I never said there was
I am not even going to bother reading your ridiculous wall, which is an obvious attempt at overcompensating.
You don't even know what my theory was. I never advocated for nationalized single payer. You are an intellectually dishonest idiot that is engaging in strawman fallacy.
You apparently don't understand the concept of "for profit motive". That's why our healthcare has always been a complete joke. You can complain all you want about ObamaCare. It wouldn't change the fact that healthcare system has always been unaffordable to the poor and shrinking middle class.
Let's do it.
Troll.
And about half the cost. Gop dupes!
I do understand the the concept, the issue here is that YOU don't. With profit as a motive, goods and services become inherently better and more affordable, entirely because they want money. A lot of the confusion from the left comes from the fact that they don't understand how the economy works. A business exists to fulfill a demand, and as that demand is fulfilled, and demand grows, that business grows. With the existence of competition, a a business has to satisfy or lose its customers, which causes them to provide the best product or service at the best price. That's why the private sector is better in every way at providing a service, because they have motivation to do so, and that motivation is money. The government already makes money off of the people in the form of taxes, they therefor have no reason to provide a good product at a reasonable price. You can't switch, because they become a monopoly, and even if you could, you'd still be paying for it.
I wonder what the comparison would be if your party hadn't destroyed our system in the first place.
More that I either think you're making it up, you've never experienced good healthcare, or you're easily impressed. It's also possible that you're impressed by default, so long as your overlords, the government, are in charge of something, and 'big evil business' isn't. I think you really just don't like the idea of your mortal enemy, Capitalism, thriving in any way, shape, or form.Apparently you haven't used the systems if you think they can work. History has proven that the government is totally incompetent, and common sense dictates that if a Business makes money off of you regardless of performance, and that if you have no other options, there's no incentive to work properly.I see you and other Liberals are still confused by the meaning of the word "Works".
I'm surprised you figured that out so quickly. Yes, the US Government, State Governments, and every Government in the world, are completely inept. Government has always been inept, is inept, and will always be inept. Even on the off chance one was not, the same person does not control the government permanently, at some point someone you don't like will control the government, and it'll be inept. One of the nearly infinite number of reasons the Liberal fantasy of the government controlling literally everything doesn't work. Ask Russia or Germany.
Obamacare: Before and After - Discover the NetworksHow many Canadians used to come to the US for healthcare?
You're saying it wouldn't be cheaper, but you're not providing any evidence.
The US healthcare system takes in the most amount of money of any system in the world per capita and you're telling me it wouldn't be cheaper.
How much money goes into corruption? The estimates are 3% of US GDP
https://www.hks.harvard.edu/fs/msparrow/documents--in use/Corruption in Health Care--The US Experience--TI Global Report on Corruption--2006--pp16-22.pdf
Healthcare expenditure "represents 15.3 per cent of the country’s GDP, up from 5.7 per cent in 1965, and 8.8 per cent in 1980."
"Despite the extraordinary level of spending, health care economists have traditionally paid very little attention to corruption, fraud, waste and abuse in the US health care delivery system. They do not factor it into their cost models, they say, because ‘there is no data on that’."
However what is not included in corruption are the legitimate ways of squeezing money out of the system.
Number one is insurance companies.
Do Dropped Patients Mean $$$ for Insurers?
"The nation's five largest for-profit insurers closed 2009 with a combined profit of $12.2 billion,"
Just five insurance companies had profits of $12.2 billion. In the UK this is simply not necessary. On top of the profits you have the workers who are paid, the overheads that are paid and all of it is for something completely unnecessary.
According to this, 7% of healthcare spending goes on insurance companies. Seeing as the government paid 64.3% of all healthcare, this 7% is actually far larger amount of private health insurance.
Here are other things which cost a lot, lot more.
The US spends 17.5% of GDP per year on healthcare.
United States GDP | 1960-2016 | Data | Chart | Calendar | Forecast | News
US GDP is $17,947 billion in 2015.
This means healthcare spending is $3140 billion a year.
This means healthcare insurance companies are wasting $219 billion a year on doing something that is completely unnecessary. The chart puts it at $190 billion a year.
Add up all these costs and you get $765 billion a year wasted.
Now, that's $2,550 per person per year. You have a family of four and they are, on average, paying $12,000 just for corruption in health. Woopie.
Now, UK GDP is $2.849 billion, and they spend 8.5% on healthcare, so that means they spend $2.42 billion on healthcare, which is $3,725 per person per year on healthcare. That's only slightly more than an American is paying for the cost of corruption.
How is the US not going to save money? Seriously if so much is going on corruption because of the system, then you can't lose.
I read through that, like, three times. It told me absolutely nothing. The fact is that the government shouldn't be paying for any part of healthcare in general, that makes privatized healthcare inherently better for that reason alone. If state lines were opened, it would cost even less than it did previously for the people, and hey, you wouldn't be having your money stolen by the government to pay for it for random people. On top of that, the government would raise taxes to compensate for the extra cost, and plunge further into debt. We all already know this, Liberals just don't care because they prefer not to have jobs and pay for things themselves~
No, I'm someone who has USED some of these systems, I know they can work. What do you have? Nothing. You read through it three times and still you have nothing.
You say the govt shouldn't pay. But we were talking about something else. You make silly claims, like it will be more expensive, I prove it won't be, then you say there is nothing.
Sorry, but your post is a waste of time with the usual "liberals this and liberals that" nonsense.
It WILL be more expensive, the other Nations implementing this failed system have higher taxes, faster growing debt, or both.
It's not nonsense if it's totally accurate.
What a ridiculous statement. You claim to be a 15 year old, so what's your experience exactly? You have the nerve to tell me that you know my experiences better than I know my own. Seriously, grow up.
