It’s true that a disproportionate share of health care costs is driven by a small percentage of the population. However, as you pointed out, most of us are already contributing to these costs through employer-sponsored insurance or other mechanisms. Universal health care simply formalizes and equalizes this process, ensuring that everyone contributes fairly and benefits when they need it. It removes the hidden costs and inefficiencies that exist in the current system, such as emergency room care for the uninsured, which we all ultimately pay for.
You suggest that the ability to opt out of current systems preserves individual choice. While this may seem ideal in theory, in practice, it often leads to gaps in coverage and higher costs for everyone as market-driven approaches often exacerbate inequities and inefficiencies.. Universal systems eliminate these disparities, ensuring a baseline of care for all while potentially allowing for supplemental private insurance for those who want more.
Good post, overall. I'm just picking a snippet to keep the nested quote size down.
I didn't mention opting out to imply that it's a good thing or that individual choice is always the right approach. In the case of health care, I don't actually think it's a good thing... for a large variety of reasons.
That said... universal care isn't my favored approach - but not for the reasons that most people would put forth.
The US has some different existing dynamics that other countries don't have. We have a deeply entrenched fully private and profit-driven delivery system. We ended up with employer sponsored health insurance endemic in our society over a relatively short span of time - where other countries moved to UHC instead. We have a gordian knot in the US and we can't just cut it in half and be done with it, because there are a lot of negative consequences of that.
My preferred approach for the US specifically is to actually start with the delivery system and just nationalize that sucker. All doctors, nurses, clinicians, therapists, etc. would be salaried government employees (complete with federal benefits). Medical training would be government funded based on aptitude and ability to complete the coursework satisfactorily. Facilities would be government owned - and distributed in a way that allows access in less urban areas instead of the current health care deserts that we're dealing with. Drugs pricing would be negotiated federally.
We can talk about Universal Access until we all asphyxiate from lack of air to our brains, but the reality is that the single biggest driver of the disparity in costs between the US and other developed countries is on the delivery side of the equation.
