| Nymeria said: Sounds like you don't disagree, but differ on the solution. My question is if a compromise between Switzerland and the United States system offered was the Canada system would you take it? Are the draw backs of Canada you see if applied to the US greater than the current US system's issues? |
Very few people disagree that the U.S healthcare system needs reform. The question people disagree on is what it should be reformed into.
As far as I can tell, no U.S legislator wants to incorporate the Canadian system either. The Canadian system works by their central government block-granting provincial governments. In order to earn the block grants, the provincial governments must incorporate "universal healthcare" along certain guidelines. If the U.S government were to block grant the state governments, without any strings attached I'd rather that than merely institute "medicare for all" I would be more willing to accept such legislation. No senator or congressman wants to do this though, because the majority of uninsured are in very red states, and the states probably won't cooperate. So then we have "medicare for all." Well I see some immediate problems with "medicare for all." Let's assume it can be funded through tax increases (which I am skeptical of), I am concerned that consolidating all health-care spending into the hands of the central government gives legislators too much power on what it is spent on. For example, in Britain they are still struggling to approve PrEP/Truvada, because it isn't cost effective. If my insurance company didn't pay for PrEP/Truvada, I can always choose a different insurance company that does. Consequently, most insurance companies cover PrEP/Truvada.
Republicans are already trying to get rid of abortion spending in Medicaid, and a certain segement of Republicans would probably find PrEP/Truvada cost-ineffective for reasons not related to cost. For people at a high risk of HIV this is a problem because the drug is expensive without insurance.
I'd rather have an inneffcient system where I get to decide what healthcare I receive than an efficent one where I don't.
So unfortunately, due to the political effects of having evangelicals and social conservatives in congress, I can't support a national single-payer system.
There is a tradeoff here between what you get and how much you save.
