The thing is that here in the States even if you pay for your health insurance they do everything they possible can to not cover you. It is like one of those bad friends, you are always there for them, but they are no where to be found when you need them the most.
Ya our healthcare is horrible quality in Canada. It's the middle men that are the issue, for us it's politicians, for you it's insurance companies. It's designed to be like this if you look at who lobbies government it's insurance companies big pharma, hospitals, all to screw the patient, for profit. So whoever has the money has the power which is why free markets work
@@bigshoots1181 Nah, I moved to Texas from Canada a few years ago. There's no improvement in quality here. It's just administered differently. Still have long wait times here at times and you pay, pay, pay for everything.
@@bigshoots1181 Of course it is. It's free market to the extreme: whatever the market will bear is what you will be charged. There's no humanity in the decisions regarding healthcare here, it's all about how much money can be made. It's a free market economy run amok.
Of course it has bias, it does not mention that either the UK or Canada have long waiting lines, in fact the NHS in the UK is so financially strapped for resources that a private system has emerged as a result, so now they have 2 systems, because the public can't cope with the demand
@@thomasjust2663 I have a co-worker who is from Canada and she says that her parents have never had a problem with getting the healthcare they need. At most, a week long wait. I think it’s the expectation that it should all be immediate. Also, we are actually subsidizing their healthcare. How? Because most of them have a cap on how much they will pay for things but the companies are ok with it because they make us pay the difference. I did my nursing research paper on the pros and cons of Universal healthcare.
The qaulity of care argument against universal healthcare isn't valid, in a country like this one (Australia) we have universal healthcare, everyone is covered, but at the same time those who wish to pay for private healthcare with better qaulity of service simply do so. just because we have universal healthcare doesn't mean there isn't private healthcare. Everyone is satisfied and taken care of.
The problem with such a system is that it can very easily become two tiered. In Canada, private healthcare is basically only available for the super rich. If the poor and middle class want the privatized, better healthcare (because they already have to pay for universal healthcare thru taxes) they essentially have to pay for two separate insurance plans. The key is to make one system that works for everyone and that is best done by having a private healthcare system with subsidies for low income earners AKA what America already has
@@xenomorphbiologist-xx1214you’ve got to be kidding! 😂 it’s already like that in America. The rich and super wealthy get the best care because they can afford it and the poor and homeless get shitty care or none at all. My mom has the government subsidized insurance you’re talking about, it literally only covers one annual check up and one dental cleaning everything else she’s on her own. I have insurance through my employer which costs $200 a month, my monthly medications come out to $180 a month, I see specialist 3 times a month that’s another $200 and once a year I have to get a round of infusions for my lupus that my amazing insurance refuses to pay for which costs $6.5k, I have medical debt galore!
@@Lighthouse6104 Agreed. That’s why I think a system like Switzerland works the best because the private care is the only tier and if u can’t afford it the government will subsidize it. The US is definitely not the ideal model
@@xenomorphbiologist-xx1214that is not how the system in switzerland works. Yes everybody has private insurance, but all private insurances only pay for basic care. If you want for example choose your doctor or hospital or get special treatments, you need a additional insurance. When you want the best healthcare in switzerland you end up with 3 or more health insurances, like in patient care insurance, dental insurance, out patient insurance, long term care insurance. The swiss system is definitely a two tier health care system. There will always be hospitals and doctors who are better than others, and therefore charge more which your insurance doesn‘t cover. The cost of for example a knee surgery is regulated, so every hospital charges the same and the private health insurance only pays the amount the government legally defined, but if you want to pick for example the surgeon, then the hospitals starts charging you extra and that can be in the ten thousands. Not every patient can be treated by the chief of medicine or in the most prestigious hospitals, so it will always be a two tier system.
Most advocating for universal healthcare in the U.S. want to outlaw private insurance, these are generally people that want the government to control EVERYTHING.
I'm astounded that you were able to not revert to and political biases while making this video. Well-rounded assessment of the pros and cons. Great work!
Above The Noise if I was a rich guy I would be donating thousands to this channel cause this was one of the few video have watched that felt like a PowerPoint of a teacher and not a PowerPoint from a commentator or podcast
To all the fiscal conservatives out there, our government spends 40k PER PERSON per year on health care. Countries like Germany and the UK? They spend about 10-15k. If you care so much about reducing the deficit, why aren't you on board with this?
Nationalizing healthcare would eliminate the profit incentive that's present in our healthcare system today, which would cause us to pay less overall for providing healthcare to we the people. I would love to have a nationalized healthcare system for the reason you just listed.
In 2015, I had a brain aneurysm rupture at the old age of 27. I was in perfect health (just ran a marathon). The total amount billed was over $7.2M. I'm lucky I had really good health insurance from my work. Medical debt is the leading cause of bankruptcy here in the US. Please vote 💚
I’m shook. Such class, understanding, smoothness, and fairness in this presentation. I’m subbed, this was an amazing video and really showed how nuanced this question could be, for better or worse. The way you evaluated both ends of the argument was really top notch!
It totally depends. If I have good health insurance from my job -- for example -- I'm actually not paying all that much out of pocket. If we then switched to universal healthcare and I lost my employer insurance, I could very well be paying MORE in taxes compared to what I'm paying NOW for taxes and private insurance.
@@AboveTheNoise Of course you are paying. It's part of your pay. That payment of insurance is part of your pay. If your employer didn't pay it to insurance you would get it.
@@Submanca Not sure I'm following you. I'm just saying that if you compare health insurance + taxes in America to countries with universal healthcare where its ALL taxes, you can't say EVERY American pays more. You can't say EVERY American pays less. It totally depends, and that's why there is so much debate about it!
@@AboveTheNoise The point is your employer doesn't pay their portion out of the goodness of their hearts. It's part of your compensation. Your cost to the employer is your pay + whatever benefits (health or otherwise) they pay a part of. Assuming your overall compensation stays the same, that money you now pay in taxes would go towards other parts of your compensation, either other benefits (gym memberships, whatever) or gross pay.
@@joewwilliams I'm not so sure. I don't think you can take it for a given that a company that no longer offers health insurance would just hand that money over to you! I don't have that much faith in companies!
In Sweden we ha universal health care - but, boy, you will have to waaaaaaait a looooong time for treatment. Sometimes even when you rush to hospital with an ambulance. The system costs a lot - so the Government can not afford to hire more staff. You could say that the health care system is universal - but only on paper.
Patrik Tikkanen exactly I got sick one time and we decided to go to a public hospital that offers free health care but the line was so long and after waiting for an hour I just decided to leave and just go to private hospital instead and even if it’s an emergency you still have to wait a long time cause there still a lot pf people
4 года назад
bien But did you pay for healthcare at the private hospital? Universal healthcare so you could go private and still get reimbursed for that healthcare, right?
Ethan Weeter no you pay out of pocket for that private healthcare. So it’s taken out of your check whether you use it or not. Then if you want fast or quality service you get to pay again.
Yes it is worth it because if you would ask any one from countries with socialized medicine to move and adopt the US model they would laugh at your face. It may be a simple explanation but it is very telling. Also to rebut the less freedom of choice argument, if the doctor you want to go to is not in network for your insurance then you can’t go to them. In socialized systems you can go to any doctor you want because they are all in network. Now that is true freedom of choice.
I dont know how the other countries free healthcare works, but in Brazil, where we have an universal healthcare system, you can't just walk in at any public hospital or clinic and choose your doctor. I believe that is also true in other countries. Because the healthcare system is so heavily regulated by the goverment, you have a lot of steps you have to go through in order to maintain order. You usually have a primary care physician thats responsible for your city region. Then he gets you a form authorizing your transfer to a more complex facility or authorizing complementary exams (such as CT scans, X rays, blood tests etc) that you then have to go to either a public laboratory (often crowded and criticized for overworked employees that treat you badly in a hurry) and a private lab that has some sort of goverment partnership. You get what im saying? It is kinda frustrating at times because if you are unsatisfied with what the government assigns you then you have to pay for a private treatment anyway since the public system has lots of steps you HAVE to go through. Sure, if you walk in at a public hospital literally dying, fainting, having a heart attack etc you are legally obligated to be taken care of. That it awesome! But if you're in for elective exams or treatments (conditions that are not life threatening such as chronic joint/back pains etc) that needs specific exams or procedures, get ready for months/years of paperwork, pre-consults and waiting for your name to be the next one on the huge list. Source: I am a physician that works in the brazilian primary healthcare. Also, I actually like it. It brings me joy being able to help people in need without billing them. But i need to expose its downsides too.
You cannot go to any doctor you want in Sweden, you go to the doctor that is available. Often times the doctor is different because doctors are always coming and going. Many Swedes are opting to pay for privatized insurance (on top of the universal insurance they are already paying for) so they can have more selection with healthcare providers and faster service. Simply settling with the state healthcare often means less selection with healthcare providers and longer wait times.
but there is record proof of people leaving those countries to USA because the hospitals had long waiting times less efficiency and less quality also there are also less options for vision and dental.
Ive never paid a dime for healthcare costs, everything is covered. no monthly premiums, no copays, no deductables, no limit. never seen a doctor bill. I had a heart attack 4 years ago. everything covered. ambulance to edmonton, even the ride home paid for. surgery, drugs, after care excellent. Even the nurses at the hospital told me they have friends, family working in the USA and they all said. its a nightmare, with or without insurance. great video, well done.
See, this is a great comprehensive explanatory video on how Universal Healthcare may or may not be better than what we have here in America already. It is NOT saying: "GOP is against the American people", or "Capitalism is bad, socialism is good for healthcare", or "Trump is the cause of why medicare is so expensive!". This video just compares and contrasts, no bias or anything 👍
Vorschweißflansch has he said it’s great? I haven’t heard anything other than Obamacare and I tend to agree with him Obamacare hasn’t helped much and is ineffective.
Indeed. Unfortunately, private insurance varies so widely that there isn't one number you can settle on. Private insurance can be you, as an individual, buying your own plan, or it can be a rich tech company offering a top-tier gold plan to it's employees with little out of pocket costs. So it's REALLY hard to do this kind of comparison, and that's why everyone argues about the cost of something like Medicare-for-all as it compares to what we have now.
@@AboveTheNoise sanders Medicare for all plan would be payed for by taxing all taxpayers on all income after 24k at 4%. With the median income of 59039, the average American would be spending $1402 a year in taxes. The median health insurance premium for an individual is $440 a month, or $5280 a year. For a normal American, that saves $3738 a year. This number is almost 5 times greater for families
@@cheybat5390 Sounds good to me! What does it cover? How much are we paying doctors and hospitals? The same? Less? What if the amount of money that additional tax revenue brings in doesn't cover what we need it to cover? Do we raise taxes the next year? Take that money from another government program?
@@AboveTheNoise Shouldn't you have figured all of that out before publishing this video. The Sanders Medicare for all bill is publicly available and it outlined the answers to all of the questions you just posed.
There's a lot to cover here so they won't be able to cover everything, give em a break people. They did a lot of work and a really great job given the amount of time they have. Great job above the noise workers! And your host is really great, everything he says just seems so relaxed and natural, like he's just having a real conversation with us. Congrats
I would disagree. The money used for universal healthcare doesn’t fall from the sky, it comes from the paycheck of us citizens. As someone who rarely ever goes to the doctor by choice and lives a very healthy lifestyle, I don’t think it’s fair to force more money from my paycheck to have me pay for something I’m not going to use. Of course accidents happen, but how often do they really happen? I rather just be in control of my money and have an emergency fund instead of having the government manage and waste my money. With universal healthcare, would I get a return for all the taxes taken out for healthcare that I didn’t use? Am I able to completely opt out of it or would I not even be able to have the choice to not pay for something?
