It's even funnier/darker when you realize that conservatives and neoliberals have been trying to defund and destroy universal healthcare for multiple decades in every single country.
It's so evidently successful to the average citizen that decades of big money propaganda focused on it's destruction has failed.
Several conservative governments in Australia have considered ditching it, but they also wanted to get reelected. All the non-conservative politicians had to do was point at the US as an example of what would happen if it was dropped and the conservatives ditched the ditching.
They should try gerrymandering, election rigging, and voter disenfranchisement after fucking their constituency to combat that reelection problem, works a charm in the US
Thankfully we have an independent organisation that sets electoral boundaries and administers elections (the Australian Electoral Commission) as well as mandatory voting (including imprisoned populations), so that shit isn’t really a viable option here. We have our issues, to be sure, but those pillars of our democracy have been strong for a long time. It’s part of the reason why it took so damn long for a right-wing populist party to gain real significance, and they’ve not yet been properly tested electorally so we don’t even know if the polls will deliver them a decent amount of seats, let alone a chance at government.
And Universal Healthcare would be cheaper for everyone than what we have now. Because we actually do kinda have it in the dumbest, most-expensive way possible.
Hospitals don't just watch you die if you can't afford to pay. They still treat you. It just puts you into crippling debt while everyone else pays more. With Universal healthcare, everybody would pitch in like they already do, and nobody would go into debt over it.
You pay the government to fund medicare (even if you're ineligible; which is fine, except that everyone should be eligible because healthcare should be treated as a public good and made universal).
You pay your insurance company for your healthcare policy (often multiple policies because they don't offer it all-in-one: vision and hearing is a separate policy; dental is a separate policy; often mental health is a separate policy; and sometimes even primary care, emergency care, and prescriptions are all separate policies).
You pay the healthcare provider when you receive treatment, because it either isn't covered, or your claim gets denied, or you haven't reached your deductible yet, or the copay is high.
Sometimes you even have to reimburse your insurance company, despite paying for your treatment out of pocket, because your insurance company decided to say fuck you and they have more expensive lawyers than you do.
Like, just cut out the middle-man. The only reason healthcare is even as expensive as it is here is because providers know they can bill insurance out they ass anyway. A single-payer healthcare system where the government pays the bill enables the health department to negotiate reasonable price caps, and will save the taxpayers money in the end. It'll also save the treasury money, and most importantly, it'll save the patients from crippling debt.
The only one who would get screwed is the predatory insurance industry which shouldn't exist anyway. Oh and the privately-owned, for-profit healthcare model. The actual medical personnel will be fine though. Arguably better off, because it gets greedy investor decisions out of their human resources departments.
At the core, MAGA and similar high-control groups reject universal systems that reduce suffering, like healthcare, paid leave and climate action, because they require shared responsibility, which conflicts with their hyper-individualist, anti-collectivist worldview. Instead, they promote piecemeal, market-based solutions that prioritize corporate profits while shifting costs to individuals.
This isn’t just bad policy, it’s a deliberate choice to maintain power for a few at the expense of many. Many countries have much lower per-capita costs, better health outcomes and longer life expectancy than the US. Even red states like Arkansas and Montana expanded Medicaid and saw reduced mortality, lower medical debt and improved mental health.
These solutions work when seriously implemented, and they would work here too if enough people prioritized collective well-being over selfish ideologies masquerading as virtue. The decline in quality-of-life measures in the U.S. over the past decade reflects this failure. Doubling down will make all this worse, even though the propaganda from controlling groups will keep blaming minorities and other red herrings and many will fall for it as they do sadly. We really can break free from the indoctrination and see the truth!
Universal Healthcare are threaten everywhere, not because their are not balanced. Lobby from Insurance company made politics diminish income from healthcare and legalize private solution.
For example in France, the healthcare system covered almost everything and was balanced fo decade (1946 - 2000), thanks to a socialization of income. At first the system was own only by Trade Unions, but now half of it's leaders come from the bosses association.
In Europe, we have to fight against the US models for decades, and we have lost some of our health coverage because of the privatization. As an example among many death and suffering, this year is a record of death-born in France.
