The US rarely looks into how other countries solve problems. (i.e. Universal Healthcare, High Speed Trains and so), this is the sad part of "American Exceptionalism"
As to rail, both the first-gen and second-gen Acela is based on the French TGV.
The comparison to the Dutch healthcare system is not apt. While the Heritage foundation may used ideas from the Dutch system our system is quite a bit more Byzantine and inefficient. We spend twice as much per capita on healthcare and have worse outcomes and fewer people covered. Our citizens have far more per capita medical debt than the Dutch.
We didn’t really implement the Dutch system and we didn’t really learn from the French how to build and maintain high speed rail. Saying we learned healthcare from the Dutch because we have doctors like they do makes as much sense as your argument.
Why does the US execution not match that of the countries it looks into? I think it's because talented people in the US disproportionately go into the private sector, leading to an incompetent public sector. American distrust of their government is arguably justified.
IMO the most distinct parts of the Swiss health insurance system is that (1) copay is obligatory but limited (i.e. healthcare isn’t free but it’s not expensive either), and (2) it’s individual, companies cannot pay for it, so there’s no US-like extreme benefit of having a good job.
It isn’t really bargaining power of the pool, but the risk assessment of the pool you are in. Being in a hodge lodge personal pool means you are sharing risk with people who will have more expenses. That’s why Switzerland throws everyone into the same pool, so no crème low risk can be siphoned away.
Due to the regulations it is not a big run to the bottom
> The average Obamacare plan costs $483 monthly for a 30-year-old, $544 for a 40-year-old and $760 for a 50-year-old.
> The bronze plan covers 60% of the costs associated with care.
I feel like they missed the most important parts of the Dutch health insurance system…
We're either bigger, or denser, or less dense, or ... essentially whatever suits the argument.
https://www.airportthai.co.th/en/aot-reiterates-the-guidelin...
edit: But I will say it works both ways. Most countries do not know what it takes to keep hundreds of millions of people of various backgrounds together under a common way of life with a certain risk vs entitlement balance. Americans as a whole are more risk tolerant AND accepting of failure and reinventing yourself. In most cultures it's a great shame to quit your job with benefits, start a business and not succeed. In the states it's not shameful. You tried? Awesome.
I have to assume many, maybe most, people that give reasons like you mention just flat out don't want the policy and reach for a reason to justify it.
I can say I don't want gun control laws. Not because it doesn't work elsewhere or couldn't work here. I just fundamentally disagree with it and don't want to live in a place where the only ones with guns are state officials.
It's baffling how despite numerous other countries outperforming the US in educational outcomes we do not even look at other approaches!
(If we had patriotic songs worth remembering im sure i would have)
The problem is this, hoe do you fix something you are proud of? It seems a contradiction?
Speaking as an American, though, I can both be proud of something and recognize its faults. I'm proud of the core principles that America was based upon, for example, but very much recognize how far we've deviated from them and how much we need to fix.
I think there's never much to gain in being proud of things you have nothing to do with or control over. If you like some principles you would be proud when you uphold them personally. It is when we start feeling proud in the abstract that we start having issues.
"Pride goeth before a fall" is a time-worn saying for good reason.
Hell, in some countries even the national anthem has no lyrics but is purely an instrumental track (Spain being a notable example).
Mexico's Pledge of Allegiance celebrated every Monday in schools.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pledge_of_Allegiance_to_the_Me...
But even that was once-in-a-lifetime event to emphasise the importance of the first day at school at age 7, it did not happen every Monday.
Needless to say, it wasn't very effective. As evidenced by history, some of our parents definitely broke that pledge later in their life.
Claiming to be the best (at anything) is just tacky and arrogant. Especially with something as impossible to quantify as "best country". There's no such thing as the best country in the world. Every one has strengths and weaknesses, and you can't really balance and rank them.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_incarcera...
[2] https://www.statista.com/statistics/262962/countries-with-th...
It’s kind of amazing that the left has forgotten that fact.
Poland,
https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/national-anthem/...
Netherlands,
https://www.classicfm.com/discover-music/periods-genres/nati...
The difference between America the Beautiful and other anthems is how much it does, for how long, and making sure it gets everything it can possibly cram in there. It's like a bunch of people standing on a stand at a sporting match shouting "America, America, America" unremittingly, whereas most people might be satisfied to shout "Go {my country}" and be done with it.
And oh, that people used to talk about us and that despite they don't anymore we are still a pretty nice place to live.
https://www.tiktok.com/@guinnessworldrecords/video/747057742...
ha-ha f....
The cultural difference is that our rich people are too rich, our media is too centralized, and none of those in power want to enrich and empower the country, when they could enrich and empower themselves.
(For now, at least? How long until that gets cracked down on as dangerous?)
There is no person in the world who cannot have a toothbrush and toothpaste if they want to. And if you find one such person, they won't have access to any centrally treated water.