@@InGodITrust333totally agree. That’s what I think too. When the ACA was approved and I was penalized for not having insurance, I thought it was not fair because getting a private insurance with a ridiculous high monthly payment doesn’t make sense to me because that was only for the cheapest coverage for medical services which means basic services with a big deductible. I consider that private health insurance companies are the worst options because they will try to find the way to charge you more covering less services.
@@AboveTheNoise Poor you..! 😜 And yet I never hear the same fundemental debate from Euopeans, on the net or on the news for instance, like you do in the US! There just is no controversy over the concept that essentially people should have access to free health care, if not a right to it. Sure, there may be grumbles over the decision of how much funding is spent on the system, but arguing - in basic conceptual terms - in favor of revoking their universal health care, let alone replacing it with a private system like they have in the US? It would be political suicide.
@@somecuriosities Totally. It's really telling that ZERO countries with universal healthcare have made the decision to STOP offering it and move to a system that the U.S. has.
@@AboveTheNoise It doesn't have to be complicated, you can have the best of both worlds. In Brazil, we do have universal health care, which has several problems (as you cited), but it isn't mandatory. One can simply pay for private health insurance and deduct the amount you paid from your annual taxes. It's simple and you can offer health care to the poorest part of population whereas the weathier people pay for better treatments
It's not as simple as allowing the government to take over health care and everything will be fine and dandy. Let's not pretend America doesn't lead the world in actual HEALTH CARE. I'm talking skilled doctors, cutting-edge medical treatments and technologies, timely care, etc. No other countries rival the United States. You'll never see a guy from Texas go to Canada or Finland for a medical procedure.
One trouble is that Americans see the French, British, Danish, Finnish, Canadian or Australian systems and think we'll have one of those without realising that they can't have any system that another country has. The reason being that all universal healthcare systems are tailor made for the country they operate in. For the US to have universal healthcare they would have to start from scratch for the US for profit system relies on Americans getting ill and thereby using the system which is how it makes money. Universal healthcare relies on people using the system as least as possible by making the population as healthy as possible. All the chemicals that go into the processed food in the US would be severely restricted to make the food more natural as it is in the rest of the world. GM foods could be banned.
As a Canadian I am satisfied with my health care although it would be nice if it covered dental and vision care. The tiny portion of my income tax that goes toward it is balanced easily by the fact that I have no premiums and no copay for doctor or hospital visits. Heart surgery would cost me no more than a broken arm would. If I lose my job or am unable to work I do not lose my health care. Prescriptions for children, the elderly and those with on social assistance or disability are covered.
I have US high deductible insurance, $150 a month, plus pay $400 for every doctor visit and pay hundreds for every test until I spend $6600. Only then will insurance start to cover things.
@@BethJehovah So, unless your revenue is in the 150 000$ range, you are paying 2-3 times more than a person in Canada with that salary is paying through taxes.
@@BethJehovah Wow! That sucks. Imagine paying a smaller premium and getting unlimited doctors visits with no deductible or co-pay. That’s what we have in Canada.
@@BethJehovah and even after paying $6000 out of pocket.. insurance usually doesn’t cover 100% of subsequent costs until you meet your out of pocket maximum, which can also vary lol
The one main reason I can’t afford to live in the US, my cobra payment was $600 a month, now it will be $1400. I had to quit my unstable job and retired early at 62. I had a bad foot infection and had to go to a hospital in Chiang Mai, in and out in 45 minutes, excellent and efficient care. My bill for ER, Doctor, Meds was 930 baht , around $31 dollars. I used to work in a hospital for 28 years. We are short staffed much of the time, our administration cut support staff to bare bones, also don’t get sick on The Weekends, because we are severely short staffed.. hospitals are just another big corporation , profit and cutting labor costs
I don't mind paying higher taxes in Australia for healthcare. It's reassuring to know that the tumor and several other emergency surgeries I've had were covered by universal healthcare. Additionally, all the MRI and CT scans I've needed were also covered.
The only argument is focused on costs. No one ever mentions the quality of care or the choices people have to choose their doctors. Not to mention the waits to even get an appointment.
@Nicole Adenegha not my experience. I have multiple life long medical conditions and the nhs has been fantastic. I really don’t give a shit if I wait a few weeks for a non urgent appt because I have always had same day care when I have needed it. Cost has never been mentioned . When I had a seizure in the middle of the night I had a dr arrive on a motorbike within a few minutes ( we live in a rural area) . An ambulance arrived a few minutes later. Before morning I had been assessed by a consultant, had had a cat scan and a lumber puncture. When I broke my wrist, I was triaged within a few minutes but then waited 4 hours to be plastered. The U.K. NHS is not first come first served. The sicker people get served first. Ectopic pregnancy... ambulance, assessment, straight to the operating theatre. Could not have been better.
@@courgette3401 Yeah people complain about wait times but I'm assuming it really only depends. It's not exactly that bad to wait if it's not something urgent that needs to be taken care of right away.
there are no wait times for emergency care. If its life threatening its treated immediately. If its not...yeah you may have to wait. Im in Australia and its brilliant. I can decline a doctor if I want and my local GP Ive been going to for the last 20 years.
I’ve had state healthcare in Oregon for over 3 years now, and it’s been pretty great; prescriptions, office visits, specialist visits (including mental health) and some dental work have all been free. But I’m about to start a big kid job with benefits which will require me to pay for my healthcare again. The question in the video title leads to a enormously complex answer, but I do wonder how it’d play out if the country’s healthcare system was like Oregon’s. With all the wealth in this country it seems that no one should go uncovered.
That's right. We are the richest country in the world and some of our poorest citizens cannot afford healthcare and never will be able to. Look what covid is doing now!
The number one problem people talk about is taxes, but look at the UK compared to us. They have slightly higher taxes with universal healthcare. Why is that? They aren't spending a ton of money on the military. We need to reorganize the budget and we will be able to keep taxes low if not keep them at the same price.
sure, thats 💩 if your condition is in critical state you get to go first, if it can wait it will wait. any amount of money should not decide who gets to live and who does not.
@@peakhelliw1509 So you would have insurance company executives make that choice instead? Those executives only answer to the shareholders, not to you.
Those "Cons" are barely cons at all. In America, increase taxes will be significantly lower than the co-pays we're already forced to pay before insurance kicks in. Quality of care doesn't matter much when most of us can't access car at all. And we already have less choice because we can't afford the expensive ones anyways. It's a non-choice already.
I am canadian waited for over a year to remove my gallbladder. Of course if it was life threatening it would have happened immediately but I just had bad acid reflux that in the end turned to be calcifying gallbladder. Well I still think it's better to have it in Canada free and never worry about bills.
The problem is is that Americans want to have timely appointments up to date technology and the best doctors around unfortunately it costs money and I think Americans believe that if we had universal healthcare quality and motivation would go down
in the U.K. I would have had an ambulance, an operation, got home. Had paid time off work . The only paperwork would have been telling the office my name and address when I got to hospital. Not a single penny would be paid at the time.
In Canada I had to pay for my ambulance ride - which I refused to pay for. Now I have a collection agency trying to collect the 90 dollars or whatever it cost. When I got discharged from the ER I had to pay for my prescription. I think the British do have something to be proud of in their NHS, however we Canadians have nothing to be proud of.
There is no way individuals can barter one the same level with for profit insurance companies the same way a government or employer can. A socialized universal system would be disruptive to switch over but would be an end net benefit for the country. The simple fact that we would all collectively pay less for a universal system compared to our current one is telling.
Bias isn't always bias by definition...generally speaking left wing politics are based off facts and science so being on the side for the right policies already has a pre built bias.
@@AboveTheNoise Why are you teaching different perspectives...this is one issue no one should be on the fence about...neutral takes on such things is a tad irresponsible.
@@DarkMustard1337 it's a fine line between pro/con debate and false equivalence -- that's true. We are very careful to only select topics where there are strong arguments on both sides of a controversial issue, and by "strong" we mean based on data-driven, peer-reviewed evidence. If that's really not happening on one side of a debate, but there are very strong * feelings* and moral objections to an issue, we will still present those perspectives but point out where they lack real evidence to support their view. We really want to push our viewers to think critically about the misinformation out there AND the persuasive arguments and decide for themselves what makes sense.
Taxes will increase? But you will not be paying any money to private health insurance. Quality of care might change? USA rank 40+ in life expectancy. while paying the most. What quality are you talking about. Less choice? universal healthcare means no matter where u go you are covered. what choice do u want?
You think that getting the government involved in healthcare will make it better? You have a lot of faith in the government. The government has fighting poverty for over 60 years and it hasn't gotten any better. The government started handing out student loans and now graduates can't afford to pay back their loans because there is no incentive for colleges and universities to control costs. The government started guaranteeing home mortgages and when the housing bubble bust people stopped paying their mortgages so the government had to bailout the bank because the government forced banks to make loans to people that couldn't afford the loan. Shall I go on?
I don't understand how this is still a question. Universal healthcare costs less, is the same for everyone, usually still leaves people the choice to go to a private institute with their money if they want to... And about the fact that the government has a greater hold on health choices than people, let's remember that anti-vaxxers are a thing in the U.S. Maybe it's better that the government handles health rather than the uninformed citizen
Great points. The facts behind universal healthcare are VERY strong. I think the U.S. just has a very strong anti-government streak. Maybe people would be more receptive to a Switzerland-style universal healthcare system?
Nelcomarproductions I think for health, people using it more (when they need it) is probably a good think for the economic health of a nation. Dead and/or very sick people are the best consumers
It’s taking away choice and money from some people who are unwilling. I see your points but it’s not convincing. The bigger the government, the more you’ll see it go corrupt. People embezzling money, censorship, people getting into positions of power just because they’re related to someone working in a certain field. It has cons. What would be nice is our style of healthcare just at a cheaper cost (regulated by the government) but not mandatory.
4 года назад+2
Above The Noise I think it is healthy people who hate this idea. They are like, I never get sick, why should I pay for sick people? Not realizing, they are covering themselves and their kids if they get sick regardless of health. The taxes may go up 5%, at most. I paid probably $12,000 a year with employer insurance and still had out of pocket health care expenses. If I paid $7,000-$8,000 in taxes and was covered no matter what, I would take that in a heartbeat.
Here in Brazil we have a very good system, but it's very bad administrated and very bad invested. But it's all people like me have, me and my family can't pay for private healthcare, and it is saving our lives.
I'm liking these recent videos before the election. It'll be my first time voting this election so these videos help me understand what the major problems are in the U.S and understanding what each candidate running for President will do about it. Anyways I think Universal Healthcare would be the way to go. Yeah it would be more expensive, but atleast everyone will have coverage and can go get treatment. That treatment could be for big illnesses spotted in it's earlier stages. And for people wanting higher quality of care, they can get private insurance instead. I'm kinda ignorant to this topic so maybe there's some information I should know about that I'm missing with my thoughts.
A problem with that that I've heard is that since we have to pay higher taxes for the universal healthcare, low and middle class Americans won't be able to afford private insurance on top of it, only the wealthy would
@@saltyspooner1770 exactly. Taxes will be higher on all classes to pay for universal health care. And then, the "middle class" will most likely want their own private insurance provides, so they would be paying double.
I mean, I think it would be much more expensive than you think. To put it to perspective, the UK has universal healthcare. Their population is 67 million people. Canada also has this healthcare, with a population of 37 million. The United States has a population of 370 million people (if I am correct). That’s MUCH more people payed for (obviously) than in either of those countries. Supply and demand in the US are drastically different than in the UK or Canada.
That would be bad, it’s not about being covered it’s about quality, we should have Swiss or Dutch healthcare system, there’s is private and everyone is insured, it’s threat quality, efficient, and affordable.
Thanks for the explanation about usa healthcare. As international viewer, every time I ask about how usa healthcare works I only get confusing or people who try to defend the usa healthcare system. Now I have a better understanding of how usa healthcare works.
