I'm surprised no one has pointed this out before, but the US is hardly free of socialism as you define it. Ever heard of public education? 🙄
Yes, I've heard of it. Point? We're talking about healthcare here, not public education.
Medicare and medicaid would also fall under your definition. Are you suggesting that babies/children of the poor/seniors be denied - flat out denied - heathcare? I don't want to live in a country that is that cruel, do you?
Oh yes, as a capitalist, I'm just itching to see everyone denied who doesn't pay cash.
Give me a break. Liberals, such as yourself, have such a hard time seeing that this isn't a zero sum game, that capitalists are actually providing BETTER care for patients and that, in fact, there are alternatives to the current system which don't include an increase in government.
Of course, we can't stop the system overnight, so there would have to be a proper weaning, but seriously, you think the government and it's massive bureaucracy provides better for the people than the free market and the people themselves? The free market always wins in that fight.
Do you really think it's fair that Family Docs are barely making 100k/yr with 7 years of graduate education; that they're limited to 10-15m visits per patient? What happens when they start refusing medicare/medicaid patients because reimbursements continue to decline? If you think the ED is overrun now, I'd hate to see it then.
What is this I hear about Family Docs salaries? First off, regarding "fair". There is no "fair" in medical salaries. Why? The government regulates them through massive bureaucracy and inane billing rules, mostly tied to medicare.
Family docs taking medicare is a HUGE problem, because with the little they are reimbursed, they have to increase volume just to pay the bills, and by doing so, drastically reduce the QUALITY of each visit. In the end, this hurts patients. That's your beautiful government doing it, and doing it more and more each year.
There are solutions to this. Take cash. Reduce overhead. Reduce government bureaucracy. Get the government out of what should be a PRIVATE economic function, and we will all be the better.
You do this, and increase access to urgent care centers which are rapid, cheap, and efficient, and you'll see a quick pressure release off the ED's, not to mention an overall decrease in costs overall.
I'm sorry but the numbers just don't bear this out. Go do some reading at the WHO. Regardless of their wait times, people in developed nations with universal coverage live longer than we do. People really aren't dropping dead in the UK waiting for CABG, tumor resections, etc anymore than they are in the States from what I've been able to find. They may wait longer - or they may not - but the wait is not affecting outcomes.
Yes, the WHO forgets to factor things in such as abortion rates in other countries, how the US spends money on people who would never get it in other countries, and, oh yeah, the fact that it is WRONG for the government to continue to grow and feed on PRIVATE industries.
Liberals and Conservatives differ on this point: Liberals see the government as the solution, Conservatives see the government as a problem. You guys want to see it grow, we want to see it shrink: ALOT.
In the end, we both want what is best for the patient. Capitalism and patient care go together to provide what is best for the system, and it's best for liberals to take note that "money", "capitalism", "less government" are not dirty phrases when associated with healthcare.
Follow me here, and this is important, Competition for profits among insurance companies means DENYING CARE TO PATIENTS! How do you think they make their money?
Reduce regulations, allow people to take more control of their healthcare through HSA's, and tell the crappy insurance companies to piss off through free market solutions.
How? Enough people get weaned off the govt and insurance tits, doctors will have greater flexibility when deciding what to accept or not. Oh, and setting prices based on MEDICARE is what insurance companies do, just another problem with government involvement.
Aren't we supposed to be the greatest country on Earth? Isn't it reasonable to think that the answer to several lifestyle issues might be more access to healthcare (by removing prohibitive costs) rather than less? Why shouldn't we be the example to the world, covering all our citizens because we have the capability and because it's the right thing to do?
We do live in the greatest country on Earth. Greatest country in the history of Earth. In Capitalism, government bureaucracy lends more to prohibitive costs than anything else, and by increasing government, we'll see a massive rise in costs. They are simply less efficient than the free market.
We are an example to the world: We have the best care, the best country, and the most GIVING country of ANY country in the entire world.
The right thing to do is to increase access , quality, and delivery of healthcare. The wrong way to do it is by increasing the government involvement and size within our healthcare system.