>> Most or all first world countries have some form of social net that attempts to ensure people don't go hungry. As does the US which has several programs for

>> Most or all first world countries have some form of social net that attempts to ensure people don't go hungry. As does the US which has several programs for both healthcare and food for the poor. That is not a counter to my statement, where by the government completely takes over the industry and provides the service. There is a Huge difference between a social net, and government provided. >>I don't think anyone implied that it's barbaric to charge for healthcare. That is exactly what was implied > What's barbaric is people being denied preventative care because they're unemployed or don't have hundreds of dollars to go to the doctor. Again this does not happen in the US >> Unsurprisingly, the supposed "free market" healthcare system isn't very efficient in practice. the US does not have a free market, I can not believe anyone can even claim we do with a strait face. healthcare is the most heavily regulated market there is, regulation is the antithesis of a free market. Any one attempting to make things cheaper, provide care in a way that would lower costs is quickly regulated out of the market. Government and government alone is the cause of the huge costs in health care. To proclaim government can solve the problem they created is laughable