Thank you so much for your viewership! if you would like to help us continue to make these toons on a regular basis, please donate at subscribestar.com/freedomtoons or if you need to use paypal, at freedomtoons.tv/#/donate I LUV U GUYS!!!!
3:34 I laughed so hard when I saw my country, Romania, on that map. Let me tell you how this "universal healthcare" works here: There are two types of hospitals: public hospitals which are run by the government and where you can have a surgery or a consultation for free and the private ones The thing about public hospitals is that they are VERY VERY BAD. They are dirty, you go there to get rid of an illness and leave with other 3, the bureaucracy is very inefficient and the doctors won't treat you professionally unless you bribe them. Many doctors aren't even professionals, they just bribed some bureaucrat to get a job. The private hospitals on the other hand are VERY GOOD and the Romanian private dentistry offices-EXCELLENT. People from all over western Europe come to our private dentists both for the high quality and for the small prices. In my opinion the only good thing in the public hospitals is that the private ones have to lower the prices considerably to compete with the public ones, but the public hospitals are a failure from all other perspectives.
Medicare nearly bankrupted my father (a doctor), as his patients were paying him next to nothing, if nothing at all. I hate it. Medicare nearly destroyed our lives, to the point where we were forced to move several times since he wasn't making enough to keep us afloat. Sometimes, he would only be payed a few cents for the entire treatment of a patient (he's a radiation oncologist). It's ridiculous people think that Medicare for All is the best idea in the world.
@@typsyk.capone2916 here is the issue the doctor is said to be a high paying job and even that is not enough to keep this person's family afloat and this would increase taxes for him and sink his ship (again if you're being paid by the Government even the Government has to be able to afford this plan)
@@minecraftpro2074 have you seen their spending habits? We can definitely afford it... Go look up the homeless racket in New York It's a $2B+ a year business
@@typsyk.capone2916 I doubt we could afford it because we would have to cut several Government programs and then not spend more money on useless causes then maybe we could but since the Government spends all our money we can't afford it without a significant tax hike
On the flip side I have family members who wouldn’t be alive if it weren’t for medicare sorry your dad who is being paid a salary of as a doctor is at least 100k dollars a year had to deal with his patients not being fucked by insurance because of there old age and or disability
1:13 Two things California and New York have in common: 1) Both pushing for single payer 2) Both saddled with immense amounts of state debt, even before 2020
Come to Florida. It's fantastic here. There are at least three Trump flags on every corner. Also, the "Florida man" is a myth, so not to worry about that LOL. We have literally the best governor in the country.
@@rustyshitbox Yeah legit im in the same boat here trying to run from NY and honestly NH is the same sort of beautiful countryside with less of the government meddling. I mean fuck if I can own a gun without a license because its my constitutional right to do so, count me in.
So I'm a little late to the party, but if you like cold states, come to Indiana! If you prefer hot states, go to Texas. If you like forest fires and left sided air, go to California. Please. Don't mess up Texas and Indiana. Thank you.
I really liked this one guys. I used to work in a walk-in clinic near the border with our friendly and polite neighbors to the north. More than half the patients who came through that door were Canadians, and not rich ones either, who had a medical issue they didnt want to wait MONTHS to have looked at. Everything from obvious cases of skin cancer, to suspected (and in many cases confirmed at the clinic) instances of breast cancer. Many of these patients came in with their medical files, and as the nurse who did the paperwork for this clinic as well as taking vitals, i would usually see people with appointments to see oncologists, or internal medicine specialists for 'further testing' 3-6 months after presenting with possible cancer symptoms. One patient had stage 3 breast cancer, and for those who are not aware, at stage 3 you start getting some...obvious signs. This person's appointment to see a specialist, just to confirm the diagnosis, not even to start treatment, was scheduled 4 months from when they visited, which was 4 weeks weeks after their initial visit to a Canadian walk in clinic. Canada's healthcare is rapidly going down hill as well. Fewer clinics are staying open, nurses and doctors in Canada, tired of not getting paid by the government, are leaving the country. Hospitals are cutting corners to save on costs because it can take three years to get payment from their government for services rendered. A;ll of this is shit you wont see the media reporting. This is the shit you hear when you work in health care. This the shit you are told by the new nurse who just moved to Maine from Quebec because they went over a year without getting paid because the walk in clinic they were working at hadnt received payment in over two years.
@@captaindonut5240 Depending on where you are in Europe, either you have good health, and dont really spend time around people with chronic illness, or you live in Switzerland. The biggest issue with the current healthcare systems in most of Europe, is that people with chronic illnesses are basically told to keep their treatments in a strict budget. If a medication that might help you live a longer life isnt covered, or is too expensive, they will deny your claim to the medication, and put you on something less effective. I've been hearing from friends in Netherlands, about doctors pushing patients with chronic illness that even in the US is easily managed, without people going bankrupt, to opt for Doctor Assisted Suicide, because the patients cant approval for the care they actually need, and are being stuck with the more cost effective option. and whats sickening, at least to me, as someone got into this line of work because he wanted to help people, is that there are two kinds of people who defend the healthcare systems that allow this. the 'thats not true, because the government denies it' and the 'even if its true, they are sick anyway'. the sheer amount of Canadians who rage at me when i bring up the failings of their healthcare system is mind boggling. Bring up how bad it is for rural Canadians in Quebec, and many Canadians will tell you 'fuck Quebec, they suck anyway'.
I’m a born and bred Michigander. I fractured my hand once, and at that point, I didn’t know what to expect from the American health care system, but I had heard the kind of crap the Canadians have to deal with. I got in, had a nurse initially diagnose me, waited a bit, had a doctor diagnose me, had x-rays taken, and had a brace put on it (it wasn’t a serious enough break to need a cast, it got better within about a month and a half). All of this took less than two hours. I commented that it probably would have taken months to even get the x-rays done in Canada, and the doctor had no idea. Why don’t people in the medical industry know this stuff? It seems like you should hear about this coming down the grapevine. It’s not like I’m super far away from Canada or anything either, this is in northern Michigan, a couple hours drive away.
@@talongreenlee7704 It depends. Not a lot of American doctors or nurses really care. I get most of my info from patients, and from friends who work in healthcare over the border. Just the other day, i was waiting to see my own GP, and they were fielding calls from Canadians about crossing the border, against quarantine rulings, to get treatments, because two of the clinics in Quebec shut down due to Covid outbreaks.
I could kill this man's argument with one question: Where in the federal constitution does it give the federal government *any* authority to nationalize medicine? Answer: It doesn't. It explicitly enunciates that the States, alone, have full autonomy over medical care as sovereign nations. That's the point of the 10th Amendment, to make sure the federal government knew/knows for *damn sure* where its limited powers stop and States' authority begins.
@@ordinaryhuman5645 Amazing. Imagine if the European States were that cowed. 'Oopsy, guess this thing we invented, and are the sole source of authority for, said we couldn't do something. Darn it! I guess we just have to obey...this little fascist brat we made together who somehow convinced himself made us instead.'
Yeah, and if Californians love single payer health care so much, then they can implement it. Nothing’s stopping them. I know for a fact their health care will turn to crap. But at least the nation will see that and we won’t decide to implement it
my take- considering the roads almost never get fixed, what makes anyone think that the government involved in keeping people healthy is a good idea. or them being involved in much of anything, for that matter.
What makes anyone think that government officials are even trying to protect us? A government is not analogous to a hired security guard. Governments do not come into existence as social service organizations or as private firms seeking to please consumers in a competitive market. Instead, they are born in conquest and nourished by plunder. They are, in short, well-armed gangs intent on organized crime. Yes, rulers have sometimes come to recognize the prudence of protecting the herd they are milking and even of improving its ‘infrastructure’ until the day they decide to slaughter the young bulls, but the idea that government officials seek to promote my interests or yours is little more than propaganda-unless, of course, you happen to belong to the class of privileged tax eaters who give significant support to the government and therefore receive in return a share of the loot. Robert Higgs
Canadian here, bought a ticket to a third world latin American country and paid for and got private medical operation the same week i was there while if i was to wait in canada i would need to wait anywhere from 6 months to 1 year.... Yeah wait times are ducking nuts here.
That reminds me of my one Canadian friend I played on Xbox live with, he got a massive laceration on his arm, it was basically a cut down to the bone and it was fairly long around like 6 inches. The emergency room in his region made him wait 7 hours in their waiting room.
You forgot to say that ppl still defend the healthcare system here, im from montreal and the only thing nice public is higher education. Its so nice and cheap americans come here to study xD
As a British ExPat now living in Germany, the Healthcare difference is STARK. You cannot fit them in the same boat. Germany>UK and if you want what Germany has you would have to rip so much out of how the US works just to try and, honestly, youll just get the UK result which is shiiiiit.
@@JesusChrist-vq6lk yea. If the Gov werent so wishy washy on funding and joe public stopped turning up because of hangovers and sunbutlrn it wouldnt be so bad but its just a mess.
3:34 Why is Chile Green on that map? As a chilean I can confidently affirm that we do NOT have Universal Health Care. It seriously makes me question the thruthfulness of the articule.
@dar'man beskar Ordo Please, I don't want to think that the democrats of the USA are cheap socialists like other countries socialists. Socialism is good in balanced amounts cooperating with the right laws. Another thing is use socialism to win elections to be in power.
It's like the claim that USA and Papua New Guinea are the only two countries without paid maternal leave. Blatantly false; I grew up in Bangladesh and we had no such thing.
Canadian here, I can tell you that you won't wait months for an "emergency surgery" if by emergency we mean "someone will die or be permanently injured without it". An example being my brother fracturing his femur, he got into surgery 3 days later because waiting any longer would cause it to heal wrong and cripple him. On the other hand, I've been waiting literally over a year for a "non emergency" shoulder surgery because I'm not going to die while waiting, and while that's true I also can't do any intense physical activity while it's unstable. So there are pros and cons to both systems but we pay very high tax rates for mediocre service. People love to trot out "Americans pay more per capita", which is true but Americans can also expect better care than you will find in many Canadian hospitals and clinics. America considering a universal system seems truly insane when you factor in their debt problem. The Feds should be looking to reduce their liabilities as much as possible, not massively expanding them. Think about what might happen if America does implement a universal system, people become dependent on it, and the Feds finally default?
There are some variables that need to be taken into account with America's higher healthcare spending even when ignoring that it has arguably higher quality. American's are some of the unhealthiest people in the world. Like aren't 66 percent of adults overweight or something. Due to more people needing more healthcare overall medical expenses will be higher. The other reason is that in America you usually tend to get a bunch of procedures that aren't required just to make sure your healthy which contributes to the higher costs. Someone on TYT talked about this.
The reason American Pay More Per Capita is One because of medicare and medicaid (they were the reason that the prices skyrocketed) and two, insurance. It is cheaper for you to pay out of pocket (though you may not be able to do it always). The lack of price transparency, the lack of price signals etc. also play a role
More Robert Reich and more of his nonsense debunked! Seriously, this guy's name is so ironic....... When my mom was little, you went to the doctor, you paid him, and he saw you. You didn't go through insurance. But sure it's the private market that's at fault. Let's just go with that!
Yes, because having your medical bills all covered so you don't have to go into debt is...the workers controlling the means of production. You know about as much about socialism as flat earthers know about science.
Several communities have tried and it only ever leads to fictatorships, mokeies throwing their poop at each other and giving capitalists more ideas on how to make money.
Free healthcare for all only works if there's a perfect ratio of doctors/medical personnel and supplies to address the needs of the entire population. No matter how much you subsidize a fisherman, even if you pay him 10x his wages, he won't be able to suddenly catch 10x more fish.
@@ben-3467 I can answer this being from the UK. Our education system is fucking shit and we've not been training doctors and nurses, it has nothing to do with how the NHS as a system functions. We thought we could endlessly import people to treat the population, but in doing so we made the population explode because we opened the floodgates. Say we were 10'000:1 people/doctors before we started importing and the gov said, hmm, that's not good, we'd better do something about it. Well now it's more like 250'000:1. The problem has been so much more exasperated that it's not even funny, because someone let idiots in charge of immigration. Systems like the NHS work ONLY in small countries with restricted immigration, it's not a bad system, it's the best way to manage in a situation like ours. The problem is some idiot decided we'd open it up to the entire world. Edit: A comparision for the USA would be similar to the NHS but it would be on a state-by-state basis with some kind of residence requirement to stop people going out of state for treatment they don't pay in for.
