It’s a free country that you choose to live in. If you choose to live in America you contribute to your safety, to the roads you use everyday, and for the gas you consume.
Only conservatives love phrasing it as free,its not free but niether are govt schools,police forces or fire brigades but you dont like knowing that do you because you cant argue they're nit,usa usa usa youre not taking my guns bullshit doesnt cut the mustard and for being the best country in the world?well there's so many other countries in the world better,my own country australia pisses all over you guys and we're an island so we dont have to build a wall,hows that going for as well
Russe Lmao, you guys have a shit healthcare system. It’s funny because I’m pretty sure around half of your population has private insurance, yet you have universal healthcare in your amazing country. The gov has to deal with your rural half so they send grants to pay regionally for healthcare, talk about inefficient allocation of resources
@@leoquintero437 umm no we dont have a shit healthcare,its actually the 2nd best but its true the conservatives here dont want it and undermine it by giving tax allowances for private and make those that dont have it pay an extra 2% a year for every year theyre not in,but aussies are smarter than that and the universal healthcare will never be replaced and even conservatives know its a political deathwish saying it should go.Dont know what country youre from,but we're happy here and its not an issue
Doctors in countries with universal healthcare (the entire first world) either work privately in partnership with the state, are directly paid by the state, or work privately. Where in your head do you see this as slavery?
Doctors have to follow rules and regulations whether they're privately or state-run. Following your logic I guess the police, firefighters, etc are slaves according to you too?
Yes somebody has to pay for it but the price manipulation by lobbyists, the medical companies, and the insurance companies are the crux of the problem I think.
has to do with a lot of regulations too. it is hard to have a surviving business that deals a lot of red tape and potential lawsuits etc. They can jack up the price because the cost of entry and stating in business is high. The only way to lower cost is making sure a lot of people are supplying health care services - small clinics, small hospitals free or little liability. But everyone is also looking for that million dollar malpractice win or like the mcdonalds 4mil lawsuit. It is just a culture of everyone going for the money so people protect from each other and that drives up cost and stops potential viable business from starting.
@@tatsuokimura5668 actually it would have been better if it was a business where everyone can compete with less regulation - it would make the cost way way down. Making something a right does not make it free... someone still needs to pay for it and if you make it a right without proper thought you could end up ruining it like making it cost way way more by forcing bad incentives. For example you could say food is a right and we force farmers to grow food and have to sell their goods at bad specific rates. If the incentive is not correct farmers end up doing something else and there would be less food making the cost of food higher overall. Because slavery and force labor does not work. Free healthcare makes doctors slaves of regulation and price control. That is why socialism does not work eventually after sometime of bad incentives. A better move of the govt is bulk billing - making some procedures cheaper by buying upfront for example x number of procedures at bidding. Here in AU healthcare is not free per se it comes from taxes and once you reach a certain bracket of salary it would be cheaper to opt to private insurance. And I see a lot of bulk billing for general stuff so I have yet to pay out of pocket but I pay for insurance... so healthcare is not totally free in AU - just cost less. And this system wont work if there are a lot of illegals which in AU is almost non existent because taxes need to cover the cost (for illusion of free) and illegals and non workers destroys that illusion. USA is problematic because it is an insurance led health care system and govt dont assist in bulk billing and force hospitals a lot of bad policies that hospitals now have to recoup somewhere else. There are a lot of non payers too in US - illegals, non workers, etc. Saying healthcare is not a business is a joke because it is. It has to employ people, lawyers, directors, staff etc. The cost of lawyers alone for hospitals in US make up a lot in increase cost to mitigate malpractice lawsuits. And whenever hospitals subsidizes something using its own money it will have to take from other paying customer to make it a viable business model... else hospitals will go bankrupt. Anyway there is a lot to explain more but I dont think you can read even this long.
@@earlnoli I know, is not for "free" , a health system costs the government, which has to use the state budget to finance it. And yes, there are also food programs for those who are going through a situation of poverty, at least the countries that best manage this know that it is not about giving away food, but about helping these people not to die of hunger, to overcome themselves and be more productive. However, what makes a comprehensive health system a human need is that it protects everyone, many people are not guilty of having accidents, being born with health problems or being attacked by armed madmen, you should know that very well in United States. So the fact of seeing a child dying of cancer because his family does not have money to pay for a treatment that he did not even think would exist is something completely absurd in a modern society, or worse, I have seen news of people who have stayed thousands of dollars in debt for coronavirus treatment even with private health insurance because insurance companies didn't want to cover certain services. Does that seem fair to you? Those people were, as a fan of the conservative right would say, irresponsible people who did not prevent? When they paid for years of insurance that ended up being useless.
The concept of individual rights still goes over most people's heads. When you believe that humans are self-destructive and life is a zero-sum game, you embrace socialism, so you can have bureaucrats save humans from themselves. Yet it is almost a certainty, that our modern wealth and standard of living did not come from such assumptions, but in fact that such assumptions are a byproduct of our feudal past. Envy is indeed a very strong reality altering drug.
I aggree, but you're describing authoriterianism, not socialism. Many socialists wants the state to take care of things, which is a terrible way to run things in a complex system. Libertarian values; that people should take control by them selves is much better, and leads to more prosperity, which is provable both psychologically and historically. But the imperialist states keep stuffing schools full of propaganda, and wage war for their own intetests. It needs to stop, and the system needs to go
@@badasunicorn6870 You're speaking of the text book theories of Socialism. In the real world, human nature will step in and sabotage that. All socialism ultimately leads to authoritarianism, because not everyone will contribute equally, or not participate at all. You always need a big government to enforce. In the end, the enforcers will not want to relinquish that power.
America spends far more on healthcare per person than the UK, Australia, New Zealand, Germany, France and Japan. And yet Americans have a lower life expectancy than people from any of these countries. Huge medical bills are the biggest cause of bankruptcies in the US, and the biggest reason for Go Fund Me campaigns.
No. That's propaganda. Are life expectancy way better than those countries. I have had six open heart surgeries. I have met many people around the world during my time in the hospital. My parents and I have asked all of them the same thing. Why are you here, and not back in your country receiving free care? They would give the same answer. It's horrible healthcare compared to the U.S.. Also, every new surgery invented is invented here because of our healthcare. With free healthcare, you only get what the government sees fit. Instead of them spending money trying to come up with better methods of treating patients. As an example. I myself, back in 2010, had a heart Cath procedure done. It was a new type of surgery, though. The typical surgery would be checking the condition of the patient's heart valves. This new surgery was a way to replace a heart valve with a new one, using the Cath procedure. It would save the person, from having an open heart surgery. I was the second person to ever have it done, and it saved me an open heart surgery. The doctor, who I forgot that man's name but he was from Germany, and I could look up his name, when I have the time. Had to come here to the States to invent the surgery since over in Europe, the government, with the "free healthcare" decides how it should be spent. Plus, what of the horror stories of "free healthcare"? Take, the recent story, of Indi Gregory. The government controls their free healthcare, and decided her treatment, although could be cured, was cut from treatment since the British government felt she had enough treatment. They ended up killing her. Wouldn't have happened in the U.S. Plus, actually, look at the real statistics of Europe and the U.S. More people die in European hospitals than the United States, patients have the same problem, and the survival rate is better in the U.S.
@@nathanlovik1753 30% of US bills go for administration, the executives, insurance companies, shareholders and management are ripping everyone off. Your drug companies and hospital are massively overcharging for all services, treatments and medicines. The end result is that you pay twice as much for a worse service with a lower average age of death, much worse infant and maternal mortality rates, and half a million bankruptcies every year.
@@nathanlovik1753those profits are in the billions even if in 3% to 8% nd because of the ACA, insurances often get subzidized by the government. So the private sector is benefiting. The public and the government are paying the price with our tax dollars, life's, and wallets. Why must we need profit to save someone's life, can you so easily put a price on someone's life.
It is not free, that's what's wrong :) It is paid by taxpayers not directly. It all costs work, effort and time. Healthcare staff does not work for free, do they? Someone says, alright the government pays for this or that. You pay for it, the government is just a manager you fund to make those matters more convenient :) It is like in a corporation, you may own 51% but you still hire people to manage everything for you. In general, the longer route it takes to get a product or a service to a client or recipient the more expensive it gets.
That’s why we don’t need for it to be that way. We could do it like some other countries where there is simple a large fund that your taxes go to and then if you need healthcare you can pull out money.
@@bibaolaitan5189 "Its stealing money"? well, with your overall taxes as huge as it is no wonder. But you see, free healthcare funds goes straight from your taxes and it doesnt cost that much, we can pay for it everyday it felt more like saving money to be honest. And on top of that, it is a shared burden which made the cost much lower so that free healthcare can be possible for everyone. Yes everyone, the money they "steal" doesn't just disappear because it is also returns to you when you are sick or get into an accident. You will also enjoy the free healthcare even if you are very god damn rich, they will still let you get free healthcare. "free healthcare" doesnt actually refers to charity workers who are indeed wanted to help you without pay, it refers to you get to enjoy expensive treatment without paying some 10.000 dollar directly, because it is covered a long time ago with your taxes. It eases your mind. Like i said, investing. Don't hesitate to invest in yourself buddy. But i bet you won't really get it even if i spill everything here. So sorry americans, but you are just not in this game.
@SunTai study after study shows that a M4A healthcare system would save taxpayers trillions of dollars over a 10 year period compared to the current system. Even the Koch bothers funded Mercury’s Institute study showed that taxpayers would save $2T. There is no real debate as to whether or not we should transition to a single payer healthcare system like the rest of the industrialized world. The only real debate should be how we should go about doing it within a period of a few years.
@SunTai I saw your comment about immigrants. It's wrong, though. According to the USCBP there's been a net negative in immigration to the U.S. That means more are leaving than coming in. Here's another interesting fact. Immingrants (documented and undocumented) pay approximately $14Billion annually into a social security program that most of them will never benefit from. And lastly, without the cheap labor that immigrants provide the farming industry this country's economy would collapse, and your tomatoes would easily be $10/lb.
@SunTai oh, and without those social programs, there'd be millions more in much worse situations. The goal shouldn't be to diminish or eliminate them. It should be to increase funding for them.
@SunTai Net negative influx simply means that there are more leaving than there are coming in. This whole illegal immigrant problem is a manufactured problem similar to "the war on Christmas" or "democrats trying to take away your guns". It distracts from the bigger problem which is corporations exploiting labor then pitting immigrants against working class Americans so that they don't take much of the blame.
"It's good for everybody. It's a win-win situation..." No it isn't good for everybody. It's good for the people that can pay for health care. Without universal health care, the poorest would be damned to die from illnesses that weren't their fault. I'm a libertarian on many positions, but I can't justify a society without universal health care. Without universal health care, any form of government is almost pointless. Why invest in infrastructure that all people should profit from, when the weakest members of our society die from illnesses that could be easily prevented. Why have a military to protect the citizens from foreign threats, when the goverment doesn't care about their survival in the first place. Yaron Brook is mostly critizing the fact that "free" health care isn't free. Of course it isn't and any supporter knows that. It's nothing more than a wrong label. "I don't want to pay for your health care. Why don't you pay for your health care?" Universal health care is intended for people who CAN'T pay for their free health care. If everybody could offord it, we obviously wouldn't need such a system. The costs of the health care of individuals isn't linked to their choices. In my opinion, the government should pay for basic health care. If you want better service, you can extra pay for it. Just abolish a lot of the way too big and useless bureaucracy of western countries and instead focus on what really matters for its citizens.
I guess survival of the fittest is the rule here. The argument is that money should not be forced out of the hands of those who are working and succeeding in life to pay for people who may be in their poorer situations due to, say, bad decision making. For example, about half of the homeless people in the local shelter near me are sex offenders. Should money be taken out of our paychecks to care for people who put themselves in that place? Or what about people who choose to stay with their beachfront homes when a hurricane comes but then they expect other people to risk their lives to save them when the waters come in and cover their houses? I say we should let the stupid people weed themselves out instead of treating them as if they deserve the wealth that we've worked for. The reason why you're not supposed to feed wild animals is that they could become dependent on handouts and become unable to find food for themselves; but unfortunately, there are those in our government who want to keep throwing out breadcrumbs just so they can get more voters.
Why should I pay for you to go to a doctor or hospital As far as I see is I don’t know you, there for I don’t care about you. pay your own medical bills
Don't use compassion for the poor to get free stuffs for yourself. If you really care for the poor then you go pay for someone else's medical bills, and not force everyone to pay just cause you supposedly care for the poor.
Us national debt= +18 trillion dollars. How much money is this new extension of the government going to cost? 17 trillion dollars... It will literally double the United States' debt over night. Why do people think this is a good idea? Let's be very generous and say 50 million Americans can't afford healthcare, that number is almost equal to the number of Americans that are considered poor (45 million). The only way you could realistically pay for this even in the long LONG term is to drastically cut every other government program (including the military and social welfare programs) for YEARS and raise taxes to the highest levels they have ever been. Thereby creating more poverty! Nothing is free!!!
Just so you know, the hospital can’t deny you service Bc you don’t have the money, you’ll just be in debt. So nobody is dying from the fact that there is no free healthcare, their just going broke
@James Street That concept is really childish. It doesn't work. It's like saying "if everyone takes care about himself everybody is taken care of". Which is not true
@@ilikelebronjames6426 Hospitals might not deny you service, but many people don’t get treatment because they are afraid of going broke. Also how is it okay for people to go broke because of something they may not have even been able to control
@James Street Hmm. Interesting thought. In fact, i challenge you to not use anything funded by taxpayers. This includes roads, sewage, information that you learned in public school, concrete or asphalt laid by the government, or any other tax funded services. It isn’t possible to just live on what you do for yourself. It’s quite the simple concept actually.
Love how he ties himself up trying to explain paying for health insurance and realizes he's sounding exactly like someone try to explain universal healthcare
@James Street he is not,every free country in the world has it apart from the self proclaimed freeest country in the world the usa, such a backward country its down with 3rd world standings when it comes to healthcare and that's not including where they sit educationally, like they said America is a third world country but wearing a Gucci belt
@@russe19642 America's not the third world country America would be a third world country if you couldn't have saved drinking water safe safe place to sleep safe place to get food. The third world country is a country like Somalia like Guatemala. Us has one of the biggest economies in the world it is not a third world country it's the fact that you can go to a school with electricity plumbing and heating and cooling. It's the fact that you can drive on a paved road. You want to see what the road looks like go to parts of Brazil they have slums in the city and tries to hide it.
@@kosrules1884 I mean we have safe food and water in Guatemala what are you talking bout , also the U.S interventions in Guatemala has done nothing but negative . So do your research before talking out your ass . One more thing Detroit is not looking good for a first world country that has a lot of resources .
Except it’s not “really” voluntary under the current system. If you “choose” not to get insurance, and something happens, you pay astronomical prices for care. That’s why 60% of bankruptcies are medical in nature. If I pay $10,000 per year for care now, and $10,000 per year under a single payer system, then what’s the difference? Well, besides the fact that in the single payer system, there are no surprises, your bill is easy to understand, you can walk into any doctors office for treatment, and you don’t go bankrupt because of an unexpected illness.
Here in Denmark there is broad consensus among politicians and the population that our healthcare system we do not want to get rid of, we are very happy with ongoing adjustments
Jørgen Skou my country is so ignorant about single prayer healthcare it’s a good thing. It’s no different than paying for the fire or police department. I am a danish American and it suck that we have to pay out of pocket. Why can’t Americans understand a group minded mentality is a good thing.