I vote for socialized healthcare like the UK. I’m an American but had a close loved one living in England that suffered with multiple myeloma. I went with him through three years of his journey with doctors, tests, hospital visits and literally kept track of all details. His medical care was superb and timely. I don’t feel that his health was compromised at all. For those that balk at the word “socialized”, what do you think medicare is??
@@fritzforsthoefel803150%? In Germany its 14,6% divided between employer and employee. And yes in most European countries you pay higher taxes in general than in America.
It is so long past due for us to switch to a single payer system here in the US. Insurance companies are bleeding so much money out of the healthcare system, and they are already rationing what healthcare is and isn't covered. I am one of the fortunate ones that has always had a good job with good healthcare coverage, but, I actually care about what happens to others.
They don't. My friend moved to Britain for a job and she does telehealth with a doctor in the USA because the wait to see a therapist in the UK was MONTHS
You could pay for universal healthcare _and_ free (or subsidized) education if you paid even slightly less on the military. ¬_¬ The cons don't matter if you can't get any coverage. Any healthcare is better than none.
- This isn’t even remotely true. If we spent the entire military budget on healthcare, we still wouldn’t have nearly enough to afford universal coverage.
We should get the system they have in France and Germany the goverment covers your insurance and you have the option to get private insurance but the companies have to be non profits and are heavily regulated.
If you are rich maybe, otherwise you are too busy paying into the universal system to afford the better more consistent care. America has the right idea, The EU has it backwards XD.
Thank you!!! Your videos explain so many issues in a way that is very clear, concise, down to earth, unbiased and straight forward. I really do appreciate what you contribute here through youtube and this channel.
Less choice? Don’t Americans have less choice now because they have to go to a hospital or doctor that’s “in-network”? The increase in tax to pay for it would eliminate the need for expensive health insurance so you would be savings hundreds a month. I am Australian, I earn 80k a year and pay for health insurance through taxes known as the Medicare levy, it’s 2% of my income but it only starts once you earn over 18k (we pay no taxes if you earn less than 18k per year) so my Medicare costs about 1600 per year or 133 per month. I can go to any doctor, any hospital, any pharmacy and get free healthcare. I could get cancer and have to undergo multiple surgeries, it won’t cost me anything out of pocket. Now in saying this, if you are unemployed.. it doesn’t matter, you’re still totally covered. We care about our fellow people and know that one day we will need to use our healthcare, so will our family and friends so paying 2% of what you earn to pay for totally free healthcare, is worth it and is cheaper than insurance.
am I missing something but why is nobody talking about that in all the countries with universal health care there is private insurance and private hospitals for that better quality and shorter waiting time. you can have your uhc + private insurance if you want. you can go to private hospital for a fraction of a price compared to usa. you can get luxury suite if you want. it will be expensive but compared to usa it's pennies
It totally depends on the country. In Canada, it's illegal to have private insurance cover what the national plan covers. You can buy private health insurance for what it DOESN"T cover, however. It's supplemental private insurance.
In Germany, you can choose a private insurance instead of the regular one. It will be cheaper but cover less that the public system. In France, you can have a private complementary health insurance that will cover better the dental/visual and pay you the small co-pays of the universal system.
@@AboveTheNoise yes, it depends. but you present it in a very black/white way. I think many americans don't know that there is private insurance in countries with UHC.
@@onelungg I totally get where you're coming from. That's why we had that section in the video about the 3 different ways you can have UHC. Hopefully it helped viewers understand that there are a bunch of different ways to get it. Most Americans are familiar with Medicare for all, but that kind of system doesn't really exist in Europe, which is often held up as the gold standard in UHC.
Informative... However, here in the UK we DO pay for health insurance by everyone... it's called N.I. or National Insurance, a paid percentage of your salary by you and your employer regardless of what you earn, taken from you each week or month directly from your earnings. The stumbling block for the US health care system is just corporate greed.
Good video, but I'll go ahead and critique the cons of universal healthcare. Taxes would likely increase: - This is a manufactured issue in terms of framing the costs and payments towards a universal healthcare system. It's just as easy for me to adapt this narrative and say americans already pay an "individual tax", that is to say we already pay a certain amount of money (out of our checks or each month) to an institution to ensure we are covered for health insurance. Continuing this narrative, instead of paying money towards a private institution the money would then be paid towards an institution that has your interests at heart (ideally). Quality of care might change: - Yes, but that is reductionist in terms of the variations in quality care under the current system. As was already said numerous times throughout the video is that there are millions of Americans without care! So a change from no insurance to having insurance is a increase in quality. Moreover, you have to consider what types of insurance are available and to who. The quality of care is related to the insurance-- if you can afford better insurance, you can have more quality healthcare. Although, there are a lot of loopholes in which insurance companies can say you don't qualify because of preconditions (which won't necessarily happen under a universal system). Let alone the fact that the United states has some of the worst statistics in quality of healthcare such as mortality rates for giving birth. Less choice for the individual: - Again, this touches upon the issue being that healthcare coverage is widely variable across the country. There's not much of a choice when your insurance is tied to your work, whether you can afford insurance or not (as well as different types), or even if your insurance will pay for the care that you need.
Thanks for your thorough comment! I'll try to address your points 1. It really comes down to whether or not you'll pay more, regardless of where the money goes. If I currently pay $5,000 a year for my private insurance and $20,000 a year in taxes, that might be better than a universal system where I may not be paying private insurance, but my taxes are now $28,000 a year. In that situation, $3,000 a year MORE is coming out of my paycheck. 2. In a short video, we have to be reductionist some time! The style of healthcare a country has certainly can impact quality. And if America were to switch to a Medicare-for-all type system, there would be winners and losers. There are people right now that pay a lot of money for great health plans, and they might not want to give that up. For them, the quality of insurance would go DOWN, and so could their quality of care. 3. This can be true. But conservatives argue about changing the system to encourage MORE competition so there are MORE quality choices to choose from.
Re: quality of care From the perspective of someone with no healthcare coverage, anything is better than nothing. From the perspective of anyone with quality healthcare now, it will likely result in a decrease in quality.
@@DrewLonmyPillow Absolutely. If you're part of the 9 percent that can't afford insurance, you're in a REALLY tough situation. The very idea that you could be in a situation where you don't have health insurance makes no sense to most Europeans!
@E KL less choice thing.. what good is choice to decide between tested medical treatment and scam _alternative_ when one does not know how to recognise which one is the real thing?
I would like to point out one thing no one mentions. Universal health care is in no way related to your job, if you get fired or quit your health care does not stop. So if you find better opportunities you can leave. Also it's cheaper for your employer because they don't have to deal with such nonsense.
Subscribed for the great effort in getting both sides of the aisles. I hope you get more content like this out. I do wish you had time to discuss the logistics issue that exists in the US (getting access to rural communities with little access to public transport). You should do a video on Prepaid Physician Groups and the history of health insurance in USA.
There shouldn't be argument between universal health care and private health care. Both should exist. Those who have money should be able to access private health care and those who don't can access universal health care. I'm from Indonesia and glad that we have both system.
I have a dear friend whose father is eighty years old. Her mother had been taking care of him by herself for years and can't do it anymore. They have gone to Medicaid, Medicare, and various social services and have been told he doesn't qualify. He is on Social Security and his income is too high, She is dead set AGAINST Universal Healthcare and then complains because her parents can't get the help they need.
That’s crazy , and unfair to not qualify for healthcare at 80:? Im under the impression everyone gets medicated at 62- years , why didn’t he qualify? My grandma gets medical, Medicare , and she barely worked in the USA . Sounds unfair to work all your life and not get Medicare when so many others get it and Didn’t earn it y paying to the system.
The real question is, what would it be like if we treated everything else we purchase the same way as health care. For example you want to buy a shirt: You would only be allowed to shop for shirts near where you live ,or else If you shopped outside your Zone you would have to pay 20% more. You would need to make an appointment. You would not be allowed to see the shirt before you bought it, It would cost about 100 times more , even after you'd been paying monthly for access to the store weather you ever shopped there or not and No refunds.
It doesn’t matter if majority of Americans have insurance, because even with it, if you are not rich you can’t pay it when you have a serious medical emergency.
It looks like the US may be open to a ‘hybrid’ system of healthcare that could be inovative and save costs, with additions but no reductions in healthcare insurance.
what innovation has the private sector created in healthcare? i hear this about private healthcare all the time "innovation. competition. MuH FrEe MuRkUt" but never seen any evidence of it actually happening
I think the federal government should not be involved in healthcare. States should run healthcare bc each state has different demographics, population, etc.. free market healthcare may work in cal where there's a lot of people so there's lot of customers whereas it wouldn't necessarily work in alaska
The states never take on this responsibility. FDR learned this during the Depression. State responsibility has always been code for forgetting about something.
One of the biggest challenges to change is the affect on the US medical industry & jobs. Right now the industry earns $$$ money for NNN patient hours/benefits. If the number of patients and or benefits increase then either the $$$ has to increase - will come out of somebody's pocket (the only place it can come from) or the $$$/NNN has to decrease (industry get payed less for more work). Increasing efficiency is just another way of stating the same thing. If they could have done this already, they would have and increases their profits. So, Universal Health Care in the US will almost certainly hurt the medical industry and/or increase the costs we pay. Since the industry has some substantial influence, my guess is we will pay or lose benefits (like the long waits for service you mentioned). Another option is to stop underwriting the rest of the world's health care by allowing Medicare to negotiate drug prices and legalize re-import so we can buy drugs at the lowest international price rather than paying 10x the price in the US our neighbors pay in Canada. This would not be a total fix; but, reducing the cost of health care could free up some $$ to cover the uninsured.
It's not just Medicaid, Medicare, and Military system that provides government run healthcare in America. Almost everyone who works for the Federal, State, or a local government has government provided health insurance, when all those people are averaged together, that equals out to about 150 million people. So Half of the population is insured by the government already, so having Medicare for all wouldn't be so much of a step of an overhall of the current system. Also a lot of these medical breakthroughs are through public institutions like universities and government research centers like the CDC, so the argument that it would stifle innovation is a mute point. Not to mention that with universal health insurance, doctors are still competing for your business, so it does not lose its competitive edge.
I am concerned about the future of universal healthcare systems. Right now in Sweden I have to be on the phone right at 7:30am to get a call back time from the local health clinic, if I wait 10 mins the call back system is usually booked for the entire day and I have to be on the phone again the next day just for an initial phone call! Some Swedes are just going straight to ER to bypass the call wait time, meaning more wait time in ER! There are definitely set backs with universal healthcare systems. Start looking into corruption with govt health departments in countries like Philippines and South Africa where health funds have been pocketed by politicians instead of used for its intended purpose. England's healthcare system seems to be spiraling downward, I have heard Brits in some areas are being told to drive themselves to the hospital rather than call an ambulance because there are ambulance shortages. Food for thought. Main issue in US is cost.
I was in Shanghai and twisted an ankle, i went to the doctor there and got a free check up and i paid $1...as a tourist...the doctor was super nice to me and the hospital was top notch. These are some of the benefits of a social system...not sure how i feel about it but thank goodness i wasnt in the USA at the time!
I'm from Brazil, a nation that has free and universal healthcare, and I'll give you my personal experience: It's good but since it's public, it may take some time to make exams. Taxes will be increased to maintain the healthcare system.
Thanks for sharing your experience in Brazil! Sounds like most publicly funded systems require that some sacrifice convenience and maybe quality for more equitable coverage for all.
It says a lot even our own doctors and nurses get screwed in our present health-care system. I have a friend who is a nurse and even she gets mediocre health-care insurance.
What I don’t get is, why are most Americans ok with large pharmaceutical companies taking their money but are opposed to the government taking a smaller amount through taxes, even though they’d actually be better off?
