Remember also Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Canada, UK, Austria, Germany, etc. The US is the only First World country that has millions of citizens uninsured and who have to pay out of pocket (or credit card) when medical conditions arise.

@CRBG I know. I am dealing with a broken elbow. I also paid when I had a fractured rib. Socialized Medicine never functioned per say at least with some exceptions.

@AlvarezGalloso So sorry about your elbow. I live in Canada, and broken limbs are one of those conditions that gets treated right away....no wait times and free of charge (our taxes pay for it). It's when we get to the very specialized surgeries that we get into long wait times (still "free" though). I hope you get well soon!

@CRBG Thank you. Right now, I am between doctors who do not want to attend since this is happened during work. The people in work send me to a private hospital and the hospital sends me back to work. I might do my own rehabilitation and treatment.

@CRBG The Scandinavian Countries (Norway, Denmark, Sweden, etc.) are NOT Socialist. They are VERY heavily taxed Democratic Monarchies with Capitalist economies that use those high tax rates to pay for their extravagant social programs. These tax rates are from a 47% low to over 60% starting at a very low income. This does not include their VAT taxes and high taxes on gasoline. Do you really want to pay upwards of 70% of your income in taxes? Especially when there are those who are "unwilling" to work and will get these same "benefits" as well?

@Dagdthompson I live in Canada, where the tax rate is between 30% and 40% (depending on your income), and we get free, universal healthcare, paid for by our taxes in addition to all other services that Americans get from their taxes. We don't have to charge a 70% tax rate to get Medicare for all. BTW, if you're paying 70% of your income on taxes, then that's a socialist state, regardless of what they call themselves and regardless of the level of "capitalism" that is allowed

@CRBG Do you know how many MRI machines are in Canada? Why do I ask? The simple reason is that many orthopedic surgeries require the diagnostic imaging of an MRI. For instance, when I had a Torn Meniscus, I had an MRI done in order for the surgeon to see if there was any other damage to my knee. The same was done to my shoulder to determine I had a Torn Labrum after I had a Grade 2 Separation of my shoulder from a Bicycle accident. Here are the Statistics, in the United States there are 37.56 MRI machines per 1 million people, whereas in Canada there are 9.97 Machines per one million. This means a much longer wait for diagnostic images for, say a torn ACL, or other images. This also is true for many other forms of diagnostic imaging machines, i.e. PET scanners, Computerized Axial Tomography (also known as CT or CAT scans), both of which can be used for Brain scans or Cancer screenings. Longer waits for those can be catastrophic. But you keep thinking that your government has your best interests in mind. I not only don't believe that, I know that my government doesn't care about me either, and that is why I don't want the government involved in the Health Care industry. For as the pre-eminent Philosopher Ringo Starr once said, "Everything the Government touches, turns to Crap!"

[statista.com]

@Dagdthompson I know there's a scarcity of MRI machines in Canada, and people are placed on a waiting list. That's bad. However, it's on a needs basis, so if your case is deemed urgent, you'll jump the queue. No one dies or suffers needlessly. Everyone gets taken care of...eventually, and no one pays. Our taxes (which aren't that much higher than American taxes) pay for all services that Americans get PLUS free medical care. When I was pregnant, every ultra sound, blood test, visit to the doctor's office, and the labour itself was free. When my husband needed a hernia surgery, he got it within one month, and it was free.

Is it feasible in the long term? Probably not.

Is it more humane than a system where a visit to a hospital can potentially make you lose your house due to medical debt? Yes.

Is it less expensive in Canada? Yes.

@CRBG That is a myth.

A lone voice in the wilderness.

@CRBG I'm opposed to the idea, in general, but the insurance industry consumes something like 20% of "care" dollars and provides nothing. The system we have is disjointed and broken. I don't want a federal program but I'm well aware it's coming. We might as well attempt to make sure it's functional.

Here is the problem with "Medicare for all" in a nutshell. There are three things that people are looking for in Health Care: (1) Universality, (2) Affordability, and (3) Quality of Care. However, the best Universal Health Care systems you will only accomplish two of those items. It can be Universal and have good Quality, but it won't be affordable, or it can ration care and be affordable but it won't be universal. Obamacare failed miserably at getting any of those. It was not Universal, the affordability of it quickly got out of hand, and since very few doctors take it, the quality became miserable. So the question should be how do we best deal with those three things. Look at Lasik eye care. 20 years ago, it cost an exorbitant amount of money to perform Lasik eye surgery, and insurance wouldn't cover it. Now, insurance still doesn't cover it, but advances in that have brought the price down tremendously to where many people can afford it, because while 20 years ago it cost thousands of dollars per eye, now it costs only a few hundred. In the same way, insurance when it was first proposed, it was only meant to cover extraordinary/catastrophic items, i.e. Heart Attack, Stroke, Cancer, broken bones, etc. however, today we use it for going to the doctor for a checkup or physical. That isn't what insurance was meant for originally. When I was young, my parents would pay the doctor in CASH for an office visit. We should do that today. It would make people see how the money is being spent.