Yes I have, there is a lot here in Denmark who professes to Asatro natmus.dk/historisk-viden/danmark/oldtid-indtil-aar-1050/vikingetiden-800-1050/tro-og-magi-doed-og-ritual/hvad-er-asatro-i-dag/ da.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asetro www.religion.dk/asatro Sorry it is unfortunately in Danish but can be translated with google translator
Our current healthcare system in America isn't free. Our current system has a lot of government involvement through regulations which causes our system to be very expensive. We need less medical regulations.
Be careful what you wish for; you had no birth defects caused by thalidomide because your medical regulator did not license the drug for use in the US.
@@peterc.1618 firstly, you have no idea if I had birth defects or not so don’t say stupid things. Secondly, people thought that drug was safe because the government was regulating it in the first place. So yes, I do wish for less regulations. The government regulation caused the problem and gave people the false sense of safety.
@@MrIvesston By you I was referring to the US (I'm in the UK), I would of course have no idea of any afflictions you personally might have or what caused them. The FDA did not license thalidomide for use in the US.
I'm so glad I live in Europe where all the countries have this "free" (universal) health care. No one here is saying stuff like "Hey, let's cut our taxes and make everyone pay for his own healthcare." Sometimes, not everyone can afford the treatment. That is why we, Europeans, are willing to make a little sacrifice for the greater good and invest into a state so that the healthcare is provided to all the classes, both rich and poor. It's like a charity. (Oh, and you still have private doctors where you can pay more and not wait in line.) I'm not a socialist. USSR's Socialism destroyed our economy in less than 40 years after WW2. All I'm saying is there are some good and valid points in social system that are worth implementing. The fact that US doesn't have healthcare like we do is mind-boggling...
TeaParty1776 ??? Voters do not dictate how a doctor goes about his or her practice. They have no bearing in anything that is in the domain of medical expertise; they simply have a say in the availability and quality of those services.
@@MarkvsMaximvs Medical expertise must have some availability and quality. Medical expertise that is not available and has no quality could not exist. You rationalize your evasion of your collectivist politics, the initiation of force against productive people. You want to stick a gun in the faces of doctors but tell yourself that you are not doing it. Hitler said that mass murder was “the final solution.” “Work makes free” was on a sign at the entrance to his death camps. Altruism, the claim that man has no moral right to his own life, is hidden by the superficiality of mere benevolence.
It's like a charity but people who dont want to donate are forced... you dont see anything wrong with that? Voluntary charities can do much better than forced ones...
0:58 I would like to correct you here, it's not paid for with "other" peoples money, it's paid for with everyone's money, including your own. it's not everybody else paying without you paying anything, it's everybody paying, including yourself. 4:12 I would like you to back up this claim that we have very few choices who takes care of us. We can freely choose any doctor we want (assuming they have room to handle more patients of course), and we can freely choose which hospital we want to be treated on (unless of course they don't have a specific specialist that is needed) both problems that would be the same without universal healthcare. So I would like you to show the evidence for this particular claim that we have very few choices. I would also like to see some evidence for your earlier claim that 75% of all medical development comes from USA. Where did you get that number Ayn Rand Institute? you can't just pull a number out of thin air and think people will believe you, you have to cite your sources, give some proof of your claims.
It "works" in Europe because they don't have 300 million people where half of that figure is obese. European countries also expect the US to pay for most of the NATO budget too.
Europe has bigger population than the USA. I don´t get why you complain that we don´t have so obese population,maybe you should complain why you have and maybe try to do something with it. Almost all your food has sugar in it and atleast some bad ingredients,which are normaly used in the US, are banned in the EU and for good reasons. I agree,we don´t pay enough for our armies,but I guess that your military operations in active combat zones (to most of them you just walked in and no one forced you) costs more yet you ignore that. It is anyway pretty weird argument,you could do a lot of things and make your country much better,but you just said weird reasons why you can´t.
The size of American and illegals seems to be the major arguments. And Medicare for All can be provided with in the existing defense spending. It is cheaper.
In 2024 poland is expected to pay 4.12% of its GDP on its military. The USA is expected to pay 3.37%. Poland has free healthcare. The USA does not. Make it make sense
@@5SecondsOfFrame why not? OBVIOUSLY the us has the largest amount of innovation in the western world because its the biggest, but the proportion accurately measures a government's efficiency in creating healthcare innovation.
The first point is the term "healthcare" usually means medical treatments and institutionalization. I use the term healthcare for having a diet that promotes physical and mental well-being, not taking injurious substances like alcohol, tobacco, smoking, and drugs, proper exercise, sufficient sleep, sufficient clean water, proper work and play, handling my problems rationally, ethically, and morally, and being sufficiently careful to avoid accidents. Medical treatments and institutionalization do not insure health or physical and mental well-being. I look to the day when people use words accurately, and instead of calling medical treatments and institutionalization healthcare, calling it what it is, medical treatments and institutionalization.
So your sayings no to it because you think your being forced to do it. Let’s say you saw a car crash and the only way to help the person In the crash was to pay a toll. Would you not pay it to help them? So what you feel forced. Should we not have police or road because you feel forced into it. We don’t volunteers to pay tax. We do it because we want things as a society. No one is happy about it. It’s the price of the ride to live is a civilization. Why not strive for better. I guess you’d rather live in a society that wants to only help when we feel like it.
So many things wrong with this video. Healthcare IS compulsory for one. You cant choose not to be sick and when you are and you don't have coverage everyone pays anyway. Whats the point in paying insurance companies a profit for moving money around? I've lived in the US, England and Canada. The US has the worst healthcare out of all of them. The most expensive and the least effective. So if I don't want to pay for other people to use Air Traffic control can we have insurance for that too?
Well said mate, and its from someone who's lived in the three big powers. I don't know why Americans are so blind to the extortion there being asked to pay for. Surely they'd be happy saving that money for their kids, or to start a business, or something practical. I can't understand Americans at all. They don't read any books.
Knowing that you, your children, or your elderly parents will be able to get treatment when they need it is very reassuring and may be one of the reasons that the countries considered to have the happiest population are those with a nationalised health care system. I recently read a YT comment by an American living in Switzerland (I think) who said that he was able to continue playing American football well into his 40s because of the 'free' health care; in the US the insurance premium would have been unaffordable. That's a consideration I'd never thought about.
No. In a true free market with real competition and innovation and consumer choice, you would be able to buy insurance coverage for less than a phone bill.
@@Apjooz Reality is actually quite clear. Capitalism leads to the lower of cost, increasing of quality, diversity of markets, innovation, and ultimately abundance. Works with iphones, TVs, cars, and everything else.
Cameron Childers think for a moment about about what free markets and capitalism have done in other industries - think about the size and cost of computer power even 20 years ago. Thanks to capitalism and free enterprise, the phone that fits in your pocket has more power and a better display than the best desktop computers of those days. Imagine if instead of trying to come up with the latest smart phone innovation, entrepreneurs had the profit incentive in healthcare to come up with a cheaper way to produce drugs, or invest in new kinds of surgery, or to research cheaper, and more effective cancer treatments. Imagine the progress in quality and cost that could be made if we had freedom. Instead we have to sit and wait 4 hours to be seen for a broken arm... but “it’s okay!” we are told, because it’s “free”. We have to settle for dirt poor quality, with cancer patients wait 3 months for a scan, to then be told it’s too late now to treat. Everyone should be outraged, but instead people are brainwashed with “the government should spend more on healthcare to solve these problems”
@Aaron Tirmanator oh thats every accident right thats such a shallow and incorrect way of living there’s something wrong in the usa univeral healthcare is the wau
@Aaron Tirmanator why should I pay for the Army if I don't wanna fight anyone? Why should I pay for Police or Firefighters if I have never been involved in a robbery, or an omicide or a fire? How funny that in the united States' guns are a right and to kill someone is a right roo, but to save someone's life is not a human right? Healthcare system in all other countries in the world is conceived to save lives, not to make money
@Aaron Tirmanator in all the nations with universal healthcare, doctors are payed very well But we pay only doctors. We don't give nothing to let insurance's managers getting richer and richer, and we pay just the right price for medicines, because governments fix the prices in our favor. How do you explain that one dose of insuline costs in Europe and Canada just 10 or 15 euros, while in the States the same insulin costs 600 dollars? May be someone from his holiday's house in the Barbados could tell you one or two things.
Maybe buddy if your government stopped squandering money on their military there'd be enough money to care for the people that live in their country too
I have had six open heart surgeries. I have met many people around the world during my time in the hospital. My parents and I have asked all of them the same thing. Why are you here, and not back in your country receiving free care? They would give the same answer. It's horrible healthcare compared to the U.S.. Also, every new surgery invented is invented here because of our healthcare. With free healthcare, you only get what the government sees fit. Instead of them spending money trying to come up with better methods of treating patients. As an example. I myself, back in 2010, had a heart Cath procedure done. It was a new type of surgery, though. The typical surgery would be checking the condition of the patient's heart valves. This new surgery was a way to replace a heart valve with a new one, using the Cath procedure. It would save the person, from having an open heart surgery. I was the second person to ever have it done, and it saved me an open heart surgery. The doctor, who I forgot that man's name but he was from Germany, and I could look up his name, when I have the time. Had to come here to the States to invent the surgery since over in Europe, the government, with the "free healthcare" decides how it should be spent. Plus, what of the horror stories of "free healthcare"? Take, the recent story, of Indi Gregory. The government controls their free healthcare, and decided her treatment, although could be cured, was cut from treatment since the British government felt she had enough treatment. They ended up killing her. Wouldn't have happened in the U.S. Plus, actually, look at the statistics of Europe and the U.S. More people die in European hospitals than the United States, patients with the same problem, and the survival rate is better in the U.S.
@@lewjg2933 I think it should. In fact, I'm pretty sure it's illegal in most places to let someone die if you could've reasonably saved them without posing any danger to yourself
@@keifer7813 that’s not true at all, for example if someone is drowning in a pool and and a olympic swimmer is pool side and doesn’t help him, he isn’t going to be prosecuted by any country I know of.
@@lewjg2933 Fair, maybe I misunderstood the law in this regard. However, I would ask you why you have an issue with being required to help save someone's life with your taxes?
@@keifer7813 I live in England so I am required to pay for “free healthcare” which can use if I wish, government health is extremely expensive in the uk it’s extremely inefficient, for example if I want a doctors appointment it would probably take 3 weeks plus to get one and the last time I went to the hospital with a suspected broken rib I was at the hospital for over 7 hours. A great quote I heard about healthcare is you can pay with money or you can pay with time.
No country with a national health scheme refers to it as “free” health care. It’s a taxpayer funded service; just like education, police and the legal system and a myriad other services. Why Americans accept a health service that spends three times more, than the British NHS, yet delivers a more inefficient, expensive and overall worse outcomes and still believe it is superior to anything? The simple fact that doctors’ bills won’t send you bankrupt, except in the USA shouts that the system is flaws, in MHO.
In anything other than universal healthcare, paid by taxation and free at the point of use, the poor only have one choice - to die in agony because they can't afford insurance. The system in the United States is not win-win. In the UK, if you think you're having a heart attack you dial 999, but in the United States, many people in a similar situation would not dial 911 for fear of bankruptcy.
actually yeah a lot of people do, there's a form of free healthcare in the US called medicaid and you end up paying very little maybe $100 or less after medicaid is involved.
you can have universal healthcare without having a tax funded system like the NHS. low income people cannot afford healthcare right now because of the government screwing up the market with import restrictions, artificial monopolies, and allowing a lack of price transparency. no other private sector business is allowed to run this way
@@kevinprzy4539 Do you even know what 100$ is? If you work for minimum wage it's 14 hours. And we're talking about people who don't have money already. How is that helping that helping them?
@@Waikeur depends on the state, minimum wage in mine is $10.10 and if you work minimum wage most hospitals and insurance companies will practically let you get off free.
American healthcare hasn't been working for decades. Insurance companies, which are businesses first and foremost, choose what to pay for. Not the insuree nor the doctors. They decide what's "medically necessary". They can deny you for almost any reason under the sun. I have experienced that constantly. I needed an ultrasound to even have a chance to obtain contraception for my health. They didn't pay for any of it stating it was not medically necessary due to my plan. I switched the following year. So im paying more per month to the same company just to get them to actually pay for my bills. Every day in different States people just randomly lose their coverage for say Medicare/Medicaid. And some of these people who were supposed to be eligible, they just get a letter in the mail and they can't read it due to their age/eyesight. We don't allow easy access to healthcare either, stating it's not a right. If you're uninsured usually they wont turn you away, but you'll be seated with the bill. I'd rather my taxes go to people who need help than to keep lining the pockets of billionaires in the Government or insurance companies who don't do diddly squat when you need to see a doctor.
Not a socialist, but that's a nonsensical catchphrase of hers. Also there's no 'other peoples money', it's collective funds spent on collective needs. A semantic misrepresentation.
I take issue with the title ´Free Health Care ´. The title should reflect what it actually is , i.e. tax funded health care. Those of us that experience such a system know full-well that it is funded with our tax contributions. We really do not have a problem with that. The title allotted to the clip greatly undermines any content due to the inability to get even the title correct. To be taken seriously you must do better than this . I am astonished by such a basic error . Try harder next time !
but what you’re saying is that it is justifiable for hospitals to be able to profit of people being sick. you’re saying people should just get insurance like they would for a car, a phone or their house. i don’t think it is acceptable to compare someone’s life, health and well-being to an object
The US pays in total 18% percent as the EU pays rughly 11% of theyr GDP... the system i cheaper and has better results, because nobody will be denied of a treatment just because the insurance doesn't cover it...
No, you are making a big assumption. You are assuming that the clients have the freedom to switch providers. Many people simply cannot afford insurance and so either must live without it or get it through their employer if they have one that provides insurance, in which case they need to use whatever policy their employer provides. The private sector would work if everyone could simply switch to providers with the best care, but the reality is that many cannot, and end up getting screwed.
Exactly lol!! Why would I be against helping other people have access to healthcare that they can't afford otherwise? It's my money sure, but they're also people who I care about.
@@lordBritish1 Why would you pay for the roads you drive on? Other people use roads you never use. Why would you pay for police interventions on someone else? Why would you pay for the army? Why would you pay for a fire department if your house may never go up in flames but others might? Need i go on? Your argument failed.
Free health care is an insurance. Run by a government it does not need to make a profit. This is why you get your health care for less money than in the private system. It is a superior system. In Finland the cost per capita is less than 40% of the cost in the US and the results are better. You simply get more for your money, and you get the same quality service even when you have no money.
All research indicates that the other 30 or so industrialized countries which have government funded universal healthcare far outperform the US and spend less per capita. Right there this guy’s explanation falls apart when empirically tested. But what about people with pre-existing conditions? Should they all just get driven into medical bankruptcy? Also, don’t confuse the innovations in medical science with the organization of medical care. The US has a lot of good researchers (many of which work out of government funded universities), but that is a completely separate thing from our ghastly, cruel and inefficient healthcare system which kills approximately 60,000 people a year.
I've been to countries with free healthcare. waiting times can be a pain and quality isn't always the best. government should never control healthcare.