*I remember the time before Medicaid, and I remember watching as Medicaid utterly destroyed the entire system in just a few years. Because Medicaid had no copays or use limits, as well as (at the time) high reimbursement rates, I watched young people seeing providers for no legitimate reasons. Some kept seeing providers until they could secure prescriptions that could be sold as a monthly "stipend" - my next door neighbor was famous for this: she was dealing in Valium, all secured through multiple Medicaid physicians. She bragged how quitting her on the books job was the biggest raise she had ever had - the State paid her rent and utilities through the welfare office, the federal government paid for her food with Food Stamps, and the Medicaid system provided her all the spending money she wanted. It was disgusting - this very part time off the books worker (a few hours a week), was living **_really_** well - far above our levels, and we were working our asses off!* *The government destroys everything it touches.*
This ⬆^⬆^⬆ is the number 2 problem in America. (#1 is the Feds) its way too easy to turn american social safety nets (a good thing, that catches your a$$ when the sh*t hits the fan) in to comfy lounge hammocks.
Yea. On Canada. I have family there that tell me how great and better their healthcare system is all the time. As they come down to the lower 48 for EVERY SINGLE serious condition or elective surgery they've EVER needed. They just go on to tell me how dumb I am to pay for health ins as theirs is "free" as they pay FAR higher taxes than we do. I try to explain about them whimping out on their military spending about 8 percent of what the U.S. does which of course allows them to funnel that money toward anything else. Which means they're USING the U.S. as a shield and letting us take the VAST amount of defense for them. That doesn't win me any points and we in the U.S. should just shhh and . you get the points..
I'm Canadian and I agree, our healthcare is only really good for injuries equivalent to breaking a leg. I would go to America if I had cancer or other surgeries that would normally have a long wait time. A lot of the reason Canadians brag about their healthcare is because they want to be as different from Americans as possible. It's not surprising that this attitude has been around for so long, there actually used to be a reason for it back when you invaded our country multiple times, first during your war to split from the UK, then again during the War of 1812, then threatened to invade again during your civil war, then we found out you had a plan drawn up to invade us yet AGAIN in the 30's, just in case you got into a dispute with Britain over trade. However, there's no real reason to think this way now. Living next to the United States is like being next to a chained dog that could break it's chain and kill you in an instant if it got pissed off. We didn't used to be so friendly as we are now, so it's been ingrained in our psyche not to trust America for centuries. I still don't want to be like America, but it's not because I don't like Americans, I simply think Americans and Canadians are different, and want different things.
America is simply too powerful for any country match. It has an amount of arable land equal to the whole of Europe, and vast reserves of all natural resources within its borders. It's geography makes invasion impossible and gives it the most developed river network in the world for free. There is no way any other country can compare to this. This is why America can afford by far the world's largest military, and still give it's citizens lower taxes than most of the developed world. Comparing anything to the us is meaningless.
@@EEYore-py1bf The US invaded Canada and failed at it once. US didn't start the War or 1812 (the Empire was illegally impressing US citizens during the Napoleonic wars and actually fired on a US military vessel in 1807), and the revolutionary war there was an offer to allow the Canadian colonies join. They did not.
@@LG-xg8fw You can compare GDP, where they spend less than half of what the US does, and the US is still spending under the historic average of about 4%.
@@GR20000 During the revolutionary war, you invaded Quebec. It did not go well, mostly due to weather and not being able to keep militia troops in foreign land for long periods of time, so the final attack was rushed. One of the American generals died. Look it up. Of course Canada said no to joining the American colonies, Canada was almost entirely French at this time and there was no evidence that the Americans would let them stay French, whereas the British had passed the Quebec act, allowing Quebec to stay French and Catholic. America disregarded all treaties the British had made with the natives, so why would the French expect anything different for them? The American soldiers were impressed because Britain was trying to fight a tyrannical empire that was conquering Europe, and needed to blockade the French to starve them of trade. The British Prime Minister made this clear, and promised to release the sailors after the war with Napoleon was over. This would be like if America was neutral in WW2 and kept trading with Nazi Germany, so Britain started attacking their trade to starve the Germans. It was life or death for the British, Napoleon was ravaging Europe, while for the Americans it was a temporary inconvenience, and more of an excuse to kick the British out of North America. That, and Britain had actually stopped impressing American sailors before the USA declared war, but America didn't hear about it until after, and when they did, they still didn't rescind the declaration like the British expected. Canada is just lucky that Major General Sir Isaac Brock was expecting an invasion, so he actually attacked a fort before the American garrison even knew there was a war in the first place. He opted for an 'aggressive defense' policy.
Why don’t the states that want single payer build a single payer plan for their own state and leave the rest of us alone? If the far left states won’t even pass it for themselves, why should the whole country have to?
Yeah, MinnesotaCare is extremely cheap health insurance for low income families. Coming from a working class family that used this, I think it helped a lot. However, it isn't entirely free and I agree that it should be a state decision.
the issue with that is that the people who would benefit most from m4a are not just in one state and dont exactly have the capability of moving to another state
That was always my argument. Why not make it a states' right issue? California and New York can have public health plans, then anyone in the country who needs health care can move there and get treated. Anyone who wants more freedom of choice can live in the other states. We don't need to make this a national issue.
In the film Sicko, Michael Moore spends half the film complaining how the government screws healthcare. Then he spends the other half saying how more government is the solution.
I know I'm late to the party, but Germany's healthcare system isn't exactly single payer. There is a government mandate that all citizens have insurance (similar to car insurance in the US). There are 4, and only 4 health care insurers in Germany, what keeps costs low is the intense competition between these companies. Somebody gets greedy and raises rates? They shoot themselves in the foot because it just sends customers to the other 3 companies. Not a single payer system, in fact it's quite the opposite.
"As republicans in congress move to REPEEEEAAAAAL the affordable care act..." Gotta love that "how dare they! Can you believe it?!" tone. Right off the bat hes creating a dishonest portrayal of the entire issue. But then, this guy was an outspoken bernie bro. But his ability to "REEEE" mid sentence is impressive lol
People who support stuff like universal healthcare, or anything similar, always look at you like you got three heads when you question them. They trully believe that their position ia logical at all costs and the you simply hate the poor, needy, etc. most of the time.
If you disagree with a policy, you vote for politicians who are against it, no one is forcing anyone to do anything, a single payer system is cheaper in every way, we pay double per person than any other country...if republicans have a better plan, why not put it forward?
@@novelisima the price of health care increased dramatically after the government got involved. That was one of the debunkers main point and they have citations in the description. Edit: grammar
Conservative Policies yeah, I didn’t talk about government involvement in healthcare in the US at any point...I don’t doubt it, it just has nothing to do with my point.
The Blakenator good thing I didn’t talk about the 16th amendment, I just want a solution to the health care problem and republicans seem to have no answer.
People have died in Canada just waiting to be seen in emergency rooms. And you still have second payer two tiered system in Canada anyway. It's a minimum 2 year wait for knee or back surgery through the government but if you go to a private clinic it's under 3 months.
Yeah I am curious if that gets brought up when debating this stuff Edit: A little add on I have heard certain countries that are socialist often have ridiculously high taxes due to all the services they provide for their people
The U.S. spends a disproportionate amount on health care at $10,224 per capita, yet even With Obamacare, 29 Million People Are Uninsured. The UK spends only $4,246 per capita and 100% of the population is covered. The National Health Service (NHS) is not perfect but I have seen utter B.S false hoods about it given to the American public. If the NHS was funded to the same level as say Germany $5,728 per capita then it would be the best in the world.
More taxes = less liquid assets = less growth = economic crisis I live and work in California and there’s a disability tax to “help you in case you get disabled” I hate taxes and I hate socialism
We (a single country) are responsible for half of *ALL* medical advancements on Earth.....we are clearly doing something right Edit: We do not produce half, the exact number is 40% (my point still stands)
@@rukardio9491 \ I dont know the exact numbers but we are number one in advancements. These "free" places greatly piggy back off of Americas medical advancements and still are ranked lower in survival for major surgeries and overall quality care. Then add the fact that we also provide military\protection\aid for the vast majority of them. If anyone says free is better and ignores the above they should not be trusted. Msm, celebreties, Holloywood, politicians etc
@@albertoperotti6510 \ More socialist programs we get more broke we become. We have higher survival rates for major surgery and better quality care but we're supposed to adopt a system like Canada that is worse and cost more??? I can see why America would be richer than Canada. America doesn't have idiotic systems like free healthcare for all that waste money. Instead America spent that money elsewhere and created the most medically Advanced Technologies in human history. The very advancements that saved hundreds of millions of lives and still maintaining better care. Honestly we can argue about the problems with America's Healthcare but to suggest those alternative systems as "better" is insanity
More govt will drive up the cost of medicine the same way it's driven up the cost of college. Colleges charge what they can get, and the government isn't exactly known to be conservative about spending. Same thing with health care.
Colleges charge the max the government will pay. Then, students are almost forced to accept aid. The democrats deserve votes from the education they "gave away".
geyck True. Very true. I've thought the same thing about the huge LAUSD (Los Angeles unified school district). The board has fought for years to not break up the district into smaller districts but also advocates for smaller class sizes. Smaller = more individualized and focused attention of the specific needs of individuals. Also, Obamacare --increased government involvement into healthcare -- created less choice and higher costs for healthcare coverage... propents of that promised healthcare costs would lower there too. I don't understand how people can't see the inefficiency. And with the fraud in Medicare now, it's not a stretch to figure the increased participation will also lead to more opportunities for fraud and abuse within the system. And government is always over budget and takes longer than projected (like the recent CA bullet train). Oh and the whole Social Security system is projected to go bankrupt within less than 20 years. And we're 22 trillion in debt. The government has not shown fiscal responsibility or real accountabilty. All dreams and no reality.
I'm so impressed with these debunker videos just because of the sheer amount of time of statistical and social researching he must have to do to put one together. Fantastic tbh.
Thanks for this video Seamus. After the Philippines passed a law giving the people universal healthcare, I can now safely say that were going to be fucked.
There's universal healthcare in philippines now? But my dad just paid 5000 pesos just for some doctor to look at his problem that ended up going away by itself without the doctors help.
Of recent Social Medicine had proven that it doesn't work for the people that are taxed the heaviest, lower-middle, middle and upper middle class in the UK.
The quality of Healthcare has already started to suffer in America. Takes months now to get a appointment to see a doctor and they just want to get people in and out as fast as possible. 3 to 4 months to see a doctor now. Just like the communist counties!
they will ... statism is a cancer of society, once it has taken hold it is only a matter if time before government this and government that has bread enough slaves. I live in denmark, you have no idea how slave like hive minded people are here, its horrible.
In my country you pay 20%, its basically present so the poor and unfortunate can get treatment, or for your basic needs, and to make the old and sick people medication cheaper. You can go to paying clinics for better faster treatment. If being human cost 20% of my payment, im okay with it. Im not a social darwinist monster.
@@grosslittlegoblin1358 Great, then there is no reason for anyone to violently extort you since you are ok with it (but they still do, just try and say no and see what happens) Just remember, you being a good person does not grant you, or anyone else, the right to violently force others to pay for what you want. You can only be generous with your own money, not others. Taxation is theft.
Hey FreedomToons. Hypothetically if someone was to make a debunked video of one of your Debunkers vids, would you in turn make a Debunkers video of the debunking vid of the original Debunkers episode?
Two months ago I broke my arm. It is the first time I have had any significant medical condition in my life. The cost of my surgery to install a metal plate in my arm was over $20,000. With financial aid with the hospital, I was expecting to figure out some payment plan with them but the hospital's financial aid covered the entire bill. I got what I would assume is relatively the best care anyone could get and I worry that a singe payer system would eliminate charity such as what I got and the care level would be reduced. I recommend people consider things like financial aid when it seems insurance costs too much or you cannot afford a medical bill. Hospitals may cover it for you or figure out a payment plan that may even be interest free. People who want single payer, socialized healthcare, don't know or believe financial aid exists.
Negotiating a cash price also makes a difference. One of my friends had to have his gall bladder out. Hospital quoted some astronomical price, so he asked how much if I just pay you right now? $4000 out the door.
Job Creator 1. The government can screw up a lot more than charity becuse you have one group is Ted of many groups. And 2. It’s been proven that the pepole in contrys with government healthcare tend to have very long wait times compared to the USA.
Working ins insurance for nearly 20 years has taught me that the problem with the insurance market is not insurance companies but rather is government interference and bureaucracy.
