John: You shouldn't complain, it is the nature of the economic system your government employs. Be thankful they don't follow the Constitution which stipulates they have the power to tax to pay the debts of the government. By careful manipulation of the tax code, it is the working stiffs in the middle of the income stream who would be paying for all this unconstitutional government charity. Instead, they just print more money and give it to the banks to distribute through loans that are usurious.
Single payor like Canada? Where gas taxes make it over a dollar a gallon more? $1.254 this past weekend per litre, times 3.785 litres in a gallon = $4.746 per gallon, times exchange rate this weekend of .81 = $3.84 a gallon American dollars...now add in massive lodging, restaurant and general sales taxes...this is what socialized medicine and big government do - they spend
You're question is incorrect, since it ignores that providing universal service by definition is inefficient.
Take the Post Office, for example. It MUST provide service to any and everyone that asks for it, no matter how much burden it places on the system. But UPS can refuse to deliver packages to customers so far off the normal route that they are unprofitable. UPS pays the Post Office to deliver them.
Universal health care/insurance is no different. Yet somehow Medicare functions.
Universal service CAN be efficient. It would just cost more for those "so far off the normal route", which is the cost of living there. Why should others have to subsidize your choice? That's what single-payer is, along with the government control.
I live very far off, and have NEVER had a UPS package delivered by USPS. It's UPS that delivers, USPS refuses to do so!
And, of course, control means "cost control"... which means your expensive procedure isn't covered, unless there is some political benefit.
Everyone wants insurance to cost $50 per month ( or less) and expects to get at Least $200 per month in benefits and wonders why it won't work.
I can't stand the LIES.
All over I hear "repealing ACA will make your premiums go up!"
NO, that's what ACA *did*... premiums up five fold or more. Do I get the same coverage? OF COURSE NOT! My deductible is now ten times what it was!
But a double down on the lies is all that arrives in response... plus attempts to make me feel guilty.
Pretending to care while implementing a lie doesn't make you a good person. It makes you a hypocrite.
@Toolsmith: "All over I hear "repealing ACA will make your premiums go up!""
Repeal or no repeal, your premiums are going up no matter what.
Though at this point it's moot, the repeal is pretty much dead.
Fact. America runs Medicare well. Medicare for all.
it works Robert. You're too much of an idiot to comprehend that.
its people like you that i will be voting against the merger. I don't want you wrecking Auburn.
It is bleeding dollars, and it is not a "closed system". It shifts a large portion of patient costs to other sources.
A hospital/health care provider that ONLY dealt with Medicare patients and had to survive ONLY on Medicare reimbursements could not and would not survive. At least under current care standards and rules of operation.
Yeah I'm with Melvin on this one... the government's track record of managing health care (both here, and in the UK - can't speak to Canada, maybe someone with Canadian expertise can chime in here) is pretty crappy at best.
I'll admit, I did enjoy going to the hospital in London for my daughter (who had a rash) and getting immediate and free attention. But if you take a look at the entire system, it's very difficult to select which procedures/medicines are covered because saying, "we won't cover X" is potentially killing specific people.
I would much rather have the government supply subsidies for the poor who buy into a privately, for-profit health care system than have the government the whole thing.
(Of course that fails when the government hates poor people and cuts their subsidies...)
The underlying problem is that no-one is attacking the fundamental cost model for health care in this country. There are numerous issues identified and needing remedy, but it's not nearly as politically rewarding as giving "free health care" away to the masses.
Some brave doctors are opting out of the system and opening Direct Patient Care practices, including some in this state. You might look into it and consider it an innovative way to restructure the basics at far lower cost, and without government involvement.
Good thing no one is sick or dying due to lack of adequate healthcare or medications here in the wealthiest country in the history of the world.
Finally...the solution to the toughest nut society has ever faced.