Hint: single-payer won’t fix America’s health care spending.
Help us make more ambitious videos by joining the Vox Video Lab. It gets you exclusive perks, like livestream Q&As with all the Vox creators, a badge that levels up over time, and video extras bringing you closer to our work! Learn more at http://bit.ly/video-lab
Americans don't drive up the price by consuming more health care. They don't visit the doctor more than other developed countries:
But the price we pay for that visit - for a procedure - it costs way more:
The price you pay for the same procedure, at the same hospital, may vary enormously depending on what kind of health insurance you have in the US.
That's because of bargaining power. Government programs, like Medicare and Medicaid, can ask for a lower price from health service providers because they have the numbers: the hospital has to comply or else risk losing the business of millions of Americans.
There are dozens of private health insurance providers in the United States and they each need to bargain for prices with hospitals and doctors. The numbers of people private insurances represent are much less than the government programs. That means a higher price when you go to the doctor or fill a prescription.
Uninsured individuals have the least bargaining power. Without any insurance, you will pay the highest price.
For more health care policy content, check out The Impact, a podcast about the human consequences of policy-making.
Vox.com is a news website that helps you cut through the noise and understand what's really driving the events in the headlines. Check out http://www.vox.com to get up to speed on everything from Kurdistan to the Kim Kardashian app.
Check out our full video catalog: http://goo.gl/IZONyE
Follow Vox on Twitter: http://goo.gl/XFrZ5H
Or on Facebook: http://goo.gl/U2g06o
I suppose private care is quicker in line for the same procedure? If one doesn't want to pay that much, I will have to wait. It is a money or time problem, nothing came for free. When health care is getting cheaper, efficiency and quality is going to be brought down.
Bottom line: PEOPLE WHO EAT AND DRINK AND TAKE CRAP ALL THEIR LIVES PUT AN UNFAIR DRAIN ON THE POCKET BOOKS OF THOSE WHO ACTUALLY TAKE CARE OF THEMSELVES. I'm talking REAL health not Toutube, TV, "Diet Plan" "Dr-Endorsed", Mass Media and Education "health".
Liberals are everything wrong with the American healthcare system. They started with employer based health insurance benefits so of course that raised the cost of insurance which lead to increased cost of health care. Helping insurance company's monopolize into HMO's, while they were making it easier and easier to sue for millions of dollars for "malpractice" with no limit, and ending with mandating that insurance pay for things that have nothing to do with insurance, like birth control and pre-existing conditions, and finally insurance mandates so every taxpayer has to have insurance weather they need it or not. This was all intentionally designed to destroy the healthcare system so they could implement universal government control. Right out of "Rules for Radicals". Tear down so you can build up in your own image.
Only a idiot with a preschool understanding of American civics and has no understanding of the U.S constitution or liberals States laws, or lack of laws, concerning universal healthcare, equates a European parliamentary country with the Republic of the United States.
+Gareth Ellis Yeah, that's just not good enough really. The problem is they need way more funding. Even now they are downsizing my Mum might be losing her job soon either way a ton of other people will be. It's not the first time when they've been talking about dropping departments due to cuts either.