In a scenario where the human race operates in a high state of optimisation as a species, with each individual human (synonymous with each individual cell in a body) fully supported, global free healthcare is mutually and wholly beneficial. Enhancing our relationship with the natural environment and patterning is too. Furthermore, there is no need for any common form of finance as a communal value system. Everyone has his or her own internal value system that can collectively regulate the economy with no need for finance in any form, in a balanced and ecological manner; allowing the natural, self-regulatory patterning of human nature to be expressed.
but the vast majority of those choose to take on risks and habits that cause them to get sick. even people on low income can afford decent food and housing and avoid cigarettes and drugs if they are responsible. all medical professionals know lifestyle is more predictive of life expectancy than any fancy medical care we could offer.
@@SeptimusTSS conservatives use the word free because dickheads like you think it is,but pay out of your taxes and before you say oh youve got higher taxes imagine calling what you pay in insurance a month as tax and youd be paying more plus you meds are being gouged and insurance companies look for loopholes to not cover you,but you dont care do you y'all got your guns and ya freedom right?
@@russe19642 I'm sorry socialist use the words free, conservatives use the words "there is no such thing as a free lunch". let's look at Bernie's plan "That is why we are going to make public colleges and universities tuition free" if that's not using the word free I don't know what is. I don't know if u actually read or study the field or just regurgitate what socialists are saying but look at the cost of health care accounted for inflation and you will see that prices start going up when the government starts intervening into the sector. How is it that the sector with the most gov intervention is the most expensive? Can you explain that? I presume it would not be a stretch to say you would want gov to control the food in our economy knowing that it is also important for the survival and is essential. But that being the case I would point you to the famine in ex USSR particularly in Ukraine, as an example of what not to do. Now that you know that health care cost have increased when goivernment started intervention into the sector compared to all other sectors where government has gotten out I hope u change your mind.
@@pablomaquaire6251 youre typical conservative regurgitating right wing talking points,always highlight russia or Venezuela when trying to articulate their arguments but never use Scandinavian countries which a social democrats because you know it destroys your argument.True nothing is for free just like private healthcare in the usa isnt either and once you calculate the cost on top of your already tax you pay youd be worst off under that system.In the usa the cost par head of population for healthcare is over$8000 per year compared to countries with universal at just over $3000 per year and no to your next argument about paying more taxes because here in australia you dont pay more than20% up to 40,000 and 27% up to 80,000 and at a sliding rate,so the first 40,000 is only taxed at 20%.The cost of paying for universal healthcare is a levy at 2% and if you earn under a certain amount which i cant recall off the top of my head you dont pay it but i think if you earn under 60,000 you dont pay,id have to check that.But here in australia as it would be in the usa the majority of people would fit into the 50,000 to 100,000 bracket at about 60% of the population and 30% below that who wouldnt pay and 10% over 100,000.Having universal healthcare here doesnt stop you from having private either,its not like its the only way here but private healthcare is so expensive and most people elect not to take it up.We haven't got free university system gere its a hecs based system similar to the usa,its a fairer system that unlike tge usa doesnt send people broke and only starts repayments when you start to earn at a certain level,so no i never said its free,you have to pay for it but once you wiegh up all the facts universal is far better system and whilst the one you champion leaves 30 unisured and another 60 million under insured,everyone is covered whether you're rich or poor unlike yours.Anyway im not here to convince you,because you'll never be convinced im just here to give you the facts to counter your bullshit conservative talking points and muddying the waters with baseless arguments about other countries with so called universal healthcare,every other country in the world has it apart from usa and you should start to question why instead if defending something indefensible
@@russe19642 I’m sorry for speaking with my bullshit conservative talking points again, but I would like to say again that I don’t support America’s healthcare system. It is not a private system, it is a partially public and private system, I argue for a system owned by the people (in private hands); not a government bureaucracy. First , the point about Nordic countries is that they are not a socialist state, they actually are very capitalist countries. They rank extremely high on the economic freedom index, which looks for ease of business, trade, tax burden, property rights, monetary freedom, labor freedom, government spending… the Prime minister of Denmark even said "I know that some people in the US associate the Nordic model with some sort of socialism. Therefore, I would like to make one thing clear. Denmark is far from a socialist planned economy. Denmark is a market economy". So your argument of Denmark being socialist is even attacked by its own people and leaders. Second, once again I have to say the price in the US is so high because since the 1960s, mostly Lyndon Johnson, the american government has interfered with private enterprise, which has led prices up. For example Obama decided to push price ceilings on insurance, which led to a market shortage. Your third point paying more taxes, imagine the government as having two hands, one that gives, the gentle hand, and one that takes, the harsh hand. Both of them must be equal, so when the government increases spending he needs to increase revenue, in one way or the other. By following this logic socialized healthcare costs more to the government, so more taxes. You can of course try a progressive income tax to dilute the harm, but it’s still present. For example, in a private system it would work like car insurance, people would enter in to pay for those who have accidents. Fourth point, yes you can have a private healthcare system, but it is directed for the rich, that’s why it’s expensive. It’s only for people who can pay the taxes and then have enough money left over to pay for private hospitals and insurance. In a fully private system you would have companies for all income brackets. Fifth point, in the us some people, like the young elect not to get insurance because they don’t want to spend money when statistically their health is fine, 80% of its people are under 42 years of age. Anyway i'm not here to convince you,because you'll never be convinced im just here to give you the facts to counter your socialist talking points and muddying the waters with baseless arguments about a country with so called private healthcare, every country in the world has some sort of socialized healthcare and you should start to question why, instead if defending something indefensible. Look up bandwagon fallacy. It's not because lot’s of people are doing it that it validates the fact yourlogicalfallacyis.com/bandwagon.
The Ayn Rand Institute is a supported by the ultra-rich Koch family. That means that this guy is required, as a libertarian to side with the top 10% of the richest Americans. Libertarians can always be counted on to present policies that protect the rich at the expense of the rest of us.
@@chetanyasingh1204 So the tobacco studies of the 20th century that found tobacco to be harmless and even beneficial to health should be taken seriously despite being funded by the tobacco companies?
So in the UK where I live, people know healthcare isn't free; we know it's tax-payer funded, but the point is that it's 'free at the point of use', which significantly eases the deep fear of sudden illness shared by pretty much everyone. We essentially use the state as the insurer through paying our taxes, and the state doesn't make a profit on the money like a private insurer would. This is only a personal view, but the idea of someone being able to withhold medicine for me - essentially to allow me to die - because through various reasons, let's say bad luck, unless I fatten their pay packet, makes me uncomfortable. The UK system means you're not faced with sudden, and highly variable, pay-at-the-point-of-use healthcare, and - most importantly - no one is profiting, meaning that what is paid for is the actual value of the healthcare. Also, there is a parallel private healthcare market which only wealthier people choose to use because it's more efficient etc. BUT THE CRUCIAL POINT is that it's only more efficient BECAUSE people are willing to pay a large premium. The NHS is so good that to use the privates you have to fund them sufficiently to be even better, so private's really expensive. This generates a false assumption that private healthcare is really good and NHS healthcare is quite bad, whereas NHS healthcare is amazing but private healthcare is amazinger because people are willing to pay stupid sums of money. In my view, you'd be a mug to use private healthcare in most cases, as you would to send your kid to a private school in a system where the state funded school are already very good. Spend the money on something else, dingbat. Yes, the theory here is that it's acceptable to tax wealthy people for poorer people's healthcare (and actually, the wealthy are proportionately taxed less than the poor for NHS spending) because they can afford it. When you see the results, a healthy country that knows it's covered by a collectively-financed good, all that that produces is solidarity and good feeling. Notice at the London olympics, we had a big celebration of the NHS in our opening ceremony. British people LOVE the NHS because it works.
The waiting times are ridiculous in NHS leading to people dying because they have to wait over a year for surgery in 1,400 examples in Wales in 2012 alone. it's more a game of Russian Roulette than a race to not finish last. Both systems have flaws, while the flaws for NHS apply to 90 percent of the population and the flaws of free -market healthcare apply to a tiny percentage that would probably get free healthcare anyway from a charity.
The NHS is also helping to bankrupt the UK. The proposition is that one persons need is not a claim on another persons rights, we all have the same rights (freedom) If someone is ill etc the idea is that in a true free market health care system those that are poor etc would either ask for help from people they know or use a health charity (which is voluntarily funded) It is also possible that a Doctor/Hospital could also have a charitable arm. The essence is, if you believe in freedom you have to respect individual rights above all else. It is not about being selfish based on doing whatever you like, it is based on using the mind to evaluate situations rationally. Given that it is surely rational to want to help voluntarily those that need it if it agrees with your personal ethics. So on a free society there is no forcing someone help against their right not to (tax) but help would happen voluntarily as we are benevolent to plight if others.
but if i don't want that why should i pay for it that is why you have freedom of choice if you want to be in that system you can pay for your encurance
Ghkjdf Hbjhffh I have freedom because I know that I will receive health care if I get a serious disease. Which eases the load on my parents that don't have to work 12 hours a day just to pay for my health care and probably end up getting health issues themselves that needs to be paid too, just piling the bills even more
@Timothy Damoulis You do realise that that logic is basically insurance. You just said you pay for healthcare, via taxes, regardless of whether or not you use it. That is the exact concept of an insurance policy where you pay a premium just in case, and may or may not use it. So the original poster is right - the government in this case is effectively the insurer, but like the OP points out, they don't profit on the same level individual insurer does, there isn't the same level of waste as a result of numerous insurers leading to vastly different costs of healthcare as there is in the US, and these factors make it fundamentally less expensive in the UK. So you pay your taxes and you may or may not use it, but how do you think it works in the US? You pay your health insurance premiums and you may or may not use it - same deal. The difference is in the US the insurance payments are vastly more expensive than what the average UK citizen's tax contribution directly attributable to healthcare is. Not only that but then when you need to use it you need to pay $1000, $2000 etc. as co-pay. So guess which the more expensive system is? Not to mention the guy in the video seems to base his argument off of well i'm rich so I won't get sick or I'm young so I won't get sick and so why should I be subsidising all these old sick people? But I can say as someone who is 28 and lives a relatively comfortable life that I just spent two weeks seriously ill in hospital. Despite being relatively well-off, I know that the cost of the same treatment in the US would bankrupt me. Maybe for the ultra-ultra rich they might be saving money by being under a privatised system but for myself, and for the majority of people, it is always going to be vastly cheaper to pay taxes for the NHS, which average $300 per month in premiums (and that's when you're young and healthy!) and $1,000+ co-pay when it's needed. Which do you honestly think is going to cost you more over your lifetime, especially as your premiums increase when you get older?
The argument he has is very weak. The state takes the same role as the insurance company, therefore it is similar system. The difference is that economically weak groups have the opportunity to receive medical care. If it will be eligible, what will be financed by state, nobody will come across, and everything is voluntary to participate, you can as well privatize the military, police and fire brigade. Many countries are satisfied with state-financed healthcare. There is nothing wrong with the system, just another way of thinking. Proper freedom is found in nature. Darwin called it "the survival of the fittest". Nature is cruel and unfair.
Niklas Molén except that the government has no incentive to do the job well because they are using somebody’s money on somebody else. Private insurance companies have incentive to stay in the business, so they have incentive to get the best deal with least cost to their clients. Government always ask for a bigger budget if their programs fail. They don’t close down.
I like how whenever you get someone who is against universal healthcare they latch on to the term "free Healthcare " as if people are really dumb enough to think it cost nothing comon now. If I'm gonna send half my paycheck (exaggerating) to an entity for health care I rather it be to an entity that will be accepted everywhere someone that will not stress me out as bad as my potential injury when its time to pay/check-out. Someone that won't ruin my credit because my insurance was rejected or they don't cover certain procedures so not only am I left with a insurance premium that left me high and dry ,but also a hospital visit that I have to pay out of pocket. Not to mention the price I would be paying for the hospital visit is not the price the insurance would be paying for the hospital visit it's much higher because I don't have the clout to negotiate a lower price.
That was taxes do. If you believe this cut all taxes and cancel government, including all benefits. Pave your own roads, pay your own school fees, pay for the police every time you call them
This "No such thing as free health care" is a tiring argument. We're all well aware that taxes pay for free health care, but it's without a doubt a better way. I wouldn't swap my free healthcare for anything
@@crotchy7667 But so can we too. There isn´t problem to change the doctor or clinic,and I am not exactly sure how can you know if your saving will be enough. Free healthcare and social state gives people stability and we don´t have to worry about our future.
Using his argument, why should any of us pay for police or fire departments? My house never gets caught on fire. My house is never broken into. I’ve never directly been the victimized a crime. Why should I have I have to pay for any of that year after year? It’s fitting that the ayn rand institute would make such an asinine argument. 😆
The correct question isn't "why should any of us pay for police or fire departments?" I would pay for those services voluntarily. The correct question is "why should you and others be allowed to point government guns at literally everyone and force them pay for those services through taxes?" I really wish people would realize that using force against peaceful people is immoral, it is evil...for any reason. If the market provided those services and we could voluntarily pay for them, there would be many more police and fire department services to choose from...which would increase quality of the services and decrease the costs. It would also decrease the costs by allowing me to pay for those services directly, instead of through a government bureaucracy.
Do the police protect when funded by government dollars? The answer is no! There used to be private police departments and private fire departments in the US
But I don't want my money to pay for other poeple's healthcare... Me and my family are completely healthy and I almost never actually pay for healthcare. I prefer using my money to go on a vacation than pay someone else's healthcare.
Amen. Regardless of how small the burden would be through distribution, which isn't true because many people, especially poor people will not pay their fair share, I should still not have to be forced to pay one cent to someone else who made poor health decisions. You have to believe that adults are capable of being responsible and making their own choices or not. If they have the right to choose an abortion, have sex, hold a job, then they have the right to pay for their own healthcare.
@@eyalswissa3705 But why would you pay for roads you don't drive on? You Americans are hilarious. (edit: sorry not all of you) What you don't get is that you don't pay for someone elses healthcare. EVERYONE pays for EVERYONE's healthcare. Are you sure you will stay perfectly healthy the rest of your life?
Sad America doesn’t have free healthcare like practically every country in Europe, yet we consider ourselves better than all of those nations yet we let people die because they can’t afford treatment or medicine
I do not think that when people say "there is no such thing as a free lunch", they don't mean that you don't pay cash. They mean that choosing to do a certain thing requires some effort or sacrifice. When you go fishing, you are getting a "free" lunch in the sense that it costs you no money. However, it does cost you time or effort. The expression means that getting something involves trading one resource or opportunity for another.
I like how he says I don't want to pay for your health care, because he's relatively healthy and financially stable. Let something terrible happen to him where he can't make and sustain himself, I bet you everything he just said will change. It doesn't matter if you want to pay for somebody else's health care that's the point of living inside of a country where we all help each other and have to cohabitate. I don't want to have to pay for your house burning down, but it doesn't matter because my taxes go to it. I don't want to have to pay to deal with your civil dispute with your wife when the cops have to come to take care of it, but our taxes go to it and I have to pay it. That's the point it's a service for the entire country. This little selfish dweeb. Every universal system started because we realized that it's inhumane not to have it as such. They used to watch your house burned down if you didn't have a special insignia on the outside of your house telling the fire department that you give money to them for their services. We realized that this is a terrible thing to do, as other people just watch their houses burn down and people die... because they don't pay into the fire department's funding. This is the exact same thing with healthcare, we watch people die because they don't have enough money for their own insurance. The selfishness on his part is absolutely ridiculous; I don't understand why anybody would even entertain this nonsense.
