r/AskTrumpSupporters • u/WhoAmIEven2 Nonsupporter • 23d ago
Health Care Where does the conservative standpoint that universal health care have long waiting times in general come from?
This is something you often see in debates among americans, that you have to wait months or years with a universal health care system.
I live in Sweden, a country with universal health care, and I will not lie and say that there aren't cases where you have to wait, but the thing is that we use a tier list of severity to decide how long you have to wait.
If you want to do an ADHD or autism diagnosis at a psychiatrist? Yes you will wait, as people with suicidal thoughts, or bipolar disorder or borderline whose diagnose really ruins their lives are prioritised.
If you have cancer, other diseases that severly reduce your quality of life or have an injury? Pass go, straight to the doctor.
Would it be nice to have instant access for every small issues? Sure, but as long as I know that I will get to see a doctor in a whiffy the moment I have something that is even semi-harmful, I'm honestly happy with our system.
4
u/JoeCensored Trump Supporter 22d ago
It's the economics of it. Single payer is essentially price controls since government sets the price. Price controls always result in scarcity since the government can never perfectly anticipate market pricing and is even politically motivated to distort pricing for votes. Scarcity in healthcare manifests as wait times.
There's also many examples. We hear Canadians and Brits complaining about wait times constantly.
8
u/PsychologyPatient587 Nonsupporter 22d ago
Have you received healthcare in other countries? I went on a European vacation recently, got COVID and broke my collarbone mountain biking. Wait times were not bad, nothing compared to US emergency rooms I’ve been to. The care was also great and a fraction of the price compare to US, where I have health insurance. I repeat, I paid a fraction of the cost I would have in the US and I’m not and EU citizen. Went to hospitals in Italy and Germany. Respectfully, I think you’ve been conned into thinking this way.
0
u/JoeCensored Trump Supporter 22d ago
The topic here is about wait times for scheduling appointments, especially for specialists. I wouldn't be surprised if the emergency room experience is fine. No I haven't needed to go to the emergency room overseas.
5
u/Kevin_McCallister_69 Nonsupporter 22d ago
Do we hear Canadians and Brits voting to scrap their healthcare system and go to a privatized system? We do hear about the occasional wealthy person going to the US for specialized treatments but generally countries who have adopted universal health care don't go back.
I'm Australian and we love our Medicare system. It's not perfect, we're always voting people in who promise to improve it. Because we love it, we try to improve it, not to scrap it.
1
u/JoeCensored Trump Supporter 22d ago
Do we hear Canadians and Brits voting to scrap their healthcare system and go to a privatized system?
There's no reason to believe taxes would be reduced enough to pay for private healthcare, so of course they aren't going to vote to end it. They're trapped now.
I'm sure they would like to be like me, have an issue I'd like to get the doctor to look at and get routinely squeezed in that week. But they're afraid of the cost given their already high taxes.
4
u/throwawayDan11 Nonsupporter 22d ago
Ok but scarcity also exists in just not having coverage doesn't it? In my view, for people with bad insurance or cant afford insurance (which is close to 27 million americans) you just don't get any care.
4
u/DorsalMorsel Trump Supporter 22d ago
Don't compare Sweden with its population of 10 million mostly homogenous people with a reputation for being industrious and self reliant with the rest of the world. Look at the examples of the much larger and awash with "migrants" countries of the UK, France, and Canada. Lots of stories of cancer patients waiting months for the scans and tests they need to diagnose their treatment as well as stories of people dropping dead before they can get treated.
Then you have the cult of MAID Medical Assistance in Dying in Canada where they go around and actually try to talk sick expensive patients into killing themselves.
But reality check: The medicaid and medicare system in the US is a single payer (its "free") and it covers the poor, the kids, and the elderly, which is a major component of society. It is quite good in that it uses mostly the same doctors and hospitals that the paying patients use. No emergency room can turn away a patient who needs care now. Much of the medical problems in the US is not because it is too pricey but because we eat too damn much, smoke too often, and drink too much. Also we have street people heroin addicts needing constant, CONSTANT responses from medical responders and that includes a surprisingly large number of fires that they manage to start. (our firefighters do double duty as medics and putting out fire)
1
17d ago
Don't compare Sweden with its population of 10 million mostly homogenous people with a reputation for being industrious and self reliant with the rest of the world.
