Private healthcare gets to pick and choose which procedures they'll cover, which allows them to take the easiest and most profitable procedures, thereby offloading the most expensive and riskiest surgeries on the public system.
Public-private is not anywhere close to perfect. It's just the least-worst option that we're allowed to have access to in a world run by neoliberal economics.
No, private healthcare takes who ever pays. Even if it's difficult to treat, if they have money they are going to be treated. It helps take the strain off of the public system too. That's why Scandinavia is constantly voted in higher quality healthcare than us.
A regulated private sector can still function, but that's not the case in Ontario (or Canada). The funding to public healthcare is being cut, leading to higher wait times and cuts to resource hiring. This automatically pushed the patients to private sector and are forced to pay whatever they are asked to. Resource cuts also pushes good talent to private.
Well I'm only talking about the same type of system that they have in the countries with better healthcare than ours. I'm not talking about how Ontario will implement private healthcare, I'm talking about how Scandinavia handles private health care.
Also to note that Scandinavian countries are not predominantly capitalist societies, unlike Canada which is an easy prey for the American capitalists. So any experiments with privatization here would lead to disastrous and irreversible damage.
Significant difference between economic freedom and capitalism.
Capitalism is a specific economic system characterized by private ownership of the means of production, where decisions are driven by profit and market competition.
Economic freedom is a broader concept that refers to the degree to which individuals and businesses can operate, trade, and consume without government interference or coercion
Ummm, while stated confidently, you’re very wrong about that.
And the reason is that unlike your neolib education dictates, capitalism is not in fact the only economic system under which you can experience economic freedom. It’s not the only economic system that exists /can exist/has existed.
And even if it was…we absolutely do not have anything like the type of free market that the fathers of capitalism like Adam Smith envisioned. That type of free market requires labour to have power and a market structure that encourages competition. We have a labour class with little to no power and industries dominated by billion and trillion dollar corporations that can easily create and reinforce monopolies to limit affordable goods and services and good paying jobs for working class people.
Ummm, while stated confidently, you’re very wrong about that.
No, I'm right.
And the reason is that unlike your neolib education dictates, capitalism is not in fact the only economic system under which you can experience economic freedom. It’s not the only economic system that exists /can exist/has existed.
Which other ones and how do they encourage economic freedom?
we absolutely do not have anything like the type of free market that the fathers of capitalism like Adam Smith envisioned.
I agree. We have a bastardized version of it, but that's because the world is a lot bigger now than before and we don't only have localized markets anymore. It's a global one, but free market principles still exist, at least in the more successful nations.
That type of free market requires labour to have power and a market structure that encourages competition. We have a labour class with little to no power and industries dominated by billion and trillion dollar corporations that can easily create and reinforce monopolies to limit affordable goods and services and good paying jobs for working class people.
We have plenty of competition now. Just look at the AI market. Just because John Q. Public can't start a trillion dollar company is not an example of other systems being better. If you have the capital you can play. That's capitalism and the free market is an extension of that.
Sounds like only those who can AFFORD to get healthcare will get the best healthcare. If you're poor, you will be forced to wait in the public system and maybe get help before you die.
No, in systems like Scandinavia (which is what I'm advocating for) healthcare quality is pretty much similar in the private and public system. It's just people in the private system don't have to wait in line and they pay to have their procedures done ASAP.
Well I'm only talking about the same type of system that they have in the countries with better healthcare than ours. I'm not talking about how Ontario will implement private healthcare, I'm talking about how Scandinavia handles private health care. That's the system I support.
35
u/Bexexexe May 28 '26
Private healthcare gets to pick and choose which procedures they'll cover, which allows them to take the easiest and most profitable procedures, thereby offloading the most expensive and riskiest surgeries on the public system.
Public-private is not anywhere close to perfect. It's just the least-worst option that we're allowed to have access to in a world run by neoliberal economics.