|
|
|
|
|
|
by cwaniak2
4436 days ago
|
|
|
The point is that the Heathcare system is there to take care of your health and not finances. Who cares you are bankrupt if you will be still alive? I never could understand why socialists are so crazy about healthcare being cheap and not about it being effective. So you'd like yo have cancer treated next year and be in good financial situation or have first chemo tomorrow and be bankrupt. Because you know, you can't have both. |
|
|
Lots of people -- particularly people who have other people depending on their resources for healthcare and other essentials -- which is why in addition to the cost of healthcare bankrupting people, it also discourages them from choosing timely (and more cost effective, though still expensive) interventions in many cases (because they gamble that maybe it will resolve on its own and not require the expensive intervention). Which results in later, more expensive, less effective interventions -- which takes care of both health and finances poorly, resulting in not only some people being bankrupt by high costs, but other people (sometimes the same people) being dead (and even more, alive but worse off than they would have been with earlier, cheaper intervention) because of the discouraging effects of the high costs.
> I never could understand why socialists are so crazy about healthcare being cheap and not about it being effective.
People interested in socialized medicine are generally concerned with it being accessible, "cheap" is seen as desirable as a means to that end.