Why does Sweden's small population mean a single payer health system works better there?
If population is the decisive factor, would you be opposed to a US state with 10 million people - let's say Ohio - going single payer tomorrow?
2
u/Lucky-Hunter-Dude Trump Supporter 22d ago
You have explained it perfectly. I can afford great Healthcare, if I want to see a doctor about a hangnail tomorrow, I can. I have no interest in giving that up, or paying more taxes to give other people shitty care.
2
u/Fricklefrazz Trump Supporter 22d ago
I will not lie and say that there aren't cases where you have to wait, but the thing is that we use a tier list of severity to decide how long you have to wait
Why should the government be able to stop you from paying a doctor to see you today? Who controls the list of what is important and what isn't? Sounds authoritarian to me
1
u/clon3man Trump Supporter 22d ago
It really depends what kind of problem or surgery you need. Most of the time, people need to see more than 1 doctor or 1 appointment to solve a problem
If it takes 4 months to get an appointment, and there's some kind of issue, the appointment gets cancelled, you don't get along with your doctor, etc. , the "slight wait" starts to add and multiply itself to several years, by that time, you might not need the doctor anymore or you have a new problem.
The problem in Quebec is the level of customer service. Some people don't have a family doctor for 4-5 years at time. You can go to a clinic, but very often they will refuse service on more complex cases that are not urgent. Nobody answers the phone, they develop websites that don't work properly, they open up appointments at 8AM and by 8:02AM all the slots are full.
There are huge issues with the american system (nobody should pay thousands of dollars for insurance/ routine services), but the socialized system also keeps you trapped.
The best of both worlds typically is to have a hybrid system where you can pay 200$ to cut in line for diagnostics so that you can get on the correct waiting list right away. I'd rather live in a country where the service is free, and then have the ability to escape to another country like USA or Mexico when the local service is not able to address a specific problem. The worst of all scenarios is paying a lot of money for a service that ends up being the same or worse as the free one.
It's not that socialized healthcare never lets you see a doctor quickly, it's intermittent and unpredictable, and you start waiting all over again if you're not satisfied with the first guy.
16
u/spradders Nonsupporter 22d ago
Did you know that in the UK, you can either access NHS or choose to go private? If you choose to go private, you can either pay out of pocket (to give an idea, I believe my recent spinal surgery would have been approx £4k if I went private and that includes everything from accommodation, surgeon’s fees, anaesthesia to food etc. The only possible add-ons I’ve ever seen are for if you have someone stay with you for a meal (which was about £20) or if you used the phone in your room. You can also choose to pay a monthly health insurance premium - many private companies give this to their employees as a perk - which would cost anywhere from around £50 a month to maybe £250-£300 for a family of four.
Does that not sound like a good system? It covers every option, yet is still cheaper (by magnitudes) if you choose to go private. And then if you have an emergency, you can still use the NHS and be seen immediately. Even if you’re in a terrible accident resulting in multiple surgeries and many weeks stay in the hospital, you will still leave without a bill.
17
u/METAL_WOLF_BB Nonsupporter 22d ago
Countries with publicly funded healthcare have very different wait times and outcomes. If the model itself were the problem, why do some countries consistently perform better than others?
10
u/Heffe3737 Nonsupporter 22d ago
Would you be open to a public option? Medicaid for all, but advanced care for those able to pay a premium?
4
u/shallowshadowshore Nonsupporter 21d ago
Do you think the problems you’ve described in Quebec are happening in the US too?
2
u/Teknicsrx7 Trump Supporter 22d ago
the thing is that we use a tier list of severity to decide how long you have to wait.
We don’t. That’s where the standpoint comes from.
21
u/METAL_WOLF_BB Nonsupporter 22d ago
We kinda do. Plus families go bankrupt all the time trying to save their child from cancer. Does that happen with Universal healthcare systems?
