The remaining question is: if you spent the extra 10%, would you get Canadian levels of healthcare or not, for everyone? Also why compare to Sweden, cherrypicking? Could pick any other EU country. Or Canada.

And it's not 40% towards healthcare. It's at most 27% of total tax (less because it's bracketed alongside education) - most of tax is other social spending, a lot of that being retired people.

So healthcare is 7-10% of Sweden's GDP, or so. And falling. This being one of the most expensive healthcare systems in the EU, if not the most expensive.

I guess you're trying to hide that your argument is invalid. Trying to justify US mismanagement or lack of health policies.

For your information, USA spend almost 18% of GDP on government funded healthcare. And still rising. And USA is 28% richer than Sweden per capita, PPP normalized. This ignores additional private costs, which are probably significant.

And getting very uneven access. Some in insurance and medical industry are striking it rich, who cares about social costs.

A) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxation_in_Sweden

B) https://www.cms.gov/research-statistics-data-and-systems/sta...

C) https://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/Sweden/Uni...

Who cares about reality when there's a narrative waiting to be pushed.