Quote Originally Posted by .blank cd View Post
This happens right now on the system we're already on. How do you suppose we remedy that?

If both people take a nasty spill and bleed out, which one do you let die?
Your solution doesn't solve anything then. It doesn't really improve anything, it just takes localized healthcare and puts it under a national regulation - and that is the established receipe for worse results at higher cost. In order for a single payer system to ever have a chance to be introduced, there needs to be a clear improvement over the existing system.

Again, I'm not against it - if it can deliver a better system. The current plans just don't offer that yet.

As for who to let die - both would die under the current system or your utopian one. Everyone dies eventually. However, both would receive the same emergency care. We aren't talking about emergency care though - we are talking about healthcare in regards to standarizing the normalized care that individuals receive. The difference is how much should one person pay towards another's care. Again, why should Person #2 be responsible for the needs of Person #1?