Economy is worse off than we thought.

Laeomis said:

Also, welfare runs into the freeriding problem. This happens when only some people pitch in to pay for the cause.

Click to expand...

You seem to have a really dark view of how much people are prone to grifting.

Laeomis said:

A lot of people think that if they are going to get subsidized healthcare, then they won't care about diet and exercise, but that they will just get healthcare once they get sick. This leads to a viscous cycle. Other problems are that there is a large portion of people receiving the subsidy who are actually very wealthy, hospitals taking advantage of the subsidy to conduct a large quantity of procedures that are not actually medically necessary, and the subsidy has a side effect of raising the equilibrium price for all medical procedures. All of these factors lowers the quality of healthcare, and raises the price of it. Medicare is known as a market failure, because there is more money leaving it than entering in. Medicare is funded through taxation, and the baby-boomer population is rapidly aging and weighing down on the system, while there are less workers in the younger population. This taxation will end up hurting the poor, and making the wealthy even richer. Public healthcare sounds nice, but upon further inspection it becomes a much more complicated problem.

Click to expand...

What a bizarre assertion. Where are you getting this from? Who do you believe thinks like this? Every metric I have ever seen shows people who have health care are more likely to be healthy, not less.

Belk said:

What a bizarre assertion. Where are you getting this from? Who do you believe thinks like this?

Click to expand...

Ok, fine. Nobody thinks this way.

Larniavc said:

Evidence please. That simple does not stand to reason.

Click to expand...

Yah, cuz yanno all those Europeans are so much fatter and lazier than us 'muricans.

Laeomis said:

Ok, fine. Nobody thinks this way.

Click to expand...

We seem to be wandering landscape where nuance is a stranger.

This just showed up on my news feed. It involves only about 320 people, 25 doctors, 100 licensed medical professionals, and nearly $15 billion in medicare fraud. Many of these fraud cases are from minimal medical procedures. Medical practices might repeatedly bill these procedures in fraud schemes. This is another example of the easily exploited market failure of public healthcare.

As part of the sweeping crackdown, officials identified perpetrators based in Russia, Eastern Europe, Pakistan, and other countries.The alleged $14.6 billion in fraud is more than twice the previous record in the Justice Department’s annual health care fraud crackdown. It includes nearly 190 federal cases and more than 90 state cases that have been charged or unsealed since June 9. Nearly 100 licensed medical professionals were charged, including 25 doctors, and the government reported $2.9 billion in actual losses.

Click to expand...

Richer, A. D. (2025, June, 30). More than 300 charged in $14.6 billion health care fraud schemes takedown, Justice Department says. Associated Press.

https://apnews.com/article/justice-department-health-care-fraud-schemes-6a3e11dc1827dfd20ec8ea04b7c7ce9a

Laeomis said:

Ok, fine. Nobody thinks this way.

Click to expand...

Notice that you seem to be making sweeping and broad claims that you cannot back up in any way?

Laeomis said:

Well, we disagree. For these reasons there was a BREXIT. You want a Nordic system, while the UK and US want an Anglo-American system. We just don't see it in our best interest to partner with you.

Click to expand...

Brexit isn't that good of an example to use as like those who campaigned to stay said about the Brexiteers claims, they've been proven to be outright lies and exaggerations with time now.

Laeomis said:

Well, we disagree. For these reasons there was a BREXIT. You want a Nordic system, while the UK and US want an Anglo-American system.

Click to expand...

I think you like making claims which are nonsensical and of course without evidence. For example, the UK and the US health care systems are very different. There is no "Anglo-American" system.

And both systems are bad compared to the most of the developed countries. Interestingly, it correlates also with the health of the population, the US and the UK are very unhealthy countries.

Laeomis said:

We just don't see it in our best interest to partner with you.

Click to expand...

I have no idea what you mean by that, as I said, your words seem nonsensical, frequently. But if you mean that you do not want to be inspired to fix your system based on the the example from better countries, then it is fine. Stay behind. We cannot force you to have a better life if you do not want to.

trophy33 said:

I think you like making claims which are nonsensical and of course without evidence. For example, the UK and the US health care systems are very different. There is no "Anglo-American" system.

And both systems are bad compared to the most of the developed countries. Interestingly, it correlates also with the health of the population, the US and the UK are very unhealthy countries.


I have no idea what you mean by that, as I said, your words seem nonsensical, frequently. But if you mean that you do not want to be inspired to fix your system based on the the example from better countries, then it is fine. Stay behind. We cannot force you to have a better life if you do not want to.

Click to expand...

Ok, sure. Go ahead and believe yourself.

Laeomis said:

Ok, sure. Go ahead and believe yourself.

Click to expand...

Cool.

trophy33 said:

Cool.

Click to expand...

I will try to explain.

Where I am coming from is within the laws of supply and demand, microeconomic theories, and also what is known as World Dependency Theory. To understand medicare, you have to understand the law of supply and demand, and you have to understand subsidies. Subsidies change the market equilibrium. Examine the graph:




Subsidies are known as a negative tax, or money that the government provides to the public or corporations to balance externalities. Subsidies change the equilibrium price. The rectangle in the graph is the effect the subsidy has on the normal market equilibrium of supply and demand. The original equilibrium point is e1, where the lines S and D intersect. The subsidy provides money to the public. This means that, say $500 is provided for a $600 procedure. What the public used to pay $600 for, they now pay $100 for, and the subsidy pays the rest. This shifts the supply curve right, and changes the equilibrium point to e2. Consumers' demand is at e2, more quantity for less price, but in reality the real price that is being paid is point b. This is how a subsidy works.

Subsidies are issued by governments to encourage a positive externality like healthcare, but they can run into many problems. These problems I have already expressed. Problems like lowering the quality of healthcare, taking advantage of the system for theft, giving too many unneccesary procedures, jacking up the price of healthcare, and consumers not taking care of their health because healthcare has become cheaper. This is all rather complex, and understanding microeconomics takes a minute of meditation.

For every pro there is a con, the system is not so simple, it is a paradox. Money does comes from somewhere, instead of nowhere. The EU is not America. Communism and slavery are at stake. There is more to think of here than just throwing out free healthcare. Take a look at these links to further understand.


Beggs, Jodi. (2025, April, 29). Understanding subsidy benefit, cost, and market effect. ThoughtCo.

https://www.thoughtco.com/analysis-of-a-subsidy-1147899

Scott, G., & Kvilhaug, S. (2024, February, 28). Subsidies: Definition, how they work, pros and cons. Investopedia.

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/subsidy.asp