I’m a personal trainer and yes I would prefer to train young healthy people because they’re low in liability compared to someone who’s old and unhealthy who may be high on a liability risk factor. Aside from people being born with preexisting conditions, a lot of people do need to take charge of their own health before starting this discussion. And oh wait, the US has an obesity epidemic. That’s how I know my argument isn’t false, bias of republican propaganda.
I still remember the argument that Cuba’s health care was top notch. They literally don’t even have bedsheets or clean surgical tools. These people are absolutely insane.
If only we could get this series national exposure! Sharp, relevant, informative and funny as hell! You are helping, my friend. Please keep up the good work. Pure genius!:)
Ok the point that our care is so much better is flawed. I looked at the link in the description, the who report is from 2000, but even with that logical flaw, we were ranked number 1 in health spending and responsiveness, but not necessarily quality of care. Just because Canada is no better doesnt mean other countries have it better. Examples include Switzerland, Australia, Germany, Singapore, France, and the UK as well. Each of these nations have very different solutions to their healthcare issue, but all of them prove better end outcomes than the US. And the idea that they benefit from the US health system existing is only due to our high amount of pharma companies, which would not be compromised by adapting a system of healthcare like those other nations. There is no reason the US must pay the highest prices for care and the companies take advantage of inelastic demand of healthcare. I understand the merits of a fully free market system of healthcare and crowding out of health consumption by the gvt, but its unproven in the modern day for such a system to work, and the crowding out is due to an inability to negotiate drug prices, as we can't just say 'fine, i wont buy medicine then'.
Also, i am for MDs not being required for all services and less requirements for medical licensing to increase the supply of doctors, solving the supply issue that supposedly everyone else has.
That bar graph at 1:28 does not help this dude's case--the equally big "top concern" was dissatisfaction with government! Yeah, so we should combine the two biggest problems into an even bigger problem. We should definitely let the government that people are so dissatisfied with manage healthcare. Did he really think highlighting the bar that says "healthcare" would make people ignore the equally big government bar?
I used to be an insurance producer. Insurance itself is a scam and should stay in the private sector. The whole point of insurance is to insure those that won't cost you money. Hint, hint. This is why your car insurance sky rockets after a speeding ticket. It kills me that people want social healthcare. They are beyond help.
Insurance is one if not the only business model where both the business and customer are gambling to screw out the other person. The customer is betting that something bad WILL happen so that they get more out of the insurance company than what they paid into it. The insurance company bets that it can take more money from their customers than what they pay out and have the army of statisticians to accurately price that bet to achieve a profit in the same way a casino works and lawyers to weasel their way out of paying what the customer thinks they are owed at every opportunity.
@@ColinTherac117 EXACTLY!!!! The more healthy suckers you get. The more money you make......don't even get me started on all the clauses, deductibles and fine print that is conveniently overlooked when forcing the public to buy it. That's where the insurance companies protect themselves while stealing your money.
I know that's how it does work, but it's not how it should work. Insurance should be like a group checking account. Everybody puts money in and the bank invests what it safely can to earn a profit while still having some liquid assets in case someone needs to withdraw money. It's a safer and longer term system that doesn't rely on gouging your own customers. It also lacks the dramatic growth investors want to see before buying stock, and thus has been abandoned for short-sighted high profit garbage.
@@emilioperez6888 lots of options. There are private clinics that work with low in come-on insurance patients. They work on a sliding fee scale and only charge you a certain percentage of your taxable income. For example. It cost my husband $1,800 usd with insurance for a medical problem. A few months later, he had another incident (our insurance dropped us and we had to use the redimedi) and it cost us $500 through them. They based it off our income. This is also another example as to why insurance is a scam. If it stays in the private sector. It will give you this option but the moment that insurance is forced, then doctors will be forced to HAVE to charge more......obamacare was borderline forcing private doctors out of business. Thank God it's over.
I live in Canada, have for all my 35 years of life A few years ago I decided to get an improperly healed broken hand looked at, haha, yeah they won't do anything for me. Not to mention, I need to purchase private health insurance through work (about 130.00 a month) as well as further health insurance in order to keep my mortgage (250.00 a month) On top of the fact that more than half my earnings are taken from me by one form of taxation or another.
1:28 did anyone else notice the graph showing Healthcare and then Dissatisfaction with Government being the top 2 public concerns? Kind of like the whole "guns are bad, we need to send the men with guns to take all the guns" argument.
At 3:43 when the guy tries to paint Canada as a good example of his system working, I can debunk that myself, waiting lists for medical treatment are like a century long, and the care you do get is so bad it’s better you don’t even go.
As a Canadian, i can say our system SUUUUUKS! I pay into a system that basically benefits no one. If we had a system like in Poland it would be better. There ARE people who need help affording health care, and thwre are people who can afford to pay for it, but in Canada i’m not allowed to buy private healthcare wven though I CAN afford it, which means that when I need it i end up forced to go to the ineffective hospital, taking up time and soace for people who actually NEED the “free” healthcare, and literally NO ONE benefits. I don’t even MIND paying into the system to provide those who need it, except that having basically zero access to private care means a slower less effective system for everyone. It also means our doctors have no financial incentive to be better, just the bare minimum. Let me pay my own way, let the public system have less people who don’t need its help, make sure doctors give time to public while being allowed to practice privatly, thus allowing them to make SOME money above their state mandated salary, and take some of the weight iff the public system and maybe it can provide those who needed with more quality service. Cutting everyone’s legs off is not making us equal, its making us all crippled. Everyone receives more value with a private and public system. No one receives value when the public system is ineffective for everyone equally
We have nationalized health care in Canada. It has its benefits and its faults. It's not free. When people say free health care I laugh. You have to lie to get decent care(I needed a hip resurfacing and waited over a year for the surgery) because apparently being in constant pain is not a prerequisite for a nationalized system. I had suffered for over 30 years with osteoarthritis. I was very happy with the outcome. I am now pain free and back to being active. That's one of the benefits. However, since I've been paying into said system for over 30 years, I basically paid for the surgery out of my own pocket. That's one thing people have to remember about nationalized systems. Statistically you're less likely to need serious health care until you are older so the longer you pay into it the more likely you will need it the older you get. So the thousands you've been paying into it can be utililzed when you are older.But that's not how it works in the long run. That money is often not there when you need it because subsequent governments spend your taxes on different things. So, I was told the average wait time for my surgery was 120 days. I actually waited 369 days. Very Malthusian, in a rather perverted way. People fear getting cancer in Canada(as they do in these other nationalized systems). Nationalized systems are fine for minor ailments and minor injuries. For everything else...it's a win or a lose situation.
@@alexanderchristopher6237 There's also the issue of the affluent in Canada going to the head of the line...or seeking first rate health care in...you guessed it...The States. Happens all the time.
The best way to describe the problem with American healthcare is that we have just the perfect balance between government involvement and a market system to have the benefits of neither.
True. The US set a limit on how many doctors are allowed to be trained, education is more expensive because of government subsidising colleges, Insurance companies are not allowed to compete across state lines, You are not allowed to sell certain drugs that studies have shown to work ( LSD has been proven to help with ptsd ) And if you wanna develop your own drug, it takes a decade ~ and millions of dollars in fees.
Camryn VB also, even more debt and tax! You guy fucking love it! Debt and tax. Debt and tax. Debt and tax. Debt and tax! Yeah, baby! More debt and tax! Who hate debt and tax?
As a Canadian who had to wait 6 months to see a specialist last time, I would like to say you hit the nail on the head. It's nice that the price is less because of health care being "free" here, but the quality of service is not great and wait times are nuts sometimes.
Last year I had a bad seizure that almost killed me. I still owe ten thousand dollars for an MRI that was ultimately useless. I can't afford that on my salary. It's showing up as bad credit.... I don't know what the right solution is, or what the right combination of solutions is, but we need to make some changes. The average joe can't afford the mess we're in and the mess we were in before ACA. Medicare for all may not be the best idea, but it's a start. Maybe. I humbly acknowledge lack of expertise in this area and look forward to learning from both sides.
It's also worth noting, regarding the Gallup poll that resulted in more than half of respondents being supportive of universal healthcare, that converting a couple thousand of respondents to "most Americans" is highly disingenuous. It's not a guarantee that most Americans want something, but only that using a statistical probability formula we expect with a certain margin of error that this will apply to most Americans based on our confidence that our sample is properly indicative of America as a whole. Much less wieldy but actually accurate.
Polls have been used to gauge public opinion for decades and generally do a fantastic job at doing so. If you want to bring up the 2016 election, keep in mind that polls used for elections are based on the popular vote, which Clinton won. Sorry, but I always have to bring that up because I know a favorite tactic of the right is to bring up the 2016 election results in order to discredit polling.
Also keep in mind that bullshit predictions made by douchebag journalists -- like when the Huffington Post put Clinton at a 98% chance to win in 2016 -- is not the same as polling data
@@OfficiallyUnofficialKamala2024 So why were the polls predicting the popular vote, when Clinton herself knew that only the electoral college mattered? It wasn't a surprise.
@@shorewall I'm sorry but I literally don't understand your question at all. Also please keep in mind that my defense of polling data should not also be translated as a defense of Hillary Clinton, whom I despise
@@OfficiallyUnofficialKamala2024 I'm very libertarian centrist. If you imagine a graph, that goes from -10 to +10 on both axes, I'm a 0 x, -10 y. With my politics out of the way, it's very true when Benjamin Disraeli said, "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." Pew Research can be quoted as writing, " *Relying largely on opinion polls* , election forecasters put Clinton's chance of winning at anywhere from 70% to as high as 99%." That's derived from the data to determine her chance of winning, not just regarding the popular vote, and was relying on the polling data. You claim that polls have done a fantastic job gauging public opinion; however, most all polls are never tested against the broader audience of all of America, so it's nearly impossible to know how accurate their samples actually are in relation to the bigger picture. Data science, especially sampled data of impossibly complex systems, depends significantly on making a number of assumptions. Data science is only marginally a science at all. Data science attempting to control for extremely complex systems, such as human opinion, has been shown to be wrong often enough that you can't depend on it to model reality dependably. It can be used as an indicator, but only with significant reservations as to its accuracy. It's not being anti-science, it's being real. You talk to any data scientist worth their salt, and they will always very carefully word what the data indicate and show significant reticence to nail anything down with conviction.
5 physicians in my small town stopped practicing since Obamacare started. What good is insurance if no one is available to provide the service? Medicare for all is the same.
Regardless of where one falls in the healthcare debate, one need not complicate things with regards to whether or not the Canadian approach of Medicare for all, with no other option is, or is not a terrible idea. If you look at almost every other industrialized nation that has instituted some form of universal healthcare, Canada is one of only 11 that have gone so far as to restrict choice to one option and one option only. Canadians pride themselves on a system that give everyone the same coverage across the board, whether one needs those services or not, yet also seem oblivious to how morally reprehensible their system truly is. To explain this, let’s compare the process of acquiring referral for specialty care. Putting aside wait times, the process is the same in the US and Canada, but the major dichotomy between the two is that in the US, you can pay out of pocket to see a specialist without getting a referral from a primary care provider (PCP). In contrast, this isn’t allowed in Canada, as the Canadian Medical Act made all forms of first party and third party transaction for “medically necessary care” illegal. To be fair, you can book an appointment with a specialist in Canada without a referral, but 99.9% of the time, you’ll be turned down, due to lower reimbursement without a referral and the added investigative duties usually relegated to the PCP, that the specialist now becomes responsible for. While the above is technically something one would likely encounter in the US as well, at least one still has the option to do so, assuming one should find a specialist whom agrees to do so. In contrast, Canadians without a PCP end up in a very scary gray area, where you don’t have a PCP, thus you can’t get a referral to a specialist, thus they’re effectively locked out of accessing anything except urgent cares and ERs for their healthcare needs. Worse still, even if you desperately need specialist services, rather than offering you a choice like almost every other industrialized country (including the US) does, Canada basically says “tough shit” and insists on perpetuating a pathological healthcare system, of which is rooted in the concept of pure equity and keeping everyone bound to the same lowest denominator in terms of quality, to the point where the government would rather people die waiting for care, than offer them an option that may potentially offer them better results. Given the above, is it any surprise that the rest of the industrialized world with universal healthcare systems fancy a two tiered approach that offers choice, with varying degrees of quality, rather than a one size fits all approach, run by a group of bureaucrats, whom vomit at the mere thought of people having any magnitude of choice, or variations in quality?