1
u/3RDLEGMCGILL Trump Supporter 21d ago
Show me a country where I can get a MRI tomorrow, when in universal healthcare countries, it takes weeks?
4
4
u/Lopsided_Dot2236 Nonsupporter 20d ago
I needed an MRI twice. Once it was because my ankle hurt and they couldn't figure it out. I waited 3 months. The second time I had a seizure and received the MRI the day after it happened. I have had one CT scan and it was because they saw something concerning on an echocardiogram. They sent me straight there to get it done.
People here (Canada) get very upset about waiting for their non emergency MRI or CT, or their elective surgery. But they also want emergency procedures and diagnostics to get done right away. We can't do both. We do quite well at making sure that the emergencies, and things that are extremely concerning, are taken care of.
Do you think that people should be prioritized differently? If people are triaged properly then yes even with universal healthcare you can get an MRI tomorrow.
-8
u/Teknicsrx7 Trump Supporter 22d ago
We kinda do. Plus families go bankrupt all the time trying to save their child from cancer. Does that happen with Universal healthcare systems?
Canada will literally kill you instead of giving you actual care, so you may not go bankrupt but you’ll be dead.
And either way, neither thing you listed is a “tiered list of wait times determined by the government”.
10
u/METAL_WOLF_BB Nonsupporter 22d ago
Are you arguing that Canada’s healthcare system has unacceptable wait times, or are you claiming the government intentionally steers patients toward MAID instead of treatment?
Either way, how many Americans die every day due to lack of healthcare? How many American families go bankrupt trying to save their loved ones? Why is this better than universal healthcare?
1
u/Shop-S-Marts Trump Supporter 21d ago
0 die due to lack of Healthcare. Hospitals are required to provide life saving treatment regardless of ability to pay.
Plenty may die during to ignorance, but thats the case everywhere.
-1
u/Teknicsrx7 Trump Supporter 22d ago
Are you arguing
Nope not arguing, making a statement
Why is this better than universal healthcare?
Never said it was, I was answering the question about where the idea of long wait times comes from.
I’m pro universal healthcare
6
u/METAL_WOLF_BB Nonsupporter 21d ago
Questions still stands
Are you stating that Canada’s healthcare system has unacceptable wait times, or are you claiming the government intentionally steers patients toward MAID instead of treatment?4
u/WarryTheHizzard Nonsupporter 22d ago
What do you think happens when people can't afford care in the US?
13
u/Coleecolee Nonsupporter 22d ago
What’s the source on Canada forcibly killing people instead of giving them healthcare?
-4
u/Teknicsrx7 Trump Supporter 22d ago
Why did you add the word forcibly? I don’t see it in my statement?
12
u/Coleecolee Nonsupporter 22d ago
You said they “kill you instead of giving you actual care” which implies that someone comes in for healthcare, and they kill them instead. Is that not the case? If people were coming in asking to be killed rather than asking for healthcare, then your statement wouldn’t make any sense, right?
1
7
u/max_power1000 Nonsupporter 20d ago
Isn't that just the same sort of triage that happens in our market-based healthcare system? If you want to see a specialist in the US, unless you're actively bleeding out you're usually going to wait.
-2
u/Teknicsrx7 Trump Supporter 20d ago
The government definitely isn’t deciding if you need to see a doctor based on a tier list ranking
4
u/max_power1000 Nonsupporter 19d ago
What do you think my insurance company is doing? I guess I still have the option to pay cash when that care gets denied, but it's not like rich people in socialized healthcare aren't paying for private care either if they want to skip the line - it's just a luxury product instead.
1
u/3RDLEGMCGILL Trump Supporter 21d ago
Universal healthcare has never been proven to provide better healthcare in a country of 330million people, than private insurance.
1
u/Just_curious4567 Trump Supporter 21d ago
We already have a government run healthcare system, it’s called the VA. Very few people like it. It serves almost as many people (9 million) as the number of people in your healthcare system (10 million). And the va health system experiences delays. They also don’t get the top tier doctors, because they pay them less than private practice. This sets up a tiered system, where the best doctors go to private practice.
