Comment

Comment by jval

The problem is that the United States isn't a 'country' in the way the UK, or Denmark, or Australia is. The entire population of Denmark is 5.59 million, the size of a single second or third tier city in the US. Australia is 22 million, the size of the NYC metro area. You can socialise and centralise healthcare in countries on such a small scale, but it becomes exponentially more difficult to do in a country like the US (pop: 313 M).

The United States is an enormous country comprised of 50 separate state governments, where the powers of the federal government are extremely limited (both by the constitution itself, and by the fact that it is practically impossible to do anything at that kind of scale).

As a result, it is extremely hard to pass any sort of massive reforms. Can you imagine how difficult it would be to pass one single, uniform system of health care for all Europeans?

Talking about solutions that work well in smaller countries is all well and good, but the reality is you need different solutions if you want them to work at scale. It's the same reason why most of Facebook's backend is now written in C++ instead of PHP. It is much more painstaking to work with and harder to pick up but when you're building a huge system of interconnected parts you want something that isn't going to fall over and die suddenly.

The supposed chaos and gridlock of the US political system is a feature, not a bug. It's the reason why if you look at a list of the world's oldest nations the United States is right at the top, and is one of the largest.

EDIT: Sorry - not saying the US's healthcare system is the best it can be and didn't make that clear enough. Just saying that comparing it to other countries won't help as the US has a unique political reality.

parent jval 12 years ago

Discussion

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton