Finland's government resigns over failed healthcare reform

Wrong!

It did NOT fail but you have failed to prove that happened!

UBI has been a resounding SUCCESS in Alaska for the past 40 years!

 

Im here to prove what DID happen.

And its NOT socialism.

 

Except that you have done nothing of the sort!

 

Don't confuse them with facts or intelligent perspective.

This almost certainly came from teh talk radio clickbait blog, and the BBC reference was added for cover. I doubt the OP ever read it. Right wingers do this all the time.

As you noted, there is no chaos. The government stays open, and the people who "resigned" will remain in their positions as "caretakers" for the three weeks that pass between now and the election.

But the talk radio blog accomplished its purpose.

It told its target audience what it already believed. Conformation bias is a core value in right wing media. Telling the audience what it want to hear pays well.

It mislead the OP into believing that a European country was "collapsing" because of universal health care, and provided the excuse he could use for peddling a popular, and largely false, right wing meme.

 

Universal health care takes different shapes in different countries. It has been around, in various forms, since the 1880's, so the world has nearly 150 years of experience with it.

It works.

We know that. It works in all the modern first world countries. It is far cheaper on a per capita and GDP basis than the American system. Indeed, health care cost TWICE as much in the United States as it does in any other country. And yet, the US ranks well down the list in quality of health care and outcomes.

I'm almost certain that you don't pay for your health insurnce, and have no idea what it actually costs (most Americans can't even make a reasonable guess how much their employers pay for their health insurance.

So much for the drivel about options. Most Americans take what their employers give them. It's the only choice they are offered. And they take the restrictions (including which doctor's they choose) with that non choice. I

You're probably still on your parents policy. If so, you can thank that "socialist" , Barack Obama.

 

Did I miss the Trump administration and heads of Congress resigning?

 

No. You didn't. Lol

 

SOCIALISM: Medicare for All Would Abolish Private Insurance. ‘There’s No Precedent in American History.’

 

Just walking away in a mess is a collapse. Then again, its Finland, so what does it matter?

 

Mexico is going to pay for it so we should be ok...hahaha

 

Nothing new about such things. All kinds of countries are constantly altering the healthcare benefits. They got 3 different parties that form the government and have +50% of the votes. That means 3 different parties need to agree on everything, or else they resign. It happens all the time. Doubt the dems and reps in the US know what it means to for a coalition with 2 other parties.

 

There is probably precedent in Soviet History.

In fact I just looked up a quick few facts...

The Bolsheviks announced in 1917 requirements for "comprehensive sanitary legislation", clean water supply, national canalisation and sanitary supervision over commercial and industrial enterprises and residential housing.[12] The All—Russia Congress of Nurses Union, founded in 1917, in 1918 had 18,000 members in 56 branches.[13] The People's Commissariat of Labour announced a broad and comprehensive list of benefits to be covered by social insurance funds in October 1917, including accident and sickness, health care, and maternity leave, but funding intended to come from employers was not available.[14] By December 1917 benefits were restricted[by whom?]to wage earners. Social insurance was re-organised as a five-tier sickness- and accident-benefit scheme which in principle included healthcare and medical treatment by October 1918. Ongoing problems in collecting contributions from employers continued at least until 1924.

In 1918 the Commissariat of Public Health was established.[citation needed] A Council of Medical Departments was set up in Petrograd. Nikolai Semashko was appointed People's Commissar of Public Health of the RSFSR and served in that role from 11 July 1918 until 25 January 1930. It[clarification needed] was to be "responsible for all matters involving the people's health and for the establishment of all regulations (pertaining to it) with the aim of improving the health standards of the nation and of abolishing all conditions prejudicial to health" according to the Council of Peoples' Commissars in 1921.[15] It established new organisations, sometimes replacing old ones: the All Russia Federated Union of Medical Workers, the Military Sanitary Board, the State Institute for Social Hygiene, the Petrograd Skoraya Emergency Care, and the Psychiatry Commission.