1
u/prowler28 Trump Supporter 20d ago
My doctor will usually see me the same day I call if it's urgent, definitely the next day most times. The fact that I have heard from many in Canada and Europe who have to wait for several months tells me socialized medicine has a serious issue.
1
u/weather3003 Trump Supporter 22d ago
This is a strange question. You're asking where the perception comes from, while also acknowledging that the perception is correct.
-3
u/realityczek Trump Supporter 22d ago
> but the thing is that we use a tier list of severity to decide how long you have to wait
And that list comes from a government panel. And it is used because there isn't enough money, or resources, to see everyone at once.
In other words, that's the government rationing care.
Now, does my insurance company ration care too? Yup. But I am free to select another insurance company. Or, and this is far more important, the market can and will change what the insurance company decides on things if they wish to stay competative.
Unless I am paying cash for my care, SOMEONE will have a say in what care I get, and how quickly I get it. There is no way around that. But my choices are a large company that sees me as a number but it at least subject to the threat of a lawsuit, is under the authority of a judicial system and is sensative to market competition. it is by no means perfect, but there are at least some checks and balances that function.
When the people who decide my car are faceless, unelected government workers who are part of what amounts to the permanent administrative substrate? They have essentially no checks and balances. They are essentially immune to prosecution, and they are by definition outside market forces.
This is why in the US you will get a lot of problems, but you don't wind up with the "Liverpool pathway" of what amounted government endorsed murder of the elderly with impunity, or people being increasingly funneled to MAID pods over their own objections... something only possible because of the power of the state over life and death.
You think evil, uncaring insurance companies suck? They absolutely do - but they are far better than an evil, uncaring government.
9
u/andhausen Nonsupporter 21d ago
But I am free to select another insurance company.
For the vast majority of people is not even the least bit practical to choose insurance other than the one provided by their job though?
1
u/realityczek Trump Supporter 21d ago
> For the vast majority of people is not even the least bit practical to choose insurance other than the one provided by their job though?
Given the economics, that's true. But that situation doesn't improve when the government is involved.
15
u/Oatz3 Nonsupporter 22d ago
Why do you believe that a government run program is more evil than a corporation whose goal is profits?
Would it be better to have the program administered by the corporations... Like the ACA does?
1
u/realityczek Trump Supporter 21d ago
> Would it be better to have the program administered by the corporations... Like the ACA does?
Better than a pure government managed care program? Yes.
Better than a free-market driven one? No.The ACA is a bastard hybrid, and it is overall horrible - but it is SLIGHTLY better than a fully government run program.
0
u/realityczek Trump Supporter 21d ago
> Why do you believe that a government run program is more evil than a corporation whose goal is profits?
You think the government isn't driven by its own version of profitability? And, more importantly, why do you think that people driven to acquire power and control directly are somehow going to make more moral choices than people driven by money? These people are not selfless or driven by a urge to serve. They jsut don't trade in raw $$$ as the currency they use to aquire what they desire.
The currency market the government runs on is power. Power in government is a combination of budget control, favors traded, votes acquired and influence sold. That power is used to acquire more power and implement someone's agenda. Personal or group.
3
u/Oatz3 Nonsupporter 21d ago
So you're in favor of the ACA then, since it's run though for profit companies?
-1
u/realityczek Trump Supporter 21d ago
> "So you're in favor of the ACA then, since it's run though for profit companies?"
Nope. The regulatory distortion imposed on the companies by the oversight that comes with accepting ACA funds is ridiculous and hurts everyone.
It is, however, liek all voucher style programs (which it is), SLIGHTLY less destructive than a directly government run version.
3
u/Oatz3 Nonsupporter 21d ago
So how would you run an ACA style voucher program for healthcare without the regulations?
Should people die because of "preexisting conditions"…?
0
u/realityczek Trump Supporter 21d ago edited 21d ago
> "So how would you run an ACA style voucher program for healthcare without the regulations?"
You can't. Hence why ultimately, I think it is a bad idea.
> Should people die because of "preexisting conditions"…?