Don’t get me wrong the staff that work there are always really caring and do their utmost to help and do a great job my annoyance is with the way it takes so long to get treated especially when you’re in pain for months on end
I’ve got kidney stones but if you’ve never heard of anything like that I assume you’re not British because mine is definitely not a unique case and 12 months is comparatively a short time many people waiting for hip and knee replacements wait 2, 3 or even 4 years and end up in so much pain they can’t walk so anyone using our NHS as an example of a healthcare system to be copied has obviously never had to use the damn thing
Wrong. First off the healthcare system we have is so far from free market. How much is a bypass surgery. You don't know. But the price between different hospitals can vary by 100%. If hospitals advertised there price then people who are planning major surgery's can make a decision. If hospital A is 9/10 and hospital B is 10/10 but the pricing is over 80% different then the more expensive hospital would need to get there pricing inline. And if they couldn't cause there overhead costs were to great then they would go out of business. That's a real free market. The idea that the public system drives saving is a joke. Medicare pays $12.00 for a doctor's visit. It doesn't cover the overhead. It's why many doctors refuse it. And if they do they offset the cost by raising the rates to non Medicare patients. This is why people with no insurance pay the most. Those people are recouping the losses from Medicare and private insurance that also wants to pay below market value. Government isn't the solution it's the problem they are in bed with the healthcare lobby which wrote the affordable healthcare act. They put provisions that drove up costs, reduced competition and made it impossible for smaller insurance companies to survive in the markets. People say we'll look at Sweden they're great. Well maybe they are but I won't bring up the tax burden that the lowest income bracket needs to shoulder to fund it. I will bring up how there healthcare even though it's completely tax funded is actually getting healthcare from private hospitals and doctors who compete with each other in a fair free market. Nothing like the VA hospitals where you die in a bed waiting to be seen. Medicare for all which calls for an abolition of private insurance might feel like your sticking it to the Man. But if the person taking care of us is Uncle Sam Va hospitals is what we will get.
As a percentage of retired Americans income which tends to be fixed & less then when employed, I suspect their health care costs are much higher than the average demonstrated here by graph keeping in mind that the older population gets more sick more often.
when i was 11 i broke my big toe on holiday in Estonia, had the european health insurance card(that is free, depending on what country you live in) but stil that just gave me the same rights as the citizens living in Estonia.
went to the ER , got X-ray and fixed up for 25 EEK at the time..
ridiculous compared to Norway, and the US is a whole nother league!
for those who don't know what i'm talking about https://helsenorge.no/foreigners-in-norway/who-is-entitled-to-a-european-health-insurance-card
There is a lot of skewed information in here. First of all when the government sets the price of how much hospitals are payed by government insurance doctors get paid less. Obamacare made my doctor go from getting paid $350 per patient to $250 per patient. Also they won't show you the fact that comparing America to Germany is comparing 325 Million people to 82 million. Total visits to the doctor is much higher than that of these small European countries.
+Im Smarter Than You you can not just say that they are paid less and ignore the fact that the society already gave a lot to them in exchange. You have to take that in your calculation. Studying costs about the same amount in both countries, but in germany one pays about 150€ per semester. In the US... We know it's more. So doctors in germany already got a lot of money . In exchange for that they get less money later. That's absolutely fair. But of course they can go where ever they want, if they get more money there. Some do. Most don't.
An other reason you tend to forget mentioning is that when there already are a lot of world leading specialists at one place, of course others go there too, because that's easier then making everything again with less specialists. It's a self fulfilling prophecy. Also, german universities often prefer basic research over application-related research.
+Altaïr Ibn-La'Ahad Its not fair to doctors that they get paid less. The US has the best doctors in the world because they like to come here even from europe for the extra pay. The US is also the leading country on medical research because of this. The US does more on medical research than any other country (See https://www.scimagojr.com/countryrank.php ). I want the US to remain this way. If you do not like the system we have i would suggest moving to Germany.
+Im Smarter Than You I like how you call (something like) the US an empire. And yes, they are paid less than in the US. But is this an issue? It's not like they are poor, doctors still get more than enough. They get less as an wage but more out of society. Depending on ones point of view this can be a opportunity.
The wages are part of the whole economic system, not just of the health care sys. Your argument is none.
+Altaïr Ibn-La'Ahad I like how you avoid the fact their doctors are paid less than in the US. Also less people in a smaller country are much more manageable than in a large empire. So no it does not work both ways.
Well to be honest imagine you can charge someone who has a buget and you let him see how much will a procedure cost than imagine you can charge someone that has an unlimited budget and he can not see the price tag you would have him spend more cause he can afford it thats basically what Medicare and Medicaid do to the prices of the health market
love it when the guy said " European model) no it's a world wide Model and most countries even poor ones ( for the most part but not all) provide some sort of Universal healthcare if it's even total healthcare or Partial, Depending how rich the country is,
Americans don't realise other places exist. They've only heard of Europe and Canada. That's the world to them so that's what they refer to as the world, even if third world countries are more advanced and civilised than them.
