Because it's means-tested?
You're describing a two-tier health system, which many countries operating under a "socialized" model follow including Australia. That's fine, too. The government provides a safety net of basic coverage and then those who want more or whose employers want to lure them with the promise of better care can opt for private care. This would still work if Medicare were an open enrollment for anyone who wanted it.
> Does everyone love medicare? Every doctor I've talked to hates it. It doesn't pay on time, it pays below market rates, it sometimes just doesn't pay at all, it doesn't let the doctors choose what care they think is best, etc.
You can't on the one hand complain about the rising price of healthcare in the US, how it's moving further out of reach for everyone, and at the same time complain that the socialized program "pays below market rates." That's the definition of lowering costs, something the US has to do more than literally every other country in the world. That's a good thing. In fact, that's an argument for the system we're proposing.
> Doctors tell me that the rest of us are all subsidizing medicare patients right now, that if they could get away without seeing any medicare patients they would.
That's kinda hilarious. Medicare patients are the most expensive, worst customers for a medical program. They're all old, sick, dying or about to. That's facts. If the private system had to bear the burden of treating those patients their margins would implode or costs would balloon. The Medicare program as it exists right now is a huge subsidy to the private sector -- especially as it's forbidden from negotiating drug prices like any other sane system permits.
> How is that going to work out when we are all on medicare?
It's going to work fine like it does in every other country in the OECD. It's not like we're proposing something wildly outrageous and unheard of. Every other developed nation does this and has better health outcomes across the board with half the cost.
"You can't on the one hand complain about the rising price of healthcare in the US, how it's moving further out of reach for everyone, and at the same time complain that the socialized program 'pays below market rates.'"
I think that American people (probably more than any other country) value freedom of choice more than "cost cutting." Also, the idea of reducing costs by a government simply taking over the market really stinks of tyrannical authoritarianism in these here parts. It's distinctly un-American (like it or not).
Strangely enough, freedom of choice (i.e., increased supply along with low switching costs and price/value transparency) generally also leads to cheaper prices. I'm pretty sure that reforms in those types of areas are what would most easily get support from American people.
Yes, we could just go along with what other countries have done, but dang it, America is a leader. America champions freedom. If you want a better system (and I'm sure just about everyone in America does, I know I do) those are the things you have to sell.
That's a false choice because the vast majority can't afford the choice and never will. The rest the choice of physician is made for them by their employer.
> Strangely enough, freedom of choice (i.e., increased supply along with low switching costs and price/value transparency) generally also leads to cheaper prices. I'm pretty sure that reforms in those types of areas are what would most easily get support from American people.
No, it doesn't. Not when your life is on the line. That's what the OECD and WHO data shows.
> Yes, we could just go along with what other countries have done, but dang it, America is a leader. America champions freedom. If you want a better system (and I'm sure just about everyone in America does, I know I do) those are the things you have to sell.
Not in this case. It's an abject failure here. It's the world's most expensive per capita -- by a country mile. It costs twice as much as Canada, has the same level of health outcomes, covers far fewer people. It's a bad system. America has lots of positive things but it's by no means a world leader in everything. For instance, not being obese.
Just because you're in front doesn't mean you're going in the right direction.
What's weird? That we have food stamps for those who are temporarily (at least that's how it's supposed to be) in a bind, yet not everyone uses food stamps? Why do you think that is?
Does everyone love medicare? Every doctor I've talked to hates it. It doesn't pay on time, it pays below market rates, it sometimes just doesn't pay at all, it doesn't let the doctors choose what care they think is best, etc. Doctors tell me that the rest of us are all subsidizing medicare patients right now, that if they could get away without seeing any medicare patients they would. How is that going to work out when we are all on medicare?