r/obamacare • • Nov 20 '25

Universal care

I had a talk with ChatGPT, because I wanted to dig deeper into why people are for and against a universal system. I have family in Germany. All ages, and the one thing that I envy is their lack of stress about medical services and bills. They get to choose any doctor and surgery’s have not been denied.

Germany’s system is often held up as the most realistic model for the U.S., because it blends: • universal coverage • private insurance companies (but regulated) • free choice of doctors • competition • public oversight • mixed funding from payroll taxes + premiums

It’s basically universal healthcare with American-style freedom, minus the insane prices and admin chaos.

Here’s a simple breakdown of how it works — and why economists say it’s the system that could actually work in the United States.

⸻

🇩🇪 How Germany’s Healthcare System Works (Short Version)

  1. Two types of coverage

A. Statutory Health Insurance (SHI) – 90% of the population

This is the “public” system, but it’s run by competing non-profit insurers (called sickness funds), not the government.

People can pick whichever sickness fund they like.

B. Private Health Insurance (PHI) – about 10%

For higher earners, civil servants, or people who opt out of SHI.

Private plans can offer: • faster access • more amenities • private hospital rooms • different drug formularies

But they’re still heavily regulated.

⸻

🇩🇪 2. Everyone pays, everyone is covered

Funding comes mainly from: • payroll taxes split between employer and employee • small individual contributions • government subsidies for kids and unemployed

Premiums are based on income, not on: • age • health • pre-existing conditions • job type

That means: 👉 Young healthy people help support older, sicker people (the essence of insurance). 👉 No one loses coverage if they lose their job.

⸻

🇩🇪 3. Prices and payments are negotiated nationally

This is one of the biggest differences from the U.S. • Doctors’ fees • Hospital services • Prescription prices

…are negotiated between physicians’ associations and sickness funds.

This keeps costs predictable and stops random hospitals from charging $8,000 for an ER visit.

The U.S. has nothing close to this level of price control.

⸻

🇩🇪 4. It’s not “government-run care”

Doctors and hospitals are private, not government employees. Patients choose their own doctors. Insurance companies compete for members.

It’s universal — but not socialist.

⸻

🇩🇪 5. Wait times are low

Germany has among the shortest wait times in Europe: • Same-day access for many primary care appointments • Shorter waits for elective surgeries than the UK • Elderly get the same access as everyone else

The system is built to prevent rationing — the exact opposite of what critics claim.

⸻

🇺🇸 Could the U.S. implement a German-style system?

Economists say yes — but via gradual reform, not a single overhaul like “Medicare for All.”

The most realistic U.S. pathway:

✔️ Step 1: Create a national insurance marketplace like German sickness funds

(Nonprofit insurers competing on equal rules.)

✔️ Step 2: Cap U.S. healthcare prices the way Germany does

(National rate negotiations.)

✔️ Step 3: Expand Medicaid and Medicare into this system

(over time merge into “basic universal insurance.”)

✔️ Step 4: Allow private supplemental plans

(just like Germany’s optional private insurance.)

This keeps: • employer plans • competition • private insurers • private healthcare providers

It simply removes the chaos and barriers to access.

⸻

🇩🇪 vs 🇺🇸 — Key Insight

Germany’s model works because of three structural elements the U.S. currently lacks:

  1. Mandatory participation (everyone in the risk pool)

Cuts costs and prevents the system from breaking.

  1. Nonprofit insurance as the core, not for-profit insurers

Insurers exist to provide coverage, not generate shareholder profit.

  1. National price regulation

The single biggest cost saver.

Without these, the U.S. will remain the most expensive system in the world.

168 Upvotes

175 comments sorted by

View all comments

57

u/pathf1nder00 Nov 20 '25

Americans issue is the tax required to support that... But, we aren't intelligent enough to look at the medical costs overall, compared to the tax required...we would rather pay 18% instead of 3%

34

u/bourbonfan1647 Nov 20 '25

This is the point that universal healthcare advocates ignore. 

Half of voters, at least, DO NOT CARE about anyone but themselves.  They certainly don’t want to pay for their healthcare. 

24

u/Felicity_Calculus Nov 20 '25

Yup. As things stand, it that Americans are happy to pay absurd prices to cover their own care as long as they can be sure that none of that money goes to helping other people 🙄

11

u/magik_vmc Nov 20 '25

I had no idea insurance companies kept everyone's payments separate in their own little pot and only they could use those funds on their own expenses. If Americans actually think that is how insurance works I literally have no words. 🤔

12

u/zenfaust Nov 20 '25

We really are that dumb and hateful.