Part of the us’s issue is that it’s people aren’t as healthy we eat poorly and don’t get a lot of exercise so we are more likely to need healthcare. When demand goes up so does the cost
That also ties into the food they feed us here, compared to other countries our food is way more processed and has a ton of harmful unnecessary ingredients added to it that shouldn’t be included. In the US it seems our government just wants to kill us.
Canada is no beacon for a health care system as of this date. The entire health care system is being taken to court - to the Supreme Court of Canada. Since it is a single payer system, it makes it illegal for citizens to purchase private health insurance for ALL services covered under a Provinces Medicare. No other country does it this way. Other countries with a single payer system at least have a functioning parallel private health sector that provides ALL of the same services that the public sector does. This prevents the system from becoming overwhelmed, and inefficient. Canada's system has led to gov't rationing, inefficiency, historic wait times for surgeries and people dying on waist lists. Since the health care costs are eating up the majority of a Province's budget, there is less money for Education, Roads, Forest and Agriculture, etc.. Hope it gets addressed soon as it will take a decade to fix.
Healthcare is should be a right. Modern societies protect their citizens. Every person should be entitled to the best quality care and every person in a country pays for that right though their tax. People want to choose their doctors not which private company foots the bill, nobody wants to pick that. Or perhaps you would like Fire Hall insurance or Police Insurance? If you get to choose which medical issue you would like to solve why shouldn't you get to choose which fire/crime you want to put out or stop?
Many hospitals here are run by universities, who continuously do research so the quality of medical care is high, we do get the latest medical innovations and treatments and we do get the latest medicine (after much testing when it's considered SAFE). Healthcare insurance is mandatory but affordable.
@@GoldenRedder USA healthcare is expensive because it is run by both insurance and pharmaceutical companies, without a government willing to put a limit to their profit making.
@@flitsertheo Which is why the spike in healthcare prices happend when the government desired to get involved in healthcare and place monopoly protections on the industry
The only way to make universal Healthcare work is to make private insurance illegal. This makes it so rich people would want the best system possible. Also giving doctors and nurses free schooling if good grades are met would fill all the necessary positions. Being that the US is the last industrialized nation on earth to utilize this system we would be able to choose the best form by seeing which of all the systems work best and mix , match the best system.
I don’t think Americans will ever have universal healthcare even if they elected a democrat. It takes a lot of cooperation to create the kind of of healthcare bureaucracy needed and the will & cooperation needed for this effort doesn’t seem to be there in such a divided nation. The primary reason being that in the US healthcare is a commodity, not a benefit, and as a commodity a lot of money is being made by a lot of very powerful people. Big medical, big Pharma, and big insurance all make a ton of money from the current system and they will fight tooth and nail to defend their incomes and demonize all single payer healthcare regimes and people will believe them. In countries with single payer systems there is a big incentive to promote preventive medicine and healthy living in order to keep costs down, whereas in the US there is only lip service to these measures because there are zero dollars to be made from healthy people. The biggest problem with healthcare costs in the US is that they are expected to continue to rise. By 2030, 50% of the population is expected to be obese and 25% severely obese. Not a rosy picture but a great forecast for those who have a vested interest in the current state of affairs.
The fact that insurance doesn't even cover all of it. Maybe some or a good bit. But not all. Here in Ireland, we only have to pay an excess fee. So basically I had an operation on my shoulder. I had to stay over night. All I had to pay was a small fee of 75 euro which is about between 70-79 dollars to the hospital and that's it. The insurance covers all the rest of the bills. You guys need that system
What you didn't cover with Canada's single payer system is that you can have private insurance if you want to. In fact many Canadians have supplemental insurance for things like dental or elective surgery. Getting Universal Health Care does not mean someone has to give up their private insurance. In fact Canadians with private health insurance can even travel to another country for services that may be better (i.e. South Korea has the best cancer treatment programs in the world). The problem with the United States is that freedom correlates directly to how much money you have in your bank account. The more money you have the more free you will be, and this correlates to just about everything - justice system, healthcare, prescription drugs, crime (money = safe neighborhoods), better police (i.e. during the L.A. riots Beverly Hills was protected while the Korean neighborhoods were thrown under the bus), education, etc.
But our taxes pay for the research and development of drugs? The same pill in the us cost $200 but in Australia cost $8. This happens bc after after we develop the medicine it gets privatized and sold for way more, but we already payed for it so now we pay for it 20x over again ? I'm just confused how you could say the quality wouldnt be the same 😂
I'll be okay with tax funded universal healthcare as soon as the federal government agrees to private audits. We have trillions of dollars going missing, I'm sure that would cover it!
All I know is: thank goodness I live in Belgium. Neither me or my family needs to wait insanely long to get a treatment & it’s very affordable. We all have our own insurances, which covers even more the possible costs. I don’t mind paying my taxes because at least we get something out of it. We don’t need to file for bankruptcy for wanting to go to college or to get some kind of surgery done. Oh and we also don’t get refused treatment or get sent home “because you don’t have health insurance”
Hal Funny because we don’t have to pay anything if I break a leg or, if it was to happen that I have to pay something, it would be less than 100 euros.
US is expensive due to government regulation, we don’t wanna pay high taxes (taxes higher than the ones in ur country cause of population size) for health care, Swiss healthcare system is best for America.
@@Ace-uc5cj The Swiss system is not that different then Obamacare, using competing insurance companies and supplementing the premiums of the poor. Swiss are probably just nicer people when it comes to working together for the common good.
@@SandfordSmythe the swiss system is different from obamacare tho when it comes to price controls, force and regulations on companies. They're two different systems that try to achieve the same goal but are different, one is successful and one is a disaster.
I have seen many, many people from other countries say how happy they are with the free medicinal they have. There are no complaints from they. I believe if this was on the ballots in the US, most people would vote for free medical!
The most recent version of the Commonwealth rankings, published in 2017, placed the U.S. last among 11 countries. The United Kingdom ranked first, followed by Australia, the Netherlands, New Zealand and Norway, Sweden and Switzerland, Germany, Canada, and France.16 Jun 2020 with regards to medical research advancement.
This video is well appreciated. Will be a big help at the next Thanksgiving dinner when I have to explain a non bias moderate perspective. Great channel 👍
It already is that way in the U.S. especially if you live below the poverty line your healthcare is all paid for by the government. My worry is with universal care you get bias treatment for everyone across the board. Money talks and with money you can receive better attentive care.
This is a really complicated issue and I think that there is no perfect solution. If America did switch to universal healthcare, I think that there would have to be a lot of incentive to increase the quality because the wages of healthcare providers will be an issue. I know the current system is already flawed, so I think that getting universal healthcare is a good idea if some of the issues are thought about and can be resolved
As they say in the video, companies are competing for profit. Some of the money from their clients is going towards marketing/strategies, and this money isn't going into service or research. With the government regulating health insurance, you just completely delete this competition and health becomes the basic human right it is rather than a run for the money
Just because a country has universal healthcare doesn't mean it doesn't continue to offer a higher quality private healthcare for those who want it, we have this in Australia, everyone is covered but those who want higher quality and better wait times can pay for private cover, everyone is happy
For a person working in health care, the US system is better since most Health care workers got paid higher because hospitals in the US are competing to attract nurses and doctors to work in their hospitals. However, a healthcare worker in Canada is paid less since all of the hospitals are just owned by one company/government and there is no competition to attract nurses since where ever you go it will be almost the same. the only competition here is per province/state. Calgary and Edmonton pay higher than Ontario and Vancouver since Ontario has more people to work in the health system.
The thing is that here in the States even if you pay for your health insurance they do everything they possible can to not cover you. It is like one of those bad friends, you are always there for them, but they are no where to be found when you need them the most.
Ya our healthcare is horrible quality in Canada. It's the middle men that are the issue, for us it's politicians, for you it's insurance companies. It's designed to be like this if you look at who lobbies government it's insurance companies big pharma, hospitals, all to screw the patient, for profit. So whoever has the money has the power which is why free markets work
@@bigshoots1181 Nah, I moved to Texas from Canada a few years ago. There's no improvement in quality here. It's just administered differently. Still have long wait times here at times and you pay, pay, pay for everything.
@@bukka6697 America is not free market
@@bigshoots1181 Of course it is. It's free market to the extreme: whatever the market will bear is what you will be charged. There's no humanity in the decisions regarding healthcare here, it's all about how much money can be made. It's a free market economy run amok.
@@bukka6697 it's the farthest thing from free market, a quick Google search will prove you wrong.
Wait a minute a RUclips channel that talks about American political issues without a clear bias?? Omg amazing!
Of course it has bias, it does not mention that either the UK or Canada have long waiting lines, in fact the NHS in the UK is so financially strapped for resources that a private system has emerged as a result, so now they have 2 systems, because the public can't cope with the demand
@@thomasjust2663 He did mention the wait: Literally months for a surgery.
@@thomasjust2663 I have a co-worker who is from Canada and she says that her parents have never had a problem with getting the healthcare they need. At most, a week long wait. I think it’s the expectation that it should all be immediate. Also, we are actually subsidizing their healthcare. How? Because most of them have a cap on how much they will pay for things but the companies are ok with it because they make us pay the difference. I did my nursing research paper on the pros and cons of Universal healthcare.
@@thomasjust2663 he said CLEAR bias everyone is biased to some extent he was much fairer and he did mention the wait
@@sandywright-leonard5238 ruclips.net/video/ZVOV3sU8Ays/видео.html
The qaulity of care argument against universal healthcare isn't valid, in a country like this one (Australia) we have universal healthcare, everyone is covered, but at the same time those who wish to pay for private healthcare with better qaulity of service simply do so.
just because we have universal healthcare doesn't mean there isn't private healthcare. Everyone is satisfied and taken care of.
The problem with such a system is that it can very easily become two tiered. In Canada, private healthcare is basically only available for the super rich. If the poor and middle class want the privatized, better healthcare (because they already have to pay for universal healthcare thru taxes) they essentially have to pay for two separate insurance plans. The key is to make one system that works for everyone and that is best done by having a private healthcare system with subsidies for low income earners AKA what America already has
@@xenomorphbiologist-xx1214you’ve got to be kidding! 😂 it’s already like that in America. The rich and super wealthy get the best care because they can afford it and the poor and homeless get shitty care or none at all. My mom has the government subsidized insurance you’re talking about, it literally only covers one annual check up and one dental cleaning everything else she’s on her own. I have insurance through my employer which costs $200 a month, my monthly medications come out to $180 a month, I see specialist 3 times a month that’s another $200 and once a year I have to get a round of infusions for my lupus that my amazing insurance refuses to pay for which costs $6.5k, I have medical debt galore!
@@Lighthouse6104 Agreed. That’s why I think a system like Switzerland works the best because the private care is the only tier and if u can’t afford it the government will subsidize it. The US is definitely not the ideal model
@@xenomorphbiologist-xx1214that is not how the system in switzerland works. Yes everybody has private insurance, but all private insurances only pay for basic care. If you want for example choose your doctor or hospital or get special treatments, you need a additional insurance. When you want the best healthcare in switzerland you end up with 3 or more health insurances, like in patient care insurance, dental insurance, out patient insurance, long term care insurance.
The swiss system is definitely a two tier health care system. There will always be hospitals and doctors who are better than others, and therefore charge more which your insurance doesn‘t cover.
The cost of for example a knee surgery is regulated, so every hospital charges the same and the private health insurance only pays the amount the government legally defined, but if you want to pick for example the surgeon, then the hospitals starts charging you extra and that can be in the ten thousands. Not every patient can be treated by the chief of medicine or in the most prestigious hospitals, so it will always be a two tier system.
Most advocating for universal healthcare in the U.S. want to outlaw private insurance, these are generally people that want the government to control EVERYTHING.
“It’s 3AM and you are wide awake”
Me: *looks at clock* Whoops...