Better start making more babies if you want to keep your universal healthcare tbh. Coverage WILL worsen as the average age of a society goes up, unless you still have colonies to exploit of course.
... or to take the wealth of the bourgeoisie, or even better expropriating it and get the wealth of our industries, or welcome more refugees.
Fuck natalism and nationalism
The fucking bullshit is US imperialism. You have been bankrolling Israel for your benefit, i.e. to be able to militarily coerce the gulf states into upholding the petrodollar system. You have not been "nice and naive", you have literally been complicit in genocide for monetary gain.
This probably says 1941 because it’s when “all” retirees became automatically insured, but earlier or later would also be a good answer.
Otto von Bismarck instated a rudimentary system (German language link) covering only poorer workers and their families in 1883, but that expanded to cover everyone gradually and was then taken away from multiple groups in the 1930s and 1940s until it was reinstated for all in 1949.
In Australia. Our government's bargaining over the price of pharmaceuticals under the PBS has caused massive pressure by big US drug companies. A great many drugs have their prices capped in this country. Trump's boys have been jumping up and down threatening this and that for us to adopt a more lethal regime.
However, it was the same under Obama, so it's the US system at fault not just the present adminstration.
The Liberals did privatise Medibank, which was the predecessor to Medicare. It took 13 years of successive Labor governments to make Medicare untouchable. If, god forbid, One Nation does get up we will end up in the right column.
Also, approval for universal healthcare in the US is even higher than that when you disregard what the over-65 crowd think. You should disregard their opinions because they are the ones most against universal healthcare but are receiving universal healthcare themselves (Medicare). If you’re gonna accept free healthcare for yourself and shit on anyone else who wants it, yes I think your opinion on it shouldn’t matter.
Would be funny if he enacted a bunch of socialist policy just so he could make a one time profit, but leaving us all in a better place in the long run. Too bad his pedo buddies won’t allow it.
Not the worst plan. But even with a zero risk, easy win like that I'm pretty sure he'd still think he's getting screwed in the deal and demand the values flipped.
The NHS is rapidly enshitifying and jumping in bed with AI and Palantir. Privatising has been a Conservative wet dream for a long time. Check back soon. We might be on the list on the right.
Not directly comparable dollar to dollar, American doctors and (traveling) nurses are paid amoral amounts of money in many cases. Would still be significantly cheaper overall than the current system.
I appreciate the sentiment but let's be real about Australia's adoption of universal healthcare:
Medibank begins in 1975 after the passing of legislation by a joint sitting of Parliament on 7 August 1974. It had only a short period of operation before the Whitlam government was dismissed in what amounted to an attempted coup by the conservatives. (With some backing from a particular US Ambassador nicknamed "the coup-master" who was close to Rupert Murdoch and the Governer General.)
1976–1981: The conservative Malcolm Fraser Coalition government unwinds Medibank, scaling back universal funding and promoting private options.
1984: The Hawke government introduces the highly controversial Medicare system. It established basic health care for all Australians. It offers free-ish public hospital care, and "bulk-billing" for GPs through an income tax levy and creates a blended public system with private provider options.
1986: Edelsten pioneers the concept of 24-hour "superclinics" that offered completely bulk-billed services. Patients flock to his clinics which feature chandeliers, grand pianos, and mink-covered examination tables as his underlying business model was heavily driven by maximizing Medicare billing in a $100m overservicing scheme.
1997: Following a failed attempt to end the Medicare scheme while in opposition, the Howard government introduces the Medicare Levy Surcharge (MLS). This penalises high-income earners an extra 1.00% if they do not hold private hospital insurance. They also introduce the Lifetime Health Cover (LHC) charge which means if you're over 30 and buy private hospital cover later in life, you are charged an extra 2% for every year you were aged over 30 without cover in a scheme explicitly designed to prop up the private system.
2013: The Gillard Labor government puts a "temporary" freeze on GP rebates as a budget-saving measure. This continues under successive governments until 2022, as government rebates fail to rise with inflation or the true cost of running a clinic, GPs are increasingly forced to abandon bulk-billing and charge patients high out-of-pocket private fees effectively killing the system by proxy.
