What's the point of socialized medicine if has to make taxes more regressive?

[Hayabusa Rider]

I'm sure that the British (and Canadian and French, etc.) system is not perfect and that there is still greed and corruption (as you have with any government or private corporation). However, I have yet to hear of the majority of Brits or even millions of Brits saying that they would prefer the American system. I suspect that the problems the British have with their system pales in comparison to the magnitude of the problems with the American system.

Actually the problems with the British system are very significant. The fundamental problem is that the bureaucracy would increase. Imagine a health care system as responsive as the IRS. Imagine what one here would look like, cobbled together by politicians who are ignorant of what is needed, who respond not with knowledgeable action but political infighting. There's the theoretical system, and the one we would get. Medicine by regulation is a frightening thing, and already there's people who are fed up with the amount of regulations we have to comply with that are paperwork exercises with no benefit, and leaving health care. I've seen everyday common sense tasks become hoops to jump through. Practices are having to cut care to comply and there has never been something which has actually lessened that burden.

 

[Timorous]

Actually the problems with the British system are very significant. The fundamental problem is that the bureaucracy would increase. Imagine a health care system as responsive as the IRS. Imagine what one here would look like, cobbled together by politicians who are ignorant of what is needed, who respond not with knowledgeable action but political infighting. There's the theoretical system, and the one we would get. Medicine by regulation is a frightening thing, and already there's people who are fed up with the amount of regulations we have to comply with that are paperwork exercises with no benefit, and leaving health care. I've seen everyday common sense tasks become hoops to jump through. Practices are having to cut care to comply and there has never been something which has actually lessened that burden.

The problems in the British system are either human error related which can happen anywhere or are a result of political meddling and the law of unintended consequences. When those issues come up though it is in the interest of the sitting government to fix them because it can hamper their chances of re-election of they don't do anything about it. When you compare horror stories in the British system to horror stories in the US system I know which one I trust more.

The problem with the US system as I see it is the conflict of interest that exists between the needs of the insurance company and the needs of the customer. The insurance company needs to minimise payments and maximise profit and the customer needs whatever ailment they have fixed at whatever cost. The current solution to that conflict of interest is extra regulation. All that does is increase the average cost of insurance, which is exasperated by the silly haggling game that hospitals and insurance companies play with each other over the cost of procedures.

That does not mean single payer is the best way to go but it does mean a solution to that base conflict of interest needs to be resolved. If you can find a system where the needs of the customer are in line with the needs of the provider then you have a good starting point.

 

[nickbits]

Single payer is only good for poor and lazy people.

I much prefer the US system I have now than what I had when I lived on Canada.