I completely agree that the current system is excellent for those who can afford it, and queuing-based-on-worth certainly appeals to those with worth.
In the US this worth translates into money, which translates into lobbying. You are not marching in the streets because you don't need to. Your money speaks for you.
I say this not to patronise you, since you clearly understand this is the case. I say it merely to point out that this system works for the few, not the many. And yes it works well for the few.
Regarding your cateract example, if the queue is need based, and you have two patients, then one with 2 cateracts is ahead of someone with 1. That's another system, a system I agree which would be most distressing to someone with 1 careact and lots of spare cash.
I get that any system other than the current one will make you worse off. Equally I hope you see that any system at all will be a massive step forward for huge numbers of people.
Sure, I get it. I prefer systems that favor me. The seething masses aren't "real" to me. I don't know them like I know me and the people I care about. I care about my medical needs now, not some hypothetical "other person". Like you, I can pay for my medical, and I appreciate that I can.
But I also wonder if this is the best way. It works for me, but maybe there's something better for us all.
I will also add that many problems in the US and other countries stem from the perversion of incentives and benefits of the few over the many. What I mean is that keeping this broken system in place as it greatly benefits the insurance companies, of which there are a few. It’s so valuable that they have the money and resources to buy the politicians, pay for the media campaigns and lobby the propaganda outlets to mitigate any power the populace has to address the issue. This allows industries to control pretty much all policy in the US. It’s a sad state of affairs.
> a system I agree which would be most distressing to someone with 1 careact and lots of spare cash.
It wouldn’t be distressing to someone with lots of spare cash in the UK because they would just get the surgery done privately. There seems to be a common misconception that private healthcare is not available in the UK.
I completely agree that the current system is excellent for those who can afford it, and queuing-based-on-worth certainly appeals to those with worth.
In the US this worth translates into money, which translates into lobbying. You are not marching in the streets because you don't need to. Your money speaks for you.
I say this not to patronise you, since you clearly understand this is the case. I say it merely to point out that this system works for the few, not the many. And yes it works well for the few.
Regarding your cateract example, if the queue is need based, and you have two patients, then one with 2 cateracts is ahead of someone with 1. That's another system, a system I agree which would be most distressing to someone with 1 careact and lots of spare cash.
I get that any system other than the current one will make you worse off. Equally I hope you see that any system at all will be a massive step forward for huge numbers of people.
Sure, I get it. I prefer systems that favor me. The seething masses aren't "real" to me. I don't know them like I know me and the people I care about. I care about my medical needs now, not some hypothetical "other person". Like you, I can pay for my medical, and I appreciate that I can.
But I also wonder if this is the best way. It works for me, but maybe there's something better for us all.