I'm not actually a fan of the NHS: I think they do things better in France and Germany. But that's one of the classic examples of anglophone ignorance: whether in the US or the UK, the assumption is that there are only two possibilities! It is perfectly possible to have health care paid for by taxation without it being provided by a nationalised industry (France) or to have healthcare paid for by private insurance but with a reliable safety net for the poor and proper regulation of the providers (Germany, Netherlands).

It's all very well to talk about what's available in the USA but it's only available if you can afford it or are eligable for state aid. Many people fall through the cracks. But then I suspect those are not the sort of people that ChuangTzu associates with, as opposed to the sort who can afford a 4-month holiday.

I knew a wife and husband in Canada and they would simply buy insurance in the US since they'd never get seen in Canada.

David, the world did fine prior to the National Healthcare schemes, even in England. The USA had a very effective system until the 1970's, most Dr.'s were cash only or worked out payment plans with each patient. As a result, Dr.'s could not charge exorbitant fees, tended to favor prevention rather then treatment after the fact etc... Dr.'s also, were not viewed as super rich rock stars back then either....

Perhaps, the better scheme would be one that encourages prevention, ex: in China their government pays for public Tai Chi and Qigong classes as well as other fitness classes as part of preventative care. Although, I am reminded of the Taoist quote "The best scheme of all is no scheme".

Regarding, your second paragraph, my friend is actually a retired pensioner; he lives a comfortable life, but is by no means rich. He has also stated several times that if he were younger (or could travel back in time) he would move to the USA, but he is in late 70's and is "trapped" by the lie of social programs (his words).

Jefro, I guess you and I should stop spreading fake news.

The Grass Is Not Always Greener: A Look at National Health Care Systems Around the World
https://www.cato.org/publications/po...s-around-world

Actually I think the above is a bit mixed up in that even today basic doctor's office fees are not the bulk of Healthcare expense. It's only when things got divided up as they are now in the US with the requirement to have a Primary Care Physician with common referrals to (lots of) specialists and specialized testing that bills skyrocket for mere doctor's fees. The major costs come into play with testing (often and oddly of limited value), surgery and prescriptions. These are the areas where monopolistic practices are more likely, more effective (at raising costs) and more expensive.

It is too easy to fall into a "baby with the bath water" scenario when we talk about "the lie of social programs" since they are by no means all the same. Let me state clearly that I am very wary of social programs in general because they are often so ripe for abuse, but it is just inaccurate to write them off altogether. We can look at economic practices in other areas where competition and access exist for analogous comparison.

There is a parallel between social programs that provide a bottom end safety net and practices like Japanese Z-Theory where avenues were created so that the lowest guy on an assembly line, instead of having to operate through a long (and often uncaring) "chain of command" had direct access to top management. Not only did this give top management a better and unfiltered perspective on "where the rubber meets the road" but it gave the lower echelon a sense of meaningfulness along with a feeling of actually having a clear cut future of which they could be an active part with the result of the creation of fierce company loyalty and far greater care for the quality of their work. When this was combined with profit sharing, Japan, even though recovering from the devastation of WWII, went from being synonymous with cheap junk to being a global economic power, that had profoundly deep affect even on The Big Three US auto manufacturers, and cars went from lasting around 35,000 miles to over 100,000 miles. It is almost impossible to overstate the wide beneficial affect that had on a huge percentage of the global population.

Similarly it is in everyone's benefit that any manner of regulations bear in mind that making the world a better place for all when there are fewer disenfranchised. Who do you sell your products to when only a few have any money, let alone any sense of future, security or hope? There is great value in empowering individuals. This is referred to as a Vertical Society as opposed to Horizontal. This is why I think that DIY medicine is an extremely important movement and only an example of how this can spread into many other areas and improve what it even means to be human and alive.