@Unspeakable Unemployment rate is under 3.6%, the vast majority of people work and would be contributing to universal healthcare through taxes. It also makes healthcare cheaper for everyone .. rich and poor due to better rates
Nobody in Europe calls it "Free Health care"... Nobody!! Everybody in Europe who has national governed health care knows that we pay this through taxes. Only US observers call it "Free". Simply because they are not told how it works - The level of uninformed opinions on this matter in the US is un- believeable.. It is also arrogant. The cost of running it is far below the US system. -And we are not falling behind in standards.. But all this you can find out by looking into this yourself instead of taking this guy for granted...
The life and death issue of healthcare delivery touches upon the most basic question of all: Why are we here? Some people believe that we are here for no divine reason and demand an equitable share of everyone else's money for their; needs. Others believe we are here for an inherent spiritual reason, in which holistic health and inequities are part of this ultimate practical goal. Moreover, people do not create themselves equitably, in health or anything else in life, so they should not be entitled to everyone else's money for their poor lifestyle choices. Mandating free healthcare for all means that many religious believers in holistic practical spirituality will be forced to go against their religious teachings, and then have to share their losses with the deluded non-believers who are rendered complicit in their losses, perhaps even those in the same family as the deceased. The most egregious example of this is a death from a violent perpetrator, who was not properly prevented with the inherent limitations of modern medicine, monopolized in public healthcare
To those that call healthcare a right I hope u understand that not all rights are free. In the US constitution we have the rights to bear arms and have an attorney but we dont get free guns and lawyers. A right is just something u can get or do without the government saying no but it doesn’t mean it’s free.
branc u have the right to buy a gun for self defense. Killing someone isn’t a right. Either way healthcare costs money everywhere whether through taxes or insurance
This is a poor argument for the right idea. Universal health care is not ideal simply because of the principle of personal responsibility and that's it. We should not be paying for your type 2 diabetes or your sex-change or any other lifestyle choices you are making. Emergency and preventive services are something to be considered but it's really just as simple as that. I'm not interested in saving the country from the consequences of their lifestyle choices... ridiculous. Insurance companies could be nonprofit organizations... no need for profits. Arguing that the profits are necessary is equally as ridiculous. Just keep it simple and rely on logic not profit motive.
It is not free health care, even if you don't pay directly for it. It has a cost and this cost may be paid by the government with tax contributions. Since taxes come from citizens, no-cost-to-you health care is not a present either. After all, you are paying for it through your and others tax contributions.
Sure, but it's much cheaper. Here in Germany they take about 600 Euro monthly from my salary. For that, my whole family of 5 people is fully covered, including dentists, any operations, anything. I can call emergency anytime I need. I stay in hospital as long as necessary. I don't pay for any prescribed pills. I get about 100% of my salary for the first 6 weeks of illness per year and 70% for the next 18 months, if needed. And my wife and kids have the same benefits. I don't think any US insurance could offer anything like that even for much greater sum..
How dare a gov't force people to pay for other people's services. It's like you didn't even watch the video. Gov't-run healthcare is about force. Forcing healthy people to pay for sick people. Force. I guess you're okay with slavery, since that's exactly what it is.
Except the insurance companies are trying to take your money, not help you. So called "Free" health care doesn't put you one heart attack away from selling your house to pay for your bypass operation.
I love how you all are so against free healthcare saying “it’ll increase taxes”, and “the government can’t afford it”, yet you all are perfectly fine with the government giving 55% of your taxpayer dollars to multi billion dollar corporations. Makes a lot of sense.
You mean like the pharmaceutical industry? Or the health insurance companies or the “military industrial complex” that’s an extremely vague statement bud.
@@Aheroswelcome14 I don't volunteer to pay for subsidizing Hollywood, or Twitter, Facebook or any of these tech platforms. It's also ridiculous and socialist garbage. I'll say at least people who wanted universal "free" government healthcare asked for it. Government is awful at handling almost everything, so I don't believe their healtcare would be worth anything though.
@@caseyjones831 We're taxed at 13-15% on practically all items. Every $1000 spent is an additional $300 (for me in Ontario) to the government. You end up spending thousands a month in sales tax alone, forget income tax. I'd rather be sales taxed at 7% so as to cut tax costs down 50%, you can then take that money and save it for a medical emergency. Our health care is also at a lower quality that also pays some doctors significantly less. It takes an average of 19.8 weeks to receive treatment from a physician whereas that number is a mere 24 days in America. There are pros and cons to the socialist system, but there's no reason to adopt it. A poor family struggling in Canada still has to pay 13-15% in sales tax, hurting them more and more with each necessary purchase.
What's the point in having freedom to choose your own healthcare if you can't afford it? In principal Mr. Brooks makes sense but there will never be a healthcare system that is purely free of government 100% free market driven...this is not the case in the US and it is why US healthcare is the worst of both worlds. I'd rather have universal healthcare paid for by taxes free at the point of need. I live in the UK and I have received excellent care all my life, never having to pay anything up front. I think American's are being fed a constant stream of lies regarding socialised healthcare.
Think again now that this Corona virus has become a global pandemic.. free health care for all is not equipped for these kind of disasters/crisis! I even know some people in Denmark that said it's a disaster over there and that no one is getting medical attention. They are running out of everything and it's taking so long to get medications that is next to impossible to get anything. It's already extremely hard & slow to get care just on a regular day but now they are up the creek and with no control of their health. Being able to regulate our own health care plan without the government involved is a freedom and most ppl from socialist countries would say the same..
The moment we start looking on Health like a business, we are lost! Business is based on negotiations which benefits both sides. I wanna see this man sales skills and how convenient he will be with the doctors when striking a deal for treatment, if he got a cancer. Don’t bite this crap! Putting live on pedestal is whats making as humans!
Our Health Care system discourages entrepreneurship. I've seen it. Whether it's the government collective running it or the insurance collective. The choices we currently have are far from Ayn Rand's desire for men to reach their full potential.
Smule Magic Piano you already do this via insurance companies. We all put in money and whoever needs the healthcare takes the money out. The only difference is that private companies get to choose your coverage, and make a profit that doesn’t have to be allocated. There’s no scenario in which it is better to have insurance over universal.
Ohr Shmuel don’t people still have to file taxes at the end of the year, or pay health insurance? That’s kinda the same thing. And plus with the taxes, u only pay when u earn a certain amount of money.
I have had six open heart surgeries. I have met many people around the world during my time in the hospital. My parents and I have asked all of them the same thing. Why are you here, and not back in your country receiving free care? They would give the same answer. It's horrible healthcare compared to the U.S.. Also, every new surgery invented is invented here because of our healthcare. With free healthcare, you only get what the government sees fit. Instead of them spending money trying to come up with better methods of treating patients. As an example. I myself, back in 2010, had a heart Cath procedure done. It was a new type of surgery, though. The typical surgery would be checking the condition of the patient's heart valves. This new surgery was a way to replace a heart valve with a new one, using the Cath procedure. It would save the person, from having an open heart surgery. I was the second person to ever have it done, and it saved me an open heart surgery. The doctor, who I forgot that man's name but he was from Germany, and I could look up his name, when I have the time. Had to come here to the States to invent the surgery since over in Europe, the government, with the "free healthcare" decides how it should be spent. Plus, what of the horror stories of "free healthcare"? Take, the recent story, of Indi Gregory. The government controls their free healthcare, and decided her treatment, although could be cured, was cut from treatment since the British government felt she had enough treatment. They ended up killing her. Wouldn't have happened in the U.S. Plus, actually, look at the real statistics of Europe and the U.S. More people die in European hospitals than the United States, patients have the same problem, and the survival rate is better in the U.S.
@@kyled1673 Not 'high' taxation. If i would live in the US and had surgery, i would have to sell my house. Now i don't and can live my life without worries.
1) The universe is a free lunch, the ultimate free lunch according to some physics. 2) A reason could be to keep down the cost. 3) Why have other things as army, police and such founded by the government? 4) Is it really a free market if you _need_ a thing otherwise you die, quickly and in pain? 5) You can still have composition if a government founded area, it's just that the government is the only buyer 6) The us way isn't always the right way.
I disagree “free healthcare” is better and would be cheaper all the government would do is pay the bill to the private hospitals and instead of paying insurance companies you would just pay taxes and hopefully less then what the insurance company was Getting
"These two states passed great victories in healthcare reform, and if you don't agree with it---just keep being ripped off by the private health insurance companies." I get "ripped off" because of government mandates. And I don't care how many people want "universal care" - it can only be obtained through force and the threat of force upon those that don't agree. If I "don't like it", I cannot merely continue paying private insurance (or none) - I am forced to contribute to your scheme.
the cost model is broke; by failing to give proper care I became disabled and YOU are paying for me for the rest of my life.... haha. All I needed was the right Dx! and I'm drawing pay and still don't get the right Dx. Keep those checks coming. Thank you!
@@SeptimusTSS They are partly in the US in some states. In Texas you quite often see 'this stretch of road paid by the Workers of Walmart' (or some other company). I wonder how free the donation was. In Seattle , Washington some guy was giving me a lift to Portland to do the Portland midsummer Duathlon so I was in his house. And the Phone rang and it was the Fire Brigade, would he like to make a donation. So there you go, both roads and the Fire Brigade are partly funded by donations. And maybe by payments by people who call them out. Because when I called 911 for an ambulance, the Police and the Fire Brigade showed up as well. So I do wonder if they took a portion of the Ambulance fee.
@@Ali-gh7rj What about those in need of social funding, you say you have a large Govt. Well, I never knew. Just keep sales tax and that pays for everything. Hmmm, what about medicare for pensioners (as they don't have healthcare provision via insurance)? Children orphaned and at risk, finding places for them to stay doesn't come cheap. Of course if you just want to leave orphaned children on the street, fair enough. i guess you want to go back to Victorian times and have beggars on the street and the old in the workhouse.
"You have to confiscate my money in order to give you health care that you don't pay for," right after literally saying that we all pay for it. Not a strong start.
well why should i pay for the war machine? or for the roads? or for oil subsidies? or for corporate jet subsidies?
Heeey! There's my anarcho-buddy, eh?
It’s a free country that you choose to live in. If you choose to live in America you contribute to your safety, to the roads you use everyday, and for the gas you consume.
@Ivan Schlotzky I agree with you
Socialism for the rich, radical capitalism for the 99%.
@@joshsmit779
It should be radical capitalism for 100%
"What's Wrong With Free Health Care?"
Besides the fact, that nothing is free?
Only conservatives love phrasing it as free,its not free but niether are govt schools,police forces or fire brigades but you dont like knowing that do you because you cant argue they're nit,usa usa usa youre not taking my guns bullshit doesnt cut the mustard and for being the best country in the world?well there's so many other countries in the world better,my own country australia pisses all over you guys and we're an island so we dont have to build a wall,hows that going for as well
Russe Lmao, you guys have a shit healthcare system. It’s funny because I’m pretty sure around half of your population has private insurance, yet you have universal healthcare in your amazing country. The gov has to deal with your rural half so they send grants to pay regionally for healthcare, talk about inefficient allocation of resources
@@leoquintero437 umm no we dont have a shit healthcare,its actually the 2nd best but its true the conservatives here dont want it and undermine it by giving tax allowances for private and make those that dont have it pay an extra 2% a year for every year theyre not in,but aussies are smarter than that and the universal healthcare will never be replaced and even conservatives know its a political deathwish saying it should go.Dont know what country youre from,but we're happy here and its not an issue
@@Ali-gh7rj u pay taxez mate, and also ur treatment costs 1000 dollars but they charge u 10000 dollars, ok, yes
@@russe19642 we have the 2nd best healthcare but our freinds at wallstreet charge 500 dollars for an epi pen that costs 3 dollars to makr
"Someone has to pay for health care"
Taxes, income tax, taxes on goods and services.
oh I forgot, it all went to military.
The government spends more on healthcare than the military but okay whatever.
have you heard of Medicare and Medicaid?
US Healthcare budget: 1.6 Trillion Dollars
US Military Budget: 750 billion dollars
@@noahremnek3615 the US? because thats just untrue
@@noahandersen3300 Yes the US spends more on healthcare than the military. Look at our budgets.
If I have a "right" to your labor and the products of your labor, then what principle limits my claims on you?
The principle of free and democratic elections enabling change of government and policies !
Nothing.Thats why you have shrtages.And rationing.
Doctors in countries with universal healthcare (the entire first world) either work privately in partnership with the state, are directly paid by the state, or work privately. Where in your head do you see this as slavery?
Liam Gordon because to get paid the Doctors have to do what the stae tell tem what to do.They have to follow the rules and regulations.
Doctors have to follow rules and regulations whether they're privately or state-run. Following your logic I guess the police, firefighters, etc are slaves according to you too?
Yes somebody has to pay for it but the price manipulation by lobbyists, the medical companies, and the insurance companies are the crux of the problem I think.
has to do with a lot of regulations too.
it is hard to have a surviving business that deals a lot of red tape and potential lawsuits etc. They can jack up the price because the cost of entry and stating in business is high.
The only way to lower cost is making sure a lot of people are supplying health care services - small clinics, small hospitals free or little liability. But everyone is also looking for that million dollar malpractice win or like the mcdonalds 4mil lawsuit.
It is just a culture of everyone going for the money so people protect from each other and that drives up cost and stops potential viable business from starting.
You try to stop that and many will quit. Doctors shortage everywhere. Subpar treatment. At the end the question comes to you want your life or money.
@@earlnoli Health is not a bussiness, is a right.
@@tatsuokimura5668
actually it would have been better if it was a business where everyone can compete with less regulation - it would make the cost way way down.
Making something a right does not make it free... someone still needs to pay for it and if you make it a right without proper thought you could end up ruining it like making it cost way way more by forcing bad incentives.
For example you could say food is a right and we force farmers to grow food and have to sell their goods at bad specific rates. If the incentive is not correct farmers end up doing something else and there would be less food making the cost of food higher overall. Because slavery and force labor does not work. Free healthcare makes doctors slaves of regulation and price control. That is why socialism does not work eventually after sometime of bad incentives.
A better move of the govt is bulk billing - making some procedures cheaper by buying upfront for example x number of procedures at bidding. Here in AU healthcare is not free per se it comes from taxes and once you reach a certain bracket of salary it would be cheaper to opt to private insurance. And I see a lot of bulk billing for general stuff so I have yet to pay out of pocket but I pay for insurance... so healthcare is not totally free in AU - just cost less. And this system wont work if there are a lot of illegals which in AU is almost non existent because taxes need to cover the cost (for illusion of free) and illegals and non workers destroys that illusion.
USA is problematic because it is an insurance led health care system and govt dont assist in bulk billing and force hospitals a lot of bad policies that hospitals now have to recoup somewhere else. There are a lot of non payers too in US - illegals, non workers, etc. Saying healthcare is not a business is a joke because it is. It has to employ people, lawyers, directors, staff etc. The cost of lawyers alone for hospitals in US make up a lot in increase cost to mitigate malpractice lawsuits. And whenever hospitals subsidizes something using its own money it will
have to take from other paying customer to make it a viable business model... else hospitals will go bankrupt.
Anyway there is a lot to explain more but
I dont think you can read even this long.
@@earlnoli I know, is not for "free" , a health system costs the government, which has to use the state budget to finance it. And yes, there are also food programs for those who are going through a situation of poverty, at least the countries that best manage this know that it is not about giving away food, but about helping these people not to die of hunger, to overcome themselves and be more productive.
