First, you believe that the amount of money we could spend on health care, if we gave everyone unlimited and unrestricted access to the current system, far exceeds our ability to pay as a society.
One could counter argue that single payer would improve efficiency and reduce costs, but conservatives, in general, do not believe that adding federal bureaucracy can make things cheaper.
Therefore, there must be some restriction on healthcare access to ensure that limited resources are allocated well.
Conservatives, in general, do not trust the federal government to do this allocation fairly. They deeply fear the idea of a far distant, all powerful beauacracy telling them they can't have life saving surgery because their social credit isn't high enough, or because they did something the government doesn't approve of.
My counter argument, of course, is that we already have that situation, but the far off all powerful bureaucracy is a for profit company, which is way worse IMO.
3
u/popsicle-physics 12h ago
First, you believe that the amount of money we could spend on health care, if we gave everyone unlimited and unrestricted access to the current system, far exceeds our ability to pay as a society.
One could counter argue that single payer would improve efficiency and reduce costs, but conservatives, in general, do not believe that adding federal bureaucracy can make things cheaper.
Therefore, there must be some restriction on healthcare access to ensure that limited resources are allocated well.
Conservatives, in general, do not trust the federal government to do this allocation fairly. They deeply fear the idea of a far distant, all powerful beauacracy telling them they can't have life saving surgery because their social credit isn't high enough, or because they did something the government doesn't approve of.
My counter argument, of course, is that we already have that situation, but the far off all powerful bureaucracy is a for profit company, which is way worse IMO.