2014: The NDIS is established to create a parallel social insurance architecture for long-term disability supports are funded with a 0.5% Medicare levy increase but funding for the NDIS is instantly being outpaced by demand.
2024: Reforms by the Albanese government to curb escalating costs and tighten rules around plan budgets and provider registration cut millions from receiving NDIS funding. However they also increase the rebate to make bulk billing once again viable for GPs.
The lesson is this. There are no permanent victories.
Yes, the reality is more nuanced than this list implies. In the UK and NZ the system is being aggressively attacked with more and more private companies getting a foothold in the public system.
I'm also noticing that none started in any year starting with a 2. Not only did all those countries realize that universal healthcare is necessary, they realized it over 30 years ago. The US is so backwards.
I always notice that one thing that's rarely discussed is that there's more to it than just healthcare. Essentially, it's a way to train medical staff. Imagine if you took your car to a mechanic and they said well I've only fixed three cars in my life, wish me luck!
10 million, if true, it only a spit in the ocean. You guys really need to learn to stop blaming other countries for your continued social crisis.
The US is still the most wealthy country in the world. And it's, I believe, the only Western country in the world without universal healthcare.
You already have the cash, you just need to decide to spend it in the right way. Every dollar you spend on other countries has a hook embedded in it, just like China does. Believe me, it's not altruistic generosity.
Yeah, $10m is chump change for a country and even most states. Pretty sure that's how much it costs to repave a mile of my street nowadays. 🤣
We may have given money to other countries, but the US has also used it's influence to shape the world in it's favor to a much larger self-benefit than few million dollars.
Germany's population is ~80 million. $10 million isn't nothing, but that's $0.125 per person. We also didn't just, hand them a bag of cash and walk away whistling.
10 million dollars on the scale of Healthcare is... well about $0.30 per person in the US. Do I need a source to say we spend far more than that? The problem isn't just how much we spend, it's what we get for it, which is mostly rich Insurance companies.
The 1945 law only covered workers and their families. It took until 1999 to get full coverage based on residency. (But I also have no idea what 1974 is doing on there.)
I dug a little, and it turns out there was a 1975 law and later 1978 removed the employment requirement to receive it, this might be why, but it's off by a year haha
I vaguely remember some quote from someone, probably a high ranking Republican, saying something like they can't let us have nationalized health care because it's too popular, and they'd never be able to shut it down.
But it is heavily regulated. They must charge everyone the same for the same plan, no pre-existing conditions, no out of network bullshit. Switzerland is very capitalistic, but it is a heavily regulated capitalism. That doesn't mean that the system is perfect, but I wouldn't say it is close to the uregulated/unenforced hell that is the USA.
Okay, but how many of those countries have a right-wing political party that cuts funding every time they get political power, until the system is running nearly badly enough that they can say privatization will fix it?
A lot of countries have been and continue to erase public healthcare budgets, to the point where it barely functions.
Officially as a response to slowing economical growth... Because as usual, GDP is the only thing that matters, and of course, we just couldn't possibly tax billionaires.
The only barrier to implementing universal healthcare in the United States is the health insurance industry, the corruption it relies on, and the racism that the corrupt politicians use to turn people against their own welfare.
Country size has nothing to do with it; it's all in the lobbies.
Much of what's wrong with American healthcare could be fixed with a few pieces of federal legislation:
Any medical practitioner who deals with one health insurance provider has to deal with all of them. Likewise, all insurances have to accept bills from all licensed medical practitioners.
There are limits to how much can be billed for a certain procedure within the health insurance system.
There are limits to how much a health insurance is allowed to charge for the basic plan relative to income.
A health insurance's basic plan must cover at least a certain set of medical procedures (but is allowed to cover more). These include all regular life-saving procedures and a range of preventative ones (e.g. semiannual dental checkups).
Health insurances are not allowed to deny basic coverage due to pre-existing conditions.
Deductibles are banned.
Copays are regulated.