However, what makes a comprehensive health system a human need is that it protects everyone, many people are not guilty of having accidents, being born with health problems or being attacked by armed madmen, you should know that very well in United States. So the fact of seeing a child dying of cancer because his family does not have money to pay for a treatment that he did not even think would exist is something completely absurd in a modern society, or worse, I have seen news of people who have stayed thousands of dollars in debt for coronavirus treatment even with private health insurance because insurance companies didn't want to cover certain services. Does that seem fair to you? Those people were, as a fan of the conservative right would say, irresponsible people who did not prevent? When they paid for years of insurance that ended up being useless.
The concept of individual rights still goes over most people's heads.
When you believe that humans are self-destructive and life is a zero-sum game, you embrace socialism, so you can have bureaucrats save humans from themselves. Yet it is almost a certainty, that our modern wealth and standard of living did not come from such assumptions, but in fact that such assumptions are a byproduct of our feudal past.
Envy is indeed a very strong reality altering drug.
I think you have summed it up brilliantly! Thank you for that, especially the last part. Respect 🤛
I aggree, but you're describing authoriterianism, not socialism. Many socialists wants the state to take care of things, which is a terrible way to run things in a complex system. Libertarian values; that people should take control by them selves is much better, and leads to more prosperity, which is provable both psychologically and historically. But the imperialist states keep stuffing schools full of propaganda, and wage war for their own intetests. It needs to stop, and the system needs to go
@@badasunicorn6870 You're speaking of the text book theories of Socialism. In the real world, human nature will step in and sabotage that. All socialism ultimately leads to authoritarianism, because not everyone will contribute equally, or not participate at all. You always need a big government to enforce. In the end, the enforcers will not want to relinquish that power.
@@My2Cents91 by that logic, public schools, police, army and libraries should not exist.
My2Cents Good point.
America spends far more on healthcare per person than the UK, Australia, New Zealand, Germany, France and Japan.
And yet Americans have a lower life expectancy than people from any of these countries.
Huge medical bills are the biggest cause of bankruptcies in the US, and the biggest reason for Go Fund Me campaigns.
No. That's propaganda. Are life expectancy way better than those countries.
I have had six open heart surgeries. I have met many people around the world during my time in the hospital. My parents and I have asked all of them the same thing. Why are you here, and not back in your country receiving free care? They would give the same answer.
It's horrible healthcare compared to the U.S.. Also, every new surgery invented is invented here because of our healthcare. With free healthcare, you only get what the government sees fit. Instead of them spending money trying to come up with better methods of treating patients. As an example. I myself, back in 2010, had a heart Cath procedure done.
It was a new type of surgery, though. The typical surgery would be checking the condition of the patient's heart valves. This new surgery was a way to replace a heart valve with a new one, using the Cath procedure. It would save the person, from having an open heart surgery. I was the second person to ever have it done, and it saved me an open heart surgery.
The doctor, who I forgot that man's name but he was from Germany, and I could look up his name, when I have the time. Had to come here to the States to invent the surgery since over in Europe, the government, with the "free healthcare" decides how it should be spent. Plus, what of the horror stories of "free healthcare"? Take, the recent story, of Indi Gregory.
The government controls their free healthcare, and decided her treatment, although could be cured, was cut from treatment since the British government felt she had enough treatment. They ended up killing her. Wouldn't have happened in the U.S. Plus, actually, look at the real statistics of Europe and the U.S. More people die in European hospitals than the United States, patients have the same problem, and the survival rate is better in the U.S.
@@detroitandclevelandfan5503I recently saw video about a girl that USA doctors refused to operate and she get treated in Ukraine
Taiwan has one of the best healthcare 🇹🇼🎉🎉
The American Healthcare system, brilliant for insurance companies, disastrous for patients.
Health insurance companies margins are only between 3 to 8% and a few LOSE money ie there are no profits. How are they benefiting?
@@nathanlovik1753 30% of US bills go for administration, the executives, insurance companies, shareholders and management are ripping everyone off. Your drug companies and hospital are massively overcharging for all services, treatments and medicines. The end result is that you pay twice as much for a worse service with a lower average age of death, much worse infant and maternal mortality rates, and half a million bankruptcies every year.
@@nathanlovik1753those profits are in the billions even if in 3% to 8% nd because of the ACA, insurances often get subzidized by the government. So the private sector is benefiting. The public and the government are paying the price with our tax dollars, life's, and wallets. Why must we need profit to save someone's life, can you so easily put a price on someone's life.
@@nathanlovik1753 that is so dumb its crazy
@TheEldenSandwich Red Herring adhominem fallacy. You haven't refuted anything I said, merely attacked me.
It is not free, that's what's wrong :) It is paid by taxpayers not directly. It all costs work, effort and time. Healthcare staff does not work for free, do they? Someone says, alright the government pays for this or that. You pay for it, the government is just a manager you fund to make those matters more convenient :) It is like in a corporation, you may own 51% but you still hire people to manage everything for you.
In general, the longer route it takes to get a product or a service to a client or recipient the more expensive it gets.
But overall cost is lower.
@@balsarmy facts
That’s why we don’t need for it to be that way. We could do it like some other countries where there is simple a large fund that your taxes go to and then if you need healthcare you can pull out money.
@@balsarmy yea, by stealing money from some specific people...
@@bibaolaitan5189 "Its stealing money"? well, with your overall taxes as huge as it is no wonder. But you see, free healthcare funds goes straight from your taxes and it doesnt cost that much, we can pay for it everyday it felt more like saving money to be honest.
And on top of that, it is a shared burden which made the cost much lower so that free healthcare can be possible for everyone. Yes everyone, the money they "steal" doesn't just disappear because it is also returns to you when you are sick or get into an accident. You will also enjoy the free healthcare even if you are very god damn rich, they will still let you get free healthcare. "free healthcare" doesnt actually refers to charity workers who are indeed wanted to help you without pay, it refers to you get to enjoy expensive treatment without paying some 10.000 dollar directly, because it is covered a long time ago with your taxes. It eases your mind. Like i said, investing.
Don't hesitate to invest in yourself buddy.
But i bet you won't really get it even if i spill everything here. So sorry americans, but you are just not in this game.
Other countries have free healthcare. Like Canada, the UK, etc. They're doing quite well. Let's just do what they're doing.
@SunTai study after study shows that a M4A healthcare system would save taxpayers trillions of dollars over a 10 year period compared to the current system. Even the Koch bothers funded Mercury’s Institute study showed that taxpayers would save $2T. There is no real debate as to whether or not we should transition to a single payer healthcare system like the rest of the industrialized world. The only real debate should be how we should go about doing it within a period of a few years.
@SunTai I saw your comment about immigrants. It's wrong, though. According to the USCBP there's been a net negative in immigration to the U.S. That means more are leaving than coming in. Here's another interesting fact. Immingrants (documented and undocumented) pay approximately $14Billion annually into a social security program that most of them will never benefit from. And lastly, without the cheap labor that immigrants provide the farming industry this country's economy would collapse, and your tomatoes would easily be $10/lb.
@SunTai oh, and without those social programs, there'd be millions more in much worse situations. The goal shouldn't be to diminish or eliminate them. It should be to increase funding for them.
@SunTai The negative influx applies to all immigrants, documented and undocumented.
@SunTai Net negative influx simply means that there are more leaving than there are coming in. This whole illegal immigrant problem is a manufactured problem similar to "the war on Christmas" or "democrats trying to take away your guns". It distracts from the bigger problem which is corporations exploiting labor then pitting immigrants against working class Americans so that they don't take much of the blame.
"It's good for everybody. It's a win-win situation..."
No it isn't good for everybody. It's good for the people that can pay for health care. Without universal health care, the poorest would be damned to die from illnesses that weren't their fault.
I'm a libertarian on many positions, but I can't justify a society without universal health care. Without universal health care, any form of government is almost pointless. Why invest in infrastructure that all people should profit from, when the weakest members of our society die from illnesses that could be easily prevented. Why have a military to protect the citizens from foreign threats, when the goverment doesn't care about their survival in the first place.
Yaron Brook is mostly critizing the fact that "free" health care isn't free. Of course it isn't and any supporter knows that. It's nothing more than a wrong label.
"I don't want to pay for your health care. Why don't you pay for your health care?"
Universal health care is intended for people who CAN'T pay for their free health care. If everybody could offord it, we obviously wouldn't need such a system. The costs of the health care of individuals isn't linked to their choices.
In my opinion, the government should pay for basic health care. If you want better service, you can extra pay for it. Just abolish a lot of the way too big and useless bureaucracy of western countries and instead focus on what really matters for its citizens.
I guess survival of the fittest is the rule here. The argument is that money should not be forced out of the hands of those who are working and succeeding in life to pay for people who may be in their poorer situations due to, say, bad decision making. For example, about half of the homeless people in the local shelter near me are sex offenders. Should money be taken out of our paychecks to care for people who put themselves in that place? Or what about people who choose to stay with their beachfront homes when a hurricane comes but then they expect other people to risk their lives to save them when the waters come in and cover their houses? I say we should let the stupid people weed themselves out instead of treating them as if they deserve the wealth that we've worked for. The reason why you're not supposed to feed wild animals is that they could become dependent on handouts and become unable to find food for themselves; but unfortunately, there are those in our government who want to keep throwing out breadcrumbs just so they can get more voters.
That's America for you
You took the words right out of my mouth
Why should I pay for you to go to a doctor or hospital As far as I see is I don’t know you, there for I don’t care about you. pay your own medical bills
Don't use compassion for the poor to get free stuffs for yourself. If you really care for the poor then you go pay for someone else's medical bills, and not force everyone to pay just cause you supposedly care for the poor.
Selfish, selfish, selfish greedy. Someday the poor will come for you and your children don’t worry.
Us national debt= +18 trillion dollars. How much money is this new extension of the government going to cost? 17 trillion dollars...
It will literally double the United States' debt over night. Why do people think this is a good idea? Let's be very generous and say 50 million Americans can't afford healthcare, that number is almost equal to the number of Americans that are considered poor (45 million). The only way you could realistically pay for this even in the long LONG term is to drastically cut every other government program (including the military and social welfare programs) for YEARS and raise taxes to the highest levels they have ever been. Thereby creating more poverty! Nothing is free!!!
Actaully the us national debt is 20 not 18 trillion.
Well you have to look to the future, you have to invest longterm not shortterm which is what America is currently doing
Pedro Tomé No, healthcare is a service, not a right.
Pedro Tomé Privilege**
@@dawoodh1932 To 30% Americans yes, to 70% of Americans and the rest of the modern world... no.
But our system sucks and it doesn’t work in the rich people just want us to die
You are right, people should die because people with lifetimes worth of money can’t give up a fraction of what they have to help others.
Just so you know, the hospital can’t deny you service Bc you don’t have the money, you’ll just be in debt. So nobody is dying from the fact that there is no free healthcare, their just going broke
@Jd Bn And everyone should be forced to pay the amount he is able to pay.
@James Street That concept is really childish. It doesn't work. It's like saying "if everyone takes care about himself everybody is taken care of". Which is not true
@@ilikelebronjames6426 Hospitals might not deny you service, but many people don’t get treatment because they are afraid of going broke. Also how is it okay for people to go broke because of something they may not have even been able to control
@James Street Hmm. Interesting thought. In fact, i challenge you to not use anything funded by taxpayers. This includes roads, sewage, information that you learned in public school, concrete or asphalt laid by the government, or any other tax funded services. It isn’t possible to just live on what you do for yourself. It’s quite the simple concept actually.
I pay for my perscritions 25%. I get benefits from work . When i didn't i bought single benefits. It is not that expensive.
Love how he ties himself up trying to explain paying for health insurance and realizes he's sounding exactly like someone try to explain universal healthcare
These lobbyists are beyond pathetic , they fight for big pharma and big pharma alone .
@James Street he is not,every free country in the world has it apart from the self proclaimed freeest country in the world the usa, such a backward country its down with 3rd world standings when it comes to healthcare and that's not including where they sit educationally, like they said America is a third world country but wearing a Gucci belt
@@russe19642 America's not the third world country America would be a third world country if you couldn't have saved drinking water safe safe place to sleep safe place to get food. The third world country is a country like Somalia like Guatemala. Us has one of the biggest economies in the world it is not a third world country it's the fact that you can go to a school with electricity plumbing and heating and cooling. It's the fact that you can drive on a paved road. You want to see what the road looks like go to parts of Brazil they have slums in the city and tries to hide it.
@@kosrules1884 by comparison to other developed nations it's third world mate. But it doesn't have to be.
@@kosrules1884 I mean we have safe food and water in Guatemala what are you talking bout , also the U.S interventions in Guatemala has done nothing but negative . So do your research before talking out your ass . One more thing Detroit is not looking good for a first world country that has a lot of resources .
Except it’s not “really” voluntary under the current system. If you “choose” not to get insurance, and something happens, you pay astronomical prices for care. That’s why 60% of bankruptcies are medical in nature. If I pay $10,000 per year for care now, and $10,000 per year under a single payer system, then what’s the difference? Well, besides the fact that in the single payer system, there are no surprises, your bill is easy to understand, you can walk into any doctors office for treatment, and you don’t go bankrupt because of an unexpected illness.
Here in Denmark there is broad consensus among politicians and the population that our healthcare system we do not want to get rid of, we are very happy with ongoing adjustments
Jørgen Skou my country is so ignorant about single prayer healthcare it’s a good thing.
It’s no different than paying for the fire or police department.
I am a danish American and it suck that we have to pay out of pocket. Why can’t Americans understand a group minded mentality is a good thing.
@@shanesorensen7878 Is it rune your picture
Your image resembles a Viking jewelery
Yes because I am a religion called asatru/heathenism I don’t know if you have ever heard of this revival.
Yes I have, there is a lot here in Denmark who professes to Asatro
natmus.dk/historisk-viden/danmark/oldtid-indtil-aar-1050/vikingetiden-800-1050/tro-og-magi-doed-og-ritual/hvad-er-asatro-i-dag/
da.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asetro
www.religion.dk/asatro
Sorry it is unfortunately in Danish but can be translated with google translator
Lol enjoy paying more than half your income to the government and your inferior health tech...I'm truly jealous.
Our current healthcare system in America isn't free. Our current system has a lot of government involvement through regulations which causes our system to be very expensive. We need less medical regulations.
Be careful what you wish for; you had no birth defects caused by thalidomide because your medical regulator did not license the drug for use in the US.
@@peterc.1618 firstly, you have no idea if I had birth defects or not so don’t say stupid things. Secondly, people thought that drug was safe because the government was regulating it in the first place. So yes, I do wish for less regulations. The government regulation caused the problem and gave people the false sense of safety.
@@MrIvesston By you I was referring to the US (I'm in the UK), I would of course have no idea of any afflictions you personally might have or what caused them. The FDA did not license thalidomide for use in the US.
I'm so glad I live in Europe where all the countries have this "free" (universal) health care. No one here is saying stuff like "Hey, let's cut our taxes and make everyone pay for his own healthcare." Sometimes, not everyone can afford the treatment. That is why we, Europeans, are willing to make a little sacrifice for the greater good and invest into a state so that the healthcare is provided to all the classes, both rich and poor. It's like a charity. (Oh, and you still have private doctors where you can pay more and not wait in line.)
I'm not a socialist. USSR's Socialism destroyed our economy in less than 40 years after WW2. All I'm saying is there are some good and valid points in social system that are worth implementing. The fact that US doesn't have healthcare like we do is mind-boggling...
And when health care providers are forced to obey your voting instead of their own minds, what will happen?