All Developed countries with Universal Healthcare do have Private healthcare options in most cases if said Universal healthcare system is unable to provide something that the Private Healthcare system can then they'd negotiate with the Private Healthcare option people and get a better deal ( for what the NHS has to spend) ( My gf is transgender and is having Gender reassignment surgery it wont cost her a penny and it's being done Privately funded through the NHS ) And in most cases Private healthcare ( if you can afford it ) will set its prices competitively with what the NHS spends on the exact same drugs and Procedures
Because it doesn't answer the question.The truth is government spending made healthcare expensive. Since 1910, when Republican William Taft gave in to the American Medical Association’s lobbying efforts, most administrations have passed new healthcare regulations. With each new law or set of new regulations, restrictions on the healthcare market went further, until at some point in the 1980s, people began to notice the cost of healthcare had skyrocketed.
One of the things that we do in the US is have the best hospitals with the best medicine that other countries get years later. We are capable of developing more medicine with the extra money. Years later the European nations with cheaper healthcare get them although Americans developed the medicine
If you subtract the gov spending what is left is on par with every other country, hmmm you don't suppose it could be the government overspending and regulations due to it's inability to keep track of its own spendings effectiveness, that causes additional unnecessary spending that is the problem?
People who always want to compare the U.S. healthcare system to other countries don’t factor in everything. The U.S. provides billions in foreign aid to lots of different countries. We pay for Japan’s military and many other countries. When these other countries don’t have to pay to protect themselves it’s much easier to look after their own population that’s usually a fraction of ours. Trump is the only one with the balls to tell these countries off so any socialist would be wise to let him do his thing he’s paving the way but it’ll take time.
In Bosnia and Hercegovina we don't pay health care, maybe for a year we gave around $10 ,then get stamp in our health book, and then we can go to our doctor, hospital or emergency, and go to analyses, MRI, CTI, blood samples etc etc just with our health book .... once i was in hospital for 6 months and dindn't cost me anything.
I just had a discussion with my co-workers about a single-payer healthcare system just last week, and I think I've figured out at least one of the problems with it. Many of my co-workers are conservative, and it is a point of fairness to them. They don't feel like their taxes should be raised to support other people. Most of them said they would support a universal healthcare system if everyone paid into it...which I think could work. Now, not everyone would pay the same amount into it (based on income and other factors) but I think there's so much resistance among conservatives because they feel they are being taken advantage of.
+Chocolatier No paid maternity leave. And around 12 paid days off work (which isn't mandatory for jobs to offer). This leads to parents face poverty and having to drop newborns off at daycares when they are very young.
The U.S.A. blows absolutely all other countries away in the amount of health research. Other countries just aren't contributing to heath research like the U.S.A..
In the U.S. Seventy-six percent of primary care residents received 50 or more job solicitations during their medical training while 55% received 100 or more.
The problem is our government cant run itself well. It cant keep itself open. Also im ok for govern healthcare. But if you never works or comity services or a US citizen you don't get it at all. If they guarantee no undocumented and lazy bum gets health care for free im for it. I don't care if that immigrant has a life treating injury they pay full price. Only working tax paying us citizens get it. Then then they pay for.it out of taxes form the 401k after retirement.
Self-pay for our children's yearly checkup and shots $120. Quick care visit when my daughter gashed her eye and needed stitches $180. Quick care visit with x-rays and tests to determine pneumonia for me $200. Hospital visit for my husband where he
received antibiotics, pain medication and was in a bed for hours $1500. All of
the family doctors, quick cares, dentist and optometrist we have been to have a
set price for an office visit ($80 - $120) and a price for every test or
procedure and have gladly shown us the sheet, before care. We have been told
that they prefer self-pay, less paper work and they don’t have to fight to get
paid. It is cheaper for us than paying monthly for health insurance for our
family of 4 through my husband's employer ($600 - $900 depending on company)
and last time we checked privately I wasn’t covered, because of pre-existing
condition, but I've heard that has changed. We are lucky that we haven't had
any major problems, so I can't tell you the price, but I'm sure $$$$. Health
insurance is something that you have to decide if it's worth it for you. When I
was young and single without any medical conditions it wasn’t worth it, and I
can't say now that I'm 34, married and 2 kids (5&7) that it's worth it.
