[ergothus]

> Whatever you say on this does not line up with reality.

This sounds like you refuse to consider that you could be wrong. Is there evidence that would convince you, or will you simply decide any evidence is wrong and find a new justification?

I could be wrong (feel free to prove me so! ;) ) and there is nothing wrong with being convicable-but-unconvinced (as I currently am about the superiority of the US healthcare system) but that is not the impression I have taken from your comment.

[18pfsmt]

Why is this a competition and quest for superiority?

The US is very different from its founding principles, priorities, and government structure. Comparing on just the basis of healthcare costs reduces these complex differences to simple sound bytes and obliterates any nuance.

This is not healthy for discussion.

[ergothus]

You are correct that there are cases where the nuances make it impossible to have one be "superior" to another, and I'm not arguing otherwise.

That does not mean that some systems can't be objectively worse than a collection of others. I also never brought up costs - healthcare outcomes matter, because...health.

I never made it a quest for superiority - I insisted that everyone participating in a discussion should be in a place where they CAN be convinced of some points - arguing from a place of facts, not unshakeable emotion.

To do otherwise is unhealthy for discussion.