[Jim Noble]

I’m going to countersignal here - just a bit.

I don’t want socialized medicine, because it will ruin a lifetime of my work.

HOWEVER

Once you are bought into it (which a majority of Americans are, in my opinion), you really can’t claim unlimited access to Other People’s Money.

That’s what we have now - a free market (sort of) paid for with OPM, which is obtained by money printing and debt. This cannot and will not go on.

So. Even in the UK, care is unlimited - IF YOU PAY FOR IT WITH YOUR OWN MONEY.

Unlike the USA, private doctors and private hospitals in the UK are under no obligation to see you or even to talk to you without payment. And your “free” healthcare provider will not pay for any care in the private system.

Therefore, most of the hospitals and most of the hospital staff doctors and GPs are part of the NHS. The NHS has a budget, which is not increased by a farthing because you need something that they provide. Every hospital, every “health area”, has to live on their budget.

Your MP can’t get you more than the NHS is budgeted to pay for. Your lawyer can’t do that for you, either.

The people who live there appear quite content with the tradeoffs. (I worked in a London teaching hospital in the 1970s). It’s always been my view that Americans would not tolerate it.

But, in the 1970s, Americans were not so dependent on Other People’s Money as they are now.

The right of Alfie, or you, or anybody in the US to have care for condition X is absolutely dependent on the willingness of someone, and at the end of the day the taxpayers, to pay for it. Right now, the process is dishonest and multiple tradeoffs are concealed. Eventually, the huge borrowing and money printing needed to make this all work will come crashing down.

In the UK, the process is explicit. Because it is explicit, it is ugly. But at least it’s not dishonest.

[Svartalfiar]

Unlike the USA, private doctors and private hospitals in the UK are under no obligation to see you or even to talk to you without payment. And your “free” healthcare provider will not pay for any care in the private system.

Therefore, most of the hospitals and most of the hospital staff doctors and GPs are part of the NHS. The NHS has a budget, which is not increased by a farthing because you need something that they provide. Every hospital, every “health area”, has to live on their budget.

This could, theoretically, be a somewhat decent way to do it. Limit the public health system to very basic/easy stuff only. However, we'd need a Constitutional amendment to even try it out here in any kind of national scale. Maybe do this just leave it at the state level 100%.

[Buckeye McFrog]

which is obtained by money printing and debt. This cannot and will not go on.

I am no longer so sure of this. If the wheels aren't coming off now with $21 trillion in debt, will they ever? Money is worth what people think it's worth. So long as they keep the population in a state of mass psychosis this can go on indefinitely. No one is going to rock the boat because everyone on earth fears the consequences if the music stops.

Everything we know about economics might be wrong.

[itsahoot]

So. Even in the UK, care is unlimited - IF YOU PAY FOR IT WITH YOUR OWN MONEY.

Clearly not true in the case of Alfie Evans because Italy was trying to take him to Italy for treatment at their own cost. Not only did the judge rule that they couldn't, he kept them from leaving a free country, proving that they are Subjects not Citizens.

The wise Judge would not allow Alfie to be transported because he might suffer a seizure as opposed to merely being painlessly starved to death.