Eh, I think it’s just semantics. People hear universal healthcare and recoil but Medicare and Medicaid are what help their parents get the help they need. I think it’s pretty powerful to already have programs ready to go. Those programs just need some better marketing and more access.
In this case words matter, and universal is not synonymous with government run. Universal healthcare means available for everyone. If it isn't available for everyone, it is not universal.
Government implemented universal single payer is the best implementation based on every civilized country.
Yeah, you’re right. I just don’t think perfection should be the enemy of good enough. Although, like others have said, Medicare and Medicaid are nowhere near even good enough. But they are programs that exists, and providers and insurers already have to, by law, negotiate with them. The laws need major reform, but it might be easier to make incremental changes rather than a total overhaul.
Plus the US does have many disparate laws guaranteeing some basic treatment. For example, hospitals have to provide stabilizing care for anyone, regardless of ability to pay. Incremental reform could gradually bring all those laws under Medicare/Medicaid, giving everyone time to adjust.
Medicare is hugely broken and barely works even for those who are eligible. You still need to get private insurance (called gap insurance) for many, many things.
When I had to switch from BCN to Medicare after I became fully disabled, one of my prescriptions went from $200 a month to $3500, and I started getting denied for routine tests. I was denied a heart cath my cardiologist ordered. I’ve had to stop 4 of my prescriptions because of cost, which of course has made me even more sick.
Even in some utopian daydream, that’s nowhere near ‘universal healthcare’, and expanding that broken system is not a solution.
eta: The US needs actual universal healthcare that’s not inexorably tied to privatisation.
Add comment