Transparency in healthcare + Single payer (by the government) = Efficiency
(see sources and explanation in my original comment)
So yes, putting the US government in the middle is what I'm suggesting. Or is the US government not a leading force in fighting corruption anymore?
But wait, is this not conjecture, since it doesn't currently exist? Sure, you have sources where it has worked, but the proof would only be implementing it here.
> Or is the US government not a leading force in fighting corruption anymore?
What? I don't understand what you're getting at here. My point isn't that the government is corrupt, it's that it's inefficient.
Universal and transparently managed healthcare consistently gives more bang for buck. Note that I said "consistently", not just in a few places.
Yes, obviously you can't know what's going to happen in the US until you try it. But if it has consistently worked around the world, the best guess is that it will work in the US as well. Surely your argument, can't be... "how can I know this ball is going to fall into the Earth, if I haven't dropped it yet".
> What? I don't understand what you're getting at here. My point isn't that the government is corrupt, it's that it's inefficient.
And my point is that transparency in healthcare + single payer makes the system efficient.
For example (according to the first Google links for "usa/uk average doctor salary"), the average doctor salary in the UK is $128,500, compared to $189,000 in the US. How are we going to cut salaries by 32%?
My guess is that there are salary discrepancies across the medical industry.
I did not look this up. But I know one thing, eventually you will save money. I don't suppose that it would take longer than 20 years to save money, but I frankly don't know. Maybe you could look it up to expand on your point:-D
> average doctor salary in the UK.. Compared to... In the US.
That is not apples to apples. There are countries with lower and higher pay, both overall and relative. Plus you have think of differences in cost of living, taxation, malpractice insurance, and even their own medical insurance.
Here's a link I found covering a bit of that. The chart would be the tldr. https://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2013/05/28/are-u-...
Was it ever?
Um...
https://www.transparency.org/news/feature/corruption_percept...
But in the context of the conversation, I think #18 is good enough to make the cutoff for single payer. After all, other countries with lower healthcare transparency are still more efficient with their universal systems.
krupan - I don't have the data for what has happened with transparency when countries implemented universal healthcare. So I don't have the answer for that.