The "Free Market" Failure of the American Healthcare System

No, there’s plenty of criticism. I just don’t have the time today.

Yes, money directly taken out of every single paycheck ( I assume you get one and are aware of this…) is the equivalent of the “boogeyman” something that isn’t real.

Swing and a miss. Hey batta batta!

1 Like

Yes they did. But one question mentioned the word taxes and almost nothing scares an ignorant conservative than the word taxes.

1 Like

The better answer is that you have none that is truthful.

1 Like

Yes, but far less is spent on healthcare resulting in a net gain of money spent. But your ideology won’t let that fact be borne out as it is in direct conflict of the theorories that guide your ideology. Pesky facts…

1 Like

Since “taxes” are how single-payer healthcare must be funded, I don’t think it’s an unfair word to invoke as part of a survey regarding opinions on single-payer healthcare.

As you said above, it depends on how the question is asked. “Do you think the government should provide healthcare for all?” is a positively worded question that will likely yield a lot of positive responses. “Do you think the government should provide healthcare for all through increased taxes?” is going to draw less positive responses, but it’s a more realistic depiction of what single-payer healthcare would look like, so shouldn’t we take that as a more realistic representation of how many Americans truly support single-payer healthcare?

This is a mind-numbingly stupid statement, but anyways, let’s see how things are going over in the UK:

“Ultimately, however, politicians and the public must understand that the financial savings the NHS in England needs to make are so large, they cannot be made without substantial cuts to the provision of publicly-funded health services; and without patients making a greater financial contribution to the costs of their health care.[11,12]”

1 Like

Irony at it’s finest.

Government multiplies any system’s inherent waste by about 100 fold. There are always inefficiencies in any economic system, and particularly one as large and complex as healthcare, but to say that we should sit down and take single payer because government can run it better and cheaper is stupid on a scale I simply can’t grok.

If there is a compelling reason for universal single payer (actual single payer) healthcare it most certainly is NOT one of economic efficiency and reduced waste. OR increased patient responsiveness.

No one is saying that any country has the perfect healthcare system. You take what is working and discard what isn’t.

The overall healthcare in the U.K. is light years ahead of this God forsaken country. US Health System Ranks Last Among Eleven Countries on Measures of Access, Equity, Quality, Efficiency, and Healthy Lives

And since this country tends greatly to spend much more than any other industrialized country the only thing mind-numbing about my statement is that YOU think it’s stupid.

And no one even Sanders is advocating for socialized medicine. Where the government handles everything, like in the U.K.

You really have nothing of importance and substance to say. Just a blind allegiance to your desiccated political philosophy no matter how demonstrably laughable.

I’ve experienced UK healthcare first hand and would take the USA system anytime.

That makes one.

1 Like

I beat the odds. I lived.
The others lay quiet, and cold.
Convenient isn’t it.

1 Like

I live here, and it isn’t the Shangri-la you imagine. Free at source healthcare is a white elephant.

1 Like

YOU may not like the system in the U.K. As paying more often for worse outcomes is not something the public here wants or believes in. You may.

No one is saying that it is Shangri-La but it costs much less and with often better outcomes. So it is superior.

It isn’t cheap, it is 23% of our tax bill, rising, and underfunded at that. The important healthcare outcomes had us at second last.

1 Like

Even with higher taxes people will get a net gain as the cost of healthcare will decrease enough.

While the political momentum is behind this country joining the rest of the world you can always move to another industrialized country that offers you your beloved “free market” healthcare, where costs are very high and outcomes are below par. Oh wait, I forgot the U.S. is the only industrialized country offering such garbage. Oh well, if single-payer happens maybe they’ll leave an option for people like you who like to pay more and receive sub-par outcomes. What value!

1 Like

Nope. In your scenario everyone is covered yes? We just increased demand. Are we going to magic more doctors/hospitals/drugs out of nowhere? No. So supply stays the same. You can not increase demand and quality of care while leaving supply alone and expect costs to decrease. That is not real world.

It has already been explained to you how the “futile” care the US engages in makes our numbers look worse. We try and save our Grandmas and our Charlie Gards. Countries with rationed care don’t.

We’ve already established that nearly 2/3 of healthcare spending is already done by government, making that 100% will somehow improve care and costs eh?

I’d like to point out something else. Scale. Every country held up as an ideal by the socialized medicine crowd is far smaller the US. For example the total budget for the NHS in the UK is roughly $163 billion. Medical fraud in the US costs $272 billion. Our fraud costs more than their entire system.

3 Likes

He doesn’t and will never understand. Lord knows I’ve tried… The sheer stupidity of his statement is all the evidence you need.