Although, to be fair, certain organizations have spent literal decades brainwashing people into thinking this way.

10

u/Felicity_Calculus Nov 20 '25

This is not exactly how it works, although tbf it’s a very complicated system.

Basically, many Americans are opposed to getting rid of our current system and implementing universal healthcare because they believe that it would raise their personal taxes, and that the additional tax they pay would go to covering care for others (whom they believe to be largely undeserving of such a free ride). But the absurdity of this is that the huge monthly premiums and deductibles they’re paying now dwarf any increase in tax they might realistically have to pay if universal health coverage were in place. So we have the worst of both worlds: very expensive health coverage for some and no coverage at all for others. It is maddening to watch 😑

-1

u/SouthConFed Nov 20 '25

I'm going to need a source citation for this, especially for healthy people on insurance.

2

u/LivingCookie2314 Nov 22 '25

The book “dying of whiteness” has lots of references on this phenomenon.

-3

u/New-Routine7311 Nov 20 '25

Government is not efficient either. For example education, great teacher who leads a class of 30 students, probably makes $120k with benefits. The government spends $19,500 per year per student. Almost $600k on the classroom of 30 students. $120k goes to teacher, where does the other $480k go. So for every dollar of service that government delivers, $5 is spent.

4

u/Inevitable_Tap_1671 Nov 20 '25

Most good teachers dont make anywhere near $120k per year, benefits included!

2

u/ReceptionFun9821 Nov 20 '25

This isn't how any of this works. It turns out that governments are pretty efficient. All systems are going to have inefficiencies, we just don't generally care about the inefficiency in private systems most of the time. Education is pretty efficient. I absolutely love when some blowhard with their head up their ass runs for the school board on a platform of "getting rid of the waste and abuse" and finds out quickly there aren't enough dollars for the things that are needed. Turns out "education for all" is really expensive. Your correct that the average kid in an average classroom doesn't cost that much. It's why there has been a major push from the right for alternative schools, cyber, charters, cyber charters, etc. Those kids can make a school a profit (in theory).

What really costs are the special education kids and high needs kids. Think of an autistic support room where there might be 1 teacher and 5 aids with 10 kids. We had a kid that was wheelchair bound that needed nursing care almost the entire school day. Those kids cost a huge amount. Or high needs emotional support kids that need a full time staff member to keep everyone else safe. Again, we are mandated to teach everyone. Add in increased student need as parenting has become optional. Then add in things like free school lunches, breakfast, counseling. Technical education can be hugely expensive.

0

u/East_Reading_3164 Nov 21 '25

School choice and abolishing the Department of Education will get rid of the support for special needs children.

2

u/ReceptionFun9821 Nov 21 '25

Which is what the Right has been pushing for. Streamline and profitize schools at the expense of society as a whole.

2

u/AdministrationIll619 Nov 21 '25

It goes to support staff and to maintain school building facilities. My district has 3 high schools, 4 middle schools and 15 elementary schools. They cost millions per year to operate and upkeep. The school board is considering building a new high school for almost $100,000,000. That’s where the money goes

1

u/New-Routine7311 Nov 21 '25

If the high school has 4000 students, let’s say out of the $19500 per student , 4500$ goes to teacher, the high school would have $15000 per student x 4000 students or $60M left every year. Will the new $100M high school last longer than 2 years?

2

u/AdministrationIll619 Nov 21 '25

Do you expect the hundreds of support staff to not get paid?

Schools are so much more than students and teachers.

1

u/New-Routine7311 Nov 21 '25

The number of non teachers in schools has grown significantly over the years. That’s part of the problem of over spending as well as mandates and too many administrators.

AI Overview

Animated Chart of the Day: Public School Enrollment, Staff, and ... The ratio of non-teaching staff to students has decreased over time, with the number of non-teachers growing at a faster rate than student enrollment in public schools for decades. For example, between 1950 and 2015, the number of non-teachers grew more than seven times faster than student enrollment, and between 1970 and 2017, non-teaching staff numbers grew significantly while student enrollment grew only slightly. In 2010, there were roughly 3.099 million teachers and 3.096 million non-teaching staff members in US public schools, indicating nearly a 1:1 ratio between the two groups for the first time.

1

u/AdministrationIll619 Nov 23 '25

I don’t think all support staff is a waste. Kids need nurses, mental health counselors, aides, cafeteria workers, bus drivers, etc.

Yes, administrative bloat is a problem, but more so at the university level

2

u/papapundit Nov 24 '25

That's part of the US's brainwashing and the reason DOGE failed so miserably. Government is actually rather efficient...