$7,200 - $10,800 (or more) a year vs. $2,160, but with age it will probably be
more and more worth the price. It’s a decision what someone should make with
research. (We have been to doctors in
TX, LA, SC, KY, IN.)
To make a complex problem simple, if every person on earth had a Guaranteed Residual Income then the cost of medical care wouldn’t have kept going up because every person could afford to buy everything they need. Another way would be if every person OWNED all things, then there’d be equal wealth worldwide, and then medical care, food, shelter, clothing, transportation and EVERYTHING would be FREE because the PROFIT SYSTEM, called capitalism aka wage SLAVERY, wouldn’t and couldn’t exist! When workers have a small income they can’t afford health insurance, so then when they get sick and hospitals have to care for them, they can’t recoup their money spent. When every person has the exact same wealth as everyone else, no one has to PAY for meds/hospital care, etc because the big corporations can’t say “if you want MY medicines, etc, you have to get a JOB so you’ll have money to BUY it from me, and if you can’t get enough money no matter how hard and long you work, you can’t have ANY medicines, hospitalization or ANYTHING!” This whole Problem is caused by the WAGE SYSTEM, called CAPITALISM: work for a small wage or starve! So over 36MILLION people starve to DEATH every year! Capitalism is when a FEW RICH people OWN EVERYTHING and try to”create jobs” for some but never enough for everyone on EARTH the majority always struggle and millions die! Capitalism IS PURE SLAVERY! “You can take a slave out of the field and put him in an office he’s STILL A SLAVE, even with a college degree!” Colleges teach slavery! When USA ends wage slavery, and when all people own everything then WE’LL END WORLD POVERTY! Because only a few rich countries created many jobs, such as the huge INSURANCE companies of all types which then forced their employees to deny it to those with no money or “pre-existing conditions” who simply DIE worldwide! That’s most people on earth, they get sick and DIE, mostly because USA is still FORCING all nations into slavery by starting wars, assassinations, teaching torture and so many horrible murders and disappearances etc, which is clearly shown in “Rogue State” by Wm Blum, and many others like Noam Chomsky, Michael Parenti, John Perkins, Gerry Spence and many more at Third World Traveler excerpts. I know there (probably) won’t be an announcement that we’re going to end capitalism, but we can start telling people they all need a GUARANTEED RESIDUAL INCOME!
So you want us to feel sorry for insurance companies? that have a 24%+ operating cost and must show billions in profits Paid Out to their CEOs, board members, stockholders. when Medicare runs at a 6% overhead cost, because they're not paying Billions to CEOs and Millionaires and billionaires and Having to showing profits... Let the hard-working folks at the Private insurance companies go to work for Social Security office they will need their help. Let us buy into Medicare!!! CEOs and board members or management let them find somewhere else to rip off...
@Vox you suggest Medicare pays less because it negotiates, but we hear a lot that Medicare actually pays below cost and hospitals shift the losses to consumers. For example: if services cost $500, Medicare may pay $450; if Medicare is 25% of revenue, then the private market must pay at a minimum $517.
Can you comment on whether there is any truth to this commonly-cited assertion, and how it impacts the healthcare discussion? e.g. https://hbr.org/2017/11/5-ways-u-s-hospitals-can-respond-to-medicares-mounting-costs
in 2015, i brought myself to the emergency room for suicidal thinking. there i met a crisis worker who recommended i voluntarily check myself into a psychiatric crisis unit at another hospital less than a mile down the street. staff would not allow to get to the other hospital by any other means except ambulance. i could have driven myself, gotten a ride, or gotten an uber, but they would absolutely not allow it. that 2 minute ambulance ride i was forced to accept cost me over $1800.