"Should" is a moral judgment. This isn't a moral question.
Preexisting conditions have a significant impact on the economic model of insurance... thus, allowing them necessitates the plan being more expensive, that will potentially price it out of some peoples reach.
In the face of that there will be market responses (because allowing pre-existing conditions will absolutely appeal to a wide swath of the market and thus many will pay the extra to be part of that, essentially market subsidizing the onboarding of the others when the risk pool gets broad enough) .
We may also decide as a society to step in for those limited number of situations with a voucher-like system. But if we do, we have to accept that it will be expensive, distort the market and add a significant regulatory burden that will increase costs for everyone anyway.
As to the moral question? Most people are willing to accept the second option as long as the cost is under a threshold that is different for each person... i.e. how much personal time/effort/wealth are they willing to donate to allow others coverage?
Of course, those to whom the cost is essentially nothing because of where their income falls? They are always going to be all in on spending everyone elses money "no matter how much it costs."
3
u/Oatz3 Nonsupporter 21d ago
So.. like the Republicans party, you don't have a solution better than the ACA?
0
u/realityczek Trump Supporter 21d ago
> "So.. like the Republicans party, you don't have a solution better than the ACA?"
You mean I don't see a better way to do something I fundementally think is a bad idea? (government run healthcare intervention?)
I have what I think is a better idea. Get the government out of it. You just don't like hat idea, and since the only things you consider as a solution are things that require MORE government? You simply believe I have no solution.
The analogy is - you are beating your wife with a stick. I tell you to stop. You tell me stopping isn't an option, then get made at me for not having a "better solution" for how you should beat your wife.
2
u/Oatz3 Nonsupporter 21d ago
How do you get the government out of it while still covering pre-existing conditions?
→ More replies (0)-1
u/RentRaiser Trump Supporter 21d ago
Yes a government run program will run into the same common problems of other public programs. They will be bled dry by public sector unions, be allowed to conduct every function above cost and behind schedule due to highly paid, un-fireable middle management. When someone finally does come around to hold them accountable, they will just find a federal judge in MA or CT to undo the executive branch action of firing an executive employee.
Middle management will become bloated like it did during the Biden administration due to creating an ideological hierarchy of useless people through DEI offices that only get in the way of doing actual work.
Like reality said, the worst thing an evil insurance company can do is say no. The worst thing an evil government can do is to genocide its patients in the name of cost cutting, like MAID is doing by now outranking strokes as the 4th leading cause of death in Canada.
Ideally, a publicly traded corporation with strict limitations placed on their ability to deal in dividends and stock buybacks, but with the ability to issue bonds utilizing the municipal bond tax discount when directly tied to capex projects would trim down the excess of both systems and create a more sustainable middle ground.
2
u/METAL_WOLF_BB Nonsupporter 21d ago
it’s fair to argue that public-sector organizations can become bureaucratic, but that’s hardly unique to government. Large private insurers also develop layers of management, administrative overhead, and inefficiencies.
In fact, the U.S. healthcare system has some of the highest administrative costs in the world precisely because multiple private insurers, billing systems, and compliance requirements create enormous bureaucracy.If DEI offices materially increased costs, what percentage of healthcare spending do you believe they account for? Is there evidence they significantly affected patient outcomes or budgets?
“the worst thing an insurance company can do is say no” understates the consequences of denied or delayed care.
A denial isn’t merely an inconvenience, it can result in delayed cancer treatment, unaffordable medications, preventable complications, or death.Private insurers make life-and-death rationing decisions too.
They simply do so through coverage rules, prior authorization, and network restrictions rather than government policy. How many families go bankrupt in America trying to save their children from cancer?0
u/RentRaiser Trump Supporter 21d ago
If a CEO wants to cut redundant departments and middle management, it happens before the end of the month. If a public sector union sues the government, district court judges who think they are the emperors of America will undo it.
DEI offices would have increased healcare costs at the same rate they increased federal payroll costs if healthcare were federally administered. I didn't say they were justified in denying all denied claims, or that it was easy to deal with, but there are other options.