I used to believe in universal healthcare. I mean, if someone is sick, why shouldn’t they get help. It just seemed cruel to let someone die because they just don’t have money, I thought. Until someone asked me plain and simple. “Is healthcare a human right?”. Let’s just say I’ve done some growing up since then. 😂
I would love to see transparency back in our healthcare system. It's not right that I get a routine knee surgery and no one can tell me how much it costs! But when I went to my dentist for a root canal they could tell me up front how much I would pay for each phase of the treatment. I could then take the information to other dentists and essentially make my own choice as to how to proceed with my treatment. How is that a bad thing. Oh, wait, I know. "Oh, but we don't want to discourage people from visiting the doctor." Well, maybe you should! A lot of things people go to the ER for is ridiculous! While agree with the rule that ERs should never be allowed to turn people away, I think knowing prices up front would discourage people from using the ER for things that they could wait and see a regular physician for. Or using it as a physician office instead of researching and committing to a physician. "But, but we don't know what's wrong with them!" No, you don't. But when I go to my mechanic, they tell me, "You'll spend x amount on diagnosis." Once they find the problem, they tell me what the problem is, how much it would cost to fix and if they're good, if there's any options i might have to save cost. And guess what? I can take that information and research other mechanics to see if there is a better value or price. Why is this not a thing in health care?! In fact, Millennial and Gen Z have little to no brand loyalty and are more inclined to research and have no qualms about switching when they find something they like more. Rather than the government fighting this, they should step aside and let it happen! Let them shop around to see if they can get their treatment cheaper. "Then they'll just choose the cheaper price or not get treated at all!" No research has ever shown that people simply choose the cheaper price for goods or service. And if people choosing not to be treated, should be incentive for hospitals and medical care providers to provide better service. Maybe they shouldn't have doctors charging hundreds of dollars for poking their head in the door and asking a patient how they're doing. Maybe they shouldn't be charging for having "oxygen tanks ready" that they don't actually use. Maybe they should consider more things overhead costs with a fixed rate as opposed to direct costs with a variable rate. It might give incentive for hospitals to offer experimental treatments, especially for terminally ill, and researchers to come up with more effective treatments. I can go on and on (as clearly I have) how many problems could be solved by just simple transparency.
Thank You. A thousand times, thank you. It's funny that you should bring up the dentist example, because that's actually the situation I'm in right now. For years I've been putting off serious dental work that really needed to be attended to (several teeth that were so badly decayed that they kept me up at night, and on a few occasions became so badly infected they sent me to the ER). My (parent's) insurance would not cover it, my parents either would not or could not help, and as I was only a teen with a part time job I certainly couldn't afford it myself. I came into some money recently when I reached adulthood and finally went to a dentist's office to get an estimate for the total treatment costs: $16,700. I was floored. Even with the money I had acquired, it was barely something I could pay, and would completely eat up the money I'd set aside for school. Fortunately, I decided to not take the bill sitting down and went to several other dentists and asked them to give plans and estimates of their own - and every single one of them ended up being cheaper, and by cheaper, I mean by thousands of dollars. My current treatment plan has a high end estimate of $10,500 and a low end of as little as $5,000 - less than a third of the original price!. That's still a lot for someone like me, but if I work hard I can potentially pay it off within a year or even less. And if you think that's crazy, get a load of this: I have a few friends overseas, and according to them I'm STILL getting ripped off! Based on their knowledge of the cost of out of pocket dental care in their country, I'm still paying almost twice as much as some Europeans would. That should tell you just how inflated U.S. health care is. The debate of Universal Health Care vs Private Insurance is ignoring the real problem: the fact that either of them need to exist in the first place! Regardless of whether the bill is being fronted by the government or private insurance, the medical industry is free to price gouge without consequence because large companies and bureaucracies can afford to pay out way more than an individual ever could. If the medical industry were more transparent and fought for business the way other industries do, they might start lowering their prices down to something that an average person can pay, drastically reducing the need for this entire debate.
As a veteran, I can't help but notice the huge military budget we have yet everything the military purchases is discount grade. I feel like there is some squandering being done that could be better used in a basic Medicare system... If you need a better doctor and can afford one, awesome go to a private practitioner... Other than that why wouldn't we at least try to save people with a bare minimum of medical care
So when you say that the USA is number one in quality of care, do you mean just how fast someone can get care? I've been hearing and ill try and find the study later, that the USA is 37th place in the world for general health of the population. Now that I look at your reference I see that the USA is number 1 in costs, but overall health care performance is 37th. Sure we might be doing alot of research but our treatment outcomes are not necessarily number 1. Sure there may not be only one reason for this discrepancy of cost vs outcome but there still is a problem we need to solve. Not saying it's to get a single healthcare insurance. Also where is all the money going? All to research? Faster times to see a Doctor? No idea.
Our education system is similar in that the results are dependent on many outside variables. There can be excellent resources, skilled and caring teachers and principals, and quality instruction materials; but if the kids come to class hungry, or sleepy, or stressed from family events, don't have consistent and available love and attention, haven't developed self-discipline or adequate social skills, are not able to speak English fluently, or have no one at home that is able or willing to invest time monitoring or encouraging or helping with homework or to reinforce academic and social/emotional development, the educational results will not be reflected in the quality of care provided. Health care results are influenced by lifestyle choices, exercise levels, diet, stress, genetics, diet, sleep, alcohol or tobacco use, drug use, societal inflence (eg married men live longer than unmarried, loneliness has negative health outcomes), and the willingness of a person to follow medical advice.
It would be easy to offer free insurance to all when u dont have a viable military. How about we stop sending billions in aid to other countries and pay off our national debt. A single payer systen would ruin the economy.
@1:28 LMFAOOO right next to healthcare is “dissatisfaction with government” why tf would he add that if he’s trying to advocate for even more federal government authority and overreach😭😭😭
"Medicare for all is likely to be the major domestic issue in the 2020 election" 2020 says hi. I do think this guy is very intelligent. BUT, he often (I've seen a lot of his stuff) get all the facts right, then comes to the completely wrong conclusion.
I´ve checked that WHO source you quoted but that does not seem to support your statement of: number one in quality of care. It does apparently have the best responsiveness and the least amount of capita spend in international dollars. But according to the source you quote you rank 37th on overall performance of your healthcare system. That does include "fairness" so there is that. But I do not see any quality stat being linked in that table.
Yeah, what's up with that? If the numbers are rankings and not scores, Germany, France, and Canada all rank higher than the U.S. in "Overall Health System performance. I don't usually disagree with him, but the stats he linked don't seem to support his position.
wait wait wait.....healthcare and government dissatisfaction are at the same level? So people thought government run healthcare was a solution? This isnt algebra class. Two negatives does not make a positive.
Thank you so much for your viewership! if you would like to help us continue to make these toons on a regular basis, please donate at subscribestar.com/freedomtoons or if you need to use paypal, at freedomtoons.tv/#/donate
I LUV U GUYS!!!!
Very informal video/videos. Love it and thank you.
I wanted to ask what did you think of the civil war who did you think was right? The union or the Confederates
@@Straznov yeah that would make a good video too
No intro, might has trash this vid
What do you mean
"No into, might hase to trash v
This vid
I'm sad the Debunkers Intro was left out.
"As am I."
As am I.
"So we don't catch the stupid."
I caught the Reich virus guys, I'm gonna fail my math test and demand a grading curve now
i have die
"Troglodytes"
3:34
I laughed so hard when I saw my country, Romania, on that map. Let me tell you how this "universal healthcare" works here:
There are two types of hospitals: public hospitals which are run by the government and where you can have a surgery or a consultation for free and the private ones The thing about public hospitals is that they are VERY VERY BAD. They are dirty, you go there to get rid of an illness and leave with other 3, the bureaucracy is very inefficient and the doctors won't treat you professionally unless you bribe them. Many doctors aren't even professionals, they just bribed some bureaucrat to get a job.
The private hospitals on the other hand are VERY GOOD and the Romanian private dentistry offices-EXCELLENT. People from all over western Europe come to our private dentists both for the high quality and for the small prices.
In my opinion the only good thing in the public hospitals is that the private ones have to lower the prices considerably to compete with the public ones, but the public hospitals are a failure from all other perspectives.
Dude shorten these out I can't screenshot these for debates in the future.
Tepes Obrejac Well, is better that nothing for people that can’t afford private service.
So public hospitals are good then lol
@@normanwhite5267
Cheap-yes
Good-HELL NO. If they were good then why no politician treats there?
Tepes Obrejac You misunderstood, I’m saying they are good because they lower costs of private services.
"It's why I moved into a bunker to avoid them."
-Savage Rich Dude
flex tap can't fix that
Wow that is a litteral echo chamber if you think about it a bit.
I paused the video to read this then hit play for less then five seconds, then he said that line. HAHAHAHAHAHA
@@anondabomb, AMAZING!
Medicare nearly bankrupted my father (a doctor), as his patients were paying him next to nothing, if nothing at all. I hate it. Medicare nearly destroyed our lives, to the point where we were forced to move several times since he wasn't making enough to keep us afloat. Sometimes, he would only be payed a few cents for the entire treatment of a patient (he's a radiation oncologist). It's ridiculous people think that Medicare for All is the best idea in the world.
With a Medicare for all, your father should be getting paid by the government to make up the difference
@@typsyk.capone2916 here is the issue the doctor is said to be a high paying job and even that is not enough to keep this person's family afloat and this would increase taxes for him and sink his ship (again if you're being paid by the Government even the Government has to be able to afford this plan)
@@minecraftpro2074 have you seen their spending habits? We can definitely afford it...
Go look up the homeless racket in New York
It's a $2B+ a year business
@@typsyk.capone2916 I doubt we could afford it because we would have to cut several Government programs and then not spend more money on useless causes then maybe we could but since the Government spends all our money we can't afford it without a significant tax hike
On the flip side I have family members who wouldn’t be alive if it weren’t for medicare sorry your dad who is being paid a salary of as a doctor is at least 100k dollars a year had to deal with his patients not being fucked by insurance because of there old age and or disability
1:13 Two things California and New York have in common:
1) Both pushing for single payer
2) Both saddled with immense amounts of state debt, even before 2020
Both lost population and a congressional seat as well
3. Both run by corrupt democrats
@@misterkaos.357 figured that was a given at this point
Both are crapholes too
I just want everyone to remember, the government is in charge of the school system. Now imagine that, but with healthcare.
Same with the USPS.
As Steven Crowder put it, it’s like putting the DMV in charge of curing cancer
That would be worse!
Thanks, I hate it
Source: Canadian
“It is likely to be the main concern in the 2020 presidential race.” Lol could have never been more wrong
In all fairness if anyone had accurately predicted the 2020 presidential race i'm pretty sure nobody would believe them.
Volrag honestly if someone did we could’ve probably gotten them to become the head of a cult I mean that’s prophet level predictions
Biden is heavily against Medicare for all. He is pretty much republican light.
the democrats show no love for sanders.
If Biden can run for president, then so can I!
See you later aligator, I'm doing a Kanye.
Kenji Wright 2024
“California and New York are moving towards a single-payer system”
That’s why I’m moving out of NY
Come to Florida. It's fantastic here. There are at least three Trump flags on every corner. Also, the "Florida man" is a myth, so not to worry about that LOL. We have literally the best governor in the country.
Come to Arkansas, we have tasty meth
Come to NH, join the free state project
@@rustyshitbox Yeah legit im in the same boat here trying to run from NY and honestly NH is the same sort of beautiful countryside with less of the government meddling. I mean fuck if I can own a gun without a license because its my constitutional right to do so, count me in.
So I'm a little late to the party, but if you like cold states, come to Indiana! If you prefer hot states, go to Texas. If you like forest fires and left sided air, go to California. Please. Don't mess up Texas and Indiana. Thank you.
I really liked this one guys. I used to work in a walk-in clinic near the border with our friendly and polite neighbors to the north.
More than half the patients who came through that door were Canadians, and not rich ones either, who had a medical issue they didnt want to wait MONTHS to have looked at.
Everything from obvious cases of skin cancer, to suspected (and in many cases confirmed at the clinic) instances of breast cancer.
Many of these patients came in with their medical files, and as the nurse who did the paperwork for this clinic as well as taking vitals, i would usually see people with appointments to see oncologists, or internal medicine specialists for 'further testing' 3-6 months after presenting with possible cancer symptoms.
One patient had stage 3 breast cancer, and for those who are not aware, at stage 3 you start getting some...obvious signs.
