Once again, if you pay $1200 a month out of pocket for health insurance/health care, and then we switch to UHC and your out of pocket expenses go to ZERO, but you pay an extra $1100 a month in taxes to pay for UHC, are you coming out ahead or behind?
This is basic math. You can do it!
I don't pay $1,200 out of pocket. I just explained to you that I pay $550 out of pocket and that includes dental and vision. Just health is closer to $485 out of pocket and I can choose any doctor and don't have to be constrained by a Gov't body. Do you not speak English? Anything and everything run by the gov't vs. the private sector is waaaaaaaaaaaay worse. Hence capitalism works so well most of the time. Now you want me to pay almost 3x more for worse service? How is that feasible?
Here's the thing, far rightwing palookas like AzogtheDefiler won't get it, because they don't want to. Period. No matter how better the math is, how good it will be for them, they just don't want to. They are ideologically against it. They have purposed in their heart not to let one. single. solitary. fact, penetrate their brains.Jesus, man. It was an analogy to help you grasp the principle at work, you dumb fuck.
Countries with UHC pay far less per capita for health care than we do. You totally made up your "3x more" figure. It has no attachment to reality whatsoever.
You are trying to move the goalposts now.
Do the math, simpleton. IF you pay $1200 a month out of pocket for health insurance/health care, and then we switch to UHC and your out of pocket expenses go to ZERO, but you pay an extra $1100 a month in taxes to pay for UHC, are you coming out ahead or behind?
Lost case, buddy.
LMAO he made up those numbers and he is actually against a single payor system. You're so dumb Marky. Those numbers are FAR from accurate. We would need to double our taxes and healthcare would be WORSE. Everything the Gov't runs is worse than if run by a private sector.