The debate on healthcare is so necessary right now. By the way, I heard Resubot is great for those looking to spruce up their resumes quickly.
I'm astounded that you were able to not revert to and political biases while making this video. Well-rounded assessment of the pros and cons. Great work!
Thank you! We try!
Above The Noise if I was a rich guy I would be donating thousands to this channel cause this was one of the few video have watched that felt like a PowerPoint of a teacher and not a PowerPoint from a commentator or podcast
Pro : Universal Healthcare...Con : Not having Universal healthcare
@@DarkMustard1337 so true. Everyone with Universal healthcare...prefer it to the CF that is American healthcare.
Thats cuz this shouldn't be a political issue, it is a Human issue.
To all the fiscal conservatives out there, our government spends 40k PER PERSON per year on health care. Countries like Germany and the UK? They spend about 10-15k. If you care so much about reducing the deficit, why aren't you on board with this?
Nationalizing healthcare would eliminate the profit incentive that's present in our healthcare system today, which would cause us to pay less overall for providing healthcare to we the people. I would love to have a nationalized healthcare system for the reason you just listed.
The downvotes must be from insurance companies. This video is very informative
Lerkero thanks for watching and glad you found it informative!
Downvotes? This isn't reddit
@@Drikkerbadevand I’d rather wait months than not be able to afford getting it at all
And the government should regulate of drug prices.
ruclips.net/video/7DhJ73JuWJY/видео.html
In 2015, I had a brain aneurysm rupture at the old age of 27. I was in perfect health (just ran a marathon). The total amount billed was over $7.2M. I'm lucky I had really good health insurance from my work. Medical debt is the leading cause of bankruptcy here in the US. Please vote 💚
Oh my goodness! Glad to hear you're OK now!
@@AboveTheNoise Probably would have ended very tragically if they didn't have insurance.
@@ryanschenk2946 Absolutely. Or they'd be in some SERIOUS debt!
God bless 🙏🏾
@@AboveTheNoise, thanks! 1 in 50 people is walking around with an unruptured brain aneurysm 💚
I’m shook. Such class, understanding, smoothness, and fairness in this presentation. I’m subbed, this was an amazing video and really showed how nuanced this question could be, for better or worse. The way you evaluated both ends of the argument was really top notch!
That comment just made our day! Week, maybe. Heck, that will keep us smiling for a good while. Thank you!
You forgot to add the cost of health insurance when you compared the taxes. That would show that Americans already pay more.
It totally depends. If I have good health insurance from my job -- for example -- I'm actually not paying all that much out of pocket. If we then switched to universal healthcare and I lost my employer insurance, I could very well be paying MORE in taxes compared to what I'm paying NOW for taxes and private insurance.
@@AboveTheNoise Of course you are paying. It's part of your pay. That payment of insurance is part of your pay. If your employer didn't pay it to insurance you would get it.
@@Submanca Not sure I'm following you. I'm just saying that if you compare health insurance + taxes in America to countries with universal healthcare where its ALL taxes, you can't say EVERY American pays more. You can't say EVERY American pays less. It totally depends, and that's why there is so much debate about it!
@@AboveTheNoise The point is your employer doesn't pay their portion out of the goodness of their hearts. It's part of your compensation. Your cost to the employer is your pay + whatever benefits (health or otherwise) they pay a part of. Assuming your overall compensation stays the same, that money you now pay in taxes would go towards other parts of your compensation, either other benefits (gym memberships, whatever) or gross pay.
@@joewwilliams I'm not so sure. I don't think you can take it for a given that a company that no longer offers health insurance would just hand that money over to you! I don't have that much faith in companies!
Good overview, touching on the main issues with reasonable fairness and accuracy. Good job.
Thank you!
@@AboveTheNoise Would you like to move out of the USA due to healthcare?
In Sweden we ha universal health care - but, boy, you will have to waaaaaaait a looooong time for treatment. Sometimes even when you rush to hospital with an ambulance. The system costs a lot - so the Government can not afford to hire more staff. You could say that the health care system is universal - but only on paper.
Patrik Tikkanen exactly I got sick one time and we decided to go to a public hospital that offers free health care but the line was so long and after waiting for an hour I just decided to leave and just go to private hospital instead and even if it’s an emergency you still have to wait a long time cause there still a lot pf people
bien But did you pay for healthcare at the private hospital? Universal healthcare so you could go private and still get reimbursed for that healthcare, right?
Ethan Weeter no you pay out of pocket for that private healthcare. So it’s taken out of your check whether you use it or not. Then if you want fast or quality service you get to pay again.
And are your surgeons multi-millionaires making 500K or more a year?
, No, they are not.
Yes it is worth it because if you would ask any one from countries with socialized medicine to move and adopt the US model they would laugh at your face. It may be a simple explanation but it is very telling. Also to rebut the less freedom of choice argument, if the doctor you want to go to is not in network for your insurance then you can’t go to them. In socialized systems you can go to any doctor you want because they are all in network. Now that is true freedom of choice.
It is telling that no country has gone from universal healthcare to something else!
I dont know how the other countries free healthcare works, but in Brazil, where we have an universal healthcare system, you can't just walk in at any public hospital or clinic and choose your doctor. I believe that is also true in other countries. Because the healthcare system is so heavily regulated by the goverment, you have a lot of steps you have to go through in order to maintain order. You usually have a primary care physician thats responsible for your city region. Then he gets you a form authorizing your transfer to a more complex facility or authorizing complementary exams (such as CT scans, X rays, blood tests etc) that you then have to go to either a public laboratory (often crowded and criticized for overworked employees that treat you badly in a hurry) and a private lab that has some sort of goverment partnership. You get what im saying?
It is kinda frustrating at times because if you are unsatisfied with what the government assigns you then you have to pay for a private treatment anyway since the public system has lots of steps you HAVE to go through. Sure, if you walk in at a public hospital literally dying, fainting, having a heart attack etc you are legally obligated to be taken care of. That it awesome! But if you're in for elective exams or treatments (conditions that are not life threatening such as chronic joint/back pains etc) that needs specific exams or procedures, get ready for months/years of paperwork, pre-consults and waiting for your name to be the next one on the huge list.
Source: I am a physician that works in the brazilian primary healthcare. Also, I actually like it. It brings me joy being able to help people in need without billing them. But i need to expose its downsides too.
Many of these comments assume a government run system as opposed to a Medicare model.
You cannot go to any doctor you want in Sweden, you go to the doctor that is available. Often times the doctor is different because doctors are always coming and going. Many Swedes are opting to pay for privatized insurance (on top of the universal insurance they are already paying for) so they can have more selection with healthcare providers and faster service. Simply settling with the state healthcare often means less selection with healthcare providers and longer wait times.
but there is record proof of people leaving those countries to USA because the hospitals had long waiting times less efficiency and less quality also there are also less options for vision and dental.
Ive never paid a dime for healthcare costs, everything is covered. no monthly premiums, no copays, no deductables, no limit. never seen a doctor bill. I had a heart attack 4 years ago. everything covered. ambulance to edmonton, even the ride home paid for. surgery, drugs, after care excellent. Even the nurses at the hospital told me they have friends, family working in the USA and they all said. its a nightmare, with or without insurance. great video, well done.
that is the dream, where do you live? I will move today if I could.
@oscartogygames3061 central alberta
@@jinglejazz7537 love it, I’ll visit it some day, love from California 🇲🇽
@oscartogygames3061 whoa...California.. hope your ok.
@@jinglejazz7537 yeah I am good fire only burned half of my house (joke)
See, this is a great comprehensive explanatory video on how Universal Healthcare may or may not be better than what we have here in America already. It is NOT saying: "GOP is against the American people", or "Capitalism is bad, socialism is good for healthcare", or "Trump is the cause of why medicare is so expensive!". This video just compares and contrasts, no bias or anything 👍
Trump is the cause of Trump. His actions speak volumes.
Sean Jones are you tone deaf, healthcare has been bad for decades, not because of Trump.
Free healthcare is not free at all, you will pay more in taxes more than if you would just pay it yourself or buy insurance.
Curtis Webber did you even watch the video that’s not true the taxes will cost less than the procedures
Vorschweißflansch has he said it’s great? I haven’t heard anything other than Obamacare and I tend to agree with him Obamacare hasn’t helped much and is ineffective.
Any discussion of the cost of taxes for healthcare should compare that cost against the cost of private insurance.
Indeed. Unfortunately, private insurance varies so widely that there isn't one number you can settle on. Private insurance can be you, as an individual, buying your own plan, or it can be a rich tech company offering a top-tier gold plan to it's employees with little out of pocket costs. So it's REALLY hard to do this kind of comparison, and that's why everyone argues about the cost of something like Medicare-for-all as it compares to what we have now.
@@AboveTheNoise sanders Medicare for all plan would be payed for by taxing all taxpayers on all income after 24k at 4%. With the median income of 59039, the average American would be spending $1402 a year in taxes. The median health insurance premium for an individual is $440 a month, or $5280 a year. For a normal American, that saves $3738 a year. This number is almost 5 times greater for families
@@cheybat5390 Sounds good to me! What does it cover? How much are we paying doctors and hospitals? The same? Less? What if the amount of money that additional tax revenue brings in doesn't cover what we need it to cover? Do we raise taxes the next year? Take that money from another government program?
@@AboveTheNoise Shouldn't you have figured all of that out before publishing this video. The Sanders Medicare for all bill is publicly available and it outlined the answers to all of the questions you just posed.
@@AboveTheNoise all things and Completely unrelated to health insurance. That's completely unlikely and absurd lmao.
There's a lot to cover here so they won't be able to cover everything, give em a break people. They did a lot of work and a really great job given the amount of time they have. Great job above the noise workers! And your host is really great, everything he says just seems so relaxed and natural, like he's just having a real conversation with us. Congrats
Thanks for the positive feedback! We feel pretty lucky to have Myles as our host.
@@AboveTheNoise seriously though...you missed the mark by a lot. Hence the majority feedback.
Man i just love how fair an unbiased this series is! Totally subscribing
Yay! We are so glad you are joining our community of subs!
As an American. We need universal Healthcare. No excuses.
Yeah people say you're gonna have to wait really long lmao the alternative is just not getting healthcare
@@enokku4583sorry sir your bill is 9000
I would disagree. The money used for universal healthcare doesn’t fall from the sky, it comes from the paycheck of us citizens. As someone who rarely ever goes to the doctor by choice and lives a very healthy lifestyle, I don’t think it’s fair to force more money from my paycheck to have me pay for something I’m not going to use. Of course accidents happen, but how often do they really happen? I rather just be in control of my money and have an emergency fund instead of having the government manage and waste my money. With universal healthcare, would I get a return for all the taxes taken out for healthcare that I didn’t use? Am I able to completely opt out of it or would I not even be able to have the choice to not pay for something?
@@InGodITrust333 you act like any of us choose where taxes go
@@InGodITrust333totally agree. That’s what I think too. When the ACA was approved and I was penalized for not having insurance, I thought it was not fair because getting a private insurance with a ridiculous high monthly payment doesn’t make sense to me because that was only for the cheapest coverage for medical services which means basic services with a big deductible. I consider that private health insurance companies are the worst options because they will try to find the way to charge you more covering less services.
Love how Universal Health Care only seems to be a "controversial issue" if you live in the good ol' U.S of A..! 😔
I don't know. These other systems seem pretty complicated, too! I had to research them all!
@@AboveTheNoise Poor you..! 😜
And yet I never hear the same fundemental debate from Euopeans, on the net or on the news for instance, like you do in the US! There just is no controversy over the concept that essentially people should have access to free health care, if not a right to it. Sure, there may be grumbles over the decision of how much funding is spent on the system, but arguing - in basic conceptual terms - in favor of revoking their universal health care, let alone replacing it with a private system like they have in the US? It would be political suicide.
