I live in the Nowhere, Texas (which is hyperbole that's not to be confused with the real town of Nowhere, Oklahoma) and the biggest problem around here isn't even the cost of health care, it's access. There's no hospital here! Not even a clinic in town! People here consequently just don't do preventative care, which might be helpful in preventing hospital visits, especially considering that the median age here is like 52, and they don't journey to a hospital either for what are thought to be minor emergencies even. Only for the most catastrophic events do people typically bother introducing themselves to the medical system.
That said, I remember one time when my mom had a stroke. (This was back when she was alive.) It was over an hour's drive to the nearest hospital, but of course under the circumstances there was no choice. Still, if you know how strokes work, the delay in travel time alone could've resulted in permanent damage! Thankfully though, she recovered almost fully and was hospitalized for only four days. All this for the low, low price of just $83,000 to us, since we had no insurance. Ask me how we paid it!
In the words of Austin Powers, YaY capitalism!
So when hear millionaire ass-wipes on my TV screen screeching about how much a system of socialized medicine they're under exactly no threat of experiencing might add to the federal budget deficit (while naturally championing more tax cuts for billionaires in the next breath, always)...ya know, try and imagine my sympathy. Try and imagine it. Try and imagine how much more concerned I am about the federal budget than I am about oh say my own for example.
When the government provides -- or even just otherwise guarantees -- people health insurance, more people access health care services. When more people access health care services, medical facilities survive and more clinics and hospitals get built. There is, in other words, a direct relationship between the two things: cost and access.
Last edited by Jaicee - on 30 April 2021
