Why do you believe that their medical systems are so far superior to ours? I have spent time in Canada and I can say that for individual patients there are some serious flaws in the Canadian health care system. A big part of which is the small profit margins for doctors/hospitals who become deinsentivized to invest in the latest technology or to have ample machines.
Why do I believe their system is so much better? Because for the vast majority of people, it simply is. Comparing
only to those US residents with the very best insurance, it may not be -- though I've seen studies showing that even for those Americans, most 'socialist' systems are better. But for the sake of argument, let's concede that at its very best, for well-insured Americans with diseases that require the highest tech. care, American healthcare is the best in the world.
But on average - NOT so good. Health crises are, by a wide margin, the number one cause of personal bankruptcies in the US. I would go as far as to say that no American under the age of 65 (Medicare) who does not own a major corporation (and thus cannot be fired) can have true financial security because we are all are vulnerable to enormous medical bills that, without employer-provided health insurance, could wipe out virtually anyone. You lose your job? You lost your health coverage. Over 50? - Good luck finding employment / insurance. Got a pre-existing condition? Something as mundane as high blood pressure or cholesterol can prevent you from even buying decent coverage. (Don't even get me started on individual policies.)
I'm not saying the Canadian system is without flaws. Just as no law can apply to every situation well, no system is without systemic flaws. Canada's medical system has some. Australia's has some. Japan's has some. Ours has many, deep, pervasive flaws.
I've also spent time in Canada and had an unexpected encounter with their medical system. It worked beautifully, efficiently, and inexpensively. What would have been a disaster in the U.S. was a minor inconvenience in Canada. Did it matter that the X-ray machine used to provide care was not the latest technology? Not in the slightest - it was certainly adequate to the task. Was it relevant that the hospital had fewer X-ray machines than its US counterpart might have? Not to me. The 5 hours saved waiting in the ER more than made up for an extra 5 minute wait for an X-ray.
A close family member lives in Australia. In addition to their national health system, which provides necessary and preventative care, people with the means to do so can purchase private supplemental care policies. Those policies get them 'better' hospitals, shorter wait times, single rooms, 'name brand' drugs instead of generic. There are plenty of physicians, and they make good money. But everybody gets the basic care they need.
We would certainly need to do something to keep our advanced research going -- IMO, that's the best thing about U.S. health care. But that challenge is not insurmountable. After all, Switzerland has big pharmaceutical companies
AND a 'socialist' healthcare system. Other countries do too.