This gets rid of the "out of network" bullshit and basically turns the American healthcare system into an approximation of the German one. The German system is one of the most expensive in the world and generally considered to be of middling quality compared to other wealthy nations but it's half as expensive per capita as the American one; based on free enterprise (with a fuckton of regulations, which is normal for the medical sector); and wildly more effective than the American system, which doesn't even rank among other developed nations.
The only reason the USA don't have a better healthcare system is that lobbyists spend an unholy amount of money to ensure it doesn't and lawmakers are willing to do whatever the highest bidder tells them to. Size and diversity have nothing to do with it.
China has a larger population and land area than the United States and they have universal healthcare. There's nothing special about the US that makes universal healthcare more difficult to implement except the entrenched special interests that lobby the government to prevent it.
I think you're just lashing out at me because you're unable to explain why you think diversity makes it harder to implement universal healthcare, but what do I know. I haven't studied the legal system in China.
Ok, I'm not American, I'm Australian (getting that out of the way up front).
But... But, we are saturated with US culture, American social norms and politics. I could say with a large degree of confidence that an average Australian (or European) could pass a pop quiz on the United States probably better than an average American. This isn't a boast, it's a fact of life due to the relative size of our comparative social footprints.
So when I say that the US isn't one country, but many, I'm not being facetious. Your federal system consists of a bunch of little fifedoms comparable with Germany in the 18th century. On the face of it, yes, you are, of course, 'United'. In reality you guys seem fundamentally Balkanised.
Culturally, socially, religiously, and very much politically, you might as well have hard borders.
86 replies
its even funnier when you realise american taxpayers pay for israels universal healthcare
It's even funnier/darker when you realize that conservatives and neoliberals have been trying to defund and destroy universal healthcare for multiple decades in every single country.
It's so evidently successful to the average citizen that decades of big money propaganda focused on it's destruction has failed.
Several conservative governments in Australia have considered ditching it, but they also wanted to get reelected. All the non-conservative politicians had to do was point at the US as an example of what would happen if it was dropped and the conservatives ditched the ditching.
They should try gerrymandering, election rigging, and voter disenfranchisement after fucking their constituency to combat that reelection problem, works a charm in the US
Thankfully we have an independent organisation that sets electoral boundaries and administers elections (the Australian Electoral Commission) as well as mandatory voting (including imprisoned populations), so that shit isn’t really a viable option here. We have our issues, to be sure, but those pillars of our democracy have been strong for a long time. It’s part of the reason why it took so damn long for a right-wing populist party to gain real significance, and they’ve not yet been properly tested electorally so we don’t even know if the polls will deliver them a decent amount of seats, let alone a chance at government.
And Universal Healthcare would be cheaper for everyone than what we have now. Because we actually do kinda have it in the dumbest, most-expensive way possible.
Hospitals don't just watch you die if you can't afford to pay. They still treat you. It just puts you into crippling debt while everyone else pays more. With Universal healthcare, everybody would pitch in like they already do, and nobody would go into debt over it.
You pay for it multiple times in this system.
Like, just cut out the middle-man. The only reason healthcare is even as expensive as it is here is because providers know they can bill insurance out they ass anyway. A single-payer healthcare system where the government pays the bill enables the health department to negotiate reasonable price caps, and will save the taxpayers money in the end. It'll also save the treasury money, and most importantly, it'll save the patients from crippling debt.
The only one who would get screwed is the predatory insurance industry which shouldn't exist anyway. Oh and the privately-owned, for-profit healthcare model. The actual medical personnel will be fine though. Arguably better off, because it gets greedy investor decisions out of their human resources departments.
At the core, MAGA and similar high-control groups reject universal systems that reduce suffering, like healthcare, paid leave and climate action, because they require shared responsibility, which conflicts with their hyper-individualist, anti-collectivist worldview. Instead, they promote piecemeal, market-based solutions that prioritize corporate profits while shifting costs to individuals.
This isn’t just bad policy, it’s a deliberate choice to maintain power for a few at the expense of many. Many countries have much lower per-capita costs, better health outcomes and longer life expectancy than the US. Even red states like Arkansas and Montana expanded Medicaid and saw reduced mortality, lower medical debt and improved mental health.
