|
> Other nations with "good health care" seem to pay their workers less, have higher taxes, have long wait times at the ER, weak militaries, etc. Something always seems to give. What is a "weak" military for you, and what does it have to do with healthcare? The UK has aircraft carriers and nuclear submarines (including 24/7 nuclear intercontinental ballistic missile patrols). Only an ignorant American (and maybe Russian) would consider that to be "weak", because they're so used to the militarised culture and massive spends that everything below blowing half the budget on tanks is "weak". As has been said many times, the US spends more public money on healthcare, per capita and as % of GDP than everyone else, and had some of the worst outcomes (infant mortality, birth mortality, life expectancy, etc.) of all the developed world. It's not a matter of how much, but how. The US system has middlemen to manage the middlemen and mind boggling prices and practices. Other systems are underfunded or with corruption here and there. Would you prefer to wait 2 months to see a non-urgent specialist doctor for "free" or have it in a few days, but billed $60k hoping your insurance covers it? I know that most people prefer not being bankrupt over speedy non-urgent treatment. And US nurses are still paid shit for terrible working conditions, so it's not like it's them getting the extra money, it's mostly at middlemen and to a lesser extent doctors. The solution to the problems exhibited in systems such as the NHS are more funding and focus (e.g. helping more students get to doctor/nurse positions to ease the burden). |