Well Canadian healthcare is universal and you're getting the care you need without going bankrupt so.....
Also, America is currently the only first world country without universal healthcare, and all the other countries aren't in nearly as much medical debt as the US
Isn't there far far more people in the US than most other first world countries? Just because it works for other countries doesn't mean it would work for all.
There are also more people working in the US than most other first world countries and the US is also richer than other first world countries. Maybe it's time to stop making excuses.
Maybe a for profit health care and pharmacology system makes as much sense as a for profit police or fire department. At the same time though, the government has shown time and time again an inability to administer social welfare effectively even on a much smaller scale. People complain about the state run educational system, now imagine facing the same challenges of long waits, over crowding, under funding, poor quality and more, while you are sick, scared, in pain, or dying. Yes- our healthcare system sucks, and it should be any decent persons goal to create a world where no one is hungry, cold, or sick because they can't pay. But where reality and philosophy meet we need a better answer than "give it away for free, let someone else pay for it though." Who foots the bill, and how do we make that fair?
I hate the scaling argument. If it works for 30 mil people, the same system will work for 300 mil. It's just linear scaling; if anything it will be slightly cheaper for 300 mil because overhead doesn't scale the same. The real issue with implementing it in the US is getting 50 states to agree.
@guest_ It will never be fair... some people will die of natural causes and never need healthcare. Some people will have a work accident that sends a nail through their spinal column, some will develop leukemia. It's about the collective health of our society.
Some people swim at public pools more than others. The same percent of your taxes are going to those public pools as the next guy, unless you have an effective zero tax rate or are in the negative.
Rhetorical question at the end. Life isn't fair, and fair is relative. The big idea is that since "fair" is an illusory concept- how does one define it, and then what way does one want to force others into living by their concept of fair? As for pools and what have you, yes. Your taxes pay into things you may not use, but we live in a society where people consistently complain of the tax rate and vote down raises, tax funds are mismanaged, and public programs like pools, schools, roads, etc are underfunded as is. So to institute universal health care, who becomes responsible for that bill, how do we force them to pay, how do we determine who pays what share? How do we ensure high quality care is still being provided to people after the change? What existing programs do we rob of funding to administer and pay for this? Many questions, few answers, and of those few answers many disagreements.
Probably Canadian healthcare.
Also, America is currently the only first world country without universal healthcare, and all the other countries aren't in nearly as much medical debt as the US
Some people swim at public pools more than others. The same percent of your taxes are going to those public pools as the next guy, unless you have an effective zero tax rate or are in the negative.