These solutions work when seriously implemented, and they would work here too if enough people prioritized collective well-being over selfish ideologies masquerading as virtue. The decline in quality-of-life measures in the U.S. over the past decade reflects this failure. Doubling down will make all this worse, even though the propaganda from controlling groups will keep blaming minorities and other red herrings and many will fall for it as they do sadly. We really can break free from the indoctrination and see the truth!
Trauma bonding as a political movement.
Universal Healthcare are threaten everywhere, not because their are not balanced. Lobby from Insurance company made politics diminish income from healthcare and legalize private solution.
For example in France, the healthcare system covered almost everything and was balanced fo decade (1946 - 2000), thanks to a socialization of income. At first the system was own only by Trade Unions, but now half of it's leaders come from the bosses association.
In Europe, we have to fight against the US models for decades, and we have lost some of our health coverage because of the privatization. As an example among many death and suffering, this year is a record of death-born in France.
Better start making more babies if you want to keep your universal healthcare tbh. Coverage WILL worsen as the average age of a society goes up, unless you still have colonies to exploit of course.
... or to take the wealth of the bourgeoisie, or even better expropriating it and get the wealth of our industries, or welcome more refugees. Fuck natalism and nationalism
I’m worried Canada might end up being the first one.
Fuck Doug Ford
Fucking Israel only has universal healthcare because we in the US pay for it! Fucking bullshit they get it and we don't but we are paying for it.
The fucking bullshit is US imperialism. You have been bankrolling Israel for your benefit, i.e. to be able to militarily coerce the gulf states into upholding the petrodollar system. You have not been "nice and naive", you have literally been complicit in genocide for monetary gain.
Don't be mean! They have not been colonizing for their own benefit!
They all did it for Israel's benefit of course!
Source?
Fuck, man, our Nazis are not even as good as the actual Nazis.
Maybe not universal...
This probably says 1941 because it’s when “all” retirees became automatically insured, but earlier or later would also be a good answer.
Otto von Bismarck instated a rudimentary system (German language link) covering only poorer workers and their families in 1883, but that expanded to cover everyone gradually and was then taken away from multiple groups in the 1930s and 1940s until it was reinstated for all in 1949.
I am in Australia, and I can guarantee you that there are lobbyists in the capital every single day trying to have it stopped.
The US also wants it stopped.
In Australia. Our government's bargaining over the price of pharmaceuticals under the PBS has caused massive pressure by big US drug companies. A great many drugs have their prices capped in this country. Trump's boys have been jumping up and down threatening this and that for us to adopt a more lethal regime.
However, it was the same under Obama, so it's the US system at fault not just the present adminstration.
100% the liberal party loath it. John Howard had a crack at weakening it by pushing more people to private health cover with his levies.
The Liberals did privatise Medibank, which was the predecessor to Medicare. It took 13 years of successive Labor governments to make Medicare untouchable. If, god forbid, One Nation does get up we will end up in the right column.
But in America nobody wants it, support for universal healthcare is barely above 70%!
Also, approval for universal healthcare in the US is even higher than that when you disregard what the over-65 crowd think. You should disregard their opinions because they are the ones most against universal healthcare but are receiving universal healthcare themselves (Medicare). If you’re gonna accept free healthcare for yourself and shit on anyone else who wants it, yes I think your opinion on it shouldn’t matter.
NHS costs 4600$ per recipient.
Current US public spending on healthcare (Medicaid, medicare, ACA subsidies, Veteran healthcare...) is 5600$ per capita (not recipient)...
We could lower taxes and give everyone free healthcare.
Fuck it, that extra 1000$ can go straight to the president pocket if he gives us Medicare for all.
Honestly, present that to him, that's the best way to get positive change these days.
Would be funny if he enacted a bunch of socialist policy just so he could make a one time profit, but leaving us all in a better place in the long run. Too bad his pedo buddies won’t allow it.
