As someone living in socialized healthcare, and who has lived with socialized healthcare in about a dozen countries, just a reminder:

**Socialized Healthcare is a broken and backwards system**

inb4: No I am not promoting the american healthcare system. It may fix or address the parts that are broken in socialized healthcare, but it has its own problems... There are solutions (though no one talks about it) that doesnt resemble either of these failed systems.

Problems I have repeatidly faced both here and in other socialized health care countries:

* Abusive wait times leading to unnecessary suffering and in my case surgery that wouldnt have been needed if I had prompter care.

* Lack of access to many prescriptions - (I have had at least a dozen medicines I couldnt get because the cost would be too much of a burden to a socialized system).

* Monopolies making unfair and abusive rules to line their pockets at the expense of patients (A good example of this is melatonin being a prescription in Israel due to a pharmecutical monopoly).

* Lack of privacy / anonymity - Since everything is registered through centralized systems (usually) there is no way for you to hide or keep private your medical records. In the USA I would pay cash for prescriptions I dont want on record, not really an option in socialized systems.

Do you think people are entitled to healthcare?
Follow

@bot I am not sure I would pick that particular language, but short answer, yes.. I think anyone too poor to afford health insurance should have it provided by the government along with tools to get them out of poverty.

I dont like the word "entitled" here, however and prefer to say that it is in the best interest of society to look after those in society who are struggling.

@freemo @bot Interesting.

I don't think the government should be forced to provide folks with healthcare, but a government's competence should be judged on their ability to enhance the economy to the point where healthcare is affordable for everyone.

If health care is too expensive, it gets inaccessible, but if it's too cheap, the quality suffers and the system eventually crumbles.

I don’t think anyone is entitled to anything, but I think it’s ok for the government to provide it if someone is legitimately disabled (not just some fat useless mobility scooter hog) and doesn’t have any resources. Otherwise it is just socialised healthcare, though “insurance” is also cancer.

@bot @freemo The problem is that you'd have to quantify "legitimately disabled", and things that are quantified can be somewhat gamified and exploited, and a program where entry is easy can just as easily become overwhelmed

@realcaseyrollins

I just dont think letting people die for being poor, even if they are lazy, is going to give us the best society for all involved.

@bot

@freemo @realcaseyrollins @bot

"History will judge societies and governments — and their institutions — not by how big they are or how well they serve the rich and the powerful, but by how effectively they respond to the needs of the poor and the helpless."

~César Chávez

@realcaseyrollins @JonKramer @freemo @bot Increasing the number of poor and helpless seems to be a key strategy.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Qoto Mastodon

QOTO: Question Others to Teach Ourselves
An inclusive, Academic Freedom, instance
All cultures welcome.
Hate speech and harassment strictly forbidden.