Does Japan have Universal Health care?
Of course in Japan. Everybody is obliged to apply the health care. And government support the system with the tax. BTW, heyteach is just picking up certain cases. There is no perfect health care system in the world. In Japan, some costly cutting edge treatments and medicines are not covered by the health care. They have to pay 100%. And you know, you can guess, how expensive is the cost of the treatments for terminal cancer. Only certain people can prolong life (or go abroad for the treatment). Seeing news or reports from CNN, CBS 60 Minutes, 48 Hours, and the movie Sicko by Michael Moore, the health care system in Japan, as a whole, is FARRRRR better than the one of the US. People can visit hospotal with no hesitation. Talking, putting in line and using other country's cases don't change the situation. They would be just an excuse.
Why should America have Universal Health Care?
AHHH!! Again there's jj_33_6 with his carbon copy answer. I've seen this EXACT same response over a dozen times on all sorts of topics. Seriously, look at this guy's list of responses. Same thing over and over. And this isn't the first time I've pointed it out. Probably won't be the last either. But to answer the question. There are all sorts of reasons why the US should have Universal Health Care of some level. I think it is a citizen's basic right to have some sort of basic health care needs taken care of. If the government can protect us, govern us and set rules that affect all aspects of our lives why the heck can't they also help take care for our health? Not only that, but when a segment of the population has no coverage they tend to wait for things to get really bad before seeking health care. This can make things worse by letting a condition get to the point where it is not treatable, or at least not treatable cheaply. And before people start thinking I'm preaching for socialized medicine, I'm not. The source of funding can have absolutely nothing to do with who is in control of the system. It is possible to have a privatized health system that is funding publicly, not privately. The cons of universal health care. Increased wait times, can be considered unfair to healthy tax payers, unequal access can still exist, coverage is typically not 100% (unless you want health care to be about 50% of GDP), etc. Pros: keeping all people with a certain level of health helps the economy by reducing sick days, by not providing 100% coverage healthcare expenditures can be kept to appropriate levels (just having health insurance increase utilization, it's called moral hazard. if someone is 100% for all care they can seek care when they really shouldn't be, it's not efficient use of limited resources), universal healthcare systems have been associated with higher life expectency, etc. Universal healthcare has it's pros and cons just like everything else. It's all about trade offs.
Why is universal healthcare demonized in the United States?
It just seems to me, that with all the problems that come with a society that views healthcare as a privelage, not a right (which is so asinine I don't even know where to begin), there is headache after headache. It seems like our healthcare system is one that is like, "If you get sick, die quickly or be a debt slave". People commit suicide over this, because they can't pay the bills... rediculous. Why not have a simple system: Everyone gets taxed, those taxes go for a giant pool of money that is used for people's health needs. There are no private insurance companies, because the notion of healthcare as a "business" is something from the dark ages. Since there is no insurance, there is no worry about "in network" or "out of network" anymore, there are no rates changing... nothing.... No one has to worry about getting sick and not having insurance, since when you are born, you automatically have insurance, and when you purchase things, part of your taxes go towards that giant pool of money. Doesn't that seem so much better? Healthcare for everyone, no huge reams of paperwork, no haggling... nothing. Countries like Germany, Great Britain, France, Spain, Canada all have socialized healthcare, and they are not super poor. They are not in great shape (perhaps Germany is still in great shape, idk though), but they don't have to worry about choosing death over huge medical bills. WHY does the U.S. ALWAYS stick to "dinosaur practices" never changing until we are near destruction? It seems to me that 25 percent of our budget going to national defense is a bit much, since most of our "threats" are too poor to get a working nuke (north korea) or are majorly dependent upon us for business (China) or are just a rag tag group of militants (Taliban) that just want us out of their countries... I think if we just butted out of people's business, they would not attack us, or at least have no reason to.
Why would the US have to raise taxes to implement universal healthcare when all the countries that have it spend less than the US on healthcare?
Taxes would not have to increase, but if they did, it would not matter if implemented correctly.To the extent taxes were raised, the offsetting saving to consumers of healthcare would result in a massive savings.We now spend 18% of our GDP on healthcare. The rest of the developed world spends an average of 10%. That 8% difference applied to our $18 Trillion GDP = $1,44 Trillion in EXCESS spending. That’s close to what all US individuals pay in personal incomes taxes ($1,540T in 2015) and over twice our defense spending ($599B in 2015).Our developed OECD peer group have health outcomes as good or better than ours.So just by hitting the OECD average, total healthcare spend would drop by $1.44 Trillion.The government is already spending (as of 2015):Medicare, Medicaid, VA, Exchange Subsidies....$980BTax Expenditures (cost to US for deductions)..…$260Bor a total of $1,240 total government spending in 2015. (It’s higher now)If we spent at the OECD average we would spend about $1.8T total. Since the government already spends $1.24T, that would leave a $560B gap which might be paid by higher taxes or other schemes likes HSA’s to fill the gap.But the point is the excess $1.4T currently paid by you, your employer, or maybe your parents would be saved a nationwide basis.Not only do we get $1.4T richer annually but we will cover 24 Million more people.This is not theory. It’s getting done right now in a lot of counties, some for as low as 5% of GDP with equal health outcomes. There are many models to choose from with various levels of private/public involvement. We should study the various systems and creatively adapt a hybrid system for our economy.Keep in mind, the big change will be in how healthcare will be delivered and it’s cost. Our politicians are arguing about getting the cost of insurance lower which is the wrong target. The cost of insurance simply reflects the cost of delivering healthcare which is the issue.The hardest part will be the structural transition.Lowering healthcare costs to the OECD average would boost our export competitiveness, mitigate wage stagnation, cover everyone, and make the nation wealthier.
How much do Canadians pay in taxes for health care?
Less than Americans pay for taxes and health insurance. From the Denver post in an article titled Debunking Canadian health care mythsMyth: Taxes in Canada are extremely high, mostly because of national health care.In actuality, taxes are nearly equal on both sides of the border. Overall, Canada’s taxes are slightly higher than those in the U.S. However, Canadians are afforded many benefits for their tax dollars, even beyond health care (e.g., tax credits, family allowance, cheaper higher education), so the end result is a wash. At the end of the day, the average after-tax income of Canadian workers is equal to about 82 percent of their gross pay. In the U.S., that average is 81.9 percent.So, Canadians and Americans pay roughly the same percentage of their income in taxes, but for that amount of money Canadians get health insurance included, along with everything else our taxes pay for. Americans pay for health insurance separately, if they have health insurance at all. I have American colleagues whose monthly health insurance payments are higher than their monthly mortgage payments. These are healthy people in their forties and fifties.And, by the way, the Canadian system makes better use of the money and gets better results. From the same article.Myth: The Canadian system is significantly more expensive than that of the U.S.Ten percent of Canada’s GDP is spent on health care for 100 percent of the population. The U.S. spends 17 percent of its GDP but 15 percent of its population has no coverage whatsoever and millions of others have inadequate coverage. In essence, the U.S. system is considerably more expensive than Canada’s. Part of the reason for this is uninsured and underinsured people in the U.S. still get sick and eventually seek care. People who cannot afford care wait until advanced stages of an illness to see a doctor and then do so through emergency rooms, which cost considerably more than primary care services.…Canada boasts lower incident and mortality rates than the U.S. for all cancers combined…Oh, and there’s this…Canadians also have a longer life expectancy….three years longer. So Canadians spend less, and live longer. Seems like good value to me.