??????????

You do realise I am very much in favour of socialised healthcare, hell I've made 250+ reply threads about how great it is. Also, what stats did I make up? It was 100% opinion hence the precursor "I think"

*be nice highwaystar101, don't be mean again*

I agree that those countries are sparse with a national healthcare system. But they work more effectively because the population is often far denser in the south than the north so it is easy to offer healthcare to the masses. As opposed to Alaska where it is generally sparsely populated throughout.

Here is the population density map for scandinavia, it  works because the popualtion denisty in the scandinavian countries is pretty concentrated. Where as this not the case for the USA, where some states are dense and some are sparse. It would work better as a nationwide scheme rather than a state by state scheme... unless some sparse state were not included.

But I am in favour for national health wherever it can be implemented, I think the US would benefit.

Also, I made a point about private health being worse in these areas, not better.

Don't you live on a island with 46 other people?

I think MrBubbles has been found out.

BTW, highwaystar - would you agree that the US system needs to get it's problems fixed (overbloated system that's outrageously priced) before expanding federal healthcare to everyone?

Oh yes, the USA have a lot of hurdles to jump before thye can expand a national healthcare service to the entire population. But I think your Medicaid system seems to work very well for those that it benefits already and has overcome many hurdles already, and that is a national health system you already have. It hink if someone (smarter than me lol) could work out a better system in the USA withr egards to national healthcare then it would be worth it.

 The UK's health care system has rapidly improved over the past few years. Mild operations can usually be done within the 12-48 hours of asking for it, and done to, well, an incredibly high standard. My nan was diagnosed with cancer and she had the tumour out in three days, to give you an idea.

We do, however, have an issue with A&E, I waited for about two hours with a broken arm. Man, that killed. We also have a months-long waiting lists for organs, but I don't see how privatisation can help with that.

I'm in the UK, and yes it does. The standard of care is probably lower for the top 10% (but they go private anyway) but it does amazing things for the other 90%.

Wait times are not that long and are made shorter if you are an emergency. It's not perfect and the cost in taxation is high but having experienced the American system for 3 years too I'd definitely say ours is better.

while i may not answer a direct question about where i live right now, i have on a number of occasions said where i live. tbh, i always find it amusing when people ask me about it.

Well one issue NHS has is failed assylum people coming in for healthcare.

"A judicial review took place on 10/11 April 2008 regarding a failed asylum seeker receiving free hospital treatment. The resultant ruling in the High Court makes it possible for failed asylum seekers to be considered 'ordinarily resident' in the UK, and, consequently, entitled to free NHS hospital treatment."

Since we already have to treat illegal immigrants on the governments bill in the US.  Think what that would run.

Probably not the point he was making... but it is a good one.

Medicaid is a disaster.  Also if you made it state by state you run the risk of having a "postcode" lottery.  Better hospitals in Ohio then Michigan for example.  (though that is the case now it's problematic when state run.)

Then again that is another issue with NHS isn't it... scotlands care isn't as good as Englands.

You would think this too... but New York has one of the worst Medicaid programs in the US.  Land density is a problem... but government competency is an even bigger problem.

With only two parties and not even an extra "half" party to rig things... there is no accountability.  Since most states are pure red or pure blue... if you get in... your set.  Unless you kill someone or have an affair or cheat on your taxes.

Our government can't accomplish anything as efficently as other countries because republicans and democrats by in large don't have to do anything to keep their jobs but cling to their blind ideologies.  Even if they're failed and faulted (as both are) they'll still keep getting reelected because that's all there is.

There is no motivation except for a few people that are self motivated... and they're mostly just self motivated because they like being in power.