Another problem is this: The definition of a Consumer is someone or something that purchases a good or a service. Then when we go to a Doctor, the insurance pays for the office visit. So, who is the consumer in that scenario? It is ACTUALLY the Insurance Company. That is another reason people should pay for an office visit. Further, who is the Consumer of the Insurance? If your employer purchases the insurance for you, then the Consumer of the insurance is your employer. This is why the health care industry is so screwed up. NOWHERE in this scenario is the person who needs the care given to them, the actual consumer. That is why we need to move back to a market based system, where the person purchases their own insurance for catastrophic needs, and pays for office visits themselves. Then prices would come down. However, this would REQUIRE getting government OUT of the Health Care Industry, and unfortunately, I don't see that happening. For although, they have the Anti-Midas Touch they can't help themselves. As the pre-eminent Philosopher Ringo Starr once said, "Everything the government touches, turns to Crap!"

@Dagdthompson We would have to insist on curbing malpractice insurance. The cost for doctors are usually 1/3 of their take, plus they are required by the insurance company to prescribe several unnecessary tests just to cover their butts, which in turn costs falls on the patient. Doctors are human, they are not God... they make mistakes but malpractice lawsuits have got out of hand

How do you make it more affordable? Most people can't afford an emergency hospital visit or a necessary surgery. Many stay in debt for the rest of their lives or have to sell their homes to pay their medical bills. Something's gotta give.

@CRBG Lowering drug cost. Big pharma has a big lobby in the US and elected reps are getting paid through campaign contributions. Until we reign in the lobbyist I don't see it happening .

So public education (K-12) is a right, but healthcare isn't?

@CRBG we have emergency care and special assistance for the indigent. Between charity and federal programs there will always be help for the truly needy. A general purpose free for all is counter productive. Life Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness is the foundation of a free born society

@Taps Yes, the indigent get taken care of in the US. Medicare and Medicaid exist for them. However, there are millions who don't qualify and who can't afford to pay for Emergency services or for doctor's visits because they don't have full-time jobs at companies that offer benefits. Millions work several part-time jobs. They are the working poor, and their pursuit of happiness is hampered by their inability to afford healthcare needs. One visit to the hospital can cost thousands of dollars that they simply don't have no matter how hard they work.

@CRBG I agree that basic health care should be reasonable and accessible. I believe the next level up from basic should be affordable. In the auto insurance industry, basic liability only policies will be drastically different than full coverage.

If 100% free housing, college, and medical becomes a reality, society as a whole will suffer

@Janeybird I can confirm, my wife was a medical biller for over 10 years. The financial aid departments exist (and did LONG before the ACA). Our local hospitals actually have an application printed on the back of every statement.

"Medicare for all" is the American term for what we Canadians call "Universal Healthcare". It doesn't pay for foreigners. It pays only for citizens and permanent residents.

@CRBG So you are asking if the US should implement Canada's Single Payer System?

@cRaZyTMG Yes

@cRaZyTMG I'll edit the question to clarify.

@CRBG Then I would have to say No.
The Canadian system is a collection of 14 difference jurisdictions each with its own overhead/administrative scheme and its own rules regarding what is covered and how coverage is provided. My province (NS) has regional boards under the provincial administration that forever seem to be studying the balance between centralized and regionalized service delivery. Wait times are off the scale and vary widely from region to region. Our local hospital has more administrative staff than it does care giving staff. Local ER's are closed with routine announcements on local radio because of doctor shortages. It is as if the objective is "How can we make this cost as much as possible." Local doctors and nurses are overworked and demoralized. The paperwork is unfucking believable. You can't get doctors to work where the people are and the local clinics have no ability to financially incentivize doctors to the point where clinics close upon a doctors retirement rather than being sold to younger doctors . If you're going to the emergency room count on 4-10hrs waiting.
I'll stop now but keep in mind, Canada elite typical fly to the US for their treatment. As it costs nothing it isn't valued. Ask any ER, they see the same people every few weeks.
I'll stop now but No, I'd have to say do not implement Canada single payer system.

@cRaZyTMG The one advantage the Canadian system has over the US is the minimization of overhead. You're saying that's not even true either? Awful. Canadian healthcare helped kill my uncle - heart surgery was scheduled for months later (after his funeral). And they had a go at my Dad - "we don't have an xray here. We'll requisition one. Should be here in a couple of weeks." Operated on the next day in the states. Canada's healthcare is great until you use it.

@RobBlair I fully support a universal access system:
Canada has 14 systems that does more rationing than it does provisioning of healthcare. As you can see from some of the other comments on this thread, it's also corrupt in that having a "friend" in your local system is the only way to "jump the queue". I have also NEVER left a child alone in the hospital (one nurse covering 12 bedridden patients) and had to resort to calling a doctor a liar and screaming at a hospital manager to get my dying mother the correct medication. I've known people that have died waiting for a specialist appointment and for god sake don't have a metal breakdown on a weekend - only monday to friday mental health services locally. It is free but not much better than nothing.