This person's appointment to see a specialist, just to confirm the diagnosis, not even to start treatment, was scheduled 4 months from when they visited, which was 4 weeks weeks after their initial visit to a Canadian walk in clinic.
Canada's healthcare is rapidly going down hill as well. Fewer clinics are staying open, nurses and doctors in Canada, tired of not getting paid by the government, are leaving the country. Hospitals are cutting corners to save on costs because it can take three years to get payment from their government for services rendered.
A;ll of this is shit you wont see the media reporting. This is the shit you hear when you work in health care. This the shit you are told by the new nurse who just moved to Maine from Quebec because they went over a year without getting paid because the walk in clinic they were working at hadnt received payment in over two years.
England
Thats crazy. I live in Europe with sort of free healthcare but it seems our healthcare is doing fine.
@@captaindonut5240 Depending on where you are in Europe, either you have good health, and dont really spend time around people with chronic illness, or you live in Switzerland.
The biggest issue with the current healthcare systems in most of Europe, is that people with chronic illnesses are basically told to keep their treatments in a strict budget.
If a medication that might help you live a longer life isnt covered, or is too expensive, they will deny your claim to the medication, and put you on something less effective.
I've been hearing from friends in Netherlands, about doctors pushing patients with chronic illness that even in the US is easily managed, without people going bankrupt, to opt for Doctor Assisted Suicide, because the patients cant approval for the care they actually need, and are being stuck with the more cost effective option.
and whats sickening, at least to me, as someone got into this line of work because he wanted to help people, is that there are two kinds of people who defend the healthcare systems that allow this.
the 'thats not true, because the government denies it'
and the 'even if its true, they are sick anyway'.
the sheer amount of Canadians who rage at me when i bring up the failings of their healthcare system is mind boggling.
Bring up how bad it is for rural Canadians in Quebec, and many Canadians will tell you 'fuck Quebec, they suck anyway'.
I’m a born and bred Michigander. I fractured my hand once, and at that point, I didn’t know what to expect from the American health care system, but I had heard the kind of crap the Canadians have to deal with. I got in, had a nurse initially diagnose me, waited a bit, had a doctor diagnose me, had x-rays taken, and had a brace put on it (it wasn’t a serious enough break to need a cast, it got better within about a month and a half). All of this took less than two hours. I commented that it probably would have taken months to even get the x-rays done in Canada, and the doctor had no idea. Why don’t people in the medical industry know this stuff? It seems like you should hear about this coming down the grapevine. It’s not like I’m super far away from Canada or anything either, this is in northern Michigan, a couple hours drive away.
@@talongreenlee7704 It depends. Not a lot of American doctors or nurses really care. I get most of my info from patients, and from friends who work in healthcare over the border.
Just the other day, i was waiting to see my own GP, and they were fielding calls from Canadians about crossing the border, against quarantine rulings, to get treatments, because two of the clinics in Quebec shut down due to Covid outbreaks.
I could kill this man's argument with one question: Where in the federal constitution does it give the federal government *any* authority to nationalize medicine?
Answer: It doesn't. It explicitly enunciates that the States, alone, have full autonomy over medical care as sovereign nations. That's the point of the 10th Amendment, to make sure the federal government knew/knows for *damn sure* where its limited powers stop and States' authority begins.
I respect your intellectual prowess and respect for the constitution
@@adaptingtolife The "federal Constitution" would be accurate, but, all the same, thanks for the compliment. (Really!)
FYI no one respects the 10th amendment anymore. It's basically been repealed, even more than the 2nd amendment.
@@ordinaryhuman5645 Amazing. Imagine if the European States were that cowed. 'Oopsy, guess this thing we invented, and are the sole source of authority for, said we couldn't do something. Darn it! I guess we just have to obey...this little fascist brat we made together who somehow convinced himself made us instead.'
Yeah, and if Californians love single payer health care so much, then they can implement it. Nothing’s stopping them. I know for a fact their health care will turn to crap. But at least the nation will see that and we won’t decide to implement it
my take- considering the roads almost never get fixed, what makes anyone think that the government involved in keeping people healthy is a good idea.
or them being involved in much of anything, for that matter.
To add to that, so many people complain about the public education system. Do they want hospitals to be as bad as public schools?
What makes anyone think that government officials are even trying to protect us? A government is not analogous to a hired security guard. Governments do not come into existence as social service organizations or as private firms seeking to please consumers in a competitive market. Instead, they are born in conquest and nourished by plunder. They are, in short, well-armed gangs intent on organized crime. Yes, rulers have sometimes come to recognize the prudence of protecting the herd they are milking and even of improving its ‘infrastructure’ until the day they decide to slaughter the young bulls, but the idea that government officials seek to promote my interests or yours is little more than propaganda-unless, of course, you happen to belong to the class of privileged tax eaters who give significant support to the government and therefore receive in return a share of the loot.
Robert Higgs
Yeah really. Let's turn my doctor's office into the DMV that would be great. Eye roll.
Good point
DarkCT Well, you can remove some of the weapon/military investment to the roads and heath care. Like Europe.
Canadian here, bought a ticket to a third world latin American country and paid for and got private medical operation the same week i was there while if i was to wait in canada i would need to wait anywhere from 6 months to 1 year.... Yeah wait times are ducking nuts here.
That reminds me of my one Canadian friend I played on Xbox live with, he got a massive laceration on his arm, it was basically a cut down to the bone and it was fairly long around like 6 inches. The emergency room in his region made him wait 7 hours in their waiting room.
You forgot to say that ppl still defend the healthcare system here, im from montreal and the only thing nice public is higher education. Its so nice and cheap americans come here to study xD
@@LexpressionQc It's insane how many Canadians are under the impression our healthcare system is anything but abysmal.
@@LexpressionQc Our education actually wouldn't be outrageous if it wasn't for dorm room living
USA is the other side of the horse, its not slightly better.
Who would win:
Multi-million dollar company
Two cartoon smart boi’s
Boiiiiiis
Those smart boahs are ceo's of Pharma inc.
Who are billionaires, too?
Who lose:
Poor people who cant afford health care.
Devine Weirdo
Who would loose?
Your grammar
>I admire that he's including arguments against his position
G O L D
As a British ExPat now living in Germany, the Healthcare difference is STARK. You cannot fit them in the same boat.
Germany>UK and if you want what Germany has you would have to rip so much out of how the US works just to try and, honestly, youll just get the UK result which is shiiiiit.
Are you referring to the NHS?
@@JesusChrist-vq6lk yea.
If the Gov werent so wishy washy on funding and joe public stopped turning up because of hangovers and sunbutlrn it wouldnt be so bad but its just a mess.
@@MasterVolton and we stopped hiring diversity managers for 60k a year.
German healthcare isn’t even great compared to American healthcare either. It is INCREDIBLY inefficient…
3:34 Why is Chile Green on that map? As a chilean I can confidently affirm that we do NOT have Universal Health Care. It seriously makes me question the thruthfulness of the articule.
It's the same logic as with socialism: if it works and superficially supports their argument, it is "real socialism", otherwise it's not.
pascal ausensi Because everyone admits that Chile is a amazing country. I love your food and cities.
@dar'man beskar Ordo Please, I don't want to think that the democrats of the USA are cheap socialists like other countries socialists. Socialism is good in balanced amounts cooperating with the right laws.
Another thing is use socialism to win elections to be in power.
You can just google your own country and discover that there is something very similar to universal health care in Chile.....
It's like the claim that USA and Papua New Guinea are the only two countries without paid maternal leave. Blatantly false; I grew up in Bangladesh and we had no such thing.
Canadian here, I can tell you that you won't wait months for an "emergency surgery" if by emergency we mean "someone will die or be permanently injured without it". An example being my brother fracturing his femur, he got into surgery 3 days later because waiting any longer would cause it to heal wrong and cripple him. On the other hand, I've been waiting literally over a year for a "non emergency" shoulder surgery because I'm not going to die while waiting, and while that's true I also can't do any intense physical activity while it's unstable.
So there are pros and cons to both systems but we pay very high tax rates for mediocre service. People love to trot out "Americans pay more per capita", which is true but Americans can also expect better care than you will find in many Canadian hospitals and clinics. America considering a universal system seems truly insane when you factor in their debt problem. The Feds should be looking to reduce their liabilities as much as possible, not massively expanding them. Think about what might happen if America does implement a universal system, people become dependent on it, and the Feds finally default?
a year for a non emergency surgery is ridiculous, i hope you have gotten it by now
There are some variables that need to be taken into account with America's higher healthcare spending even when ignoring that it has arguably higher quality. American's are some of the unhealthiest people in the world. Like aren't 66 percent of adults overweight or something. Due to more people needing more healthcare overall medical expenses will be higher. The other reason is that in America you usually tend to get a bunch of procedures that aren't required just to make sure your healthy which contributes to the higher costs. Someone on TYT talked about this.
The reason American Pay More Per Capita is One because of medicare and medicaid (they were the reason that the prices skyrocketed) and two, insurance. It is cheaper for you to pay out of pocket (though you may not be able to do it always). The lack of price transparency, the lack of price signals etc. also play a role
@Grand St. Mark Those too.
Nailed it
More Robert Reich and more of his nonsense debunked!
Seriously, this guy's name is so ironic.......
When my mom was little, you went to the doctor, you paid him, and he saw you. You didn't go through insurance.
But sure it's the private market that's at fault. Let's just go with that!
Noel “ Reich” no more needs to be said
Yes, because having your medical bills all covered so you don't have to go into debt is...the workers controlling the means of production. You know about as much about socialism as flat earthers know about science.
Tommy What if you can’t afford the cake? Should the government hand out free cake to anyone who can’t afford it?
Lol I'm not the only one who thinks he's a dumbass 😂
@00rphb Never had to use socialized hospitals have you? Spemd more time overseas.
"But has anybody actually TRIED socialism? Because that's not really socialism!"
--Mouth breathers
Several communities have tried and it only ever leads to fictatorships, mokeies throwing their poop at each other and giving capitalists more ideas on how to make money.
"That's why I moved into a bunker - to get away from those people." HAHAHA
Btw that’s Robert reich, I believe so
Interesting that a satirist knows more about economics than a former Secretary of Labor.
And a certain House Representative who has an economics degree.
Interesting, yes. Surprising, sadly no.
yea...it almost sounds like he doesn't
They know exactly how economics work, they are simply using populism for easy support.
Spoiler slert: he clearly doesn't
Free healthcare for all only works if there's a perfect ratio of doctors/medical personnel and supplies to address the needs of the entire population. No matter how much you subsidize a fisherman, even if you pay him 10x his wages, he won't be able to suddenly catch 10x more fish.
But if you start paying him 0.5x his wage you will probbaly get 0 fish... why do you think dr's are decreasing in places like the UK and Canada.
@@ben-3467 I can answer this being from the UK. Our education system is fucking shit and we've not been training doctors and nurses, it has nothing to do with how the NHS as a system functions. We thought we could endlessly import people to treat the population, but in doing so we made the population explode because we opened the floodgates.
Say we were 10'000:1 people/doctors before we started importing and the gov said, hmm, that's not good, we'd better do something about it. Well now it's more like 250'000:1. The problem has been so much more exasperated that it's not even funny, because someone let idiots in charge of immigration.
Systems like the NHS work ONLY in small countries with restricted immigration, it's not a bad system, it's the best way to manage in a situation like ours. The problem is some idiot decided we'd open it up to the entire world.
Edit: A comparision for the USA would be similar to the NHS but it would be on a state-by-state basis with some kind of residence requirement to stop people going out of state for treatment they don't pay in for.
It also works if you tax peoples income 50pct.
BlunderingFool
Thats the other issue here in the US, is too much immigration, a large portion of the people here shouldn’t even be here.
That's a damn good analogy, I'm going to use that one
That Bernie sketch is a little generous on the hair
Matheson Armstrong and the smile
When the government took over student loans, tuition skyrocketed. Same thing with healthcare.