This video does not explain 1. Private insurance companies essentially subsidise public expenditure by paying more per patient driving up private cover costs to cover the smaller margin from public patients. 2. Unlike other countries the quality of care is the same whether private or public as private hospitals can be used by those using medicare etc. Whereas in uk for example the hospitals themselves are public. This means you are not comparing like for like. It's like complaining that a privately produced Mercedes is more expensive than a government produced volkswagen, even though in US the government effectively provides money to cover the cost of the far superior private product.
Free market works great when choice is involved but healthcare is a natural monopoly. When your having a heart attack you just want an ambulance, treatment and the right drugs, you haven't time to negotiate the best price for an ambulance, the right hospital and the right drugs for the best price. The bigger an insurance pool is the cheaper it is and there's no bigger pool than the whole population in a single payer system. Being able to see any doctor, dentist or any hospital means far less bureaucracy than the US, it also means no paper or work for the user. Another big saving is that pharmaceutical companies compete to get the huge contracts for a whole nation's population. For example American's pay 3 X more on average in real terms for drugs than Brits do in the UK. No matter the drug an American will pay 2, to 3, to 4 and 5 and upwards amount that a Canadian, European, Australian or New Zealander will pay. American's are often misled but you only have to look at whose getting what in campaign money to know whose serving who, plus the media makes a fortune in advertising from the massively bureaucratic, expensive US healthcare system so only a few of them are going to tell the truth.
I don't know how the price differs in the lower 48 but in Alaska an ambulance ride is, at minimum, $1,000. This was in the city where hospitals are 10-15 minutes away. Ambulance rides are billed seperately and privately from your hospital bill though. If you are helicoptered in it's a few grand.
This video is riddled with inaccuracies and misrepresentations.
Firstly in the United States, 67% of people have private health insurance plans, and 37% receive government coverage (some people have both). The video's breakdown of healthcare spending shows a 50/50 split between private and government spending. This suggests that the government is less efficient with its spending than private plans, as it is spending the same amount on fewer people. Of course, it's possible that the people the government covers are in poorer health and cost more (highly possible as the government covers seniors through Medicare). However, the data presented doesn't explore that.
Next, the "Annual Physician Visits" is used to suggest that Americans consume less healthcare. A physician visit is not the same as a trip to urgent care or the ER. It also says nothing about the nature of care. For instance, the length of hospital stays following surgery, the rate of hospitalization, or the number of treatments and tests people receive. It also says nothing about pharmaceutical usage.
The video also references the NHS when talking about how healthcare costs are negotiated. The NHS has its own hospitals. It's a fully-integrated system. It isn't fee-for-service.
One could argue the opposite of this video. That the government is able to demand lower prices from providers because the providers can just shift costs to private insurance companies, which cover most people. It's not clear that if the government were to cover the majority of people, that its lower prices would be extended to more people. I tend to think that hospitals and doctors will lobby aggressively to preserve their revenue. The video eventually admits this.
Lastly, not all healthcare decisions are emergencies. It is possible to consider multiple options for a hip replacement, or for ongoing routine care, or for other procedures. In fact, many people DO explore multiple options when choosing a doctor or when considering a procedure. There's just no cost transparency.
It's so simple you'll kick yourself when I tell you.
Ok So the Government will purposely sabotage services so they can privatise it. They will tell the public the service is not salvagable and that ONLY the private sector can save it. They will sabotage it so bad and frustrate the public so much that the Public agree with privatisation and end up thinking private means better. Meanwhile the Government officials and corrupt politicians own or get handouts from these private companies. So Mr Politician who says we should privatise ACTUALLY owns the company that miraculously by coincidence happens to buy that service. Then let the cash roll in.
Part of the problem isn't really that the private sector can't do it cheaper, they probably could. It's that there's no incentive to do it cheaper. There's money to be made, and lots of it, and what business would turn down higher profits when they need to be increasingly profitable for their owners to make money.
