0
0

[–] Yorn ago  (edited ago)

Given that at the local level Sweden's (and Norway, from what I understand) health care is actually more libertarian, they could probably use that as a model.

For those curious: think of how food stamps work. You define a base level of care and provide vouchers for people to use, but they can go to any hospital they want to using those vouchers. At the end of every year, the hospitals are provided compensation for their care based on how many vouchers they've collected. That way it still gets to be capitalism, but has a base-level of support and there's still plenty of competition.

Leagues better than the top down system of medicare and medicaid we have now.

0
1

[–] ShinyVoater 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

The biggest problem with the single-payer argument in America is that it's almost 100% along the lines of expanding Medicare and Medicaid. It's almost exactly like throwing a blanket over a broken leg and pronouncing it healed: you've done fuck all to fix the issue and ensured it'll get worse because nobody's looking at it anymore. The healthcare system is expensive because it's screwed up six ways to Sunday, not because of who pays for it; that a seemingly simple solution like making everybody have health insurance backfired as spectacularly as it did is proof enough. What we really need is an exhaustive investigation into every element of what drives the price up, from the emergency room deadbeat to the student loans for medical school, but good luck with that.

0
1

[–] drunkywood 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

Even if we didn't use that system, I think it would be hard to find people that don't think our healthcare system needs an overhaul. I'm not sure what that is, but we can figure this shit out (and at a reasonable cost).

Btw, I'm a Trump guy and I would support single payer or universal healthcare as long as private options were available. I'm sure there are many that would also support this.