[foo42]

> And this is the best country in the world, with the best system of government, because private citizens can voice their disagreement with such actions, including by refusal to participate.

On the off chance other Americans were unaware of this: Other countries are democracies too (and many are better functioning)

[andruby]

That quote was indeed off-putting to read.

> because private citizens can voice their disagreement

I'm not sure that's true anymore in the US. At least not without fearing repercussions.

[knuppar]

how cooked do you have to be to synthesize that sentence without universal healthcare and an enormous chunk of the population living paycheck to paycheck

[jaccola]

Some would say having a choice of which healthcare to pay for, the ability to choose a provider, the right to not pay for healthcare (maybe you value an extra holiday more than being able to go to a GP) is a good thing.

I'm from the UK, everyone I've met in the NHS has good intentions but the system itself means the standard of care is very poor. I have no option to go elsewhere with my £'s if a receptionist is extremely rude to me or a doctor won't listen.

Not to say the US system is perfect, just that adding even more government intervention (and associated plunder) by making healthcare universal, is perhaps not the answer.

[beefandcheese]

"I have no option to go elsewhere with my £'s if a receptionist is extremely rude to me or a doctor won't listen."

In the UK, private healthcare is very much an option if you have the £.

[jaccola]

The £'s I give to the NHS I cannot instead take to other healthcare providers.

[ruszki]

That’s not inherent of universal healthcare at all. In Austria, you can go to a different doctor if you wish.

[quietbritishjim]

It's easy, in this discussion, to get into the weeds and be distracted by details (like lots of people have by your "no option to go elsewhere with my £'s" remark).

If you want free at the point of healthcare, clearly you are better off in the UK than in the USA. If you want to pay for better care (like, well off middle class, not millions) then you're still better off in the UK than in the USA because we don't have perverse incentives for healthcare insurance, so the cost is lower even when you include the price of NHS services you aren't using. And if you're paying literal millions for healthcare then you ought to be paying for others' healthcare even if you aren't using it in principle.

Does it make logical sense that public healthcare should work better? That's irrelevant because, empirically, it does.

[duskdozer]

>Not to say the US system is perfect, just that adding even more government intervention (and associated plunder)

Uh huh. Because companies that have the explicit purpose of making as much money as possible don't "plunder". Why do you think it is that the US spends more public money per capita than many other countries and yet still has worse healthcare outcomes?

[drcongo]

> I'm from the UK [..] I have no option to go elsewhere with my £'s

One of these is an obvious, outright lie. I wonder which.

[jaccola]

They are both true. The £'s I give to the NHS I cannot instead take to other healthcare providers.

[dash2]

You're the richest country in the world (Andorra isn't real, don't @ me). And if you want universal healthcare, come and experience the joy of the NHS. I have to actually live with it.

[reeredfdfdf]

Don't you have private healthcare in the UK too, if you aren't satisfied with the NHS?

IMO universal healthcare is awesome as the final safety-net that provides critical care, no matter your financial or employment situation. Yet it doesn't need be the only option. If businesses or people with money want to pay more to get care faster from private sector, that's okay too. It's how the system works here in Finland.

[defrost]

Ditto Australia, hybrid public / private healthcare ...

* private is good for better rooms, more scenic views, personalised spa like service and near immediate access to non life essential procedures

* public keeps the majority of people alive and triages procedures, you can get overnight heart stent surgery for free if required, might have to wait a few months for non critical knee surgery.

[dash2]

Private healthcare exists in the interstices of the NHS. The gorilla in the room squishes everything else into the corners.

Safety nets would be great, but a net that arrives several days after you have already fallen to the ground is not very helpful. That is what rationing-by-queueing does. Maybe Finland is great - I believe you! Britain's system is not.

[abyssin]

This kind of patriotism is embarrassing, I don’t think I have ever seen it displayed by others than US citizens.

[noduerme]

Well, North Koreans and Iranians say it, but they have a gun to their heads.

[inemesitaffia]

UK and Germany

[xhcuvuvyc]

America's not a democracy, hell it's not even a country.

[qsort]

???

[laffOr]

Some Americans think the "democracy" vs "republic" distinction is extremely important, and that "democracy" means something like "tyranny of the majority", hence why it is good that America is not a _democracy_, but a _republic_ or a _democratic republic_.

Some other Americans (there is some overlap) also think that the US is so large and diverse that essentially its States are their own countries and the US is more like its own continent, and talking about the American _nation_ or even _country_ is meaningless. It is a union of States (though it is rare that someone argues that the US is not a country).

[qsort]

Isn't this some extreme distortion of semantics though? Going by the majority usage of those words, "democracy" and "republic" mean different but not incompatible things and the claim that America isn't a country is just baffling.

[eru]

Yeah, republic doesn't really mean much these days (in the common definition and applied to contemporary countries).

North Korea is officially a republic, but it's closer to a hereditary, absolutist monarchy in practice. The UK is officially a constitutional monarchy, but in practice not all that much would change, if they demoted the royal family.

[quietbritishjim]

I think they're making a USA vs America (continent) distinction.

[bbor]

Yeah that's a terrible note to start on -- this is just someone hoping for a pat on the head from the fascists. Not even they would truly believe something so absurd!

That whole intro is whack, really;

  There are many things that I or Anthropic or most of you would look at as mass domestic surveillance, that are legal, and it is DoW’s position that it’s their job and duty to do everything legal to protect our country, including those things.

"It's not their fault that they're evil, they're doing things that have yet to be explicitly forbidden by statute!" would be bad enough for a typical executive agency, but to say that about the US Department of Defense in March 2026 is just... brazen.