@@somecuriosities Totally. It's really telling that ZERO countries with universal healthcare have made the decision to STOP offering it and move to a system that the U.S. has.
@@AboveTheNoise It doesn't have to be complicated, you can have the best of both worlds. In Brazil, we do have universal health care, which has several problems (as you cited), but it isn't mandatory. One can simply pay for private health insurance and deduct the amount you paid from your annual taxes. It's simple and you can offer health care to the poorest part of population whereas the weathier people pay for better treatments
It's not as simple as allowing the government to take over health care and everything will be fine and dandy. Let's not pretend America doesn't lead the world in actual HEALTH CARE. I'm talking skilled doctors, cutting-edge medical treatments and technologies, timely care, etc. No other countries rival the United States. You'll never see a guy from Texas go to Canada or Finland for a medical procedure.
My Aunt Died of Cancer in California and my Uncle had to Sell the House to Pay for the Medical 🏥 Bills. The United States Needs Universal Healthcare.
I'm so sorry to hear that. That's horrible.
One trouble is that Americans see the French, British, Danish, Finnish, Canadian or Australian systems and think we'll have one of those without realising that they can't have any system that another country has. The reason being that all universal healthcare systems are tailor made for the country they operate in. For the US to have universal healthcare they would have to start from scratch for the US for profit system relies on Americans getting ill and thereby using the system which is how it makes money. Universal healthcare relies on people using the system as least as possible by making the population as healthy as possible. All the chemicals that go into the processed food in the US would be severely restricted to make the food more natural as it is in the rest of the world. GM foods could be banned.
As a Canadian I am satisfied with my health care although it would be nice if it covered dental and vision care. The tiny portion of my income tax that goes toward it is balanced easily by the fact that I have no premiums and no copay for doctor or hospital visits. Heart surgery would cost me no more than a broken arm would. If I lose my job or am unable to work I do not lose my health care. Prescriptions for children, the elderly and those with on social assistance or disability are covered.
I have US high deductible insurance, $150 a month, plus pay $400 for every doctor visit and pay hundreds for every test until I spend $6600. Only then will insurance start to cover things.
@@BethJehovah So, unless your revenue is in the 150 000$ range, you are paying 2-3 times more than a person in Canada with that salary is paying through taxes.
@@BethJehovah Wow! That sucks. Imagine paying a smaller premium and getting unlimited doctors visits with no deductible or co-pay. That’s what we have in Canada.
@@bcreason That would be great.
@@BethJehovah and even after paying $6000 out of pocket.. insurance usually doesn’t cover 100% of subsequent costs until you meet your out of pocket maximum, which can also vary lol
The one main reason I can’t afford to live in the US, my cobra payment was $600 a month, now it will be $1400. I had to quit my unstable job and retired early at 62. I had a bad foot infection and had to go to a hospital in Chiang Mai, in and out in 45 minutes, excellent and efficient care. My bill for ER, Doctor, Meds was 930 baht , around $31 dollars. I used to work in a hospital for 28 years. We are short staffed much of the time, our administration cut support staff to bare bones, also don’t get sick on The Weekends, because we are severely short staffed.. hospitals are just another big corporation , profit and cutting labor costs
I don't mind paying higher taxes in Australia for healthcare. It's reassuring to know that the tumor and several other emergency surgeries I've had were covered by universal healthcare. Additionally, all the MRI and CT scans I've needed were also covered.
The only argument is focused on costs. No one ever mentions the quality of care or the choices people have to choose their doctors. Not to mention the waits to even get an appointment.
@Nicole Adenegha not my experience. I have multiple life long medical conditions and the nhs has been fantastic. I really don’t give a shit if I wait a few weeks for a non urgent appt because I have always had same day care when I have needed it. Cost has never been mentioned . When I had a seizure in the middle of the night I had a dr arrive on a motorbike within a few minutes ( we live in a rural area) . An ambulance arrived a few minutes later. Before morning I had been assessed by a consultant, had had a cat scan and a lumber puncture. When I broke my wrist, I was triaged within a few minutes but then waited 4 hours to be plastered. The U.K. NHS is not first come first served. The sicker people get served first. Ectopic pregnancy... ambulance, assessment, straight to the operating theatre. Could not have been better.
@@courgette3401 Yeah people complain about wait times but I'm assuming it really only depends. It's not exactly that bad to wait if it's not something urgent that needs to be taken care of right away.
there are no wait times for emergency care. If its life threatening its treated immediately. If its not...yeah you may have to wait.
Im in Australia and its brilliant. I can decline a doctor if I want and my local GP Ive been going to for the last 20 years.
@@jellybee68 So I was right then?
@@JackFoxtrotEDM Yes :-)
I’ve had state healthcare in Oregon for over 3 years now, and it’s been pretty great; prescriptions, office visits, specialist visits (including mental health) and some dental work have all been free. But I’m about to start a big kid job with benefits which will require me to pay for my healthcare again. The question in the video title leads to a enormously complex answer, but I do wonder how it’d play out if the country’s healthcare system was like Oregon’s. With all the wealth in this country it seems that no one should go uncovered.
I live Oregon I don’t have health care insurance;( what insurance did U get
Brian Morales Oregon health plan
Oregon's Medicaid program.?
That's right. We are the richest country in the world and some of our poorest citizens cannot afford healthcare and never will be able to. Look what covid is doing now!
@@karlabritfeld7104 We are not the richest country in the world
We are already "rationing" who does and does not get treatment it's just based on how much you make instead of who needs it the most.
The number one problem people talk about is taxes, but look at the UK compared to us. They have slightly higher taxes with universal healthcare. Why is that? They aren't spending a ton of money on the military. We need to reorganize the budget and we will be able to keep taxes low if not keep them at the same price.
You left out wait times. It can take 3 months in some cases to get tests and life saving treatments in other countries
sure, thats 💩
if your condition is in critical state you get to go first, if it can wait it will wait.
any amount of money should not decide who gets to live and who does not.
@@nescius2 and the government shouldn't make the choice on if I can live or not
@@peakhelliw1509 then you should have studied very hard to became a doctor of everything.
@@peakhelliw1509 So you would have insurance company executives make that choice instead? Those executives only answer to the shareholders, not to you.
In which countries and what kind of treatments? Source?
Those "Cons" are barely cons at all. In America, increase taxes will be significantly lower than the co-pays we're already forced to pay before insurance kicks in. Quality of care doesn't matter much when most of us can't access car at all. And we already have less choice because we can't afford the expensive ones anyways. It's a non-choice already.
I am canadian waited for over a year to remove my gallbladder. Of course if it was life threatening it would have happened immediately but I just had bad acid reflux that in the end turned to be calcifying gallbladder. Well I still think it's better to have it in Canada free and never worry about bills.
So if it was life-threatening you wouldn't mind anyway because it's free?
@@peakhelliw1509if it was life threatening they would have operated immediately!
Thats so true I would much rather have a free option than no option. I bet the free option makes the private options try a lot harder.
Trying to explain this to people that believe the US should have universal healthcare is like talking to a brick wall.
The problem is is that Americans want to have timely appointments up to date technology and the best doctors around unfortunately it costs money and I think Americans believe that if we had universal healthcare quality and motivation would go down
yes because we have proof of that happening anytime the GOVERNMENT gets its hands on things. Look at education.
in the U.K. I would have had an ambulance, an operation, got home. Had paid time off work . The only paperwork would have been telling the office my name and address when I got to hospital. Not a single penny would be paid at the time.
In Canada I had to pay for my ambulance ride - which I refused to pay for. Now I have a collection agency trying to collect the 90 dollars or whatever it cost. When I got discharged from the ER I had to pay for my prescription. I think the British do have something to be proud of in their NHS, however we Canadians have nothing to be proud of.
French healthcare is half the cost and has better outcomes than American private health insured healthcare
There is no way individuals can barter one the same level with for profit insurance companies the same way a government or employer can. A socialized universal system would be disruptive to switch over but would be an end net benefit for the country. The simple fact that we would all collectively pay less for a universal system compared to our current one is telling.
i really liked that you did a fair pro and con, that people could see both sides without bias. :)
-- thank you! We aim for showing different perspectives.
Bias isn't always bias by definition...generally speaking left wing politics are based off facts and science so being on the side for the right policies already has a pre built bias.
@@AboveTheNoise Why are you teaching different perspectives...this is one issue no one should be on the fence about...neutral takes on such things is a tad irresponsible.
@@DarkMustard1337 it's a fine line between pro/con debate and false equivalence -- that's true. We are very careful to only select topics where there are strong arguments on both sides of a controversial issue, and by "strong" we mean based on data-driven, peer-reviewed evidence. If that's really not happening on one side of a debate, but there are very strong * feelings* and moral objections to an issue, we will still present those perspectives but point out where they lack real evidence to support their view. We really want to push our viewers to think critically about the misinformation out there AND the persuasive arguments and decide for themselves what makes sense.
@@DarkMustard1337 how can you say left wing politcs are based on facts and right wing is not bias. That's literally the definition of bias.
I love this video because it just lays out the information for each individual to make their own decision
2:34 IS THAT BIDEN SNIFFING A KID 💀
yes that’s exactly what that is
He tends to do that a lot. Corruption, censorship and brainwashing allowed him to become president while getting away with it.
Him on the daily
yup. I saw that too. LOL
As a grad student studying US healthcare I truly appreciate the content of this video, well done!
Taxes will increase? But you will not be paying any money to private health insurance.
Quality of care might change? USA rank 40+ in life expectancy. while paying the most. What quality are you talking about.
Less choice? universal healthcare means no matter where u go you are covered. what choice do u want?
You think that getting the government involved in healthcare will make it better? You have a lot of faith in the government. The government has fighting poverty for over 60 years and it hasn't gotten any better. The government started handing out student loans and now graduates can't afford to pay back their loans because there is no incentive for colleges and universities to control costs. The government started guaranteeing home mortgages and when the housing bubble bust people stopped paying their mortgages so the government had to bailout the bank because the government forced banks to make loans to people that couldn't afford the loan. Shall I go on?
Wow! I’m really impressed. This was awesome! I love how unbiased it was, and how accurate it was across the whole video.
I don't understand how this is still a question. Universal healthcare costs less, is the same for everyone, usually still leaves people the choice to go to a private institute with their money if they want to... And about the fact that the government has a greater hold on health choices than people, let's remember that anti-vaxxers are a thing in the U.S. Maybe it's better that the government handles health rather than the uninformed citizen
Great points. The facts behind universal healthcare are VERY strong. I think the U.S. just has a very strong anti-government streak. Maybe people would be more receptive to a Switzerland-style universal healthcare system?
how does it cost less when people dont have to pay for it and by nature people will use it more in general?
Nelcomarproductions I think for health, people using it more (when they need it) is probably a good think for the economic health of a nation. Dead and/or very sick people are the best consumers
It’s taking away choice and money from some people who are unwilling. I see your points but it’s not convincing. The bigger the government, the more you’ll see it go corrupt. People embezzling money, censorship, people getting into positions of power just because they’re related to someone working in a certain field. It has cons. What would be nice is our style of healthcare just at a cheaper cost (regulated by the government) but not mandatory.
Above The Noise I think it is healthy people who hate this idea. They are like, I never get sick, why should I pay for sick people? Not realizing, they are covering themselves and their kids if they get sick regardless of health. The taxes may go up 5%, at most. I paid probably $12,000 a year with employer insurance and still had out of pocket health care expenses. If I paid $7,000-$8,000 in taxes and was covered no matter what, I would take that in a heartbeat.
Here in Brazil we have a very good system, but it's very bad administrated and very bad invested. But it's all people like me have, me and my family can't pay for private healthcare, and it is saving our lives.
Thanks for commenting from Brazil!
I'm liking these recent videos before the election. It'll be my first time voting this election so these videos help me understand what the major problems are in the U.S and understanding what each candidate running for President will do about it.
