries. Some of your infrastructure may be in need of investment, or even crumbling, but you have already got it. Many countries never had it. Maybe that makes them uncivilised? Many other countries’ citizens might like the chance to at least consider paying as much or as little tax as you do, and having some of that ‘crumbling’ infrastructure. I suspect we probably agree in general but I found the
suggestion a tad over-egged, that’s all.
1 Like
Given that the MSP premiums are going straight into general revenue, it was a bit of a misnomer, anyway. I am just as happy without the sleight-of-hand. Tack it into regular taxes, and be honest about it.
1 Like
I’ve posted this often, but it’s still telling. No suprise to see so many countries with universal health care towards the top and with lower costs.
(Edited to provide a modicum of additional commentary.)
10 Likes
I hate the “Three Worlds” construct. It kind of made sense when the USSR was still doing it’s thing - and at that point the 1st and 2nd Worlds were largely peers rather than a ranked order. But the 2nd World basically vanished in 1991, and since then the whole thing has been a theory in search of a reality to which it can apply itself.
2 Likes
Smallpox blanket, perchance?
Oh, there are plenty of shady dentists on the fiddle.
1 Like
Oh, did I leave out the dentists? 
That certainly wasn’t intended as an endorsement that dentists aren’t also commiting fraud. They’re included in the et cetera.
A fair proportion of my professional life has been spent dealing with arguments between dentists about whether one of them is screwing the other over, often while the NHS is pursuing one or both of them for allegedly diddling their UDAs.
UDA payments and pension scheme contributions seem to be favourite fiddles.
2 Likes
Not enough, but it could be the only thing you say from now until the heat death of the universe and it still wouldn’t be enough times
2 Likes
People also tend to forget or not know that Switzerland is a third world country, as it is not a member of NATO.
2 Likes
I have to note here that the “third world” was very much a self conscious construct on the part of some in the global south:
Makes sense.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