*I remember the time before Medicaid, and I remember watching as Medicaid utterly destroyed the entire system in just a few years. Because Medicaid had no copays or use limits, as well as (at the time) high reimbursement rates, I watched young people seeing providers for no legitimate reasons. Some kept seeing providers until they could secure prescriptions that could be sold as a monthly "stipend" - my next door neighbor was famous for this: she was dealing in Valium, all secured through multiple Medicaid physicians. She bragged how quitting her on the books job was the biggest raise she had ever had - the State paid her rent and utilities through the welfare office, the federal government paid for her food with Food Stamps, and the Medicaid system provided her all the spending money she wanted. It was disgusting - this very part time off the books worker (a few hours a week), was living **_really_** well - far above our levels, and we were working our asses off!*
*The government destroys everything it touches.*
This ⬆^⬆^⬆ is the number 2 problem in America. (#1 is the Feds) its way too easy to turn american social safety nets (a good thing, that catches your a$$ when the sh*t hits the fan) in to comfy lounge hammocks.
Yea. On Canada. I have family there that tell me how great and better their healthcare system is all the time. As they come down to the lower 48 for EVERY SINGLE serious condition or elective surgery they've EVER needed.
They just go on to tell me how dumb I am to pay for health ins as theirs is "free" as they pay FAR higher taxes than we do.
I try to explain about them whimping out on their military spending about 8 percent of what the U.S. does which of course allows them to funnel that money toward anything else. Which means they're USING the U.S. as a shield and letting us take the VAST amount of defense for them. That doesn't win me any points and we in the U.S. should just shhh and .
you get the points..
I'm Canadian and I agree, our healthcare is only really good for injuries equivalent to breaking a leg. I would go to America if I had cancer or other surgeries that would normally have a long wait time.
A lot of the reason Canadians brag about their healthcare is because they want to be as different from Americans as possible. It's not surprising that this attitude has been around for so long, there actually used to be a reason for it back when you invaded our country multiple times, first during your war to split from the UK, then again during the War of 1812, then threatened to invade again during your civil war, then we found out you had a plan drawn up to invade us yet AGAIN in the 30's, just in case you got into a dispute with Britain over trade. However, there's no real reason to think this way now. Living next to the United States is like being next to a chained dog that could break it's chain and kill you in an instant if it got pissed off. We didn't used to be so friendly as we are now, so it's been ingrained in our psyche not to trust America for centuries. I still don't want to be like America, but it's not because I don't like Americans, I simply think Americans and Canadians are different, and want different things.
America is simply too powerful for any country match. It has an amount of arable land equal to the whole of Europe, and vast reserves of all natural resources within its borders. It's geography makes invasion impossible and gives it the most developed river network in the world for free. There is no way any other country can compare to this. This is why America can afford by far the world's largest military, and still give it's citizens lower taxes than most of the developed world. Comparing anything to the us is meaningless.
@@EEYore-py1bf The US invaded Canada and failed at it once. US didn't start the War or 1812 (the Empire was illegally impressing US citizens during the Napoleonic wars and actually fired on a US military vessel in 1807), and the revolutionary war there was an offer to allow the Canadian colonies join. They did not.
@@LG-xg8fw You can compare GDP, where they spend less than half of what the US does, and the US is still spending under the historic average of about 4%.
@@GR20000 During the revolutionary war, you invaded Quebec. It did not go well, mostly due to weather and not being able to keep militia troops in foreign land for long periods of time, so the final attack was rushed. One of the American generals died. Look it up.
Of course Canada said no to joining the American colonies, Canada was almost entirely French at this time and there was no evidence that the Americans would let them stay French, whereas the British had passed the Quebec act, allowing Quebec to stay French and Catholic. America disregarded all treaties the British had made with the natives, so why would the French expect anything different for them?
The American soldiers were impressed because Britain was trying to fight a tyrannical empire that was conquering Europe, and needed to blockade the French to starve them of trade. The British Prime Minister made this clear, and promised to release the sailors after the war with Napoleon was over.
This would be like if America was neutral in WW2 and kept trading with Nazi Germany, so Britain started attacking their trade to starve the Germans. It was life or death for the British, Napoleon was ravaging Europe, while for the Americans it was a temporary inconvenience, and more of an excuse to kick the British out of North America. That, and Britain had actually stopped impressing American sailors before the USA declared war, but America didn't hear about it until after, and when they did, they still didn't rescind the declaration like the British expected.
Canada is just lucky that Major General Sir Isaac Brock was expecting an invasion, so he actually attacked a fort before the American garrison even knew there was a war in the first place. He opted for an 'aggressive defense' policy.
Why don’t the states that want single payer build a single payer plan for their own state and leave the rest of us alone?
If the far left states won’t even pass it for themselves, why should the whole country have to?
Isn't that what MinnesotaCare is?
Yeah, MinnesotaCare is extremely cheap health insurance for low income families. Coming from a working class family that used this, I think it helped a lot. However, it isn't entirely free and I agree that it should be a state decision.
the issue with that is that the people who would benefit most from m4a are not just in one state and dont exactly have the capability of moving to another state
exactly!
That was always my argument. Why not make it a states' right issue? California and New York can have public health plans, then anyone in the country who needs health care can move there and get treated. Anyone who wants more freedom of choice can live in the other states. We don't need to make this a national issue.
In the film Sicko, Michael Moore spends half the film complaining how the government screws healthcare. Then he spends the other half saying how more government is the solution.
Just because a majority is in favor of something doesn't mean that something is good.
SpiderLily Amen
Democracy has its faults .
I know I'm late to the party, but Germany's healthcare system isn't exactly single payer. There is a government mandate that all citizens have insurance (similar to car insurance in the US). There are 4, and only 4 health care insurers in Germany, what keeps costs low is the intense competition between these companies. Somebody gets greedy and raises rates? They shoot themselves in the foot because it just sends customers to the other 3 companies. Not a single payer system, in fact it's quite the opposite.
"As republicans in congress move to REPEEEEAAAAAL the affordable care act..."
Gotta love that "how dare they! Can you believe it?!" tone. Right off the bat hes creating a dishonest portrayal of the entire issue. But then, this guy was an outspoken bernie bro. But his ability to "REEEE" mid sentence is impressive lol
People who support stuff like universal healthcare, or anything similar, always look at you like you got three heads when you question them. They trully believe that their position ia logical at all costs and the you simply hate the poor, needy, etc. most of the time.
Smollett freedom toon NOW, God bless
If a product is really that good why force people to pay for it? :)
If you disagree with a policy, you vote for politicians who are against it, no one is forcing anyone to do anything, a single payer system is cheaper in every way, we pay double per person than any other country...if republicans have a better plan, why not put it forward?
jose cavallo Taxation was a power given by the 16th amendment. Something I had no say in.
@@novelisima the price of health care increased dramatically after the government got involved. That was one of the debunkers main point and they have citations in the description.
Edit: grammar
Conservative Policies yeah, I didn’t talk about government involvement in healthcare in the US at any point...I don’t doubt it, it just has nothing to do with my point.
The Blakenator good thing I didn’t talk about the 16th amendment, I just want a solution to the health care problem and republicans seem to have no answer.
People have died in Canada just waiting to be seen in emergency rooms. And you still have second payer two tiered system in Canada anyway. It's a minimum 2 year wait for knee or back surgery through the government but if you go to a private clinic it's under 3 months.
Why is it so long in private as well?
5:57 - 6:07 This is absurd. My MS-ridden mother cannot afford the medicines she wants or go to the doctors she wants or have the plan she wants.
Universal socialized health care= More taxes.
Yeah I am curious if that gets brought up when debating this stuff
Edit: A little add on I have heard certain countries that are socialist often have ridiculously high taxes due to all the services they provide for their people
The U.S. spends a disproportionate amount on health care
at $10,224 per capita, yet even With Obamacare, 29 Million People Are Uninsured. The UK spends only $4,246 per capita and 100% of the population is covered. The National Health Service (NHS) is not perfect but I have seen utter B.S false hoods about it given to the American public. If the NHS was funded to the same level as say Germany $5,728 per capita then it would be the best in the world.
Oh, hey! I see you from TheBitBlock. Hiya!
-Sorry, not relevant. XD-
More taxes = less liquid assets = less growth = economic crisis
I live and work in California and there’s a disability tax to “help you in case you get disabled” I hate taxes and I hate socialism
@@iAnnie WTF R U on about
Seamus Ben Shapiro impression: They're trying to turn our doctors into literal slaves folks.
Did you know Ben's wife is a doctor?
His wife is a doctor, btw
Francesco Lombardi “my wife’s a Doctor folks.”
Ok folks, they’re trying to enslave my wife
If I wanted someone to take care of me I'd move back in with my parents. I do not need the government taking care of me.
Shut up, you need your broccoli clause. The Supreme Court said so, it must be true.
@@MrDj232 just for that in going to refill my sweet tea
@@benselectionforcasting4172 And I'm going to throw it into the harbor.
@@machomanalexyt5736 no Sweet Iced Tea is a southern tradition!
"Crawl back into your mama!" is what I say when the socialists start whining.
That healthcare isn't free. It's paid for by higher taxes like france where gift tax is 55% and income tax in france reaches almost 50%
Yeah, in Canada, you can literally only get fast healthcare if you are about to die
"That's why I moved into a bunker." LOLOL
We (a single country) are responsible for half of *ALL* medical advancements on Earth.....we are clearly doing something right
Edit: We do not produce half, the exact number is 40% (my point still stands)
Honestly I found that a little hard to believe at first but like you said if it’s true we must be doing something right
Bump
@@rukardio9491 \ I dont know the exact numbers but we are number one in advancements. These "free" places greatly piggy back off of Americas medical advancements and still are ranked lower in survival for major surgeries and overall quality care. Then add the fact that we also provide military\protection\aid for the vast majority of them. If anyone says free is better and ignores the above they should not be trusted. Msm, celebreties, Holloywood, politicians etc
Or maybe u guys are the riches country in the world so u can afford to fund research massively
@@albertoperotti6510 \ More socialist programs we get more broke we become. We have higher survival rates for major surgery and better quality care but we're supposed to adopt a system like Canada that is worse and cost more??? I can see why America would be richer than Canada. America doesn't have idiotic systems like free healthcare for all that waste money. Instead America spent that money elsewhere and created the most medically Advanced Technologies in human history. The very advancements that saved hundreds of millions of lives and still maintaining better care. Honestly we can argue about the problems with America's Healthcare but to suggest those alternative systems as "better" is insanity
More govt will drive up the cost of medicine the same way it's driven up the cost of college. Colleges charge what they can get, and the government isn't exactly known to be conservative about spending. Same thing with health care.
yep, that is the truth
Colleges charge the max the government will pay. Then, students are almost forced to accept aid. The democrats deserve votes from the education they "gave away".
My answer to people when they say we need Medicare for all is “when the VA is run efficiently then we can talk about doing it for everyone.”
When insurance companies merge there is less competition and that's a bad thing. So how is single payer supposed to be a good thing?
geyck True. Very true. I've thought the same thing about the huge LAUSD (Los Angeles unified school district). The board has fought for years to not break up the district into smaller districts but also advocates for smaller class sizes. Smaller = more individualized and focused attention of the specific needs of individuals. Also, Obamacare --increased government involvement into healthcare -- created less choice and higher costs for healthcare coverage... propents of that promised healthcare costs would lower there too. I don't understand how people can't see the inefficiency. And with the fraud in Medicare now, it's not a stretch to figure the increased participation will also lead to more opportunities for fraud and abuse within the system. And government is always over budget and takes longer than projected (like the recent CA bullet train). Oh and the whole Social Security system is projected to go bankrupt within less than 20 years. And we're 22 trillion in debt. The government has not shown fiscal responsibility or real accountabilty. All dreams and no reality.
Nooo debunkers intro??? HOW DARE YOU!!! 😭😭😭
I'm a brilliant intellectual 🎩
As am I 🧐
The two of us are sick of dealing with troglodytes, so we moved into a bomb shelter so we don't catch the stupid!
To stay sharp, we spend our days pursuing the pastime of *true* intellectuals: debunking TH-cam videos
*slow clap*
😊😊😊
I'm so impressed with these debunker videos just because of the sheer amount of time of statistical and social researching he must have to do to put one together. Fantastic tbh.
Thanks for this video Seamus. After the Philippines passed a law giving the people universal healthcare, I can now safely say that were going to be fucked.
There's universal healthcare in philippines now? But my dad just paid 5000 pesos just for some doctor to look at his problem that ended up going away by itself without the doctors help.
@@heavy_ang_patay Private healthcare still exists in the Philippines, alongside state-funded ones.
Of recent Social Medicine had proven that it doesn't work for the people that are taxed the heaviest, lower-middle, middle and upper middle class in the UK.
The quality of Healthcare has already started to suffer in America. Takes months now to get a appointment to see a doctor and they just want to get people in and out as fast as possible. 3 to 4 months to see a doctor now. Just like the communist counties!
