By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Goatseye said:
palou said:

It is involved in all the wrong places.

 

Republicans prevent the national program from developping further into something beneficial, and democrats refuse to give up on a dysfunctional system.

 

Both convinced that more involvment is necessarily going to make things worse/better, respectively.

 

 

Making the government the sole client in healthcare helps regulate a supply/demand curve which is generally moment to moment heavily skewed towards the producer.

 

Instead, the US decided to force everyone to buy their insurance privately, which does the exact contrary.

Obamacare was not really dysfunctional.

It had issues because it was sabotaged by Republicans from 2012 until 2017 and still managed to slash filings for bankrupcy by 50% (which were overwhelmingly by medical bills). http://time.com/money/4765443/obamacare-bankruptcy-decline/

It could've saved US $2.6 trillion if it remained the same as of 2016 and we could've saved more if it was backed by everyone. http://fortune.com/2016/06/21/us-health-care-costs/

Remember that most red states refused to expand Medicaid. A political act no matter what people say.

It does, however, miss the biggest advantages of a governemental healthcare system.



Bet with PeH: 

I win if Arms sells over 700 000 units worldwide by the end of 2017.

Bet with WagnerPaiva:

 

I win if Emmanuel Macron wins the french presidential election May 7th 2017.