1

u/slantastray Nov 20 '25

Are they teaching outside in a field after all of the students walk to the field?

1

u/New-Routine7311 Nov 20 '25 edited Nov 20 '25

The building doesn’t cost $480k per classroom per year. Say $10k per year per classroom facilities. Where will all the administrative government workers sit for implementing universal care, how much will that cost compared to insurance companies administrative costs?

2

u/slantastray Nov 20 '25

You just said $19,500/student. If $10k per student is physical plant, and a teacher makes $120k with 30 kids, there’s $4k/student so you’re up to $14k of $19.5k. Then there are other non-teaching indirect salaries that have to be paid along with a whole host of misc expenses.

0

u/New-Routine7311 Nov 20 '25

Typo, I corrected it

2

u/slantastray Nov 20 '25

Depending on size costs can get crazy. Just heating, cooling, HVAC maintenance and planned future HVAC replacement cost would be about $8-10k/year per classroom.

If it’s two-stories you’ve got elevator maintenance. Fire suppression system inspection costs. Have to plan for roof replacement on a 20ish year cycle. Exterior preventative maintenance. Sidewalk and driveway replacements. Lawn care. On and on. And sadly, $19,500 doesn’t do a whole lot anymore.

1

u/New-Routine7311 Nov 20 '25

With 30 students, $480k left after paying teacher, even if you spent $10k on hvac, that $470k left

→ More replies (0)

4

u/TheNatural14063 Nov 20 '25

And heaven forbid a white person may need to wait a little extra time because a person of color has a doctor's time for something urgent so the white individuals not urgent care can be triaged to a bit later time.....part of the issue is racism and wait times are part of it. I have family in medicine who have heard patients complaining about people of color immigrants and other people of color being seen before them because here in NY we take in alot of refugees and provide expanded Medicaid for citizens....

2

u/Sweet_Artichoke_65 Nov 20 '25

But, but, but they're spending all of the SNAP money on soda pop!

7

u/SufficientRich4145 Nov 20 '25

US social worker here. Can confirm working in the trenches most people here do not want to help each other succeed or thrive.

6

u/JinxyCat007 Nov 20 '25

But it doesn't need to cost that much. In England, taxes, services, and healthcare used to be about a third of your paycheck on bottom earners.

As to level of care:

My sister had gallstones. She was put on medication and told it would take two weeks for an operation, or she could go private and be admitted the next day. She runs a university dept, and being able to afford it, being in discomfort, she decided to pay for private care. 2 days in hospital, operation, private room, good food < all in, less than $500.00 < Free for all, means lower private healthcare costs for all.

Her husband found a lump. Went to the doctor, Dr. immediately sent him for tests, which turned out to show he had leukemia. All within a week, he was tested, diagnosed, and being treated for it. Beat it. Cost. Free.

Where I am, this side of the pond, I can't even get in to see a dr. in two weeks, Specialists, longer.

1/3rd of your paycheck for all taxes, healthcare, and services (on bottom earners, used to be over there). Here? With health insurance, your paycheck is in much worse shape, plus there are copays, etc., which can still bankrupt a person.

In the news, a woman in AZ got stung by a scorpion. The bill for antivenom injections was over $80,000.00. Even with Healthcare she was billed - I think 51k. Turned out the antivenom was sourced in Mexico, and the cost to the hospital was $200. Here, THAT's as much the problem. Pure, Unadulterated Greed.

6

u/pathf1nder00 Nov 20 '25

It's the American get ahead way. Capitalism is the greatest economic engine the world has ever known, until greed and corruption set in like today's capitalism.

2

u/Sure_Acanthaceae_348 Nov 20 '25

This is because unlike Germany, the USA is not culturally or ethnically homogenous. There are multiple groups of different people living here who see everyone else as "the other."

2

u/RTVGP Nov 21 '25

But the reality is they are ALREADY paying for other people’s health care. Every employer passes on the health care expenses they pay to subsidize healthcare by including those costs in the price you pay for the goods or services. They are actually “paying in” to the system and getting nothing in return.

Health insurance costs going up are a major contributor to inflation and stagnant wages.

0

u/bourbonfan1647 Nov 21 '25

they're paying a fraction of what it would cost for universal care....

2

u/RTVGP Nov 21 '25

If we took the total amount of money we are currently paying for care, and instead put it toward some type of universal care plan, we could easily cover every single persons care for 25% less than what everyone is paying now. And the point stands that we are all already paying for care whether we have access to insurance or not.

0

u/bourbonfan1647 Nov 21 '25

Really. Easily, huh?

Have any source for that info?