I bet a majority isn’t okay with paying nearly 60% of their income to taxes lol
they will ... statism is a cancer of society, once it has taken hold it is only a matter if time before government this and government that has bread enough slaves.
I live in denmark, you have no idea how slave like hive minded people are here, its horrible.
I'm not okay paying 40%+ now for being "self employeed" according to the Gov. I had to create a susbisderary company just to not get taxed to shit.
In my country you pay 20%, its basically present so the poor and unfortunate can get treatment, or for your basic needs, and to make the old and sick people medication cheaper.
You can go to paying clinics for better faster treatment.
If being human cost 20% of my payment, im okay with it.
Im not a social darwinist monster.
@@grosslittlegoblin1358 Great, then there is no reason for anyone to violently extort you since you are ok with it (but they still do, just try and say no and see what happens)
Just remember, you being a good person does not grant you, or anyone else, the right to violently force others to pay for what you want.
You can only be generous with your own money, not others.
Taxation is theft.
Jesse Collins Why not removing some investment from weapons to health care as Europe.
Hey FreedomToons. Hypothetically if someone was to make a debunked video of one of your Debunkers vids, would you in turn make a Debunkers video of the debunking vid of the original Debunkers episode?
*_*INCEPTION HORNS BLARE*_*
Rebunkers and then Redebunkers?
Perhaps he would on a topic he hasn't decided on dogmatically sticking to an extreme on.
now i want to see this
Debunkception
Two months ago I broke my arm. It is the first time I have had any significant medical condition in my life. The cost of my surgery to install a metal plate in my arm was over $20,000. With financial aid with the hospital, I was expecting to figure out some payment plan with them but the hospital's financial aid covered the entire bill. I got what I would assume is relatively the best care anyone could get and I worry that a singe payer system would eliminate charity such as what I got and the care level would be reduced.
I recommend people consider things like financial aid when it seems insurance costs too much or you cannot afford a medical bill. Hospitals may cover it for you or figure out a payment plan that may even be interest free.
People who want single payer, socialized healthcare, don't know or believe financial aid exists.
Negotiating a cash price also makes a difference. One of my friends had to have his gall bladder out. Hospital quoted some astronomical price, so he asked how much if I just pay you right now? $4000 out the door.
With single payer you wouldn’t have to beg for charity to cover your medical expenses.
Job Creator 1. The government can screw up a lot more than charity becuse you have one group is Ted of many groups. And 2. It’s been proven that the pepole in contrys with government healthcare tend to have very long wait times compared to the USA.
That guy's probably having a heart attack now that Trumps president again, lol. That is, if that guy lasted this long
Working ins insurance for nearly 20 years has taught me that the problem with the insurance market is not insurance companies but rather is government interference and bureaucracy.
I’m a personal trainer and yes I would prefer to train young healthy people because they’re low in liability compared to someone who’s old and unhealthy who may be high on a liability risk factor. Aside from people being born with preexisting conditions, a lot of people do need to take charge of their own health before starting this discussion. And oh wait, the US has an obesity epidemic. That’s how I know my argument isn’t false, bias of republican propaganda.
I'm a personal trainer also. And I 100% agree with you
Last time I was this early the Debunker's hair wasn't grey.
I still remember the argument that Cuba’s health care was top notch. They literally don’t even have bedsheets or clean surgical tools. These people are absolutely insane.
The only word I have for the people that say that is "cringe"
If only we could get this series national exposure! Sharp, relevant, informative and funny as hell! You are helping, my friend. Please keep up the good work. Pure genius!:)
Yes! I love The Debunkers. Them and Debates With Strawmen are my favorite series of yours.
I stopped another freedom toons for this
Only when he can give your money to someone else.
He drew Bernie Sanders with a smile. I don't think I've ever seen Bernie Sanders smile.
nexus1g A rich guy once got eaten alive by crocodiles, after Bernie pushed him over the ledge, I saw a twinkle in his eyes and a a slight smirk.
he smiles when he has your money in his hand
He has a yt channel if you leave a similar comment someone will call you a racer lol
Angry Bernie
It’s more of a dupeing delight kinda look
Ok the point that our care is so much better is flawed. I looked at the link in the description, the who report is from 2000, but even with that logical flaw, we were ranked number 1 in health spending and responsiveness, but not necessarily quality of care. Just because Canada is no better doesnt mean other countries have it better. Examples include Switzerland, Australia, Germany, Singapore, France, and the UK as well. Each of these nations have very different solutions to their healthcare issue, but all of them prove better end outcomes than the US. And the idea that they benefit from the US health system existing is only due to our high amount of pharma companies, which would not be compromised by adapting a system of healthcare like those other nations. There is no reason the US must pay the highest prices for care and the companies take advantage of inelastic demand of healthcare. I understand the merits of a fully free market system of healthcare and crowding out of health consumption by the gvt, but its unproven in the modern day for such a system to work, and the crowding out is due to an inability to negotiate drug prices, as we can't just say 'fine, i wont buy medicine then'.
Also, i am for MDs not being required for all services and less requirements for medical licensing to increase the supply of doctors, solving the supply issue that supposedly everyone else has.
That bar graph at 1:28 does not help this dude's case--the equally big "top concern" was dissatisfaction with government! Yeah, so we should combine the two biggest problems into an even bigger problem. We should definitely let the government that people are so dissatisfied with manage healthcare. Did he really think highlighting the bar that says "healthcare" would make people ignore the equally big government bar?
SnowWonder Ya. I noticed that too!
I know right!
I used to be an insurance producer. Insurance itself is a scam and should stay in the private sector. The whole point of insurance is to insure those that won't cost you money. Hint, hint. This is why your car insurance sky rockets after a speeding ticket.
It kills me that people want social healthcare. They are beyond help.
Insurance is one if not the only business model where both the business and customer are gambling to screw out the other person. The customer is betting that something bad WILL happen so that they get more out of the insurance company than what they paid into it. The insurance company bets that it can take more money from their customers than what they pay out and have the army of statisticians to accurately price that bet to achieve a profit in the same way a casino works and lawyers to weasel their way out of paying what the customer thinks they are owed at every opportunity.
@@ColinTherac117 EXACTLY!!!! The more healthy suckers you get. The more money you make......don't even get me started on all the clauses, deductibles and fine print that is conveniently overlooked when forcing the public to buy it. That's where the insurance companies protect themselves while stealing your money.
I know that's how it does work, but it's not how it should work. Insurance should be like a group checking account. Everybody puts money in and the bank invests what it safely can to earn a profit while still having some liquid assets in case someone needs to withdraw money. It's a safer and longer term system that doesn't rely on gouging your own customers. It also lacks the dramatic growth investors want to see before buying stock, and thus has been abandoned for short-sighted high profit garbage.
Teeny Anderson But what happen with the people that can’t even afford insurance?
@@emilioperez6888 lots of options.
There are private clinics that work with low in come-on insurance patients. They work on a sliding fee scale and only charge you a certain percentage of your taxable income. For example. It cost my husband $1,800 usd with insurance for a medical problem. A few months later, he had another incident (our insurance dropped us and we had to use the redimedi) and it cost us $500 through them. They based it off our income.
This is also another example as to why insurance is a scam. If it stays in the private sector. It will give you this option but the moment that insurance is forced, then doctors will be forced to HAVE to charge more......obamacare was borderline forcing private doctors out of business. Thank God it's over.
I live in Canada, have for all my 35 years of life
A few years ago I decided to get an improperly healed broken hand looked at, haha, yeah they won't do anything for me.
Not to mention, I need to purchase private health insurance through work (about 130.00 a month) as well as further health insurance in order to keep my mortgage (250.00 a month)
On top of the fact that more than half my earnings are taken from me by one form of taxation or another.
1:28 did anyone else notice the graph showing Healthcare and then Dissatisfaction with Government being the top 2 public concerns? Kind of like the whole "guns are bad, we need to send the men with guns to take all the guns" argument.
At 3:43 when the guy tries to paint Canada as a good example of his system working, I can debunk that myself, waiting lists for medical treatment are like a century long, and the care you do get is so bad it’s better you don’t even go.
Genuine question, would you rather healthcare you can actually afford or to be denied coverage and go bankrupt
As a Canadian, i can say our system SUUUUUKS! I pay into a system that basically benefits no one. If we had a system like in Poland it would be better. There ARE people who need help affording health care, and thwre are people who can afford to pay for it, but in Canada i’m not allowed to buy private healthcare wven though I CAN afford it, which means that when I need it i end up forced to go to the ineffective hospital, taking up time and soace for people who actually NEED the “free” healthcare, and literally NO ONE benefits. I don’t even MIND paying into the system to provide those who need it, except that having basically zero access to private care means a slower less effective system for everyone. It also means our doctors have no financial incentive to be better, just the bare minimum. Let me pay my own way, let the public system have less people who don’t need its help, make sure doctors give time to public while being allowed to practice privatly, thus allowing them to make SOME money above their state mandated salary, and take some of the weight iff the public system and maybe it can provide those who needed with more quality service. Cutting everyone’s legs off is not making us equal, its making us all crippled. Everyone receives more value with a private and public system. No one receives value when the public system is ineffective for everyone equally
One of the main reasons I left for the US tbh.
I'm going to share the hell out of this.
I really like the pavlovian bell noise when the guy says something he wants you to think is good
I love The Debunkers. Where's the regular open which introduces them?
We have nationalized health care in Canada. It has its benefits and its faults.
It's not free. When people say free health care I laugh. You have to lie to get decent care(I needed a hip resurfacing and waited over a year for the surgery) because apparently being in constant pain is not a prerequisite for a nationalized system. I had suffered for over 30 years with osteoarthritis. I was very happy with the outcome. I am now pain free and back to being active.
That's one of the benefits.
However, since I've been paying into said system for over 30 years, I basically paid for the surgery out of my own pocket. That's one thing people have to remember about nationalized systems. Statistically you're less likely to need serious health care until you are older so the longer you pay into it the more likely you will need it the older you get. So the thousands you've been paying into it can be utililzed when you are older.But that's not how it works in the long run. That money is often not there when you need it because subsequent governments spend your taxes on different things. So, I was told the average wait time for my surgery was 120 days. I actually waited 369 days.
Very Malthusian, in a rather perverted way.
People fear getting cancer in Canada(as they do in these other nationalized systems). Nationalized systems are fine for minor ailments and minor injuries. For everything else...it's a win or a lose situation.
And now add the complex stuffs like heart disease, obesity, and depression, all of which are pretty big issues in the States.
@@alexanderchristopher6237 Absolutely.
@@alexanderchristopher6237 There's also the issue of the affluent in Canada going to the head of the line...or seeking first rate health care in...you guessed it...The States. Happens all the time.
The best way to describe the problem with American healthcare is that we have just the perfect balance between government involvement and a market system to have the benefits of neither.
True.
The US set a limit on how many doctors are allowed to be trained, education is more expensive because of government subsidising colleges,
Insurance companies are not allowed to compete across state lines,
You are not allowed to sell certain drugs that studies have shown to work ( LSD has been proven to help with ptsd )
And if you wanna develop your own drug, it takes a decade ~ and millions of dollars in fees.
For the record, the people of Colorado voted on whether they wanted universal healthcare in the state. Nearly 80% voted against it.
America is a joke. They’re voting against their best wishes. Also where’s the proof
Camryn VB Canada and UK
@@justnoob8141 lol they're not spending near as much as the US.
Camryn VB Yeah, good luck with your stage 1 cancer in Canada and UK then, hope won't go stage 4 when you finally see a doctor
Camryn VB also, even more debt and tax! You guy fucking love it! Debt and tax. Debt and tax. Debt and tax. Debt and tax! Yeah, baby! More debt and tax! Who hate debt and tax?
Anyone else find it funny that the second biggest concern was "dissatisfaction with government"?
In Australia we have a Medicare for all kind of thing going, BUT everyone here hates it because it’s so slow
Unfortunately some people here in the U.S. only care about costs not quality.
As a Canadian who had to wait 6 months to see a specialist last time, I would like to say you hit the nail on the head. It's nice that the price is less because of health care being "free" here, but the quality of service is not great and wait times are nuts sometimes.
1:43 watching and hearing this after couple months after the assassination attempt this really feels like a threat
Last year I had a bad seizure that almost killed me. I still owe ten thousand dollars for an MRI that was ultimately useless. I can't afford that on my salary. It's showing up as bad credit.... I don't know what the right solution is, or what the right combination of solutions is, but we need to make some changes. The average joe can't afford the mess we're in and the mess we were in before ACA. Medicare for all may not be the best idea, but it's a start.
