US Healthcare Through the Eyes of a Briton
"...........treatment then that means the burden of healthcare would be on those that work hard and don't depend on others to survive" just shows the uncaring, I'm all right Jo, attitude of the naysayers. I'm a Brit, proud to be in a society that took the idea of universal health care through to implementation. I worked hard, long hours, away from my family, for 30 years, paying around 50% of my income in taxes and NI - I had a good job! I did not mind (well a little bit) as I had peace of mind knowing that I, and ALL my family, would be aided should we require it. I paid insurance for medical assistance - National Insurance. Everyone that can afford it pays medical insurance in the UK - National Insurance. Insurance is that, to insure against the possibility of need. There is no small print. It does not run out when you most need it, or when it is deemed that you have used it up. That is the British way.
Americans that can afford to pay for private medical insurance do so with the knowledge that, should they need it, it may not be enough to cover their needs. The system is geared towards the rich. They, and only they, can live without fear or doubt that they will be catered for in their hour (or year, or decade) of need. Those that are below the 'rich' status should wake up, smell the air, and understand that this situation is tantamount to oppression. The US fights against oppression overseas. It is a part of their constitution to fight against religious persecution. Why cannot they see that their medical insurance system flies in the face of basic human rights; is medical oppression; and does not actually do what it says on the tin.
What message does it send out to the world? But then again, do they care?
humagaia, Feb 10, 2012