Aeolus451 said:
MDMAlliance said:
I feel like you don't really understand it. People like arguing against universal health care (or insurance or whatever else you want to brand it) by saying it "isn't free" and phrase it like someone else is paying for others. What you don't understand is that's how ANY insurance works. Insurance isn't covering the amount you put in, necessarily. The reason it works is because not everyone is going to need it. So actually it IS better if everyone conformed to it, because insurance is about managing risk. The more people who participate, the cheaper it will be per person. Having insurance doesn't increase the number of people who NEED medical attention. It may increase the number of people who go, which can in turn mean more people coming up with less medical issues in the future.
So the last sentence you put there doesn't apply in this case.
|
Oh yes it does. I was talking about countries. If someone has a rare illness or an illness that's expensive to treat, you're put on a waiting list aka thrown under the bus because the needs of the many outweigh the few. In the US, you can pay to get treated. In other places, you're on a waiting list. If someone wants to get treatment, they can fly to somewhere like the US for it. That's why its better if some countries don't use universal healthcare. Just keep the US out of that.
|
That's a severe oversimplification of the issue. There are priorities on who gets treated. Long waiting times still exist in the USA. People will die from waiting here or simply not ever getting treated due to not being able to pay for it. You still don't seem to understand the issue that well if you think that universal coverage means that more people will die.