Anyways I think Universal Healthcare would be the way to go. Yeah it would be more expensive, but atleast everyone will have coverage and can go get treatment. That treatment could be for big illnesses spotted in it's earlier stages. And for people wanting higher quality of care, they can get private insurance instead. I'm kinda ignorant to this topic so maybe there's some information I should know about that I'm missing with my thoughts.
Thanks for watching! We're stoked that you're getting informed before you cast your ballot for the first time!
A problem with that that I've heard is that since we have to pay higher taxes for the universal healthcare, low and middle class Americans won't be able to afford private insurance on top of it, only the wealthy would
@@saltyspooner1770 exactly. Taxes will be higher on all classes to pay for universal health care. And then, the "middle class" will most likely want their own private insurance provides, so they would be paying double.
I mean, I think it would be much more expensive than you think. To put it to perspective, the UK has universal healthcare. Their population is 67 million people. Canada also has this healthcare, with a population of 37 million. The United States has a population of 370 million people (if I am correct). That’s MUCH more people payed for (obviously) than in either of those countries. Supply and demand in the US are drastically different than in the UK or Canada.
That would be bad, it’s not about being covered it’s about quality, we should have Swiss or Dutch healthcare system, there’s is private and everyone is insured, it’s threat quality, efficient, and affordable.
Thanks for the explanation about usa healthcare. As international viewer, every time I ask about how usa healthcare works I only get confusing or people who try to defend the usa healthcare system. Now I have a better understanding of how usa healthcare works.
I vote for socialized healthcare like the UK. I’m an American but had a close loved one living in England that suffered with multiple myeloma. I went with him through three years of his journey with doctors, tests, hospital visits and literally kept track of all details. His medical care was superb and timely. I don’t feel that his health was compromised at all. For those that balk at the word “socialized”, what do you think medicare is??
@Malik Richards I agree, but surely we could adopt some form of it?
Will you send half your income to the government to pay for it or just add it to the humongous debt our children will have to pay for
@@fritzforsthoefel803150%? In Germany its 14,6% divided between employer and employee. And yes in most European countries you pay higher taxes in general than in America.
I don't consider U.S. Medicare to be "socialized medicine because Medicare is a payer, but does not own the hospitals and medical offices.
It is so long past due for us to switch to a single payer system here in the US. Insurance companies are bleeding so much money out of the healthcare system, and they are already rationing what healthcare is and isn't covered. I am one of the fortunate ones that has always had a good job with good healthcare coverage, but, I actually care about what happens to others.
why is it all the Americans living in Britain prefer the NHS.
I hear England’s NHS is a mess. Scotland NHS is much better than England’s.
They go to Britain because they prefer the NHS, among other things.
They just love NHS man. To each his own.
They don't. My friend moved to Britain for a job and she does telehealth with a doctor in the USA because the wait to see a therapist in the UK was MONTHS
You could pay for universal healthcare _and_ free (or subsidized) education if you paid even slightly less on the military. ¬_¬
The cons don't matter if you can't get any coverage. Any healthcare is better than none.
Good points!
- This isn’t even remotely true. If we spent the entire military budget on healthcare, we still wouldn’t have nearly enough to afford universal coverage.
@@nicolasleroux5302 ? Can you show me where you're getting those numbers from?
most of the spending goes to welfare and medicare.
That’s completely false and no evidence to back that up
We should get the system they have in France and Germany the goverment covers your insurance and you have the option to get private insurance but the companies have to be non profits and are heavily regulated.
And get income taxed 40%
@@snapdragonzoroark France doesn't have a high income tax
But you forget that all those countries also have private doctors and hospitals, so you can choose to go privat if you want
If you are rich maybe, otherwise you are too busy paying into the universal system to afford the better more consistent care. America has the right idea, The EU has it backwards XD.
@@celiafrostborn no, my last MRI was 40$, you really don't need to be rich to pay that
Thank you!!! Your videos explain so many issues in a way that is very clear, concise, down to earth, unbiased and straight forward. I really do appreciate what you contribute here through youtube and this channel.
We appreciate you watching and leaving this encouraging feedback. Thank you!
Less choice? Don’t Americans have less choice now because they have to go to a hospital or doctor that’s “in-network”? The increase in tax to pay for it would eliminate the need for expensive health insurance so you would be savings hundreds a month.
I am Australian, I earn 80k a year and pay for health insurance through taxes known as the Medicare levy, it’s 2% of my income but it only starts once you earn over 18k (we pay no taxes if you earn less than 18k per year) so my Medicare costs about 1600 per year or 133 per month. I can go to any doctor, any hospital, any pharmacy and get free healthcare. I could get cancer and have to undergo multiple surgeries, it won’t cost me anything out of pocket.
Now in saying this, if you are unemployed.. it doesn’t matter, you’re still totally covered. We care about our fellow people and know that one day we will need to use our healthcare, so will our family and friends so paying 2% of what you earn to pay for totally free healthcare, is worth it and is cheaper than insurance.
am I missing something but why is nobody talking about that in all the countries with universal health care there is private insurance and private hospitals for that better quality and shorter waiting time. you can have your uhc + private insurance if you want. you can go to private hospital for a fraction of a price compared to usa. you can get luxury suite if you want. it will be expensive but compared to usa it's pennies
It totally depends on the country. In Canada, it's illegal to have private insurance cover what the national plan covers. You can buy private health insurance for what it DOESN"T cover, however. It's supplemental private insurance.
In Germany, you can choose a private insurance instead of the regular one. It will be cheaper but cover less that the public system.
In France, you can have a private complementary health insurance that will cover better the dental/visual and pay you the small co-pays of the universal system.
@@AboveTheNoise yes, it depends. but you present it in a very black/white way. I think many americans don't know that there is private insurance in countries with UHC.
@@onelungg I totally get where you're coming from. That's why we had that section in the video about the 3 different ways you can have UHC. Hopefully it helped viewers understand that there are a bunch of different ways to get it. Most Americans are familiar with Medicare for all, but that kind of system doesn't really exist in Europe, which is often held up as the gold standard in UHC.
Informative... However, here in the UK we DO pay for health insurance by everyone... it's called N.I. or National Insurance, a paid percentage of your salary by you and your employer regardless of what you earn, taken from you each week or month directly from your earnings. The stumbling block for the US health care system is just corporate greed.
Good video, but I'll go ahead and critique the cons of universal healthcare.
Taxes would likely increase:
- This is a manufactured issue in terms of framing the costs and payments towards a universal healthcare system. It's just as easy for me to adapt this narrative and say americans already pay an "individual tax", that is to say we already pay a certain amount of money (out of our checks or each month) to an institution to ensure we are covered for health insurance. Continuing this narrative, instead of paying money towards a private institution the money would then be paid towards an institution that has your interests at heart (ideally).
Quality of care might change:
- Yes, but that is reductionist in terms of the variations in quality care under the current system. As was already said numerous times throughout the video is that there are millions of Americans without care! So a change from no insurance to having insurance is a increase in quality. Moreover, you have to consider what types of insurance are available and to who. The quality of care is related to the insurance-- if you can afford better insurance, you can have more quality healthcare. Although, there are a lot of loopholes in which insurance companies can say you don't qualify because of preconditions (which won't necessarily happen under a universal system). Let alone the fact that the United states has some of the worst statistics in quality of healthcare such as mortality rates for giving birth.
Less choice for the individual:
- Again, this touches upon the issue being that healthcare coverage is widely variable across the country. There's not much of a choice when your insurance is tied to your work, whether you can afford insurance or not (as well as different types), or even if your insurance will pay for the care that you need.
Thanks for your thorough comment! I'll try to address your points
1. It really comes down to whether or not you'll pay more, regardless of where the money goes. If I currently pay $5,000 a year for my private insurance and $20,000 a year in taxes, that might be better than a universal system where I may not be paying private insurance, but my taxes are now $28,000 a year. In that situation, $3,000 a year MORE is coming out of my paycheck.
2. In a short video, we have to be reductionist some time! The style of healthcare a country has certainly can impact quality. And if America were to switch to a Medicare-for-all type system, there would be winners and losers. There are people right now that pay a lot of money for great health plans, and they might not want to give that up. For them, the quality of insurance would go DOWN, and so could their quality of care.
3. This can be true. But conservatives argue about changing the system to encourage MORE competition so there are MORE quality choices to choose from.
Re: quality of care
From the perspective of someone with no healthcare coverage, anything is better than nothing. From the perspective of anyone with quality healthcare now, it will likely result in a decrease in quality.
@@DrewLonmyPillow Absolutely. If you're part of the 9 percent that can't afford insurance, you're in a REALLY tough situation. The very idea that you could be in a situation where you don't have health insurance makes no sense to most Europeans!
@E KL also its not choice a lay person can make, in economics this is called Information asymmetry.
@E KL less choice thing..
what good is choice to decide between tested medical treatment and scam _alternative_ when one does not know how to recognise which one is the real thing?
I would like to point out one thing no one mentions. Universal health care is in no way related to your job, if you get fired or quit your health care does not stop. So if you find better opportunities you can leave. Also it's cheaper for your employer because they don't have to deal with such nonsense.
Subscribed for the great effort in getting both sides of the aisles. I hope you get more content like this out.
I do wish you had time to discuss the logistics issue that exists in the US (getting access to rural communities with little access to public transport).
You should do a video on Prepaid Physician Groups and the history of health insurance in USA.
There shouldn't be argument between universal health care and private health care. Both should exist. Those who have money should be able to access private health care and those who don't can access universal health care. I'm from Indonesia and glad that we have both system.
As long as all pay the tax.
I have a dear friend whose father is eighty years old. Her mother had been taking care of him by herself for years and can't do it anymore. They have gone to Medicaid, Medicare, and various social services and have been told he doesn't qualify. He is on Social Security and his income is too high, She is dead set AGAINST Universal Healthcare and then complains because her parents can't get the help they need.
Yeah, a cognitive dissonance in its prime...
That’s crazy , and unfair to not qualify for healthcare at 80:?
Im under the impression everyone gets medicated at 62- years , why didn’t he qualify?
My grandma gets medical, Medicare , and she barely worked in the USA .
Sounds unfair to work all your life and not get Medicare when so many others get it and
Didn’t earn it y paying to the system.
The real question is, what would it be like if we treated everything else we purchase the same way as health care.
For example you want to buy a shirt:
You would only be allowed to shop for shirts near where you live ,or else
If you shopped outside your Zone you would have to pay 20% more.
You would need to make an appointment.
You would not be allowed to see the shirt before you bought it,
It would cost about 100 times more , even after you'd been paying monthly for access to the store weather you ever shopped there or not and
No refunds.
As long as people get the life saving care they need without spending an arm and a leg, that is what I would consider good health care.
It doesn’t matter if majority of Americans have insurance, because even with it, if you are not rich you can’t pay it when you have a serious medical emergency.
It looks like the US may be open to a ‘hybrid’ system of healthcare that could be inovative and save costs, with additions but no reductions in healthcare insurance.
what innovation has the private sector created in healthcare?
i hear this about private healthcare all the time "innovation. competition. MuH FrEe MuRkUt" but never seen any evidence of it actually happening
@@afgor1088 are you nuts? The government doesn't innovate anything.
@@PaulsWanderings wrong.
I think the federal government should not be involved in healthcare. States should run healthcare bc each state has different demographics, population, etc.. free market healthcare may work in cal where there's a lot of people so there's lot of customers whereas it wouldn't necessarily work in alaska
The states never take on this responsibility. FDR learned this during the Depression. State responsibility has always been code for forgetting about something.
One of the biggest challenges to change is the affect on the US medical industry & jobs.
