Ok. But that's still elective. I get that it still was a medical benefit, but you could just a easily have govt owned & run hospitals where there's no profit motive on drugs and supplies, and administration is far cheaper. Then citizens can pay for elective surgery at the govt cost.
Comments
I also had the same thing for the same reasons, told to me by a doctor in Minnesota.
I'm pointing out that while you're talking about big change and leaving private insurance for elective surgery, I'm pointing out that if you do that, AND bring the hospitals and doctors under the govt umbrella, you get cheaper everything.
Ok, I'll try again.
Imagine the medical care segment (hospitals, drugs, supplies, doctors) are govt owned and paid. With no profit margin at the point of service, the wholesale cost for care is cheaper.
So even if there's private insurance for elective care, even that would be cheaper.
Single-Payer, with private as a secondary, optional system that is not necessary.
In this system (that most of Europe uses), public benefits from private, but private does not benefit from public.