3 ms·

> Providing cost effective healthcare is the best way to treat more people. *Providing free healthcare is the best way to treat more people. > If you make it

> Providing cost effective healthcare is the best way to treat more people. *Providing free healthcare is the best way to treat more people. > If you make it more expensive, people will get less service All countries with free healthcare also have way tighter regulation on the pharma/medical industry than say, the US, so they can't just go and rise the price of medications whenever they want. Just to be clear, I'm not saying we should throw money by the windows and not count what we are paying. We should definitely try to optimize the healthcare system so it costs as little as possible, but having a non-profitable healthcare system is not the end of the world, and is definitely better than what is currently in place in the US.

conanbatt 9y ago
> Providing free healthcare is the best way to treat more people. Outlandish claim. Venezuela has free healthcare. Argentina has free healthcare. Germany has free healthcare. And in each country, people go private when they can afford it. > All countries with free healthcare also have way tighter regulation on the pharma/medical industry than say, the US, so they can't just go and rise the price of medications whenever they want. You got cause and effect mixed up. It is regulation that makes pharma expensive in the us. It is the FDA that doesnt allow german pharma to flood the US, and that puts incredibly onerous costs to the R&D and manufacture of drugs. Thats why it is better for patients in the us to fly to other countries to buy their medication and fly back, in retail smuggling.
Voloskaya 9y ago
> Outlandish claim. Venezuela has free healthcare. Argentina has free healthcare. Germany has free healthcare. And in each country, people go private when they can afford it. Sure private medicine is often still better than the public service, so what? The point of free health care is to make sure that people with low income can get treated when they need it without getting crushed by debt. If you are rich and can afford the best private clinic in town that's good for you. But you weren't the one this system is trying to help in the first place.
- conanbatt 9y ago
  That tells you you should give money, not healthcare. Its a very different proposition!

conanbatt 9y ago

> Providing free healthcare is the best way to treat more people. Outlandish claim. Venezuela has free healthcare. Argentina has free healthcare. Germany has free healthcare. And in each country, people go private when they can afford it. > All countries with free healthcare also have way tighter regulation on the pharma/medical industry than say, the US, so they can't just go and rise the price of medications whenever they want. You got cause and effect mixed up. It is regulation that makes pharma expensive in the us. It is the FDA that doesnt allow german pharma to flood the US, and that puts incredibly onerous costs to the R&D and manufacture of drugs. Thats why it is better for patients in the us to fly to other countries to buy their medication and fly back, in retail smuggling.

Voloskaya 9y ago

> Outlandish claim. Venezuela has free healthcare. Argentina has free healthcare. Germany has free healthcare. And in each country, people go private when they can afford it. Sure private medicine is often still better than the public service, so what? The point of free health care is to make sure that people with low income can get treated when they need it without getting crushed by debt. If you are rich and can afford the best private clinic in town that's good for you. But you weren't the one this system is trying to help in the first place.

conanbatt 9y ago
That tells you you should give money, not healthcare. Its a very different proposition!