I’m sorry, but this is a motte and bailey argument. It’s conflating the idea that every health system necessarily makes trade-offs with the specific decisions UHC made to squeeze patients for money.
Reposted from
Will Stancil
I think it’s a far better system! But it has serious tradeoffs, it could result in slower access to care for many people and probably puts some treatments out of reach. Changing to a more public system would cause real political shocks and it’s useful to understand where they could come from.
Comments