In Germany we have mandatory health insurance but it's affordable. Right now I pay around 200 € a month. My wife and my son are automatically in my insurance and don't have to pay anything. The insurance covers everything except extra (not necessary) examinations in almoust whole Europa. To be honest I don't want to imagine how life would be without it...
Great analysis. The current situation is the result of 20 years of poor government policy decisions in which the wealthy, corporations and institutions have much more political power than the common person. This affects all of American society including healthcare, education, social services, infrastructure, taxation, law enforcement, and the media. In the US the the wealthy, corporations and non-governmental institutions have too much money which buys them too much influence and power. The strength of the US is in its democracy as exercised by the people.
you can’t have both universality and quality. i would rather pay for good health care rather than long waiting times. healthcare isn’t a right but a commodity and the left only accounts for the 10% of the population that isn’t covered by insurance which is their own fault, not taking into consideration the other 90% that will be affected if the government switches to a single payer system.
Wf Coaker i can say both quantitatively and qualitatively that a privatized healthcare system is better for the majority of the population in america. if you had both universality and quality, the government would be in much greater debt than now. the nhs death rates are four times higher than in the US, with the most seriously i’ll nhs patients were seven times more likely to die than their american counterparts. the reason why people in the UK, canada and other countries with a single payer systems don’t go private is the fear if they don’t have insurance not being able to afford healthcare. people that can’t afford insurance go to blame the government when in reality it is their own wrongdoing.
EthanB Why not instead look at the falsehoods in your own statement. You can have quality and universality. The health care system in Canada isn’t perfect, but none of us would trade it for your system. We get better health care than you do. Yes, there are long wait times for certain elective procedures, but every government (health care in Canada is a provincial responsibility, not federal) has been tackling the problem for years, there are benchmarks for acceptable wait times. I mention that because you alluded to it, but your conservatives have blown the issue way out of proportion. To hear them talk, we are dying in droves waiting for essential care. We aren’t. I’m here to express my bemusement at the fact that Americans seem to want a system that is unwieldy and actually costs more. And to try, yet again, to tell an American that you are badly mislead by your conservative politicians who have blatantly lied to you about health care in countries like the one I live in. Why do you think that, despite the flaws in our system, we Canadians don’t demand that it be dismantled in favor of a system like yours? Because we don’t, we demand that it be improved. If our system is so bad, if the British system is so bad, why is there no demand for a return to a private insurance system? Surely, if our systems were as bad as you think they are, we ought to be doing that. You will probably find a quote from some conservative in Alberta speaking about privatisation , but they are completely ignored by the rest of us, even their own constituents, and the issue is a nonstarter. If you’re going to compare your system to others, compare the facts, not the misinformation that you are fed.
Wf Coaker healthcare in the US is not a right. you can’t expect to go to the store and expect the government to pay for your grocery’s. instead of focusing on the 10% that can not afford it, look at the great health care that the US offers in comparison to countries like the UK.
EthanB What a load of utter nonsense! Why is it Americans love being lied to? I’ve had Yanks say that they’re the only ones doing medical research, that us Canadians are flocking over the border to get health care in the US (as if we could afford it, very few of us have private insurance), that American care is better because people can but their way to the head of the line, it’s pathetic. I am a lab physician in Canada. We have people who go to Florida for the weather in the winter. If they fall ill in the US,they come home for treatment. Then we have to get their lab results from their US hospital. Yeah, I’ve seen the “superior care” Americans get. Lab tests that are Standard of Care in civilized countries that don’t get done in the US because the HMO won’t let their doctors perform than, or the private insurance won’t pay for them. But, hey, don’t let me challenge your deep seated beliefs. Wave your flag, put your hand over your heart, and demand your right to bankrupt yourself if you get sick, or die for lack of care, while the obscenely wealthy fat cats profit from your misery, means nothing to me, I’m Canadian, our system isn’t perfect, but it’s better than the wasteful free for all that Americans think is good health care.
Government, is not always perfect. But when applied correctly, and without benefit or merit. It can do what you can't do! The idea is for government to be a leader, in every aspect!