Not the worst plan. But even with a zero risk, easy win like that I'm pretty sure he'd still think he's getting screwed in the deal and demand the values flipped.
The NHS is rapidly enshitifying and jumping in bed with AI and Palantir. Privatising has been a Conservative wet dream for a long time. Check back soon. We might be on the list on the right.
used as example of comprehensive healthcare,
It still provides healthcare,
US is the third largest spender of public funds in healthcare, and when it comes to quality it ranks bellow Kazachtan.
Not directly comparable dollar to dollar, American doctors and (traveling) nurses are paid amoral amounts of money in many cases. Would still be significantly cheaper overall than the current system.
if you want to get angry, compare us drug prices with other countries (without subsidies or insurance).
I appreciate the sentiment but let's be real about Australia's adoption of universal healthcare:
The lesson is this. There are no permanent victories.
Yes, the reality is more nuanced than this list implies. In the UK and NZ the system is being aggressively attacked with more and more private companies getting a foothold in the public system.
I'm also noticing that none started in any year starting with a 2. Not only did all those countries realize that universal healthcare is necessary, they realized it over 30 years ago. The US is so backwards.
unfortunately not true.
for example, Spain ended universal healthcare on 2012. it was recovered fully just this years
That's why they won't let US citizens have it, and pretend it's something else when they get old enough for Medicare.
Mexico. Add Mexico
I always notice that one thing that's rarely discussed is that there's more to it than just healthcare. Essentially, it's a way to train medical staff. Imagine if you took your car to a mechanic and they said well I've only fixed three cars in my life, wish me luck!
The USA gives millions of dollars to these countries... Germany received 10 million from the USA in 2025.
Why does Germany get 10 million and universal healthcare, and we get 0 million and $1000 shots of insulin?
Well, as long as we take care of Nancy Pelosi and Mitch McConnell, that's our number one priority.
10 million, if true, it only a spit in the ocean. You guys really need to learn to stop blaming other countries for your continued social crisis.
The US is still the most wealthy country in the world. And it's, I believe, the only Western country in the world without universal healthcare.
You already have the cash, you just need to decide to spend it in the right way. Every dollar you spend on other countries has a hook embedded in it, just like China does. Believe me, it's not altruistic generosity.
Yeah, $10m is chump change for a country and even most states. Pretty sure that's how much it costs to repave a mile of my street nowadays. 🤣
We may have given money to other countries, but the US has also used it's influence to shape the world in it's favor to a much larger self-benefit than few million dollars.
I don't think this person is blaming Germany they're blaming politicians for giving money to Germany.
Millions is nothing these days for countries.
Germany's population is ~80 million. $10 million isn't nothing, but that's $0.125 per person. We also didn't just, hand them a bag of cash and walk away whistling.
10 million dollars on the scale of Healthcare is... well about $0.30 per person in the US. Do I need a source to say we spend far more than that? The problem isn't just how much we spend, it's what we get for it, which is mostly rich Insurance companies.
France implemented it in 1945 not 1974 idk where that year comes from
The 1945 law only covered workers and their families. It took until 1999 to get full coverage based on residency. (But I also have no idea what 1974 is doing on there.)
I dug a little, and it turns out there was a 1975 law and later 1978 removed the employment requirement to receive it, this might be why, but it's off by a year haha
Makes me wonder if all the other dates aren't just made up as well...
The date in Germany doesn't really add up, the first version was implemented in 1883 and got substantially expanded.
Sadly there's no English article. https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gesetz%2C_betreffend_die_Krankenversicherung_der_Arbeiter
Was the first social security network.
fuck I didn't realize the UAB had universal healthcare too
United Arab 🅱️e🅱️irates
Most on this list have slowly gutted it in one way or another im sure
Obviously still better than, well, over there
But we're FREE.
Free from good health.
I vaguely remember some quote from someone, probably a high ranking Republican, saying something like they can't let us have nationalized health care because it's too popular, and they'd never be able to shut it down.
Euuuuh, Switzerland doesn't... The system is very close to the US one, but it's mandatory.
