"Same straw man argument JF brought up."
Well, discussing this issue with you is like nailing Jello to a tree. You flatly state that it won't work, if not make the situation worse. But, the fact of the matter is we pay more per capita, a lot more, for care that is no better for most people than in many other countries. It is even more if you were to adjust for the fact that there is a significant percentage of the population who has no insurance and, in general, receives little or no health care. Given the big multiplier, the US should lead across all categories, and we don't. Not even close. Even the much vaunted wait time for procedures is worse than most countries, save Canada. Who isn't that much longer than the US for most procedures.
"and introduce new ones, such as new taxes that create a tremendous drag on the economy."
If the taxes were offset by lower costs due to insurance, what is the drag? Someone pays for it. If costs are cut, then costs are cut. At worst, it would shift the costs around.
And it would avoid certain nightmare scenarios. A good friend of mine and her husband are nearing retirement. They had saved up around $500k and then she was diagnosed with breast cancer. They burned through the $50k that the insurance would pay for really quick. Burned through their savings, too. Were, in fact, reduced to asking for help at a charity. Else they would have lost their home. She is in remission and her prognosis is good. But, instead of looking at a secure retirement, they are looking at being Walmart greeters...
And they aren't career burger flippers. Both have PhDs and had good careers. |