Maybe. I humbly acknowledge lack of expertise in this area and look forward to learning from both sides.
It's also worth noting, regarding the Gallup poll that resulted in more than half of respondents being supportive of universal healthcare, that converting a couple thousand of respondents to "most Americans" is highly disingenuous. It's not a guarantee that most Americans want something, but only that using a statistical probability formula we expect with a certain margin of error that this will apply to most Americans based on our confidence that our sample is properly indicative of America as a whole. Much less wieldy but actually accurate.
Polls have been used to gauge public opinion for decades and generally do a fantastic job at doing so. If you want to bring up the 2016 election, keep in mind that polls used for elections are based on the popular vote, which Clinton won. Sorry, but I always have to bring that up because I know a favorite tactic of the right is to bring up the 2016 election results in order to discredit polling.
Also keep in mind that bullshit predictions made by douchebag journalists -- like when the Huffington Post put Clinton at a 98% chance to win in 2016 -- is not the same as polling data
@@OfficiallyUnofficialKamala2024 So why were the polls predicting the popular vote, when Clinton herself knew that only the electoral college mattered? It wasn't a surprise.
@@shorewall I'm sorry but I literally don't understand your question at all. Also please keep in mind that my defense of polling data should not also be translated as a defense of Hillary Clinton, whom I despise
@@OfficiallyUnofficialKamala2024 I'm very libertarian centrist. If you imagine a graph, that goes from -10 to +10 on both axes, I'm a 0 x, -10 y.
With my politics out of the way, it's very true when Benjamin Disraeli said, "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." Pew Research can be quoted as writing, " *Relying largely on opinion polls* , election forecasters put Clinton's chance of winning at anywhere from 70% to as high as 99%." That's derived from the data to determine her chance of winning, not just regarding the popular vote, and was relying on the polling data. You claim that polls have done a fantastic job gauging public opinion; however, most all polls are never tested against the broader audience of all of America, so it's nearly impossible to know how accurate their samples actually are in relation to the bigger picture. Data science, especially sampled data of impossibly complex systems, depends significantly on making a number of assumptions. Data science is only marginally a science at all. Data science attempting to control for extremely complex systems, such as human opinion, has been shown to be wrong often enough that you can't depend on it to model reality dependably. It can be used as an indicator, but only with significant reservations as to its accuracy. It's not being anti-science, it's being real. You talk to any data scientist worth their salt, and they will always very carefully word what the data indicate and show significant reticence to nail anything down with conviction.
IT'S A YOOMAN RIGHT
Yachts are a yooman right!
OOFF COOUURRSSE!
GOOOGLE IT!!
Tommy John McAllister ....and thaaa one perrrceeentt!!!!!
5 physicians in my small town stopped practicing since Obamacare started. What good is insurance if no one is available to provide the service? Medicare for all is the same.
Regardless of where one falls in the healthcare debate, one need not complicate things with regards to whether or not the Canadian approach of Medicare for all, with no other option is, or is not a terrible idea.
If you look at almost every other industrialized nation that has instituted some form of universal healthcare, Canada is one of only 11 that have gone so far as to restrict choice to one option and one option only. Canadians pride themselves on a system that give everyone the same coverage across the board, whether one needs those services or not, yet also seem oblivious to how morally reprehensible their system truly is.
To explain this, let’s compare the process of acquiring referral for specialty care. Putting aside wait times, the process is the same in the US and Canada, but the major dichotomy between the two is that in the US, you can pay out of pocket to see a specialist without getting a referral from a primary care provider (PCP). In contrast, this isn’t allowed in Canada, as the Canadian Medical Act made all forms of first party and third party transaction for “medically necessary care” illegal. To be fair, you can book an appointment with a specialist in Canada without a referral, but 99.9% of the time, you’ll be turned down, due to lower reimbursement without a referral and the added investigative duties usually relegated to the PCP, that the specialist now becomes responsible for.
While the above is technically something one would likely encounter in the US as well, at least one still has the option to do so, assuming one should find a specialist whom agrees to do so. In contrast, Canadians without a PCP end up in a very scary gray area, where you don’t have a PCP, thus you can’t get a referral to a specialist, thus they’re effectively locked out of accessing anything except urgent cares and ERs for their healthcare needs.
Worse still, even if you desperately need specialist services, rather than offering you a choice like almost every other industrialized country (including the US) does, Canada basically says “tough shit” and insists on perpetuating a pathological healthcare system, of which is rooted in the concept of pure equity and keeping everyone bound to the same lowest denominator in terms of quality, to the point where the government would rather people die waiting for care, than offer them an option that may potentially offer them better results.
Given the above, is it any surprise that the rest of the industrialized world with universal healthcare systems fancy a two tiered approach that offers choice, with varying degrees of quality, rather than a one size fits all approach, run by a group of bureaucrats, whom vomit at the mere thought of people having any magnitude of choice, or variations in quality?
I used to believe in universal healthcare. I mean, if someone is sick, why shouldn’t they get help. It just seemed cruel to let someone die because they just don’t have money, I thought. Until someone asked me plain and simple. “Is healthcare a human right?”. Let’s just say I’ve done some growing up since then. 😂
In the richest country ever in human history..... It should be!
@@j3v1N just because a country is rich, doesn’t healthcare should be cheap. Clear sign a adolescent who doesn’t know how economics works
Oh, how I wish for the good old days, where it seemed like private vs public healthcare would be a major issue in 2020.
Guys I’m big dum
I just now realized that they live in a bunker cause they are the deBUNKERS
I would love to see transparency back in our healthcare system. It's not right that I get a routine knee surgery and no one can tell me how much it costs! But when I went to my dentist for a root canal they could tell me up front how much I would pay for each phase of the treatment. I could then take the information to other dentists and essentially make my own choice as to how to proceed with my treatment. How is that a bad thing. Oh, wait, I know.
"Oh, but we don't want to discourage people from visiting the doctor." Well, maybe you should! A lot of things people go to the ER for is ridiculous! While agree with the rule that ERs should never be allowed to turn people away, I think knowing prices up front would discourage people from using the ER for things that they could wait and see a regular physician for. Or using it as a physician office instead of researching and committing to a physician.
"But, but we don't know what's wrong with them!" No, you don't. But when I go to my mechanic, they tell me, "You'll spend x amount on diagnosis." Once they find the problem, they tell me what the problem is, how much it would cost to fix and if they're good, if there's any options i might have to save cost. And guess what? I can take that information and research other mechanics to see if there is a better value or price. Why is this not a thing in health care?! In fact, Millennial and Gen Z have little to no brand loyalty and are more inclined to research and have no qualms about switching when they find something they like more. Rather than the government fighting this, they should step aside and let it happen! Let them shop around to see if they can get their treatment cheaper.
"Then they'll just choose the cheaper price or not get treated at all!" No research has ever shown that people simply choose the cheaper price for goods or service. And if people choosing not to be treated, should be incentive for hospitals and medical care providers to provide better service. Maybe they shouldn't have doctors charging hundreds of dollars for poking their head in the door and asking a patient how they're doing. Maybe they shouldn't be charging for having "oxygen tanks ready" that they don't actually use. Maybe they should consider more things overhead costs with a fixed rate as opposed to direct costs with a variable rate. It might give incentive for hospitals to offer experimental treatments, especially for terminally ill, and researchers to come up with more effective treatments.
I can go on and on (as clearly I have) how many problems could be solved by just simple transparency.
Thank You. A thousand times, thank you. It's funny that you should bring up the dentist example, because that's actually the situation I'm in right now. For years I've been putting off serious dental work that really needed to be attended to (several teeth that were so badly decayed that they kept me up at night, and on a few occasions became so badly infected they sent me to the ER). My (parent's) insurance would not cover it, my parents either would not or could not help, and as I was only a teen with a part time job I certainly couldn't afford it myself. I came into some money recently when I reached adulthood and finally went to a dentist's office to get an estimate for the total treatment costs: $16,700. I was floored. Even with the money I had acquired, it was barely something I could pay, and would completely eat up the money I'd set aside for school. Fortunately, I decided to not take the bill sitting down and went to several other dentists and asked them to give plans and estimates of their own - and every single one of them ended up being cheaper, and by cheaper, I mean by thousands of dollars. My current treatment plan has a high end estimate of $10,500 and a low end of as little as $5,000 - less than a third of the original price!. That's still a lot for someone like me, but if I work hard I can potentially pay it off within a year or even less.
And if you think that's crazy, get a load of this: I have a few friends overseas, and according to them I'm STILL getting ripped off! Based on their knowledge of the cost of out of pocket dental care in their country, I'm still paying almost twice as much as some Europeans would. That should tell you just how inflated U.S. health care is. The debate of Universal Health Care vs Private Insurance is ignoring the real problem: the fact that either of them need to exist in the first place! Regardless of whether the bill is being fronted by the government or private insurance, the medical industry is free to price gouge without consequence because large companies and bureaucracies can afford to pay out way more than an individual ever could. If the medical industry were more transparent and fought for business the way other industries do, they might start lowering their prices down to something that an average person can pay, drastically reducing the need for this entire debate.
As a veteran, I can't help but notice the huge military budget we have yet everything the military purchases is discount grade.
I feel like there is some squandering being done that could be better used in a basic Medicare system...
If you need a better doctor and can afford one, awesome go to a private practitioner...
Other than that why wouldn't we at least try to save people with a bare minimum of medical care
So when you say that the USA is number one in quality of care, do you mean just how fast someone can get care?
I've been hearing and ill try and find the study later, that the USA is 37th place in the world for general health of the population.
Now that I look at your reference I see that the USA is number 1 in costs, but overall health care performance is 37th. Sure we might be doing alot of research but our treatment outcomes are not necessarily number 1. Sure there may not be only one reason for this discrepancy of cost vs outcome but there still is a problem we need to solve. Not saying it's to get a single healthcare insurance. Also where is all the money going? All to research? Faster times to see a Doctor? No idea.
37th in general health because everyone is eating shitton of fried food n shit. so ya kno XD.
@@ManCheat2 That adds to it ya.
Our education system is similar in that the results are dependent on many outside variables. There can be excellent resources, skilled and caring teachers and principals, and quality instruction materials; but if the kids come to class hungry, or sleepy, or stressed from family events, don't have consistent and available love and attention, haven't developed self-discipline or adequate social skills, are not able to speak English fluently, or have no one at home that is able or willing to invest time monitoring or encouraging or helping with homework or to reinforce academic and social/emotional development, the educational results will not be reflected in the quality of care provided. Health care results are influenced by lifestyle choices, exercise levels, diet, stress, genetics, diet, sleep, alcohol or tobacco use, drug use, societal inflence (eg married men live longer than unmarried, loneliness has negative health outcomes), and the willingness of a person to follow medical advice.
America is only ranked 37th in overall health care performance
Class starts in five minutes but video....ugh why do ya do this to me
It would be easy to offer free insurance to all when u dont have a viable military. How about we stop sending billions in aid to other countries and pay off our national debt. A single payer systen would ruin the economy.
Brilliant just brilliant 👌💯👏
@1:28 LMFAOOO right next to healthcare is “dissatisfaction with government” why tf would he add that if he’s trying to advocate for even more federal government authority and overreach😭😭😭
"Medicare for all is likely to be the major domestic issue in the 2020 election"
2020 says hi.
I do think this guy is very intelligent. BUT, he often (I've seen a lot of his stuff) get all the facts right, then comes to the completely wrong conclusion.
Freedomtoons or the guy freedomtoons is debunking?
I´ve checked that WHO source you quoted but that does not seem to support your statement of: number one in quality of care. It does apparently have the best responsiveness and the least amount of capita spend in international dollars. But according to the source you quote you rank 37th on overall performance of your healthcare system. That does include "fairness" so there is that. But I do not see any quality stat being linked in that table.
Yeah, what's up with that? If the numbers are rankings and not scores, Germany, France, and Canada all rank higher than the U.S. in "Overall Health System performance. I don't usually disagree with him, but the stats he linked don't seem to support his position.
Because they're lying. These jokers have no actual arguments
@@stupidcommentmaker the UN?
Your Toons are sooo informative. You do fantastic research!
wait wait wait.....healthcare and government dissatisfaction are at the same level? So people thought government run healthcare was a solution? This isnt algebra class. Two negatives does not make a positive.