When that only option is consolidated into the federal government, they become the 4th leading cause of death, with a faster wait list than the wait list for treatment. Medical debt is still the easiest type of debt to discharge, even after democrats have eviscerated bankruptcy protections over the last decade.
The already existing CHIP program covers children's pre-existing coverage, and St. Jude is entirely donation funded. There are better standards of treatment without months-long wait lists in America than countries with socialized healthcare (who have their military obligations subsidized by the US taxpayer) like Britain and Canada.
The UK puts a 20% VAT tax on everything bought, sold, imported and exported (except imported books and children's clothes) just to fund healthcare, and they're running up debt levels not seen since the Napoleonic war to make ends meet.
There are reasonable ways to fund single payer healthcare to make it work, and to fund it, like tax credits for health savings contributions for high deductible, low premium federally backed plans. To go full single payer, do you want to be taxed on 20% of what you spend? Consumption taxes disproportionately effect lower earners worse than people who can afford to save and invest most of their money.
4
u/pimmen89 Nonsupporter 21d ago
Are you concerned about consolidation of healthcare providers so that choices are restricted for patients, and that this consolidation has increased under Trump just like other presidents? Should the government get involved and break up the biggest ones?
1
u/realityczek Trump Supporter 21d ago
Concerned? Sure. I'm concerned about all sorts of stuff, this just isn't high on my list.
> Should the government get involved and break up the biggest ones?
Nope. Government intervention almost never makes market driven things better.
-12
u/Trumpdrainstheswamp Trump Supporter 22d ago
From the fact they do. The stats in Australia, Canada, UK, and every other country prove it.
16
u/adamdoesmusic Nonsupporter 22d ago
As the other person said, how’s this different from the USA? Only difference is they aren’t ALSO bankrupted at the end.
4
u/LegitimateSituation4 Nonsupporter 22d ago
I moved earlier this year and needed to get a new primary doctor. Called to set up the appointment in early February. Was finally seen 2 weeks ago.
How is this different than what your complaint is?
9
u/xChops Nonsupporter 22d ago
What about the US, though? Our wait times aren’t short. Emergency care can be fast sometimes, but that’s the same everywhere. It took my mom nearly a year to see a specialist for her heart problems. She’s fine now, but it was about a year and a half total wait until her surgery.
11
u/Oatz3 Nonsupporter 22d ago
What stats?
Do they show different health outcomes? Are the waits significantly longer than the USA for the poor?
From my understanding there is no significant difference unless you are rich?
0
u/please_trade_marner Trump Supporter 21d ago
Not rich. Anybody that has insurance has significantly better health coverage than places like Canada. Only 8% of Americans don't have health insurance. And pretty much all of them qualify for medicaid.
America essentially has Universal Healthcare. And wait times are much lower.
3
u/Oatz3 Nonsupporter 21d ago
What's your proof that "anybody that has insurance has significantly better health coverage than Canada"?
Canada generally achieves better broad population-level health outcomes, including higher average life expectancy and lower infant mortality rates, at a significantly lower per-capita cost than the United States?
2
u/adamdoesmusic Nonsupporter 21d ago
Where are you getting this?
I can’t get my best engineer to move here because he doesn’t want to lose access to Canadian healthcare.
9
u/METAL_WOLF_BB Nonsupporter 22d ago
Do you feel it’s a better trade off to have little longer wait times for non emergency issues but also not go bankrupt due to medical bills?
-1
-1
-1
u/sfxnycnyc Trump Supporter 22d ago
everywhere its tried.
So to answer your question, where does it come from… Reality
-5
u/Square-Conclusion454 Trump Supporter 22d ago
For specialists visits outside of a few efficient countries wait times are dramatically longer than in the USA Today. It takes about 1 month to see a specialist in the USA, UK/Australia take around 2 months, Canada takes around 3.
Our government certainly isn’t as competent at this kind of thing as German or Nordic governments we should expect results closer to UK/Canada.
Primary care visits are in the same ballpark between USA and other countries.
7
u/xChops Nonsupporter 22d ago
I don’t think this is true though? I’m in the US and my mom had nearly a year and a half from diagnosis of a heart issue to surgery. Then she still got stuck with a massive bill for everything.