@Jamie Brennan Do you want your doctor to be guided by his knowledge of medicine or by voters ignorant of medicine?
TeaParty1776 ??? Voters do not dictate how a doctor goes about his or her practice. They have no bearing in anything that is in the domain of medical expertise; they simply have a say in the availability and quality of those services.
@@MarkvsMaximvs Medical expertise must have some availability and quality. Medical expertise that is not available and has no quality could not exist. You rationalize your evasion of your collectivist politics, the initiation of force against productive people. You want to stick a gun in the faces of doctors but tell yourself that you are not doing it. Hitler said that mass murder was “the final solution.” “Work makes free” was on a sign at the entrance to his death camps. Altruism, the claim that man has no moral right to his own life, is hidden by the superficiality of mere benevolence.
It's like a charity but people who dont want to donate are forced... you dont see anything wrong with that? Voluntary charities can do much better than forced ones...
4:17 emergency is a broad term. But if you are in a near death experience then there are no queues nor papers which you need to sign
0:58 I would like to correct you here, it's not paid for with "other" peoples money, it's paid for with everyone's money, including your own. it's not everybody else paying without you paying anything, it's everybody paying, including yourself.
4:12 I would like you to back up this claim that we have very few choices who takes care of us. We can freely choose any doctor we want (assuming they have room to handle more patients of course), and we can freely choose which hospital we want to be treated on (unless of course they don't have a specific specialist that is needed) both problems that would be the same without universal healthcare. So I would like you to show the evidence for this particular claim that we have very few choices.
I would also like to see some evidence for your earlier claim that 75% of all medical development comes from USA. Where did you get that number Ayn Rand Institute? you can't just pull a number out of thin air and think people will believe you, you have to cite your sources, give some proof of your claims.
It "works" in Europe because they don't have 300 million people where half of that figure is obese. European countries also expect the US to pay for most of the NATO budget too.
Europe has bigger population than the USA.
I don´t get why you complain that we don´t have so obese population,maybe you should complain why you have and maybe try to do something with it. Almost all your food has sugar in it and atleast some bad ingredients,which are normaly used in the US, are banned in the EU and for good reasons.
I agree,we don´t pay enough for our armies,but I guess that your military operations in active combat zones (to most of them you just walked in and no one forced you) costs more yet you ignore that. It is anyway pretty weird argument,you could do a lot of things and make your country much better,but you just said weird reasons why you can´t.
The size of American and illegals seems to be the major arguments. And Medicare for All can be provided with in the existing defense spending. It is cheaper.
In 2024 poland is expected to pay 4.12% of its GDP on its military.
The USA is expected to pay 3.37%.
Poland has free healthcare.
The USA does not.
Make it make sense
Actually in proportion to population Switzerland has the most healthcare innovation.
But we're not talking about proportion...
@@5SecondsOfFrame why not? OBVIOUSLY the us has the largest amount of innovation in the western world because its the biggest, but the proportion accurately measures a government's efficiency in creating healthcare innovation.
Bruh here in Canada we have free health care no trouble, Doctors still get paid here🤨
Not enough and certainly not what they deserve given the amount of training and education the job requires.
@@levity90 that's just not true
It's a scam for obese people to take our tax
@@Christian-ki5js good thing you edited the first part out, cause it totally missed the point and bullshit
@@johannespete3760 I figured my point is far more concise now 😂
The first point is the term "healthcare" usually means medical treatments and institutionalization.
I use the term healthcare for having a diet that promotes physical and mental well-being, not taking injurious substances like alcohol, tobacco, smoking, and drugs, proper exercise, sufficient sleep, sufficient clean water, proper work and play, handling my problems rationally, ethically, and morally, and being sufficiently careful to avoid accidents.
Medical treatments and institutionalization do not insure health or physical and mental well-being.
I look to the day when people use words accurately, and instead of calling medical treatments and institutionalization healthcare, calling it what it is, medical treatments and institutionalization.
So your sayings no to it because you think your being forced to do it. Let’s say you saw a car crash and the only way to help the person In the crash was to pay a toll. Would you not pay it to help them?
So what you feel forced. Should we not have police or road because you feel forced into it. We don’t volunteers to pay tax. We do it because we want things as a society. No one is happy about it. It’s the price of the ride to live is a civilization. Why not strive for better.
I guess you’d rather live in a society that wants to only help when we feel like it.
So many things wrong with this video. Healthcare IS compulsory for one. You cant choose not to be sick and when you are and you don't have coverage everyone pays anyway. Whats the point in paying insurance companies a profit for moving money around? I've lived in the US, England and Canada. The US has the worst healthcare out of all of them. The most expensive and the least effective. So if I don't want to pay for other people to use Air Traffic control can we have insurance for that too?
Well said mate, and its from someone who's lived in the three big powers. I don't know why Americans are so blind to the extortion there being asked to pay for. Surely they'd be happy saving that money for their kids, or to start a business, or something practical. I can't understand Americans at all. They don't read any books.
It’s not I pay for your healthcare. It is, everyone pays for everyone’s healthcare. Two different perspectives
Knowing that you, your children, or your elderly parents will be able to get treatment when they need it is very reassuring and may be one of the reasons that the countries considered to have the happiest population are those with a nationalised health care system.
I recently read a YT comment by an American living in Switzerland (I think) who said that he was able to continue playing American football well into his 40s because of the 'free' health care; in the US the insurance premium would have been unaffordable. That's a consideration I'd never thought about.
Would the free healthcare taxation be cheaper then paying for health insurance?
No. In a true free market with real competition and innovation and consumer choice, you would be able to buy insurance coverage for less than a phone bill.
I would like that kind of fantasy land but reality is messy.
@@Apjooz Reality is actually quite clear. Capitalism leads to the lower of cost, increasing of quality, diversity of markets, innovation, and ultimately abundance. Works with iphones, TVs, cars, and everything else.
In the long run it would be way more expensive with “free healthcare”
Cameron Childers think for a moment about about what free markets and capitalism have done in other industries - think about the size and cost of computer power even 20 years ago. Thanks to capitalism and free enterprise, the phone that fits in your pocket has more power and a better display than the best desktop computers of those days. Imagine if instead of trying to come up with the latest smart phone innovation, entrepreneurs had the profit incentive in healthcare to come up with a cheaper way to produce drugs, or invest in new kinds of surgery, or to research cheaper, and more effective cancer treatments. Imagine the progress in quality and cost that could be made if we had freedom. Instead we have to sit and wait 4 hours to be seen for a broken arm... but “it’s okay!” we are told, because it’s “free”. We have to settle for dirt poor quality, with cancer patients wait 3 months for a scan, to then be told it’s too late now to treat. Everyone should be outraged, but instead people are brainwashed with “the government should spend more on healthcare to solve these problems”
HealthCare is a Human Right! Rich or Poor! 🌈
Water is a human right, is that subsidized by the government?
@@KarimAlKharsa a lot of countries do have their water supply nationalised. Therefore: yes.
Obviously the best Health Care system is when a person injured in a car accident asks you not to call an ambulance because it costs too much.
@Aaron Tirmanator oh thats every accident right thats such a shallow and incorrect way of living there’s something wrong in the usa univeral healthcare is the wau
@Aaron Tirmanator why should I pay for the Army if I don't wanna fight anyone? Why should I pay for Police or Firefighters if I have never been involved in a robbery, or an omicide or a fire?
How funny that in the united States' guns are a right and to kill someone is a right roo, but to save someone's life is not a human right?
Healthcare system in all other countries in the world is conceived to save lives, not to make money
@Aaron Tirmanator How is it possible that countries with free healthcare have doctors?
@Aaron Tirmanator in all the nations with universal healthcare, doctors are payed very well
But we pay only doctors. We don't give nothing to let insurance's managers getting richer and richer, and we pay just the right price for medicines, because governments fix the prices in our favor. How do you explain that one dose of insuline costs in Europe and Canada just 10 or 15 euros, while in the States the same insulin costs 600 dollars? May be someone from his holiday's house in the Barbados could tell you one or two things.
Yeah, so poor (useless) dude dies and smart people don't pay for him.
What is wrong with free healthcare?
It is cheaper for the taxpayer
It covers more people
It works
It makes the people more healthy
you are delusional
@@highrepublic3264 sir this is a Wendy's restaurant. If you are here to argue points the door it to your left
Maybe buddy if your government stopped squandering money on their military there'd be enough money to care for the people that live in their country too
True
Medicare for All is cheaper than existing costs. No need to worry about military spending.
There’s just too many horror stories about US healthcare to make this argument convincing.
I have had six open heart surgeries. I have met many people around the world during my time in the hospital. My parents and I have asked all of them the same thing. Why are you here, and not back in your country receiving free care? They would give the same answer.
It's horrible healthcare compared to the U.S.. Also, every new surgery invented is invented here because of our healthcare. With free healthcare, you only get what the government sees fit. Instead of them spending money trying to come up with better methods of treating patients. As an example. I myself, back in 2010, had a heart Cath procedure done.
It was a new type of surgery, though. The typical surgery would be checking the condition of the patient's heart valves. This new surgery was a way to replace a heart valve with a new one, using the Cath procedure. It would save the person, from having an open heart surgery. I was the second person to ever have it done, and it saved me an open heart surgery.
The doctor, who I forgot that man's name but he was from Germany, and I could look up his name, when I have the time. Had to come here to the States to invent the surgery since over in Europe, the government, with the "free healthcare" decides how it should be spent. Plus, what of the horror stories of "free healthcare"? Take, the recent story, of Indi Gregory.
The government controls their free healthcare, and decided her treatment, although could be cured, was cut from treatment since the British government felt she had enough treatment. They ended up killing her. Wouldn't have happened in the U.S. Plus, actually, look at the statistics of Europe and the U.S. More people die in European hospitals than the United States, patients with the same problem, and the survival rate is better in the U.S.
1:15 So if your neighbour was dying and you could've helped prevent their death - you won't do anything?
Not the kind of society I'd wanna live in
He’s saying the government shouldn’t force me to help him, if a individual wants to help him that their choice.
@@lewjg2933 I think it should. In fact, I'm pretty sure it's illegal in most places to let someone die if you could've reasonably saved them without posing any danger to yourself
@@keifer7813 that’s not true at all, for example if someone is drowning in a pool and and a olympic swimmer is pool side and doesn’t help him, he isn’t going to be prosecuted by any country I know of.
@@lewjg2933 Fair, maybe I misunderstood the law in this regard. However, I would ask you why you have an issue with being required to help save someone's life with your taxes?
@@keifer7813 I live in England so I am required to pay for “free healthcare” which can use if I wish, government health is extremely expensive in the uk it’s extremely inefficient, for example if I want a doctors appointment it would probably take 3 weeks plus to get one and the last time I went to the hospital with a suspected broken rib I was at the hospital for over 7 hours. A great quote I heard about healthcare is you can pay with money or you can pay with time.
No country with a national health scheme refers to it as “free” health care. It’s a taxpayer funded service; just like education, police and the legal system and a myriad other services. Why Americans accept a health service that spends three times more, than the British NHS, yet delivers a more inefficient, expensive and overall worse outcomes and still believe it is superior to anything? The simple fact that doctors’ bills won’t send you bankrupt, except in the USA shouts that the system is flaws, in MHO.
It is generally referred to as "free at the point of delivery" in the UK.
In anything other than universal healthcare, paid by taxation and free at the point of use, the poor only have one choice - to die in agony because they can't afford insurance. The system in the United States is not win-win. In the UK, if you think you're having a heart attack you dial 999, but in the United States, many people in a similar situation would not dial 911 for fear of bankruptcy.
Or die because they couldn’t afford an ambulance to take them to hospital.
actually yeah a lot of people do, there's a form of free healthcare in the US called medicaid and you end up paying very little maybe $100 or less after medicaid is involved.
you can have universal healthcare without having a tax funded system like the NHS. low income people cannot afford healthcare right now because of the government screwing up the market with import restrictions, artificial monopolies, and allowing a lack of price transparency. no other private sector business is allowed to run this way
@@kevinprzy4539 Do you even know what 100$ is?
If you work for minimum wage it's 14 hours.
And we're talking about people who don't have money already. How is that helping that helping them?
@@Waikeur depends on the state, minimum wage in mine is $10.10 and if you work minimum wage most hospitals and insurance companies will practically let you get off free.
American healthcare hasn't been working for decades. Insurance companies, which are businesses first and foremost, choose what to pay for. Not the insuree nor the doctors. They decide what's "medically necessary". They can deny you for almost any reason under the sun.
I have experienced that constantly. I needed an ultrasound to even have a chance to obtain contraception for my health. They didn't pay for any of it stating it was not medically necessary due to my plan. I switched the following year. So im paying more per month to the same company just to get them to actually pay for my bills.
Every day in different States people just randomly lose their coverage for say Medicare/Medicaid. And some of these people who were supposed to be eligible, they just get a letter in the mail and they can't read it due to their age/eyesight. We don't allow easy access to healthcare either, stating it's not a right. If you're uninsured usually they wont turn you away, but you'll be seated with the bill.
I'd rather my taxes go to people who need help than to keep lining the pockets of billionaires in the Government or insurance companies who don't do diddly squat when you need to see a doctor.
“The trouble with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people’s money.” -Margaret Thatcher
Not a socialist, but that's a nonsensical catchphrase of hers. Also there's no 'other peoples money', it's collective funds spent on collective needs. A semantic misrepresentation.
And Maggie never seriously messed with the NHS.
I don’t want to pay for the road this guy drives on. Why should the government confiscate my money?
I take issue with the title ´Free Health Care ´. The title should reflect what it actually is , i.e. tax funded health care. Those of us that experience such a system know full-well that it is funded with our tax contributions. We really do not have a problem with that. The title allotted to the clip greatly undermines any content due to the inability to get even the title correct. To be taken seriously you must do better than this . I am astonished by such a basic error . Try harder next time !
The title is just the question he’s being asked “what’s wrong with free healthcare” he even says that it’s taxpayer funded healthcare
Obviously you didn't watch the video
but what you’re saying is that it is justifiable for hospitals to be able to profit of people being sick. you’re saying people should just get insurance like they would for a car, a phone or their house. i don’t think it is acceptable to compare someone’s life, health and well-being to an object
The US pays in total 18% percent as the EU pays rughly 11% of theyr GDP... the system i cheaper and has better results, because nobody will be denied of a treatment just because the insurance doesn't cover it...
No, you are making a big assumption. You are assuming that the clients have the freedom to switch providers. Many people simply cannot afford insurance and so either must live without it or get it through their employer if they have one that provides insurance, in which case they need to use whatever policy their employer provides.
The private sector would work if everyone could simply switch to providers with the best care, but the reality is that many cannot, and end up getting screwed.
I'll pay my taxes for it.
Exactly lol!! Why would I be against helping other people have access to healthcare that they can't afford otherwise? It's my money sure, but they're also people who I care about.
