JS50 - I might give you the example of Australia's Medicare, which by and large works very well (and I'm not going to argue that there aren't imperfections, as it can always improve!).Johnsell50 wrote: ↑Fri Apr 19, 2019 6:24 amAll of the shining examples of government run health care systems around the world (HIC) should be enough to make most, if not all working Americans, very wary of any such system. It is sad to see that some are still so highly indoctrinated by their left wing colleges and news sources to still believe government can run anything effectively. Haven't they been screwed enough? The only thing these programs do is raise costs for workers to pay for those who don't want to work. It is a simple enough equation even Democrats should understand.
Medicare is Australia's universal healthcare system - and has been in place since 1975.
It guarantees all citizens (and some overseas visitors) access to a wide range of health services at little to no cost.
It is funded through a mix of general revenue and a tax Levy (currently 1.5% of taxable income or 2.5% for those on high incomes who don’t have private health insurance).
It pays a benefit to the user for various healthcare costs including:
Doctors’ and specialists’ consultation fees;
Tests and examinations your doctor orders for you;
Eye tests carried out by optometrists; and
Most surgical procedures
The benefits paid are generally 85% of the fee listed for the service in a listed schedule.
So, how does Australia’s health care system measure up internationally?
Well, compared with health systems in other developed nations, Australia delivers above-average health outcomes. Australians have a life expectancy of 82.4 years, ie about 3 years longer than your average yank.
In an economic sense, in terms of cost of care, we're below the average of other developed countries. And in terms of the health cost share of the GDP and life expectancy, we're above the average of other developed countries.
A Bloomberg study on the Most Efficient Healthcare Systems in the World has Australia ranked 8th overall, USA is ranked 54th. The rankings are based according to three criteria:
Life expectancy (weighted 60%)
Relative per capita cost of health care (30%); and
Absolute per capita cost of health care (10%)
Australia’s healthcare investment as a percentage of GDP sits at approximately 9.4% per capita, a figure almost half that of the US who takes up 16.8% of its GDP.
So in other words, despite spending almost double what Australia spends, the US is flagging dramatically when it comes to life expectancy and overall wellness.
Why shoud one be wary of this type of system? I think this disproves your comment "The only thing these programs do is raise costs for workers to pay for those who don't want to work."