The USians get lumped with any extra costs because your system allows them to get away with it. NZ has indicated that they’re prepared to wear things like a longer time before generics can be released to the market. That doesn’t happen because it’s not part of international agreements. And of course NZ has no capability of influencing international policies on drugs.

As for choice, we can rely on our government to buy the best drugdrugs available for different conditions, and it’s not just one for each condition. If our doctor thinks a different one would be better, we can still be prescribed it and pay for it ourselves. I currently do that for one of my medications. Choice is not an issue.

There are two main reasons other countries can bargain for lower drug prices: [a] They get a free ride on R&D because they and the drug companies know Americans will pay for it; and [b] they’re willing to settle for less choice than Americans would ever sit still for.

I believe many saw Truman as weak, though I don’t know anything about why. Possibly it’s in relation to the peace negotiations?

Except that I’ve never claimed to be qualified to be President.

“Left office with a 60% approval rating”.

No surprise there. I totally approved of his leaving office.

On these approval ratings since WE II:
The highest for Bill Clintoyn (!) at 66%, Ronald Reagan at 63%, Barack Obama 60%, about ex aequo with Dwight D. Eisenhouwer.
The lowest approval ratings: Richard Nixon 24%, Harry S. Truman 32% (!), and both George W. Bush and Jimmy Carter at 34%
Note that different sites give slightly different numbers, but they mostly concur on the order. The ‘(!)’ mark’s my personal surprise.

I think Medicare should be available for everyone. Perhaps those under 65 could pay premiums. The extra people in the scheme would mean it would be in a stronger negotiating position to get lower costs because of bulk buying.

In NZ, for example, prescription medication (except for some exceptions) is free for everyone under 15, over 65, with a serious chronic or terminal condition, and below a certain income threshold. Everyone else pays $5 per item up to a maximum of $100 per family, per year. The government can do that because they negotiate with drug companies for all the drugs for the entire population and therefore get a really good deal. There must be insurance companies, states, etc who serve much bigger populations than NZ that could do the same.

Correct me if I’m wrong, but the Veterans’ Administration do some good negotiating. In fact, they’re a pretty good model that could be rolled out across the country. The stuff in it that doesn’t work seems to me to be because the federal government, while it wants to care properly for vets, doesn’t want the rest of the population demanding the same system. So there’s a failure to fund things like computerisation of old records which leads to cases that look bad in the media, like people getting called in for treatment after they’ve died.

It is not a pot/kettle comparison, since in this case there is only one nincompoop (and -spoiler alert- it is not Mr Obama).

[Columbia University, Harvard Law School, President of the Harvard Law Review, professor of Constitutional Law at the University of Chicago Law School, not to mention his stellar political career. Nobel Peace prize winner. Left office with a 60% approval rating, the third highest since WW II. Not exactly the summary of a nincompoop]

Medicaid is a newer coverage, primarily for poor folks who still make some money but cannot afford any insurance. It also has become a big part of coverage for nursing home care and without it, there would be lots of people in very bad shape because nursing home care is very big.

Remember also, the amount of money you get from Social Security depends on how much you paid in and how long you worked and when you start taking it. So do not think that everyone makes the same or gets the same. It does not work that way.

Do you really want to go there? Hitchens excoriated the monarchy, renounced his allegiance to same, became an American, and supported those so-called “unnecessary” actions. (All war is unnecessary, inasmuch as appeasement and capitulation to evil are always options.) Britain’s crimes vastly outweigh anything America may have done, but that’s neither here nor there. As someone I deeply admire likes to say, two wrongs don’t make a right.

What do you say I concede that I don’t understand your system, and you do likewise?