Right now the industry earns $$$ money for NNN patient hours/benefits. If the number of patients and or benefits increase then either the $$$ has to increase - will come out of somebody's pocket (the only place it can come from) or the $$$/NNN has to decrease (industry get payed less for more work). Increasing efficiency is just another way of stating the same thing. If they could have done this already, they would have and increases their profits. So, Universal Health Care in the US will almost certainly hurt the medical industry and/or increase the costs we pay. Since the industry has some substantial influence, my guess is we will pay or lose benefits (like the long waits for service you mentioned).
Another option is to stop underwriting the rest of the world's health care by allowing Medicare to negotiate drug prices and legalize re-import so we can buy drugs at the lowest international price rather than paying 10x the price in the US our neighbors pay in Canada. This would not be a total fix; but, reducing the cost of health care could free up some $$ to cover the uninsured.
It's not just Medicaid, Medicare, and Military system that provides government run healthcare in America. Almost everyone who works for the Federal, State, or a local government has government provided health insurance, when all those people are averaged together, that equals out to about 150 million people. So Half of the population is insured by the government already, so having Medicare for all wouldn't be so much of a step of an overhall of the current system. Also a lot of these medical breakthroughs are through public institutions like universities and government research centers like the CDC, so the argument that it would stifle innovation is a mute point. Not to mention that with universal health insurance, doctors are still competing for your business, so it does not lose its competitive edge.
I like how the picture of Obama shows biden sniffing a child's hair.. keepin it classy Biden 😂😂
Noticed that too!
I am concerned about the future of universal healthcare systems. Right now in Sweden I have to be on the phone right at 7:30am to get a call back time from the local health clinic, if I wait 10 mins the call back system is usually booked for the entire day and I have to be on the phone again the next day just for an initial phone call! Some Swedes are just going straight to ER to bypass the call wait time, meaning more wait time in ER! There are definitely set backs with universal healthcare systems. Start looking into corruption with govt health departments in countries like Philippines and South Africa where health funds have been pocketed by politicians instead of used for its intended purpose. England's healthcare system seems to be spiraling downward, I have heard Brits in some areas are being told to drive themselves to the hospital rather than call an ambulance because there are ambulance shortages. Food for thought. Main issue in US is cost.
I definitely think there should be universal healthcare in the US
I differ. but we can debate.
I was in Shanghai and twisted an ankle, i went to the doctor there and got a free check up and i paid $1...as a tourist...the doctor was super nice to me and the hospital was top notch. These are some of the benefits of a social system...not sure how i feel about it but thank goodness i wasnt in the USA at the time!
America: where everyone who needs a lawyer gets one, but need a doctor? Well, tough luck.
I'm from Brazil, a nation that has free and universal healthcare, and I'll give you my personal experience:
It's good but since it's public, it may take some time to make exams.
Taxes will be increased to maintain the healthcare system.
Thanks for sharing your experience in Brazil! Sounds like most publicly funded systems require that some sacrifice convenience and maybe quality for more equitable coverage for all.
@@AboveTheNoise Yes, but despite of the sacrifices, it's worth it.
It says a lot even our own doctors and nurses get screwed in our present health-care system. I have a friend who is a nurse and even she gets mediocre health-care insurance.
What I don’t get is, why are most Americans ok with large pharmaceutical companies taking their money but are opposed to the government taking a smaller amount through taxes, even though they’d actually be better off?
That’s a good question. We’ve got a deeply ingrained knee jerk reaction to taxation in this country that goes back pretty far
Part of the us’s issue is that it’s people aren’t as healthy we eat poorly and don’t get a lot of exercise so we are more likely to need healthcare. When demand goes up so does the cost
exactly.
That’s still not a good reason for terrible coverage from insurance companies like UnitedHealthcare and Cigna.
Also Wendell Potter prove how that’s more of an excuse to avoid healthcare reform since he used to do propaganda for Cigna
That also ties into the food they feed us here, compared to other countries our food is way more processed and has a ton of harmful unnecessary ingredients added to it that shouldn’t be included. In the US it seems our government just wants to kill us.
Canada is no beacon for a health care system as of this date. The entire health care system is being taken to court - to the Supreme Court of Canada. Since it is a single payer system, it makes it illegal for citizens to purchase private health insurance for ALL services covered under a Provinces Medicare. No other country does it this way. Other countries with a single payer system at least have a functioning parallel private health sector that provides ALL of the same services that the public sector does. This prevents the system from becoming overwhelmed, and inefficient. Canada's system has led to gov't rationing, inefficiency, historic wait times for surgeries and people dying on waist lists. Since the health care costs are eating up the majority of a Province's budget, there is less money for Education, Roads, Forest and Agriculture, etc.. Hope it gets addressed soon as it will take a decade to fix.
Healthcare is should be a right. Modern societies protect their citizens. Every person should be entitled to the best quality care and every person in a country pays for that right though their tax. People want to choose their doctors not which private company foots the bill, nobody wants to pick that. Or perhaps you would like Fire Hall insurance or Police Insurance? If you get to choose which medical issue you would like to solve why shouldn't you get to choose which fire/crime you want to put out or stop?
Sounds good on paper, but it's much more complicated in reality
Many hospitals here are run by universities, who continuously do research so the quality of medical care is high, we do get the latest medical innovations and treatments and we do get the latest medicine (after much testing when it's considered SAFE). Healthcare insurance is mandatory but affordable.
2:35 lmao look at the left thi picture isn’t even about Joe
Still, US hospitals can't give us a cost for our treatment, until it's all done.
You're not making Universal Healthcare look bad at all. You're making it more appealing.
Which it is
That is if we could afford it.
@@GoldenRedder USA healthcare is expensive because it is run by both insurance and pharmaceutical companies, without a government willing to put a limit to their profit making.
@@flitsertheo Which is why the spike in healthcare prices happend when the government desired to get involved in healthcare and place monopoly protections on the industry
The only way to make universal Healthcare work is to make private insurance illegal.
This makes it so rich people would want the best system possible.
Also giving doctors and nurses free schooling if good grades are met would fill all the necessary positions.
Being that the US is the last industrialized nation on earth to utilize this system we would be able to choose the best form by seeing which of all the systems work best and mix , match the best system.
I don’t think Americans will ever have universal healthcare even if they elected a democrat. It takes a lot of cooperation to create the kind of of healthcare bureaucracy needed and the will & cooperation needed for this effort doesn’t seem to be there in such a divided nation. The primary reason being that in the US healthcare is a commodity, not a benefit, and as a commodity a lot of money is being made by a lot of very powerful people. Big medical, big Pharma, and big insurance all make a ton of money from the current system and they will fight tooth and nail to defend their incomes and demonize all single payer healthcare regimes and people will believe them. In countries with single payer systems there is a big incentive to promote preventive medicine and healthy living in order to keep costs down, whereas in the US there is only lip service to these measures because there are zero dollars to be made from healthy people. The biggest problem with healthcare costs in the US is that they are expected to continue to rise. By 2030, 50% of the population is expected to be obese and 25% severely obese. Not a rosy picture but a great forecast for those who have a vested interest in the current state of affairs.
Thats why i have noticed Europeans looking slimmer
*coronavirus enters the chat*
The fact that insurance doesn't even cover all of it. Maybe some or a good bit. But not all. Here in Ireland, we only have to pay an excess fee. So basically I had an operation on my shoulder. I had to stay over night. All I had to pay was a small fee of 75 euro which is about between 70-79 dollars to the hospital and that's it. The insurance covers all the rest of the bills. You guys need that system
How does this guy not have at least 1 million followers? Underrated channel for sure. Great video!
We ask ourselves this question on the regular. Thanks for the compliment!
What you didn't cover with Canada's single payer system is that you can have private insurance if you want to. In fact many Canadians have supplemental insurance for things like dental or elective surgery. Getting Universal Health Care does not mean someone has to give up their private insurance. In fact Canadians with private health insurance can even travel to another country for services that may be better (i.e. South Korea has the best cancer treatment programs in the world).
The problem with the United States is that freedom correlates directly to how much money you have in your bank account. The more money you have the more free you will be, and this correlates to just about everything - justice system, healthcare, prescription drugs, crime (money = safe neighborhoods), better police (i.e. during the L.A. riots Beverly Hills was protected while the Korean neighborhoods were thrown under the bus), education, etc.
But our taxes pay for the research and development of drugs? The same pill in the us cost $200 but in Australia cost $8. This happens bc after after we develop the medicine it gets privatized and sold for way more, but we already payed for it so now we pay for it 20x over again ? I'm just confused how you could say the quality wouldnt be the same 😂
I'll be okay with tax funded universal healthcare as soon as the federal government agrees to private audits. We have trillions of dollars going missing, I'm sure that would cover it!
All I know is: thank goodness I live in Belgium. Neither me or my family needs to wait insanely long to get a treatment & it’s very affordable. We all have our own insurances, which covers even more the possible costs. I don’t mind paying my taxes because at least we get something out of it. We don’t need to file for bankruptcy for wanting to go to college or to get some kind of surgery done. Oh and we also don’t get refused treatment or get sent home “because you don’t have health insurance”
Hal
Funny because we don’t have to pay anything if I break a leg or, if it was to happen that I have to pay something, it would be less than 100 euros.
US is expensive due to government regulation, we don’t wanna pay high taxes (taxes higher than the ones in ur country cause of population size) for health care, Swiss healthcare system is best for America.
@@Ace-uc5cj Exactly
@@Ace-uc5cj The Swiss system is not that different then Obamacare, using competing insurance companies and supplementing the premiums of the poor. Swiss are probably just nicer people when it comes to working together for the common good.
@@SandfordSmythe the swiss system is different from obamacare tho when it comes to price controls, force and regulations on companies. They're two different systems that try to achieve the same goal but are different, one is successful and one is a disaster.
I have seen many, many people from other countries say how happy they are with the free medicinal they have. There are no complaints from they. I believe if this was on the ballots in the US, most people would vote for free medical!
Universal healthcare would mean extremely high taxes
Not necessarily
Absolutely wrong. Pay attention!
The most recent version of the Commonwealth rankings, published in 2017, placed the U.S. last among 11 countries. The United Kingdom ranked first, followed by Australia, the Netherlands, New Zealand and Norway, Sweden and Switzerland, Germany, Canada, and France.16 Jun 2020 with regards to medical research advancement.
This video is well appreciated. Will be a big help at the next Thanksgiving dinner when I have to explain a non bias moderate perspective. Great channel 👍
Glad you find it useful! We try.
Painting a photo of Disaster at any dinner table. Love 💘 it!
It already is that way in the U.S. especially if you live below the poverty line your healthcare is all paid for by the government. My worry is with universal care you get bias treatment for everyone across the board. Money talks and with money you can receive better attentive care.
Not all states will pay health insurance for the poor. In some, you have to be disabled or over 65.
This is a really complicated issue and I think that there is no perfect solution. If America did switch to universal healthcare, I think that there would have to be a lot of incentive to increase the quality because the wages of healthcare providers will be an issue. I know the current system is already flawed, so I think that getting universal healthcare is a good idea if some of the issues are thought about and can be resolved
As they say in the video, companies are competing for profit. Some of the money from their clients is going towards marketing/strategies, and this money isn't going into service or research. With the government regulating health insurance, you just completely delete this competition and health becomes the basic human right it is rather than a run for the money
Just because a country has universal healthcare doesn't mean it doesn't continue to offer a higher quality private healthcare for those who want it, we have this in Australia, everyone is covered but those who want higher quality and better wait times can pay for private cover, everyone is happy
For a person working in health care, the US system is better since most Health care workers got paid higher because hospitals in the US are competing to attract nurses and doctors to work in their hospitals. However, a healthcare worker in Canada is paid less since all of the hospitals are just owned by one company/government and there is no competition to attract nurses since where ever you go it will be almost the same. the only competition here is per province/state. Calgary and Edmonton pay higher than Ontario and Vancouver since Ontario has more people to work in the health system.