Someone doesnt seem to want to explain clearly to the public that paying some of your income to make care available to all makes the care you will *inevitably* need sometime in the future free for some things and a lot cheaper for other treatments because the costs are borne by a large group. It's not "socialism" it's creating a system that works (for the most part) and helps the largest amount of people improving life for all

The people who profit financially from the current system make sure the dumb masses remain convinced universal healthcare is some sort of horrible evil.

Because the medical industry spends countless millions per year one way (lobbying all parties and politicians) as well as the other (advertising to spread fear against general healthcare). Nobody can outspend them, and if they could nobody is prepared to sink to their moral depths to counter them. So that's it. No country is perfect but nothing in the developed world comes close to the drama you have organised there.

I think, it is because your huge capitalism there and your hospitals and doctors works as private business. But still, how can broken leg by you cost $20 000? Idk. Here in Slovakia, we also have type of capitalism, but also with kind of light "socialism" (we have democracy). But many western europe countries has as well, and everywhere is public healthcare (of his version). We are paying "fee" from our income/salary to public healthcare system and for retirement system. The "fee" to public healthcare system is counted from your salary. If you are unwillingly unemployed, the goverment pays for you, if you are willingly unemployed, you have to pay it by yourself, but it is for example somewhere from $15 to $150. But for high fee you have to have really high salary so it is not too much though. And in this fee you have almost everything covering, surgeries, treatments, some drugs, drug discounts etc. Wy this can’t be standard also in US i really don’t know, but it works.

Many factors. Most voters have health insurance through their employer, which means they never see how much they are paying for their health care (employer pays the premium, hospital/doctor bills the insurance company). Most voters also think their health care is OK because they have never experienced anything better, and/or have never needed anything better. Americans tend to have a significant distrust of the government, and half the politicians rely on and encourage this distrust. ("The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the Government, and I'm here to help." - Ronald Reagan). Also, the health insurance industry and the health care industry are making a huge profit from the current system, so they spend billions of dollars to lobby against any change. And finally, Americans tend to distrust other countries, so the "it works so well in [insert country]" argument isn't very effective.

Unfortunately a lot of Americans aren't mentally able to comprehend how this would benefit them.

Many of us would love for that to happen.

Because that would mean that the insurance companies would no longer be able to practice medicine without a license and thereby not be able to make the obscene profits they make!

Greed.

Kristoffer Rahbek-Jensen -

This comment is hidden. Click here to view.

Because nothing is really "for free". It functions because of taxes. I remember, when Obama tried to change the system, Lots of American people were outraged and didn't want it. Later seen a documentary about how lobbyists contributed to such mass-control. But I can't speak for sure because, honestly, I don't know exactly what Obama's health reform would present. Anyway, it's always the unwillingness to pay taxes and to pay "for someone else", rather than for the common good of the society. Plus, if you have a corrupted government, it's tough to trust the taxes system. Anyway, things have to change, and every country that has it working well, it's been through taxes or donations.