7 ms·
There are three things a nation needs to accept about universal health care: (1) It’s expensive (2) Everybody has to pay (3) The government’s gotta run it
by GnarfGnarf 1y ago
There are three things a nation needs to accept about universal health care:
(1) It’s expensive
(2) Everybody has to pay
(3) The government’s gotta run it
- bluGill 1y agoGovernment does not have to run it. Gokernment needs to ensure it is run well but there is no reason they have to run it.
- reactordev 1y agoOversight doesn’t work, look at the finance markets.
- vjvjvjvjghv 1y agoIt works in other countries
- bluGill 1y agoworks very well there - don't confuse imperfection for not working.
- cowcity 1y agoAmericans are perfectly conditioned to instinctively and aggressively deny all three. :(
- gruez 1y ago>The government’s gotta run it But there are plenty of countries with functioning healthcare systems that are private? The Swiss, for instance. Moreover depending on what counts as "government’s gotta run it" (paying for it? administering it? actually providing care?) you can argue that the German or even Canadian systems aren't government run, at least to some degree.
- olddustytrail 1y agoSo why don't we see Republican Americans advocating to adopt the Swiss system which provides universal coverage at a lower per capita cost?
- Loughla 1y agoBecause it's any amount of government spending for one. And for two (this one is more of my opinion than the last one) the US has a problem where we, as a culture, view poor people as somehow morally or ethically broken, which is what causes them to be poor. Therefore, we shouldn't spend money that could positively impact them, regardless of its overall benefit. I got mine, so anyone can, but as the cultural zeitgeist.
- LocalH 1y agoBecause Republican Americans tend to overwhelmingly think "government bad, private business good". Even the "small-c conservatives".
- vjvjvjvjghv 1y agoAlthough they think government is good at controlling their version of morality.
- dayjah 1y agoIf you only ever look at the way a system works at a specific point in time you only observe it at that point in time. America has had multiple attempts at solutions for healthcare over the years, each started with good intent and then waylaid by various causes to produce what we have right now. A sibling comment mentions political compromise to pass the ACA, as an example of this. Another example is that HMOs were started with inherent goodness, but got “corrupted” (in my mind) by profit seeking. To directly answer your question: a core tenet of the Republican tent is minimal government involvement in day to day lives of the citizenry. Ergo, the Swiss system won’t work because it involves a lot of bureaucracy. Republicans link bureaucracy to cost, and feel this is not an appropriate use of tax payers dollars. The holes in this political doctrine are not part of my answer here fwiw. Please no “but…” comments to that end :)
- bradleyjg 1y agoIt’s not a matter of acceptance. We can’t accept the cost of anything consistently growing at a rate faster than GDP. That’s just math, not ethics or political choice theory or anything else. Health care cost growth is going to slow one way or the another.
- reactordev 1y agoWatch what happens to the GDP if they don’t tackle the health care problem. You think it’s expensive now? Negotiating drug prices isn’t going to solve the problem. Having “health insurance” isn’t going to work when an AI decides whether your illness warrants saving you. You all need to think about what’s going to happen to you when you can’t move anymore. Will you have enough money? Triple it. Maybe 6x it. Only the rich will be able to live healthy unless you’re diligent about your own health or strike it rich in an IPO.
- toomuchtodo 1y agoBut growth is also going to slow due to demographics, and this is unavoidable. Are we going to prioritize caring for humans? Or line goes up? Because line goes up is going to hit the demographic wall eventually. https://www.mckinsey.com/mgi/our-research/dependency-and-depopulation-confronting-the-consequences-of-a-new-demographic-reality https://www.mckinsey.com/mgi/our-research/dependency-and-dep... https://www.cato.org/cato-journal/spring/summer-2018/demographics-their-implications-economy-policy https://www.cato.org/cato-journal/spring/summer-2018/demogra... https://www.cato.org/commentary/clear-eyed-look-our-demographic-future https://www.cato.org/commentary/clear-eyed-look-our-demograp... https://www.sas.upenn.edu/~jesusfv/Slides_London.pdf https://www.sas.upenn.edu/~jesusfv/Slides_London.pdf
- wredcoll 1y agoWhat part of the cost of healthcare involves providing profits for middlemen?
- fnordpiglet 1y agoIt has more to do with demand than being anything. Demand for healthcare is highly inelastic. If the price of Pokémon’s grew faster than GDP consistently we would be fine. But if the price of a necessity for life does, we will not be fine. This is why life necessities are often treated as a public responsibility. Health care is one of the few that is treated as a luxury.
- gosub100 1y agoComputers and software used to be extremely expensive about 30 years ago, yet private industry advanced the state of the art and brought the prices down. There seems to be very little talk about making medical education cheaper and more accessible. Why wouldn't it be cheaper if we had more MDs and nurses? What if we made it easier to become an MD ? The insurance system is a cartel and they are greedy. However the regulations (upheld by the government) enable it.
- throwawayqqq11 1y agoWithout relgulation, the profit seekers would remain in power and the same applies to more medical staff. The insurance system is a profit seeking institution, that functions as intended. Why dont you talk about that BURNING aspect?
- gosub100 1y agoYou didn't address a single thing I said
- Spooky23 1y agoBecause your congressman gets lots of donations from doctors and hospitals. Doctors like to drive fancy cars. In places with Catholics, you usually get the bishops advocating for the local Catholic hospital system.
- gosub100 1y agoSo government (my congressman) IS the problem! Thanks for reinforcing what Reagan said 40 years ago.
- wredcoll 1y agoSure, but what these types of people fail to understand is that the only way to solve the problem is also government. It turns out the real world is a big complicated messy place and there's rarely a simple answer like "delete government!"
- tiahura 1y agoThis isn’t about health care. Please read the article.
- i80and 1y agoElder care and memory care are under the umbrella of healthcare. That they're nonsensically broken out as a separate insurance category is intrinsically linked to the problems the article describes
- vjvjvjvjghv 1y ago(1) is not correct. The US spends more than other nation per capita on health care (3) isn't correct either. It needs to be regulated in some way. Government doesn't have to run it. I think it should be treated more like a utility
- byryan 1y agoYour first point doesn't mean that universal health care in the US would not be expensive. It definitely would, not that the USG couldn't afford it, but it wouldn't be cheap. Agree with your second point.