Why should I have to pay for something else to see a doctor is they need to see a doctor they should pay for it, not Me
@@lordBritish1 Why would you pay for the roads you drive on? Other people use roads you never use. Why would you pay for police interventions on someone else? Why would you pay for the army? Why would you pay for a fire department if your house may never go up in flames but others might? Need i go on? Your argument failed.
then do it yourself but you have no right to force others to do the same, if you were to it would be theft and extortion
In other countries it takes months even years to get an appointment or surgery that could be life saving but it's "free"
227 people hate rupert murdoch just like i do
Free health care is an insurance. Run by a government it does not need to make a profit. This is why you get your health care for less money than in the private system. It is a superior system. In Finland the cost per capita is less than 40% of the cost in the US and the results are better. You simply get more for your money, and you get the same quality service even when you have no money.
i love my canadian universal healthcare
Where people die in emergency room hallways waiting to see a doctor
Americans have this wrong. In Australia people are not choosing between death or risking bankruptcy at the hospital. 🤦♂️
All research indicates that the other 30 or so industrialized countries which have government funded universal healthcare far outperform the US and spend less per capita. Right there this guy’s explanation falls apart when empirically tested. But what about people with pre-existing conditions? Should they all just get driven into medical bankruptcy? Also, don’t confuse the innovations in medical science with the organization of medical care. The US has a lot of good researchers (many of which work out of government funded universities), but that is a completely separate thing from our ghastly, cruel and inefficient healthcare system which kills approximately 60,000 people a year.
I've been to countries with free healthcare. waiting times can be a pain and quality isn't always the best. government should never control healthcare.
So what if I'm poor, have cancer and I live in a third world country like the US?
It's a win win situation for the insurance companies and big pharma
In a scenario where the human race operates in a high state of optimisation as a species, with each individual human (synonymous with each individual cell in a body) fully supported, global free healthcare is mutually and wholly beneficial. Enhancing our relationship with the natural environment and patterning is too.
Furthermore, there is no need for any common form of finance as a communal value system. Everyone has his or her own internal value system that can collectively regulate the economy with no need for finance in any form, in a balanced and ecological manner; allowing the natural, self-regulatory patterning of human nature to be expressed.
People don't choose to get sick or be disabled there's something sinister about punishing them financially for this
but the vast majority of those choose to take on risks and habits that cause them to get sick. even people on low income can afford decent food and housing and avoid cigarettes and drugs if they are responsible. all medical professionals know lifestyle is more predictive of life expectancy than any fancy medical care we could offer.
@@echochamber1234 hmm, okay. How about genetics?
Lol...first words out of his mouth - no such thing as free. Love this guy!
Like there is a single person alive who was under the assumption it was going to be free. Really the intellectual arrogance is embarrassing
@@SeptimusTSS conservatives use the word free because dickheads like you think it is,but pay out of your taxes and before you say oh youve got higher taxes imagine calling what you pay in insurance a month as tax and youd be paying more plus you meds are being gouged and insurance companies look for loopholes to not cover you,but you dont care do you y'all got your guns and ya freedom right?
@@russe19642 I'm sorry socialist use the words free, conservatives use the words "there is no such thing as a free lunch". let's look at Bernie's plan "That is why we are going to make public colleges and universities tuition free" if that's not using the word free I don't know what is. I don't know if u actually read or study the field or just regurgitate what socialists are saying but look at the cost of health care accounted for inflation and you will see that prices start going up when the government starts intervening into the sector. How is it that the sector with the most gov intervention is the most expensive? Can you explain that? I presume it would not be a stretch to say you would want gov to control the food in our economy knowing that it is also important for the survival and is essential. But that being the case I would point you to the famine in ex USSR particularly in Ukraine, as an example of what not to do. Now that you know that health care cost have increased when goivernment started intervention into the sector compared to all other sectors where government has gotten out I hope u change your mind.
@@pablomaquaire6251 youre typical conservative regurgitating right wing talking points,always highlight russia or Venezuela when trying to articulate their arguments but never use Scandinavian countries which a social democrats because you know it destroys your argument.True nothing is for free just like private healthcare in the usa isnt either and once you calculate the cost on top of your already tax you pay youd be worst off under that system.In the usa the cost par head of population for healthcare is over$8000 per year compared to countries with universal at just over $3000 per year and no to your next argument about paying more taxes because here in australia you dont pay more than20% up to 40,000 and 27% up to 80,000 and at a sliding rate,so the first 40,000 is only taxed at 20%.The cost of paying for universal healthcare is a levy at 2% and if you earn under a certain amount which i cant recall off the top of my head you dont pay it but i think if you earn under 60,000 you dont pay,id have to check that.But here in australia as it would be in the usa the majority of people would fit into the 50,000 to 100,000 bracket at about 60% of the population and 30% below that who wouldnt pay and 10% over 100,000.Having universal healthcare here doesnt stop you from having private either,its not like its the only way here but private healthcare is so expensive and most people elect not to take it up.We haven't got free university system gere its a hecs based system similar to the usa,its a fairer system that unlike tge usa doesnt send people broke and only starts repayments when you start to earn at a certain level,so no i never said its free,you have to pay for it but once you wiegh up all the facts universal is far better system and whilst the one you champion leaves 30 unisured and another 60 million under insured,everyone is covered whether you're rich or poor unlike yours.Anyway im not here to convince you,because you'll never be convinced im just here to give you the facts to counter your bullshit conservative talking points and muddying the waters with baseless arguments about other countries with so called universal healthcare,every other country in the world has it apart from usa and you should start to question why instead if defending something indefensible
@@russe19642 I’m sorry for speaking with my bullshit conservative talking points again, but I would like to say again that I don’t support America’s healthcare system. It is not a private system, it is a partially public and private system, I argue for a system owned by the people (in private hands); not a government bureaucracy. First , the point about Nordic countries is that they are not a socialist state, they actually are very capitalist countries. They rank extremely high on the economic freedom index, which looks for ease of business, trade, tax burden, property rights, monetary freedom, labor freedom, government spending… the Prime minister of Denmark even said "I know that some people in the US associate the Nordic model with some sort of socialism. Therefore, I would like to make one thing clear. Denmark is far from a socialist planned economy. Denmark is a market economy". So your argument of Denmark being socialist is even attacked by its own people and leaders. Second, once again I have to say the price in the US is so high because since the 1960s, mostly Lyndon Johnson, the american government has interfered with private enterprise, which has led prices up. For example Obama decided to push price ceilings on insurance, which led to a market shortage. Your third point paying more taxes, imagine the government as having two hands, one that gives, the gentle hand, and one that takes, the harsh hand. Both of them must be equal, so when the government increases spending he needs to increase revenue, in one way or the other. By following this logic socialized healthcare costs more to the government, so more taxes. You can of course try a progressive income tax to dilute the harm, but it’s still present. For example, in a private system it would work like car insurance, people would enter in to pay for those who have accidents. Fourth point, yes you can have a private healthcare system, but it is directed for the rich, that’s why it’s expensive. It’s only for people who can pay the taxes and then have enough money left over to pay for private hospitals and insurance. In a fully private system you would have companies for all income brackets. Fifth point, in the us some people, like the young elect not to get insurance because they don’t want to spend money when statistically their health is fine, 80% of its people are under 42 years of age. Anyway i'm not here to convince you,because you'll never be convinced im just here to give you the facts to counter your socialist talking points and muddying the waters with baseless arguments about a country with so called private healthcare, every country in the world has some sort of socialized healthcare and you should start to question why, instead if defending something indefensible. Look up bandwagon fallacy. It's not because lot’s of people are doing it that it validates the fact yourlogicalfallacyis.com/bandwagon.
3:58 it doesnt eliminate innovation, the uk found the first covid vaccine and has the fastest vaccine roll out
Scientists found the vaccine, the NHS rolls it out and treats patients
@@dansfilms7901 yes uk scientists, the nhs doesnt stop scientific innovation
@@eliothayhow20 agreed, I agree with some which is said in this, and alit I disagree with
@@dansfilms7901 yh, it just shows you sadly always have to be careful with the right and the left as they both lie alot
Is as effective as Pfizer and moderna and j&j
The Ayn Rand Institute is a supported by the ultra-rich Koch family. That means that this guy is required, as a libertarian to side with the top 10% of the richest Americans. Libertarians can always be counted on to present policies that protect the rich at the expense of the rest of us.
Please attack the argument, not the presenter of it.
@@chetanyasingh1204 So the tobacco studies of the 20th century that found tobacco to be harmless and even beneficial to health should be taken seriously despite being funded by the tobacco companies?
@@peterc.1618 I was a lolbert then. I am a paleocon now
@@peterc.1618 Red herring fallacy. This has nothing to do with the argument at hand.
Yaron Brook isn't a Libertarian.
So in the UK where I live, people know healthcare isn't free; we know it's tax-payer funded, but the point is that it's 'free at the point of use', which significantly eases the deep fear of sudden illness shared by pretty much everyone.
We essentially use the state as the insurer through paying our taxes, and the state doesn't make a profit on the money like a private insurer would. This is only a personal view, but the idea of someone being able to withhold medicine for me - essentially to allow me to die - because through various reasons, let's say bad luck, unless I fatten their pay packet, makes me uncomfortable.
The UK system means you're not faced with sudden, and highly variable, pay-at-the-point-of-use healthcare, and - most importantly - no one is profiting, meaning that what is paid for is the actual value of the healthcare.
Also, there is a parallel private healthcare market which only wealthier people choose to use because it's more efficient etc. BUT THE CRUCIAL POINT is that it's only more efficient BECAUSE people are willing to pay a large premium. The NHS is so good that to use the privates you have to fund them sufficiently to be even better, so private's really expensive. This generates a false assumption that private healthcare is really good and NHS healthcare is quite bad, whereas NHS healthcare is amazing but private healthcare is amazinger because people are willing to pay stupid sums of money. In my view, you'd be a mug to use private healthcare in most cases, as you would to send your kid to a private school in a system where the state funded school are already very good. Spend the money on something else, dingbat.
Yes, the theory here is that it's acceptable to tax wealthy people for poorer people's healthcare (and actually, the wealthy are proportionately taxed less than the poor for NHS spending) because they can afford it. When you see the results, a healthy country that knows it's covered by a collectively-financed good, all that that produces is solidarity and good feeling. Notice at the London olympics, we had a big celebration of the NHS in our opening ceremony. British people LOVE the NHS because it works.
The waiting times are ridiculous in NHS leading to people dying because they have to wait over a year for surgery in 1,400 examples in Wales in 2012 alone. it's more a game of Russian Roulette than a race to not finish last. Both systems have flaws, while the flaws for NHS apply to 90 percent of the population and the flaws of free -market healthcare apply to a tiny percentage that would probably get free healthcare anyway from a charity.
The NHS is also helping to bankrupt the UK. The proposition is that one persons need is not a claim on another persons rights, we all have the same rights (freedom) If someone is ill etc the idea is that in a true free market health care system those that are poor etc would either ask for help from people they know or use a health charity (which is voluntarily funded) It is also possible that a Doctor/Hospital could also have a charitable arm. The essence is, if you believe in freedom you have to respect individual rights above all else. It is not about being selfish based on doing whatever you like, it is based on using the mind to evaluate situations rationally. Given that it is surely rational to want to help voluntarily those that need it if it agrees with your personal ethics. So on a free society there is no forcing someone help against their right not to (tax) but help would happen voluntarily as we are benevolent to plight if others.
but if i don't want that why should i pay for it that is why you have freedom of choice if you want to be in that system you can pay for your encurance
Ghkjdf Hbjhffh I have freedom because I know that I will receive health care if I get a serious disease. Which eases the load on my parents that don't have to work 12 hours a day just to pay for my health care and probably end up getting health issues themselves that needs to be paid too, just piling the bills even more
@Timothy Damoulis You do realise that that logic is basically insurance. You just said you pay for healthcare, via taxes, regardless of whether or not you use it. That is the exact concept of an insurance policy where you pay a premium just in case, and may or may not use it.
So the original poster is right - the government in this case is effectively the insurer, but like the OP points out, they don't profit on the same level individual insurer does, there isn't the same level of waste as a result of numerous insurers leading to vastly different costs of healthcare as there is in the US, and these factors make it fundamentally less expensive in the UK. So you pay your taxes and you may or may not use it, but how do you think it works in the US? You pay your health insurance premiums and you may or may not use it - same deal. The difference is in the US the insurance payments are vastly more expensive than what the average UK citizen's tax contribution directly attributable to healthcare is. Not only that but then when you need to use it you need to pay $1000, $2000 etc. as co-pay. So guess which the more expensive system is?
Not to mention the guy in the video seems to base his argument off of well i'm rich so I won't get sick or I'm young so I won't get sick and so why should I be subsidising all these old sick people? But I can say as someone who is 28 and lives a relatively comfortable life that I just spent two weeks seriously ill in hospital. Despite being relatively well-off, I know that the cost of the same treatment in the US would bankrupt me. Maybe for the ultra-ultra rich they might be saving money by being under a privatised system but for myself, and for the majority of people, it is always going to be vastly cheaper to pay taxes for the NHS, which average $300 per month in premiums (and that's when you're young and healthy!) and $1,000+ co-pay when it's needed. Which do you honestly think is going to cost you more over your lifetime, especially as your premiums increase when you get older?
The argument he has is very weak. The state takes the same role as the insurance company, therefore it is similar system. The difference is that economically weak groups have the opportunity to receive medical care.
If it will be eligible, what will be financed by state, nobody will come across, and everything is voluntary to participate, you can as well privatize the military, police and fire brigade.
Many countries are satisfied with state-financed healthcare. There is nothing wrong with the system, just another way of thinking.
Proper freedom is found in nature. Darwin called it "the survival of the fittest". Nature is cruel and unfair.
Niklas Molén except that the government has no incentive to do the job well because they are using somebody’s money on somebody else. Private insurance companies have incentive to stay in the business, so they have incentive to get the best deal with least cost to their clients. Government always ask for a bigger budget if their programs fail. They don’t close down.
I like how whenever you get someone who is against universal healthcare they latch on to the term "free Healthcare " as if people are really dumb enough to think it cost nothing comon now. If I'm gonna send half my paycheck (exaggerating) to an entity for health care I rather it be to an entity that will be accepted everywhere someone that will not stress me out as bad as my potential injury when its time to pay/check-out. Someone that won't ruin my credit because my insurance was rejected or they don't cover certain procedures so not only am I left with a insurance premium that left me high and dry ,but also a hospital visit that I have to pay out of pocket. Not to mention the price I would be paying for the hospital visit is not the price the insurance would be paying for the hospital visit it's much higher because I don't have the clout to negotiate a lower price.
That was taxes do. If you believe this cut all taxes and cancel government, including all benefits. Pave your own roads, pay your own school fees, pay for the police every time you call them
You can't compare free clothes to free health care...
Marc You can if everyone's clothes are provided through public funding.
Yes you can compare them. What you just said, essentially means that I can’t compare anything to anything
But you CAN compare food to healthcare!!!!! I'm pretty sure what you eat is directly related to health.
Free healthcare did exist in 1922 - 1991
This "No such thing as free health care" is a tiring argument. We're all well aware that taxes pay for free health care, but it's without a doubt a better way.
I wouldn't swap my free healthcare for anything
The savings vastly outweighs the taxes that are taken from me. It is awesome that we can go to any walk-in clinic or change doctors easily too.
@@crotchy7667 But so can we too. There isn´t problem to change the doctor or clinic,and I am not exactly sure how can you know if your saving will be enough. Free healthcare and social state gives people stability and we don´t have to worry about our future.
Using his argument, why should any of us pay for police or fire departments? My house never gets caught on fire. My house is never broken into. I’ve never directly been the victimized a crime. Why should I have I have to pay for any of that year after year?
It’s fitting that the ayn rand institute would make such an asinine argument. 😆
The correct question isn't "why should any of us pay for police or fire departments?" I would pay for those services voluntarily. The correct question is "why should you and others be allowed to point government guns at literally everyone and force them pay for those services through taxes?" I really wish people would realize that using force against peaceful people is immoral, it is evil...for any reason.