Considering that the number of such people is very low it would be very cheap to solve this issue.
> really?
Yes, really.
> So why are they poor?
Why is anything the way that it is?
It was referring to the comment where you said “less cynical”.
> Why is anything the way that it is?
America big? America different?
It’s more challenging to find non-cynical reasons for people being poor and suffering.
It's not perfect by any means, but it's definitely much better than nothing. So the US should absolutely be able to at the very least match that, but really most likely it should be able to do much better. That it doesn't is very much a choice.
I think the US would prefer a UHC if we were starting from a blank slate. The difficulty is mapping a path from what we have now to that.
Do you remember when Republicans went on and on about how "Democrats rammed through the ACA without a single Republican vote"? As if that represented a problem on the Democratic Party side, and not the Republican one? Despite the similarities to models proposed by Republicans in the past, and the relative conservative step it represented from "Byzantine kludge of often poor-to-no-coverage" to "something with a higher floor"? That's how hard it would be to find a Republican to "prefer a UHC if we were starting from a blank slate."
It's important not to underestimate the distrust of government services and regulation of any sort of the Republican base. The conservative media - talk-radio, then cable, then social/podcasts - has been intentionally undermining the credibility of government services at every opportunity for 40 years. And the politicians hamstring and sabotage whenever they get a chance to try to make sure that services offered in the US are sub-par compared to elsewhere.
It's a well-oiled machine running a cycle that keeps people focused on anything else but the services they actually use all the time so that cognitive dissonance can't creep in. (Granted, sometimes, when necessary to acknowledge those things, they'll fall back to making it clear that YOU earned/paid for the things you use, but those other gross poor people are just freeloaders.)
It's like with abortion - for decades "overturning Roe V Wade" was what Republicans said they wanted to do. And people kept trying to convince themselves "oh they don't really mean that, they wouldn't do that actually anymore." Take their word on it about wanting to tear down government services.
This is partly what I was getting at when I said the culture of the US is different and the scale is much larger than European countries. It's not just geographically larger, but it's politically and ideologically broader too. If you have a wonderful idea like UHC, you need to make it work with liberals, conservatives, and everyone in between. Like it or not, a universal healthcare or Medicare for all plan is either going to be DoA in Congress, or a considerably watered-down and Americanized version if it has any hope at all of getting enough senators to pass it without first seeing massive electoral college reform in this country first.
That is the scale of the US. You can't assume that an idea that's well-liked and popular in another country is going to be popular and well-liked here.
And the various countries in Europe do have different healthcare systems, sometimes significantly different.
It's difficult, but not as difficult as it's often presented to be, as long as you're okay with giving the finger to a relatively small number of wealthy health industry executives.
And that, is the difficulty. Sure, I agree that it wouldn't be too logistically difficult to implement universal healthcare in the US. But that doesn't matter when more than half the country has been propaganda'd into not even wanting it in the first place.
Hell, I expect that there are a ton of Medicaid and Medicare recipients in the US who would tell you that they think government-provided, single-payer healthcare is a bad idea, when that's essentially what they have, to some degree.
That's what it still has.
The current healthcare system is working perfectly (and by that I mean lucratively) for the 0.01% in control of the political system.
If you want to make that argument, actually make it, because if you try, 99% of the time its not actually true, its simply ignorance.
> US states used to be offered much more independence.
But even in your own example with the EU, the EU still mandates many health policies for its member countries: food safety; air and water quality; tobacco, sugar and alcohol regulations; and so on. That's not at all dissimilar to what the federal government does in the US, except our states don't implement those policies/directives themselves because the feds enforce it all.
The comment I was replying to pointed out that the US isn't several countries put together. As you describe, the EU is several countries put together and yet the US actually pushes more power to the states.
Doesn’t their comment claim the opposite?
Unlike the US Federal government EU has very limited direct means of imposing any if its laws or regulations on member states of they chose not to comply with them.
And are those conditions manmade? If so, would we be better off reversing the proximal issues rather than adding fluoride to try to fix it?
let alone the precautionary principle in a complex system with a gazillion variables... (i.e. things we don't know we don't know)
And this is known by people who do professional advocacy work, on topic I am familiarly with, such as city design and transportation. They take great care to make sure all the examples are from the US, even if those examples aren't nearly as good as others. Because they know, when speaking to American audiences, you lose the audience if you suggest in X town, they should do Y that is done in Europe. In the US selling something as domestic innovation is usually the best, "if people in Indiana can do it, you can do it even better".
To just ignore any explanation that points out that culture matters, and believing that only 'hard' factors matter, is incredibly foolish. Cultural believes, such as exceptionalism absolutely do a play a huge role in determining what happens in the real world. To point that out, is not cynical or lazy.
And this does not just apply to the US, it many countries have different forms of that.
I really don't buy it, at least not as a general statement.