But it is heavily regulated. They must charge everyone the same for the same plan, no pre-existing conditions, no out of network bullshit. Switzerland is very capitalistic, but it is a heavily regulated capitalism. That doesn't mean that the system is perfect, but I wouldn't say it is close to the uregulated/unenforced hell that is the USA.
Okay, but how many of those countries have a right-wing political party that cuts funding every time they get political power, until the system is running nearly badly enough that they can say privatization will fix it?
Unfortunately, we might be slowly getting there.
A lot of countries have been and continue to erase public healthcare budgets, to the point where it barely functions.
Officially as a response to slowing economical growth... Because as usual, GDP is the only thing that matters, and of course, we just couldn't possibly tax billionaires.
I really want a system like this but it is SO HARD to do in a large and diverse country.
The only barrier to implementing universal healthcare in the United States is the health insurance industry, the corruption it relies on, and the racism that the corrupt politicians use to turn people against their own welfare.
Oh ok clearly it's not worth doing, let's fund genocide instead! Fuck off with this bullshit.
Brazil did it ages ago and it is just as large and diverse as the US. I'm not saying it's easy but it is absolutely doable.
Pff. I feel like if you understood just how big Texas is, you'd realise your mistake.
Don't worry, someone will be along to tell us soon enough...
Country size has nothing to do with it; it's all in the lobbies.
Much of what's wrong with American healthcare could be fixed with a few pieces of federal legislation:
This gets rid of the "out of network" bullshit and basically turns the American healthcare system into an approximation of the German one. The German system is one of the most expensive in the world and generally considered to be of middling quality compared to other wealthy nations but it's half as expensive per capita as the American one; based on free enterprise (with a fuckton of regulations, which is normal for the medical sector); and wildly more effective than the American system, which doesn't even rank among other developed nations.
The only reason the USA don't have a better healthcare system is that lobbyists spend an unholy amount of money to ensure it doesn't and lawmakers are willing to do whatever the highest bidder tells them to. Size and diversity have nothing to do with it.
These are great ideas!
Europe managed it. Every country in it has it.
And they are double the population of the US.
Size is not an issue what so ever.
Sure but Europe isn’t one country lol
China has a larger population and land area than the United States and they have universal healthcare. There's nothing special about the US that makes universal healthcare more difficult to implement except the entrenched special interests that lobby the government to prevent it.
They are also significantly more culturally homogenous and they’re the oldest established civilization on the planet, so that sounds about right.
I don't understand what any of that has to do with healthcare.
Oh, ok. Might want to study the legal system and how laws are passed. It’ll make sense after that.
If it still doesn’t, I can’t help sorry.
I think you're just lashing out at me because you're unable to explain why you think diversity makes it harder to implement universal healthcare, but what do I know. I haven't studied the legal system in China.
And the US is?
Where are you going with this? Please continue. I’m curious.
Ok, thanks for your question.
Ok, I'm not American, I'm Australian (getting that out of the way up front).
But... But, we are saturated with US culture, American social norms and politics. I could say with a large degree of confidence that an average Australian (or European) could pass a pop quiz on the United States probably better than an average American. This isn't a boast, it's a fact of life due to the relative size of our comparative social footprints.
So when I say that the US isn't one country, but many, I'm not being facetious. Your federal system consists of a bunch of little fifedoms comparable with Germany in the 18th century. On the face of it, yes, you are, of course, 'United'. In reality you guys seem fundamentally Balkanised.
Culturally, socially, religiously, and very much politically, you might as well have hard borders.
That's what my casual one-liner meant to convey.
Makes sense, and I could definitely see how someone outside the US could develop that perspective. Thank you.
It’s pretty accurate but a bit more nuanced than how you described it!
If course, you are also right to say that. Every generalisation is wrong.
Diverse???
Race/Ethnicity? Religion? Language? Cultures? Politics? The US is a bit short on diversity in some of these.
The larger and more diverse the insurance pool, the cheaper it becomes per capita.
You're literally just repeating propaganda.
You don’t think it’s more difficult to get legislation through in a large country, vs a small one? Curious. Super curious.
Almost as hard as the way we do it now in the US