If the market provided those services and we could voluntarily pay for them, there would be many more police and fire department services to choose from...which would increase quality of the services and decrease the costs. It would also decrease the costs by allowing me to pay for those services directly, instead of through a government bureaucracy.
Do the police protect when funded by government dollars? The answer is no! There used to be private police departments and private fire departments in the US
but if everyone pays a smaller amount of money in taxes than an individual would pay, the burden would be distributed and lessened
But I don't want my money to pay for other poeple's healthcare...
Me and my family are completely healthy and I almost never actually pay for healthcare.
I prefer using my money to go on a vacation than pay someone else's healthcare.
Amen. Regardless of how small the burden would be through distribution, which isn't true because many people, especially poor people will not pay their fair share, I should still not have to be forced to pay one cent to someone else who made poor health decisions. You have to believe that adults are capable of being responsible and making their own choices or not. If they have the right to choose an abortion, have sex, hold a job, then they have the right to pay for their own healthcare.
And I don't want to pay for the road and the airport infrastructure you use to go on vacation...
@@eyalswissa3705 But why would you pay for roads you don't drive on? You Americans are hilarious. (edit: sorry not all of you) What you don't get is that you don't pay for someone elses healthcare. EVERYONE pays for EVERYONE's healthcare. Are you sure you will stay perfectly healthy the rest of your life?
Sad America doesn’t have free healthcare like practically every country in Europe, yet we consider ourselves better than all of those nations yet we let people die because they can’t afford treatment or medicine
I do not think that when people say "there is no such thing as a free lunch", they don't mean that you don't pay cash. They mean that choosing to do a certain thing requires some effort or sacrifice.
When you go fishing, you are getting a "free" lunch in the sense that it costs you no money. However, it does cost you time or effort. The expression means that getting something involves trading one resource or opportunity for another.
In the EU healthcare is a right
Unfortunately, In The United States health care is becoming a law that you have to have it
@@lordBritish1 a taco bell*
Shameful
@@mixedfeelingsaboutturning1910 you won’t be saying that after getting charged $40,000 for some stitches
@@Jim54_ you can agree that healthcare is too expensive without wanting it universal or a right. Nice strawman try there though, hahaha
It is just plain stupid to compare health care to food. I need food every day, and I need approximately the same amount of food as everyone else.
I like how he says I don't want to pay for your health care, because he's relatively healthy and financially stable. Let something terrible happen to him where he can't make and sustain himself, I bet you everything he just said will change. It doesn't matter if you want to pay for somebody else's health care that's the point of living inside of a country where we all help each other and have to cohabitate.
I don't want to have to pay for your house burning down, but it doesn't matter because my taxes go to it. I don't want to have to pay to deal with your civil dispute with your wife when the cops have to come to take care of it, but our taxes go to it and I have to pay it. That's the point it's a service for the entire country. This little selfish dweeb.
Every universal system started because we realized that it's inhumane not to have it as such. They used to watch your house burned down if you didn't have a special insignia on the outside of your house telling the fire department that you give money to them for their services. We realized that this is a terrible thing to do, as other people just watch their houses burn down and people die... because they don't pay into the fire department's funding.
This is the exact same thing with healthcare, we watch people die because they don't have enough money for their own insurance. The selfishness on his part is absolutely ridiculous; I don't understand why anybody would even entertain this nonsense.
@Unspeakable Unemployment rate is under 3.6%, the vast majority of people work and would be contributing to universal healthcare through taxes. It also makes healthcare cheaper for everyone .. rich and poor due to better rates
True healing is free, when you understand it properly. Almost all people don't and that is where the real problem lies.
Nobody in Europe calls it "Free Health care"... Nobody!!
Everybody in Europe who has national governed health care knows that we pay this through taxes.
Only US observers call it "Free". Simply because they are not told how it works - The level of uninformed opinions on this matter in the US is un- believeable..
It is also arrogant. The cost of running it is far below the US system. -And we are not falling behind in standards..
But all this you can find out by looking into this yourself instead of taking this guy for granted...
The life and death issue of healthcare delivery touches upon the most basic question of all: Why are we here? Some people believe that we are here for no divine reason and demand an equitable share of everyone else's money for their; needs. Others believe we are here for an inherent spiritual reason, in which holistic health and inequities are part of this ultimate practical goal. Moreover, people do not create themselves equitably, in health or anything else in life, so they should not be entitled to everyone else's money for their poor lifestyle choices. Mandating free healthcare for all means that many religious believers in holistic practical spirituality will be forced to go against their religious teachings, and then have to share their losses with the deluded non-believers who are rendered complicit in their losses, perhaps even those in the same family as the deceased. The most egregious example of this is a death from a violent perpetrator, who was not properly prevented with the inherent limitations of modern medicine, monopolized in public healthcare
To those that call healthcare a right I hope u understand that not all rights are free. In the US constitution we have the rights to bear arms and have an attorney but we dont get free guns and lawyers. A right is just something u can get or do without the government saying no but it doesn’t mean it’s free.
Yeah. You have the right to buy a gun and kill someone, but not the one to save other people's lives.
branc u have the right to buy a gun for self defense. Killing someone isn’t a right. Either way healthcare costs money everywhere whether through taxes or insurance
This is a poor argument for the right idea. Universal health care is not ideal simply because of the principle of personal responsibility and that's it. We should not be paying for your type 2 diabetes or your sex-change or any other lifestyle choices you are making. Emergency and preventive services are something to be considered but it's really just as simple as that. I'm not interested in saving the country from the consequences of their lifestyle choices... ridiculous. Insurance companies could be nonprofit organizations... no need for profits. Arguing that the profits are necessary is equally as ridiculous. Just keep it simple and rely on logic not profit motive.
You work for your lunch, that is not free at all. And BRAVO to you.
It is not free health care, even if you don't pay directly for it. It has a cost and this cost may be paid by the government with tax contributions. Since taxes come from citizens, no-cost-to-you health care is not a present either. After all, you are paying for it through your and others tax contributions.
Sure, but it's much cheaper. Here in Germany they take about 600 Euro monthly from my salary. For that, my whole family of 5 people is fully covered, including dentists, any operations, anything. I can call emergency anytime I need. I stay in hospital as long as necessary. I don't pay for any prescribed pills. I get about 100% of my salary for the first 6 weeks of illness per year and 70% for the next 18 months, if needed. And my wife and kids have the same benefits. I don't think any US insurance could offer anything like that even for much greater sum..
@E KL Everyone knows that. What's your point?
@E KL I understand your point, I think strategically it is better to use the term accessible to all. In the US, "free" has a very shyster connotation.
Wow! Who'd have thought it?
Yes, your absolutely right. How dare a government try to keep it's population healthy! it's an outrage!!!
How dare a gov't force people to pay for other people's services. It's like you didn't even watch the video. Gov't-run healthcare is about force. Forcing healthy people to pay for sick people. Force. I guess you're okay with slavery, since that's exactly what it is.
Except the insurance companies are trying to take your money, not help you. So called "Free" health care doesn't put you one heart attack away from selling your house to pay for your bypass operation.
I love how you all are so against free healthcare saying “it’ll increase taxes”, and “the government can’t afford it”, yet you all are perfectly fine with the government giving 55% of your taxpayer dollars to multi billion dollar corporations. Makes a lot of sense.
You mean like the pharmaceutical industry? Or the health insurance companies or the “military industrial complex” that’s an extremely vague statement bud.
Cicero Progontus I fully agree. But these people and the guy doing the video seem to be pro crony capitalism.
@@Aheroswelcome14 I don't volunteer to pay for subsidizing Hollywood, or Twitter, Facebook or any of these tech platforms. It's also ridiculous and socialist garbage. I'll say at least people who wanted universal "free" government healthcare asked for it. Government is awful at handling almost everything, so I don't believe their healtcare would be worth anything though.
I bet you my fucking life tax in canada is lower than tax in the US only in America there is no universal health care.
@@caseyjones831 We're taxed at 13-15% on practically all items. Every $1000 spent is an additional $300 (for me in Ontario) to the government. You end up spending thousands a month in sales tax alone, forget income tax. I'd rather be sales taxed at 7% so as to cut tax costs down 50%, you can then take that money and save it for a medical emergency. Our health care is also at a lower quality that also pays some doctors significantly less. It takes an average of 19.8 weeks to receive treatment from a physician whereas that number is a mere 24 days in America. There are pros and cons to the socialist system, but there's no reason to adopt it. A poor family struggling in Canada still has to pay 13-15% in sales tax, hurting them more and more with each necessary purchase.
What's the point in having freedom to choose your own healthcare if you can't afford it? In principal Mr. Brooks makes sense but there will never be a healthcare system that is purely free of government 100% free market driven...this is not the case in the US and it is why US healthcare is the worst of both worlds. I'd rather have universal healthcare paid for by taxes free at the point of need. I live in the UK and I have received excellent care all my life, never having to pay anything up front. I think American's are being fed a constant stream of lies regarding socialised healthcare.
Healthcare should be free so the Democratic Party can get votes for big gubment.
He should visit France, Germany, Denmark and other developed countries first before answering.
Think again now that this Corona virus has become a global pandemic.. free health care for all is not equipped for these kind of disasters/crisis! I even know some people in Denmark that said it's a disaster over there and that no one is getting medical attention. They are running out of everything and it's taking so long to get medications that is next to impossible to get anything. It's already extremely hard & slow to get care just on a regular day but now they are up the creek and with no control of their health. Being able to regulate our own health care plan without the government involved is a freedom and most ppl from socialist countries would say the same..
The moment we start looking on Health like a business, we are lost! Business is based on negotiations which benefits both sides. I wanna see this man sales skills and how convenient he will be with the doctors when striking a deal for treatment, if he got a cancer. Don’t bite this crap! Putting live on pedestal is whats making as humans!
Companies will compete with each other at the prices will be lower. It does not be benefit a business to have poor reputation
Our Health Care system discourages entrepreneurship. I've seen it. Whether it's the government collective running it or the insurance collective. The choices we currently have are far from Ayn Rand's desire for men to reach their full potential.
We pay for the healthcare through taxes
Which is stupid Bc like the guy said I don’t wanna pay lots of money for mine and for ur healthcare. I wanna pay less money for my own healthcare
Smule Magic Piano you already do this via insurance companies. We all put in money and whoever needs the healthcare takes the money out. The only difference is that private companies get to choose your coverage, and make a profit that doesn’t have to be allocated. There’s no scenario in which it is better to have insurance over universal.
Yes and its too much. Free would litteraly be cheaper through taxes
Ohr Shmuel don’t people still have to file taxes at the end of the year, or pay health insurance? That’s kinda the same thing. And plus with the taxes, u only pay when u earn a certain amount of money.
@Jason Fisher Omg.
Wtf.
I have had six open heart surgeries. I have met many people around the world during my time in the hospital. My parents and I have asked all of them the same thing. Why are you here, and not back in your country receiving free care? They would give the same answer.
It's horrible healthcare compared to the U.S.. Also, every new surgery invented is invented here because of our healthcare. With free healthcare, you only get what the government sees fit. Instead of them spending money trying to come up with better methods of treating patients. As an example. I myself, back in 2010, had a heart Cath procedure done.
It was a new type of surgery, though. The typical surgery would be checking the condition of the patient's heart valves. This new surgery was a way to replace a heart valve with a new one, using the Cath procedure. It would save the person, from having an open heart surgery. I was the second person to ever have it done, and it saved me an open heart surgery.
The doctor, who I forgot that man's name but he was from Germany, and I could look up his name, when I have the time. Had to come here to the States to invent the surgery since over in Europe, the government, with the "free healthcare" decides how it should be spent. Plus, what of the horror stories of "free healthcare"? Take, the recent story, of Indi Gregory.
The government controls their free healthcare, and decided her treatment, although could be cured, was cut from treatment since the British government felt she had enough treatment. They ended up killing her. Wouldn't have happened in the U.S. Plus, actually, look at the real statistics of Europe and the U.S. More people die in European hospitals than the United States, patients have the same problem, and the survival rate is better in the U.S.
What a pile of crap. Exceptionally wealthy Europeans might choose US healthcare but most wouldn't choose or could afford it.
Nothing comes for free....we are dying from hefty taxation,i am paying for someones health services.
And somebody else is paying for your health services...
@@jarls5890 Through high taxation.
@@kyled1673 Not 'high' taxation. If i would live in the US and had surgery, i would have to sell my house. Now i don't and can live my life without worries.
1) The universe is a free lunch, the ultimate free lunch according to some physics.
2) A reason could be to keep down the cost.
3) Why have other things as army, police and such founded by the government?
4) Is it really a free market if you _need_ a thing otherwise you die, quickly and in pain?
5) You can still have composition if a government founded area, it's just that the government is the only buyer
6) The us way isn't always the right way.
I was trying to prove a point to my friend. Ended up with the conclusion no matter what system we're screwed
I disagree “free healthcare” is better and would be cheaper all the government would do is pay the bill to the private hospitals and instead of paying insurance companies you would just pay taxes and hopefully less then what the insurance company was Getting
not really
Capitalism Screws.
Im never having children in a world where you have to pay to feel comfortable in your own body
OK, RIP you I guess lol
"These two states passed great victories in healthcare reform, and if you don't agree with it---just keep being ripped off by the private health insurance companies."
I get "ripped off" because of government mandates. And I don't care how many people want "universal care" - it can only be obtained through force and the threat of force upon those that don't agree. If I "don't like it", I cannot merely continue paying private insurance (or none) - I am forced to contribute to your scheme.
exactly
the cost model is broke; by failing to give proper care I became disabled and YOU are paying for me for the rest of my life.... haha. All I needed was the right Dx! and I'm drawing pay and still don't get the right Dx. Keep those checks coming. Thank you!
Paid for through *extortion*. Taxation is extortion by definition.
Yeah, lets privatize roads. And fire fighting. Thats gonna be fun
Adam D if we privatize roads, they’d get dine even slower.
@@SeptimusTSS They are partly in the US in some states. In Texas you quite often see 'this stretch of road paid by the Workers of Walmart' (or some other company). I wonder how free the donation was. In Seattle , Washington some guy was giving me a lift to Portland to do the Portland midsummer Duathlon so I was in his house. And the Phone rang and it was the Fire Brigade, would he like to make a donation.
So there you go, both roads and the Fire Brigade are partly funded by donations. And maybe by payments by people who call them out. Because when I called 911 for an ambulance, the Police and the Fire Brigade showed up as well. So I do wonder if they took a portion of the Ambulance fee.
@@Ali-gh7rj What about those in need of social funding, you say you have a large Govt. Well, I never knew. Just keep sales tax and that pays for everything. Hmmm, what about medicare for pensioners (as they don't have healthcare provision via insurance)? Children orphaned and at risk, finding places for them to stay doesn't come cheap. Of course if you just want to leave orphaned children on the street, fair enough. i guess you want to go back to Victorian times and have beggars on the street and the old in the workhouse.
its called, thats being a society, which is why almost all cointries has it.
It’s not free healthcare but an asthma pump in America costs more than my taxes
lmao not at all, a asthma pump costs me $80 per year with very shitty state provided insurance.
"You have to confiscate my money in order to give you health care that you don't pay for," right after literally saying that we all pay for it. Not a strong start.
That's a wrong analogy. You dont pay for their health care. We pay for our healthcare. Instead of other wasted taxes.