In 1920 the world's first state rest-home for workers was set up, followed in 1925 by the world's first health resort, in Yalta, for agricultural workers.[16][need quotation to verify]

Most pharmacies and pharmaceutical factories were nationalised[by whom?] in 1917 but it was not a uniform process. In 1923 25% of pharmacies were still privately owned. There was heavy reliance on imported medicine and ingredients. 70% of all pharmaceuticals and 88% of drugs were produced locally by 1928.[citation needed] Local pharmacy schools were established in many cities.[17]

In 1923 there were 5440 physicians in Moscow. 4190 were salaried state physicians. 956 were registered as unemployed. Low salaries were often supplemented by private practice. In 1930 17.5% of Moscow doctors were in private practice. The number of medical students increased from 19,785 in 1913 to 63,162 in 1928 and to 76,027 by 1932.[18] When Mikhail Vladimirsky took over the Commissariat of Public Health in 1930 90% of the doctors in Russia worked for the State.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_Russia#Early_Soviet_period

 

Why on Earth are you dredging Wikipedia for facts about the Soviet health care system in the 1920s to support an argument about in a discussion about health care systems in 21st Century? If you want to present a valid argument compare 'like with like' i.e. the modern US health system vs the health systems of other contemporary western nations with either free market systems like the US (if you can find one) or the various universal systems they use.

Oh, and for heavens sake do some more research and learn the differences between socialism and communism (they are NOT interchangeable). You might also start asking yourself why, the US has a nation wide public education system yet according to you somehow remains the worlds one true bastion of private enterprise while all the Western nations with public health systems are apparently socialist hell holes.

 

Apparently you've not heard. Most are struggling, if not failing.

NHS failure is inevitable – and it will shock those responsible into action

Sweden’s Trademark Universal Healthcare On Its Deathbed

'Sweden's healthcare is an embarrassment'

Ireland's healthcare system: What exactly are we doing wrong?

Our system was broken, but made EXPONENTIALLY worse with the ACA. It made Healthcare accessible to the poor but put healthcare out of reach for the majority of Americans. Rather than fix what was ailing our system, we increased how broken it was.

These are the same factos plaguing every nation who uses Universal Healthcare. That is why you see such long wait times and or delays on treatment.

They were trying to reform it and failed so resigning as there is no way to fundamentally fix it.

One of the reason why our cost is greater than any other nation is the US subsidizes research for the rest of the world. We have less restrictions here since we are a free market system, unlike Canada that restricts the price of prescription drugs. This forces the US to absorb the cost for high risk research but by the same token, we also generally have the most advanced technological and scientific processes and procedures over most of these other advanced nations with Universal Healthcare.

SJR - International Science Ranking

 

To say that other systems are failing is a big exaggeration. The real solution to these problems is to simply raise taxes in response to rising costs and to promote healthier living. Even if they raise taxes, they will still be spending far less on healthcare than we do and only have somewhat more public spending on healthcare than we do.

You mention wait times as a problem, but we have our own wait time problem, and many universal healthcare systems have wait times closer to ours. In addition, wait times don't take into account that Americans often put off care for years thanks to the higher cost and have a much higher rate of preventable disease.

We do subsidize drug costs, but that is because we are so bad at negotiating prices. More reason to switch to a universal healthcare system where we can negotiate down prices and stop getting ripped off.

 

All they have to do is fix it. If your a marine, you get universal healthcare. The rest of our country deserves it too. Just becasue you served does not give you the right over others. sorry...

 

As opposed to what? Medicare and Medicaid? Have you looked at the projections for what these programs are going to cost the US as a % of the US government budget in the next 10-20 years?

And as for your comment statement about 'forcing' the US to invest in medical research? Completely false. The rest of world doesn't 'force' the US to do anything. If investing in medical research wasn't profitable under the status quo then the capital involved would simply be invested elsewhere.

No-one is pointing a gun at the heads US investors and saying 'invest in medical research or else' (or for that matter the heads of those in charge of all the billions of dollars in foreign investment that piles into US medical research every year). They do so because they think can get a return on their investment. And that's despite the fact most of the Western World is smart enough to use bulk buying power to reduce the cost of medical products for their citizens.

So if the US wants to go on paying over the odds for it's health products (all in the name of 'free market purity' of course ) go ahead and do so. Just stop complaining about the fact that rest of the world is smart enough to cut the best prices they can for the end products.

 

Healthcare costs per capita:
Finland $4,033
US $9,892

Life expectancy:
Finland 81.1 years
US 79.3 years

 

So Finland no longer has a state ruling over it?

 

Your using statistics to prove your point. Stop immediately, hard facts have no place in any discussion about health care policy - all that matters is ideology.

 

One thing that we can say about everything the US govt is involved in. Its costs twice as much as anywhere else in the world and the US ranks low in. Health care and education being the worst offenders.

 

"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.” - Daniel Moynihan

 

It doesn't need to though. One way to decrease healthcare costs per person is to have the largest possible insured group, with the resulting low premiums per person. The US due to its population and average income could have a very efficient and low cost system. But unfortunately the private insurers get a say in the decision.

 

I know it and you know it. Its certain other people you have to explain it to.