With better education, people can understand, how government works. Then people, can elect the appropriate individuals!
there are a group of individuals, that are trying to keep things a certain way. So that people don't, pick the best to represent them. And make decisions, that maybe they can't! Due to illness or come lack of understanding!
I got six stitches in my arm after a self harm incident and was in the hospital for no more than six hours. Four months later I’m $10k in debt ($5k from facility, $5k from other bills the hospital sent). I have no insurance and I’m a 19 year old student with no idea how to even begin to pay that off. America really burdens their people with health care
I would recommend to anyone watching this video, watch some form of competing media. Whether it's a debunking of this video or a rational discussion of a different set of solutions. This video, like most by Vox, come across as propaganda using very selective statistics, trying to win you to their side of the argument with moral and ethical reasons, as opposed to factual ones. The echo chamber that is the comment section here doesn't help, as it's almost all people who have been screwed by the American healthcare system, but who don't have enough information to form a reasoned argument, leading to nothing but agreement and outcries based in ignorance.
For those who say that healthcare should be free simply to help the poor: you wouldn't be helping anyone. Every time something is subsidized by government, its quality and efficiency suffer. Similar to the corruption and idiocy of big banks, if a product or service is subsidized, what reason does the provider have to compete in a fair marketplace? The answer, at least as far as I can tell, is to massively reduce the government influence on healthcare, forcing the businesses and service providers involved to compete in a fair market, without the guarantee of profit provided by the government. The downside: this includes the dismantling of Medicare, Medicaid, and any other form of government influence, even welfare, which will temporarily make life for those dependent on those entities harder. Over time though the market will adjust by necessity to make itself available to the most consumers that it can, i.e. the elderly and poor that used to depend on the government institutions. Not out of benevolence, but because a free market always wants to get as many consumers as possible. This will mean that everyone will benefit from the same quality of care, at a far lower competitive price. Those who would find themselves without the aid they used to have would be just fine, there is no way to shield them from the collapse of these systems without causing an even bigger problem, but as we've seen from history their communities and loved ones would quickly step in to help, as they always do.
Long story short: The USA is an exception to the way the rest of the world does things, and this has led to some of the greatest innovations and freedoms the world has ever seen. Because of this however, we have to stop looking at other completely different countries for examples of how to do things. We need our own solutions, built on our own values and knowledge, not on subjective morality. Look at all the information from both sides of an argument, and come up with a solution that works here, not in unrelated countries. If you absolutely are in love with the way another country acts, then move there, don't try to turn an exception like the USA into a copy of the rule.
Sooner or later, one of our Democratic Presidential Candidates, will promise to-turn-back-on Obama Care and win the election. Obama Care is still the law of the land. Trump is just not releasing the funds. There should be no tax increases because America will push the cost to future generations. The insurance companies should like this because it does not put the insurance companies out of business like Medicare For All.
This guy is hardly addressing the underlying causes of our problems. Not even close.
As if Gov is the solution...the creators of the problem are not going to solve it. Believing that the Gov is the answer is called Communism... for the dummies who don't know.
It does not work. Never has, never will. It only destroys nations and the decieved and ignorant people in them. It is the most Evil and Diabiolocial system ever devised by an evil and corrupt people... and its exactly where America is headed.
In fact, here's a quick comparison of several nations' healthcare services: https://www.internationalinsurance.com/news/ranking-top-eleven-healthcare-systems-country.php
Kinda makes you wonder why US healthcare is SO expensive, doesn't it?
Yeah, what a GREAT system that is - LET PEOPLE DIE BECAUSE THEY CAN'T AFFORD TO PAY FOR TREARTMENT.
I'll stay in Great Britain and keep on using our, frankly brilliant, free-at-point-of-use National Health Service, if you don't mind...
The graph at 0:39 shows that we spend say 47% on public healthcare. 37.7% of Americans are on public healthcare. So it looks like public health care is not as efficient as private healthcare. We only use 53% to cover 67% of the people in private health care.
