The counter argument around choice is also quickly falling to the wayside. With large monopolies taking over our healthcare space, we are being "steered" (and yes, in the health insurance industry we "steer" people to providers) to certain low cost providers. We have "access" to any provider, but most providers and services are very costly and we all have high deductible health plans (HDHP), that we can't actually go to most of the doctors we have "access" to nor can we get most of the services we have "access" to. The health insurance industry has now come up with a term for those people with health insurance who are unable to use it due to cost; they are called the under insured. Thus, I have "access" to life saving cancer treatment, but as recent analysis into cancer cost found, 42% of all people that paid for cancer treatment for two years or more end up burning through all their assets (and this analysis was done prior to the adoption of HDHP and CAR-T oncology therapy). So the argument of choice is a fallacy for the majority of the people getting medical services. They are absolutely limited by what and who their insurance will cover--and this list is getting smaller and smaller.
There's a bit of a fallacy with the per capita spend thing. Yes, we do pay the most per capita in health care spend, but a broader analysis showed that the reason the Brits (in particular the Brits because they were so close to us regarding health outcomes) spend more on other social safety nets so their spending does eventually equal ours, but theirs includes things like public transportation and other social services that are just too "commie" for us Americans to stomach. But the integrity of your argument still stands in that the Brits are able to fund so many more social services per capita than Americans largely due to our for profit system.
Excellent points. Which reinforce the argument that, increasingly, the bitter divide over taking health care public in the United States revolves around the wealthy, who are the greatest political contibutors and beneficiaries.
Now, to get really controversial - there has always been a faction within the Republican party, which has now taken it over, which is white supremacist and beholden to the wealthy elite. They block broader public access to both education and health care, as they actually want to keep a significant part of the population dumb and sick. Natural selection, I suppose.
Just as with Covid restrictions, they use 'freedom' and the 'Constitution' as their foils. The broad misuse of both are largely the crux of the divide. Freedom isn't about choice, which has been misconstrued as being able to do what the fuck the person wants. And continuing to misapprehend the Constitution to what they claim is a 'literal' interpretation - no such thing exists - instead of viewing it through the lens of contemporary norms - is a major stumbling block no one seems to have the courage to address.
The insanity of Covid behaviors and attitudes magnifies this. Donald Trump stated at the outset of Covid that it was a little flu. Then he said it would be all over in a few months. Then he said that deaths would peak at about 150,000. Now, America has hit over 800,000 deaths - a staggering number - and will hit 1,000,000 by spring.
And this is still open for debate??
Here in Ontario, we have what can only be considered a right wing conservative government. The brother of the late, notorious Mayor Rob Ford, star of late night television. And we have had the longest lockdown in the world, and still have significant restrictions. No one goes anywhere without a mask - period. Not on the subway, the bus, or a plane. Offices are still remote, and will be for at least the next 6 months. A Vax passport is in effect - and it is enforced. No one gets in a restaurant or bar without one. If the establishment violates that, it isn't just a fine. They get shut down.
That's becuase 'freedom' here means freedom from the actions of others that may cause you harm, and 'freedom' also means 'for the greater good'.