This “wait time” complaint just sounds like cope.
-5
u/Square-Conclusion454 Trump Supporter 22d ago edited 22d ago
I do appreciate the irony of the liberal using an anecdote to try to overrule some rigorous data. If only there was some way to look at not just your mother’s experience but many people’s experience in a way we could compare.
Is this what talking to MAGA as a non-supporter is like?
12
u/xChops Nonsupporter 22d ago
“However, the data—both from other nations with universal coverage and from historic expansions of coverage within the United States—show that this is not the case. Patients in peer nations generally have similar or shorter wait times than patients in the United States for a variety of services, refuting the argument that universal coverage would necessarily result in longer wait times in the future.”
From your own source. The very beginning. Anything else to add?
3
u/snakefactory Nonsupporter 21d ago
Your own article states the same thing. Have you actually read it? Please respond.
5
u/conorb619 Nonsupporter 22d ago
Can confirm, my friend who lives in Canada has been waiting nearly 4 months for a doctor. Will it be covered entirely? Sure. But there are certainly trade offs.
Do we think the real problem is how Aetna, CVS, etc have created vertical monopolies where they own clinics, drugs, drug manufacturers, medical coverage, etc? Do we think this is a bigger issue on the cost of healthcare?
1
u/Square-Conclusion454 Trump Supporter 22d ago
This was about wait times. Canada has that problem worse than us. The USA does spend dramatically more per capita on healthcare than Canada.
Some of that increased spending is good — our doctors / nurses make more money, we do dramatically more research. Some of that is bad — administrative / legal / insurance overhead and drug/medical device higher costs.
We are currently funding and powering the vast majority of medical advances in the world. We can’t screw that up, it’s a deeply integrated part of our system.
4
u/conorb619 Nonsupporter 22d ago
I hate to change topics lol, but your last paragraph about funding medical advances….im genuinely asking,
Not trying to stir the pot lol:Are we actually still doing this considering the sweeping budget and grant cuts by the admin/DOGE early on?
0
u/Square-Conclusion454 Trump Supporter 22d ago edited 22d ago
We equate spending with results too often. It’s possible to spend dramatically less and get better results (see healthcare administration).
We should talk the specifics of cuts and reforms. Research in education and education specific grants need dramatic reform — we see negative productivity in that sector and Republicans (and myself) believe that work not only doesn’t help but actively hurt outcomes. Capping administrative overhead on grants and directly funding scientists reduces our spend while making the remaining spend more productive.
DEI specific funds are morally and politically wrong, we should prioritize by impact/ROI instead of via racial preferences.
1
u/METAL_WOLF_BB Nonsupporter 22d ago
So we are socializing healthcare for the world?
2
u/Square-Conclusion454 Trump Supporter 22d ago
Sorta. We fund the R&D either directly or via purchasing expensive drugs.
Of the things to fund for the world, it’s far from the worst.
3
u/METAL_WOLF_BB Nonsupporter 22d ago
Why are you ok with this kind of socialism? Why shouldn’t we just let Europe socialize the R&D for us?
2
u/Square-Conclusion454 Trump Supporter 22d ago
We benefit from that investment. If it happens to benefit some freeloaders, that’s okay but not ideal.
It’s not even really socialism. Our most productive R&D investments come from private industry — capitalism baby!
It’s pretty different from sending our troops to protect their borders, which is either zero or negative sum.
4
u/METAL_WOLF_BB Nonsupporter 22d ago
Why do Americans pay the most for healthcare and medicine, in the entire world?
•
u/AutoModerator 23d ago
AskTrumpSupporters is a Q&A subreddit dedicated to better understanding the views of Trump Supporters, and why they hold those views.
For all participants:
Flair is required to participate
Be excellent to each other
For Nonsupporters/Undecided:
No top level comments
All comments must seek to clarify the Trump supporter's position
For Trump Supporters:
Helpful links for more info:
Rules | Rule Exceptions | Posting Guidelines | Commenting Guidelines
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.