Milton Friedman on National Healthcare
Vložit
- čas přidán 22. 08. 2024
- In light of The Affordable Healthcare Act (Obamacare), it is important to put the debate over socialized medicine in historical perspective. Watch Milton Friedman dissect claims that National Healthcare is effective, desired and fair.
Check out our Facebook page here: / freetochoosenetwork
Visit our media website to find other programs here: freetochoosemed...
Connect with us on Twitter here: / freetochoosenet
Learn more about our company here: freetochoosenet...
Shop for related products here: www.freetochoos...
Stream from FreeToChoose.TV here: freetochoose.tv/
That's misleading. Milton opposes bailing out corporations, and corporate subsidies as well. Free-market is not pro-corporation. Of course its easy to demonise anyone with opposing views and say things like they 'hate the poor', but when everyone stops saying that the other side is evil, and comes to understand that we all want to help but simply believe that different solutions work best, then we will have proper dialogues from which people of all viewpoints can learn, and not just ad hominems.
devsun2 can you explain his last point about universal healthcare? I don’t understand what he means by looking forward and taking much more effective action
Having insurance, you're already paying for everyone else's insurance
We were $50 Billion dollars in debt when he was speaking of this subject and assuming Washington would not be irresponsible enough to add socialized medicine to it. We are currently over $16 Trillion in debt, rising rapidly, with an unconcerned administration adding socialized medicine to it.
"If you like your doctor you can keep your doctor." - Bath House Barry.
Oh my God, the budget has risen to 500 billion dollars???? Lol.
Paying for healthcare doesn't get to the reason health care cost are so high. It is liberal judges giving an incentive to sue doctors with huge pay outs. It is the fact that people don't shop for treatment like they do everything else. People only use fire insurance, auto insurance, etc. when something big happens. Yet, Americans use health insurance for the smallest of things. However, liberals are good at legislating forced action without fixing the problem that created it.
How on earth are normal people supposed to shop for healthcare when they don't know the slightest thing about medicine? People spend 10 years of their lives studying medicine before they can become doctors, you really think an average person is going to have even a tenth of a doctor's ability to tell which treatment is good and which treatment is bad?
Socialized medicine "works in EVERY other advanced democracy in the entire world"...where debt, high insurance premiums and relatively lower quality of service is prevalent.
Insurance is supposed to do one thing: Measure risk. Let that be the starting point for your future research in basic economics.
PS: We're a Republic, not a democracy. Google that while you're at it.
"where debt, high insurance premiums and relatively lower quality of service is prevalent"
US debt per capita is higher than any of the other 32 developed countries that have socialized medicine. This is probably due to the fact that they spend half the amount that the US does per capita on healthcare and health insurance.
There are, generally, no insurance premiums in a socialized healthcare system.
Every country of similar wealth per capita to the US that has socialized medicine (Japan, France, UK, Canada, Germany) has better health outcomes than the US in most domains of health care. The US leads in certain cancers (fewer than the other developed countries), which is still pretty nice. The US also leads in equipment (MRI scans, CT scans, etc.) yet somehow delivers worse healthcare outcomes for double the expenses.
www.healthsystemtracker.org/chart-collection/quality-u-s-healthcare-system-compare-countries/#item-start
"Insurance is supposed to do one thing: measure risk"
Insurance is supposed to insure. Measuring risk is part of what they do in order to insure. Health "assurance" as it was called in the olden days of America--when healthcare was tantamount to socialized. You were, in essence, assured that something terrible could happen to you and you wouldn't a) die, b) risk your entire livelihood to pay to survive; this was because your fellow citizens agreed to help out if you helped them out too.
"we're a Republic, not a democracy"
We're both. Democracy is an ideology. Republic is the form of government based on that ideology. The definition of Republic is "a state in which supreme power is held by the people and their elected representatives". A democracy is "a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives".
...
Every single claim you have made in this comment was false. I don't even understand how you managed to do that.
America is the Only developed country not to have nationalized it's healthcare system. it spends close to double wat the next highest countries spend on it, and it only gets mediocre results with an estimated 40,000 ppl unnecessarily dying each year because of it according to Harvard.
00:38 - Wow! Good thing we've solved that problem then. =P
By both Mitt Romney and Barack Obama.
$50 Billion deficit, so cute.
He's confusing socialized medicine with national health insurance. Socialized medicine is when the physicians work for the government, national health insurance is when the government insures people so they can get healthcare in a private system. He's over confident here. No facts to back himself up.
+Sam Peak SORRY but you are contradicting yourself. Answer me this, who does the physicians work for, if they have a patient covered by government insurance?
Also, look into all the research Milton did, I believe he won a Nobel Prize, he backs himself :)
Macca he works for the hospital still. the patient is simply a customer. it’s like when you use a credit card at a store, does the store now work for the credit card company? no it’s simply getting the service it provided to you payed for. i’m by no means a supporter of national health care, jjsy pointing out the flaw in your logic.
What is wrong with everyone paying for everyone's healthcare? If you're poor, you're more likely to need it because quality of life is lower; if you're rich then you won't notice it come out of your wages at all. If you make £25000/$23500 a year, roughly £1000 will go to our healthcare service.
You say it like it’s so easy but here in America many people already have health insurance from there employers and do not want to pay for other people’s bills. Human beings are naturally selfish to some degree and blindly giving more money to the government that is already massively in debt gives people doubt that it will even be used correctly. Like Milton says “Nobody spends somebody else’s money as carefully as he spends his own”.