:roll: Nice chocie of sources. Let me provide a few others:
Sweden:
Sweden's government run healthcare system is constantly at the top of international rankings. This could be because of their fast and efficient treatment of patients.
Sweden's Healthcare System - Best Health Care Countries
Sweden tops the list of 94 countries in the State of the World's Mothers index examining 10 factors related to women's and children's health, education and political status.
Sweden ranks 1st, U.S. 11th on 'Mother's Index' - CNN
BBC NEWS | Health | How the NHS could learn from Sweden
These are after your paper says everything went to ****? Go figure.
Canada:
Yes, they protest cuts. So? We protest things here to. Our insurance companies cut our ebenfits as well. What exactly do you think you're saying?
The United States spends far more per capita on health care than any comparable country. In fact, the gap is so enormous that a recent University of California, San Francisco, study estimates that the United States would save over $161 billion every year in paperwork alone if it switched to a singlepayer system like Canada's.3 These billions of dollars are not abstract amounts deducted from government budgets; they come directly out of the pockets of people who are sick.
(snip)
The solid statistics amassed since the 1970s point to only one conclusion: like it or not, believe it makes sense or not, publicly funded, universally available health care is simply the most powerful contributing factor to the overall health of the people who live in any country. And in the United States, we have got the bodies to prove it.
Canadian Single-Payer Health Care Program: Is it Better than US Health Care?
Remember, Canada ranked 30th by WHO. The US 37th. France was number one.
And your vermont article is factually inaccurate. A single payer system does not involve itself in who provdes care, hire doctors, run hospitals. They function like a single insurance company for all. And here, the wealthy would be free to not only pay for more, but buy more and separate insurance. Your editorial simply isn't quite accurate.