top of page

The 0.2% vs Medical Care for All

Many questions have multiple answers. Some, few in fact, do not. Medical Care for All is one. 99.8% of the 7.8 billion people agree. M4A is a human right.

Point two percent is a small number. In some ways it is a great number. If our mortgage rate was 0.2% we would be stoked. But if the survival rate of a medical procedure were 0.2%, we would probably opt out of it. Simply the risk would outweigh the reward.

Sometimes I think we need to rely a bit more on math to find and trust answers. If C had a 0.2% chance of being correct, no one would pick it. Yet, America seems to be relying and listening to the 0.2% who picked C or opted for the procedure.

There are 7.8 Billion people on planet Earth. 7,800,000,0000. That’s a big number. Of those, about 350 million are Americans. 350,000,000. Still a big number but small in comparison. 175 million Americans want Medicare for All, otherwise known as socialized medicine. Half the population.

If all we do is look at certain issues through a 50/50 split, then the debates are logical, acceptable and founded. They make sense. It’s only when you add in the rest of the earth’s population do you come to realise that there is a wrong answer.

7,450,000,000 billion people support socialized medicine. They all understand that medical care is a need and not a want, and therefore should not be capitalized. Add half of the American population to that number and you get 7,625,000,000 billion people who choose the same answer. Medicare for All is a human right.

No one, and really 0.2%, still equals no one, wants to pay a high cost for a necessity. Yes, there are levels of care just like there are levels of phones and cars. But the fact that there are only 175,000,000 who support medical insurance over medical care demonstrates how we have been sold a lemon.

The counter argument is Capitalism. But it is not. Capitalism relies on freedom which the 0.2% argue as a reason to not provide M4A. But in truth, the system has corrupted itself. Freedom, concerning medical care, would equal a free market system.

Meaning a diabetic could go online with a prescription and order their insulin from who they want to buy from. Insurance companies don't allow this. That’s not freedom. If I don't want to pay $300 for insulin, I can search online and buy it for $4 from a provider elsewhere. That is freedom.

Same for HIV medicine. In Thailand it costs $2 a day. In Turkey it costs $4 a day. Both include a doctor visit, full blood work and quality care. Yet, in America you are lucky to pay $1000 a month out of pocket for meds not including insurance, copayments and bloodwork.

Someone with a medical condition that requires regular care has no freedom in America.

The other counter argument is also a fallacy. The 0.2% will argue that the money obtained in the American market is what drives the research and science behind the field of medicine. It is not the case. A scientist is a scientist like a teacher is a teacher and a businessperson is a businessperson. The first measures success in proving hypothesis, the next in student growth, only the last measures the success in money.

It doesn't hold weight. The science will still move forward if medical insurance goes by the wayside because the last time I checked, managers driving Bugattis are not the scientists in the lab coats finding cures.

Lots of big issues are close to 50/50. Medical Care for All is not one. 99.8% of all people on planet earth believe in socialized medicine. Anyone who doesn't, I think the proof is clear. They are wrong. Insurance is not a need. It’s a tax on health which burdens the sick more than the healthy.

Medical Care for All is a human right. The few who think or speak otherwise are part of the 0.2%. It’s hard to argue that the sky is blue. Let the math speak for itself.

3 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All
Post: Blog2_Post
bottom of page