@cRaZyTMG Thanks. I concur with a lot of this. I had to wait in a children's emergency ward with my 5-year old son for 13 hours before seeing a doctor. I was livid. I was told that I must have "slipped through the system". I will never go to another emergency ward in Canada ever again....unless I'm shot.

@RobBlair So sorry about your uncle!! This is horrific. Glad your dad got taken care of in the US. But US costs are unaffordable....for most people. It provides excellent care, but they'll take your house if you can't pay.

@CRBG The golden goose laying golden eggs. Our US medical system stands at the pinnacle of worst cost possible with a "cheap" socialist medical system on one side (grab the golden egg) and a free market system (grab the goose and strip it of golden feathers) on the other. I say "cheap" because it won't be. Just hidden with little to no innovations coming (no more eggs). Free markets push prices down under competition and promotes innovation (eggs) under profit motive.

Retired Major General and they still made him wait. One of his exes had no problems using the system for plastic surgery though.

@Janeybird Of course it's ok. I wouldn't have it any other way. Foreigners can purchase their own travel insurance (or private insurance in Canada).

So do police services, fire truck services, public education, etc. They cost money, and most taxpayers are willing to fund them through taxes. Why not healthcare?

@CRBG $31,000,000,000,000,000 over 10 years for something the vast majority of Americans already have? No thanks

@CRBG Police and fire protection is provided at the local level, not federal. And not everyone has immediate access. When it comes to healthcare, I don't want some bureaucrat deciding when, where and to what level I get my care. That is my personal responsibility and should be others. You're comparing grapes to watermelons.

@CRBG, for me it's not about 'why not healthcare'? If the government came up with a system of universal healthcare that works, cool. I have ZERO confidence in the Government to do that. Police, fire probably work because the scale isn't near what healthcare is. EVERYONE uses healthcare (number of people using it grows when it's 'free to them' ). Few people actually use police or fire services. The schools are a big mess for so many reasons. We keep throwing money at it, and it doesn't help. Why doesn't it help?

@CRBG a difference I see between the Medicare for all institution, and the other services that you mention is the level of immediacy ( with the exception of schools, possibly).

Emergency services are exactly that, for emergencies. Healthcare isn't discussed as emergency related. It's more often discussed in terms of basic healthcare. Perhaps if the conversation of government run healthcare (see health insurance) related to its use in emergencies it could be a different matter.

@CalebBaeten Thanks for the distinction. So you'd get behind "Emergency-services-for-all"? That would require an increase in taxes to pay for it, but I think it would be worth it.

@CRBG I don't know for certain if I would be behind such a measure as I don't know if we have the kinds of info we need to objectively make an informed decision yet. I can say that I'm open to the discussion about that type of service, and discovering if it could be a viable option to place against the insanity that is out there right now.

@Janeybird Not in the US, no. You need to have health insurance (either private or through a full-time job) in order to get Emerg. services covered. I once had to use emerg after a rollerblading accident (when I was living in the US), and my bill was 1000.00 + dollars even though I declined the ambulance (which would have cost me $600.00 more). I didn't have insurance at the time.

@Janeybird For those who are only working part-time or contract? Getting a full time job, with benefits (health and dental insurance, 401 K, etc.), is difficult to obtain.

Part of the reason those prices go up like that is because Insurance companies are constantly squeezing payouts. Hospitals, doctors charge more to try to get the same amount they got before the last cut.

@chuckpo We would have to insist on curbing malpractice insurance. The cost for doctors are usually 1/3 of their take, plus they are required by the insurance company to prescribe several unnecessary tests just to cover their butts, which in turn costs falls on the patient. Doctors are human, they are not God... they make mistakes but malpractice lawsuits have got out of hand.

@Mortaqai They don't have good social "healthcare". They have socialized health insurance. As we know, Europe leans very socialist and it is further along than Canada in its "creeping" socialism. We, in Canada, have only had our health insurance single payer system for two generations and it is already showing cracks. Under our system It is illegal to buy private health care. The rich, and our politicians, that want immediate service purchase it in the US. Most, if not all, of the European systems allow you to purchase private healthcare, at least. But the wheels are coming off their systems as well. The big problem with socialized health insurance is trying to introduce innovative change. As soon as any change is mentioned the cry from the system is, "Hands off our healthcare!"

In the communist or totalitarian socialist states of course medicine just becomes another tool of the state where if you disagree with anything politically you get a free clinical diagnosis and a free ticket to the gulag archipelago.

@Mortaqai The gulag is next door to the Siberian salt mines. Close to good jobs!

@Mortaqai it's also an incredible book that very few of us (especially in the US) have ever read.

@CalebBaeten I haven't read it either. Its got three volumes. But, yes those that have mentioned they have read it say it is very thought provoking.