5 ms·

How does bankrupting the system improve quality of life for all?

Voloskaya 9y ago
You assume that having a non profitable healthcare system means bankrupting the entire system. This is false. In France, where the healthcare system is arguably one of the best in the world, it has been losing money since as long as I can remember. So what? The healthcare system looses money and the government injects money back, either directly from taxes or by some other means. I don't know a single french person that would want to get rid of this system even if that means paying less tax, because this very clearly improve the quality of life of everyone.
- conanbatt 9y ago
  Its also important to see what cannot be seen. Who bears the cost of the most expensive healthcare? And what is the effect of it? > The healthcare system looses money and the government injects money back, either directly from taxes or by some other means. The government doesnt have money. Its your money. There's no difference between the government paying it and you paying it, except the government takes a slice along the way. Government is seldom if ever efficient there. I dont think french people were happy when retirement age was increased, which was to balance the budget. And the spending per capita is amongst the highest in europe. Its not a perfect system. You are also making assumptions by result. You are saying france has great healthcare because its provided by the government, because it has great healthcare. There are no shortage of examples of countries with socialized medicine and disastrous results, so we must dig deeper to have a model we can compare.
  - fao_ 9y ago
    > There's no difference between the government paying it and you paying it, except the government takes a slice along the way. Ok, so why don't you pay for the roads in front of your house privately? Because... guess what, with more money, you can achieve more. > You are saying france has great healthcare because its provided by the government, because it has great healthcare. There are no shortage of examples of countries with socialized medicine and disastrous results, so we must dig deeper to have a model we can compare. Yes, France has bad results, and it is still better than what is available in the US. The fact that you have to find a worse model to compare to your country just means that you're already failing.
    - conanbatt 9y ago
      > Because... guess what, with more money, you can achieve more. Isn't the whole point here that healthcare in the US is spending a lot of money for the results it shows? If money is no problem then this is not a debate. > Yes, France has bad results, and it is still better than what is available in the US. The fact that you have to find a worse model to compare to your country just means that you're already failing. I dont think you got my point. The debate on socialized care in the U.S. has to compare what the U.S. would look like with it. If you compare current US with current socialized France, you will make the mistake of saying "socialized medicine is better" on that sample. Add argentina into that mix, and now socialized medicine doesn't work as well. So you need a different model to compare what is successful and what isnt on each instance.
      - Voloskaya 9y ago
        Compare any country with socialized medicine and with a GDP per capita in the same order of magnitude as the US and it's always better. France is not an outlier.
        conanbatt 9y ago
        I can compare US medicare, which is socialized health, with other gdp/per capita countries and say the same. Its still very expensive.

You assume that having a non profitable healthcare system means bankrupting the entire system. This is false. In France, where the healthcare system is arguably one of the best in the world, it has been losing money since as long as I can remember. So what? The healthcare system looses money and the government injects money back, either directly from taxes or by some other means. I don't know a single french person that would want to get rid of this system even if that means paying less tax, because this very clearly improve the quality of life of everyone.

conanbatt 9y ago
Its also important to see what cannot be seen. Who bears the cost of the most expensive healthcare? And what is the effect of it? > The healthcare system looses money and the government injects money back, either directly from taxes or by some other means. The government doesnt have money. Its your money. There's no difference between the government paying it and you paying it, except the government takes a slice along the way. Government is seldom if ever efficient there. I dont think french people were happy when retirement age was increased, which was to balance the budget. And the spending per capita is amongst the highest in europe. Its not a perfect system. You are also making assumptions by result. You are saying france has great healthcare because its provided by the government, because it has great healthcare. There are no shortage of examples of countries with socialized medicine and disastrous results, so we must dig deeper to have a model we can compare.
- fao_ 9y ago
  > There's no difference between the government paying it and you paying it, except the government takes a slice along the way. Ok, so why don't you pay for the roads in front of your house privately? Because... guess what, with more money, you can achieve more. > You are saying france has great healthcare because its provided by the government, because it has great healthcare. There are no shortage of examples of countries with socialized medicine and disastrous results, so we must dig deeper to have a model we can compare. Yes, France has bad results, and it is still better than what is available in the US. The fact that you have to find a worse model to compare to your country just means that you're already failing.
  - conanbatt 9y ago
    > Because... guess what, with more money, you can achieve more. Isn't the whole point here that healthcare in the US is spending a lot of money for the results it shows? If money is no problem then this is not a debate. > Yes, France has bad results, and it is still better than what is available in the US. The fact that you have to find a worse model to compare to your country just means that you're already failing. I dont think you got my point. The debate on socialized care in the U.S. has to compare what the U.S. would look like with it. If you compare current US with current socialized France, you will make the mistake of saying "socialized medicine is better" on that sample. Add argentina into that mix, and now socialized medicine doesn't work as well. So you need a different model to compare what is successful and what isnt on each instance.
    - Voloskaya 9y ago
      Compare any country with socialized medicine and with a GDP per capita in the same order of magnitude as the US and it's always better. France is not an outlier.
      - conanbatt 9y ago
        I can compare US medicare, which is socialized health, with other gdp/per capita countries and say the same. Its still very expensive.