+Metasyn thanks for answering. It looks like the number I was missing is that 10% of the nonelderly population is uninsured. It's as you said, the reason it looks like the private sector is doing a pretty good job at keeping costs down is because they are not insuring everyone. And I assume those people they are not insuring are the sickest of us.
The population of people who have private health insurance and those with public health insurance aren't the same, which is why you can't make this comparison. Private health insurance is not only incentivized to not cover those who would be the most expensive to cover, but the government has to run programs like medicare that exclusively target those who are 65+, whose healthcare is the most expensive.
The narrator has a partial understanding of how free market works. The medical industry in the US isn’t a free market at all. In the video he says the government can collectively bargain with the hospital, the drug makers and physicians and the like for lower prices. But what made them so powerful in the beginning at all? Why is the supply in the medical industry so low? Is there a government control behind that fixes up the supply so that there is little competition to drive costs down? It’s not explored.
Anunciado durante a Gamescom 2017, uma das maiores feiras de videogame do mundo, o remake de Secret of Mana é, desde o início, um projeto pensado para agradar aos fãs de longa data e atrair jogadores novatos com um gameplay mais acessível.
Não se engane: a versão 2018 de Secret of Mana está mais para uma recriação do que uma mera remasterização com pequeno ajustes gráficos. O que temos aqui é um jogo completamente atualizado, com personagens redesenhados que ganharam nova vida graças à estética cartunesca.
Se, por um lado, as mudanças visuais foram projetadas para atrair novatos, por outro, algumas pessoas podem torcer o nariz pela simplicidade da nova abordagem - especialmente no que diz respeito aos cenários e criaturas do mundo.
Os cenários coloridos, por exemplo, ainda que estejam bem representados, trazem pouca variedade e deixam game com cara de “jogo de celular”. Isso fica mais evidente pela estrutura do game, já que muitas áreas estão completamente vazias e monótonas. Nesse quesito, Secret of Mana não tem vantagem em ter o fator nostalgia a seu favor.
O remake utiliza a clássica perspectiva de visão aérea, com a câmera posicionada acima dos personagens. É possível arrastar as bordas da tela manualmente para ter uma visão mais ampla do ambiente, o que é bastante útil para momentos de exploração.
O brilho da era noventista, mas com ressalvas.
Antes de tudo, é importante ressaltar que não há legendas em português, então o melhor a fazer é jogar com textos em inglês. A história continua sendo o ponto mais alto de Secret of Mana e, novamente, coloca o jogador no controle de três adoráveis personagens: Randi, Primm e Popoi - é possível jogar em modo cooperativo local para até três usuários.
O objetivo do grupo é lutar contra um império traidor ao mesmo tempo em que tenta recuperar o poder da Mana para restaurar a paz. O grande problema é que, embora os gráficos estejam atualizados, as animações ficaram presas ao passado. Em vez de despertar o sentimento de nostalgia, a falta de capricho passa a impressão de que o remake foi feito às pressas.
A jogabilidade à la Zelda foi aprimorada e permite desferir ataques de qualquer ângulo. Os inimigos também demonstram mais inteligência, uma vez que agora eles têm a opção de atacar a partir de qualquer ponto do cenário.
Ainda que a movimentação esteja mais fluida, parece haver algum problema técnico relacionado ao impacto dos golpes. Isso porque há momentos em que o personagem simplesmente não acerta o ataque, mesmo posicionado a uma distância razoável do oponente.
Além disso, a interface dos menus ficou bem aquém do esperado, com abas confusas e muito mal posicionadas. Há, no entanto, uma opção de mapear os itens essenciais nos botões do joystick ou teclado, o que facilita muito a organização na hora de combates mais exigentes.
O remake de Secret of Mana mantém a essência da pérola dos RPGs de ação dos anos 90, mas comete muitos deslizes ao tentar mexer em time que está ganhando. Menus engessados, sistema de combate com problemas técnicos e animações presas ao passado impedem o relançamento de ser a experiência definitiva, apesar de que possa valer para quem nunca experimentou o jogo original.