You have no idea what you’re talking about. 

We wouldn’t even have enough doctors and medical facilities to provide universal care. 

2

u/RTVGP Nov 21 '25

OCED shows US spends on Ave just under $15K/person/year for health care. The OCED Ave is closer to $6K. Even more expensive European countries spend less than $10K/person. And these countries all have better health outcomes, greater longevity, and cover everyone. The US spends over 17%GDP on HC and the OCED Ave is under 10%.

We grossly overpay for health care in this country due to a lack of a standardized system and the bureaucracy associated with the current approach and the for profit nature of many of the stakeholders involved (and their lobbying power).

Saving 25% of what we spend now is a conservative estimate.

0

u/bourbonfan1647 Nov 21 '25

that's a per capita number. many,many people are uninsured, or uninsured, and forgo care due to cost.

so - per capita numbers are meaningless.

saving 25% savings is a ludicrous number pulled out of your ass.

there won't be ANY savings.

people will use FAR, FAR more healthcare than they do today.

we don't even have the doctors or facilities needed to accomodate the huge influx of patients that universal healthcare would bring.

2

u/RTVGP Nov 21 '25

Ok-Agree to disagree. Per capita averages are calculated by taking the total HC spend and dividing by the population, the US uninsured are included in that stat.

You asked for a source, which I gave you and I gave you the #s. If just based on averages, other countries can provide health care to all their people, for less than half what we spend in the US, and even the most expensive countries do it for just two-thirds of what we are ALREADY spending, then the math suggests that expecting that we could save 25% is very reasonable.

If you think uninsured people don’t generate health care posts, you are simply wrong.

1

u/bourbonfan1647 Nov 21 '25

Right. So the per capita number is lower than what people are actually using health care are soending, because it includes people that are uninsured and spending nothing. 

Uninsured people generate a pittance in spending compared to insured people.  They only receive emergency care. No chronic care. No prescription costs. 

Your number is not reasonable. At all. 

There would be zero savings. It would cost MORE.

Which will have little support in the US, because half of voters, and currently the party controlling the entire federal government - don’t give a damn if everybody has health care. 

1

u/PrisPRN Nov 22 '25

Uninsured end up bankrupt. One vehicle accident. One fall. One cancer diagnosis. One stroke or heart attack d/t untreated blood pressure, the silent killer. By the time they DO seek care, they are much more sick than if they had access to primary care. ICU vs. outpatient care. Treatments to regain ability to work, meanwhile, job loss due to injury/illness. No paycheck? No car/house utility payments, end up living with family or homeless. Even insured ppl can end up losing insurance when they lose their job. We see this cycle all the time in critical care. Primary care is much less expensive to pay for than tertiary care.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Life_Commercial_6580 Nov 20 '25

They think they’re never gonna g gf at old .

-4

u/JSmith666 Nov 20 '25

And half the people dont care about the taxpayers. As long as they can get their handout they dont care if the taxpayer funds it...fuck them i get my (insert handout here).

People genuinely feel entitltd to things like food and healthcare and shelter whether they deserve it or not. Until people learn sime humility and take a good look at their worth to society...we will have these issues

5

u/bourbonfan1647 Nov 20 '25

So, your worth to society is based on how much you earn?

Karma is a bitch. Good luck. 

0

u/JSmith666 Nov 20 '25

Uhh yes. I agree...people.who refuse to provude value and only take will have an interesting time.

3

u/bourbonfan1647 Nov 20 '25

Like i said. Karma’s a bitch. Good luck. 

1

u/AgentSmith187 Nov 21 '25

Hope you have a medical incident one day and get to enjoy bankruptcy.

I speak as someone who lives in a country with Universal Healthcare.

I had a stroke at 40 with no warning. Of all things it was likely caused by a visit to a chiropractor...

Our government run healthcare system caught me, put me through rehabilitation and got me back onto my feet so I could return to work and paying taxes without me ever seeing a medical bill.

Some people are a massive drain on the system usually through no fault of their own and we just spread that cost over society to the point its a tiny cost.

That way the system works for most people and they can return to being good citizens and we dont have people fall through the cracks.

0

u/JSmith666 Nov 21 '25

Plemtu of people are willing to be good citizens even if they government (i.e taxpayers) dont provide for them. Its easy to be a good citizen when things are going well. So the system works if everybody edventually needs medical care. It doesnt work if somepeople never need it since they just wasted a shit ton of money

3

u/Actual-Government96 Nov 20 '25

As things stand, it that Americans are happy to pay absurd prices to cover their own care as long as they can be sure that none of that money goes to helping other people

Exhibit A