yes yes ... but it says "exceptionally good reason" ... there must be harm ... exceptionally serious harm ... right?

"they pay similar taxes as we do in the US in terms of taxes as a % of income" ... where "similar" translates to a, what, 40% later "tax freedom day".

"so not only is private healthcare not illegal [in canada]" ... but it is. IIRC, a few years ago, Ontario ran out of the province an american company who wanted to open up a subscription-fee-based very quick access to new family doctors. (There is quite a shortage of that in most areas here.) No can do - says the Canada Health Act - the government must monopolize that industry, and we citizen-units aren't permitted to pay someone else for anything that the System provides. They couldn't even start up.

"their system is cheaper and more effective and of a higher quality" ... the grass always look greener on the other side. There are ways in which the canadian systems work better, and ways in which they work worse. They are certainly much less libre and not gratis either.

"people don't go bankrupt from getting sick"

Look, bankruptcy is not even the worst thing that can happen to a person. Going untreated is worse. Paying taxes for health care, then finding out that one's condition isn't covered ... having to beg/threaten invincible government bureaucrats who get to make such rationing decisions ... complaining to newspapers how OHIP or whatever is letting Poor Kelly die ... taking up collections from public so Poor Kelly can travel to the States for treatment. This really happens here in the Great White Up.

Adjust your reality filter accordingly.

"OTOH if you don't have health insurance in the US, your access to health care in many states is nonexistent"

It is a clever trick to equivocate "insurance" and "access". It is possible to self-insure - a completely rational, actuarially-sound, choice for many young people.

Please read the wikipedia text before parroting the link. "This mostly goes towards services not covered or partially covered by Medicare ..."

In other words, if you would like to set up a family practice, or walk-in clinic, or hospital, or specialist office, and work directly for your customers, the po-po will take you to the jail-jail.

You haven't quite supplied enough activation energy to fuel a point-by-point rebuttal, so this will have to do ...

Are you QUITE sure that the reason this seems (to you) to work so well (in terms of services provided) is because of economies of scale? Have you considered that, just perhaps, it might be because the weighted-distribution of the beneficiaries is different from taxpayers, so that your aggregation of "canadians" into a single uniform mass of happy taxpayers-beneficiaries is ... dishonest?

"the system there is very popular"

That proves nothing. Private medicine is -outlawed-, nearly uniquely in western countries. People have no choice, so of course they'll be grateful for the snippets of rationed health care they might receive.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

"while people getting government insurance"

Government "insurance" is no such thing.

"in Canada pay an average of about half as much in taxes (scaled to their income)"

I don't know what that's supposed to mean, but if you want a broad-based measure, consider the annual "tax freedom day": mid-june for Ontario, mid-april for New York. Doesn't look good for Canadian "half as much in taxes".

... because that is Very Important.

... a convenience, especially to a government that wishes to dip into people's savings and tax every transaction.

"If that "better way" doesn't make profit for the labels or the artists, then why exactly should they support it?"

Wait a minute, didn't you say "wealth is generated by society" and "money violates all natural laws" just an hour or two ago?

... it better be massively parallel if it is to have an advantage over a software emulation of same.

"Wealth is generated by society. ... Money violates all natural laws."

Haha ok, well at least you're out of the marxist type of closet.

"Like for example for my niece, born last night"

Congratulations!

"paid for out of general taxation"

IOW, "someone else pays".

"no premiums" ... except for the taxes, so mostly paid by the wealthy. You're welcome!

"no waivers, no limits" ... except the various government rationing organs who determine what disorders and treatments are covered, how far to go to save someone's life - i.e., when to give up and give that scarce hospital bed resource to someone else.

You didn't think it really violates the natural laws of scarce resources?

"I am not saying regulation is the only option, I'm saying it's the best option."

Well, nice to see evolution in action, but your new position requires if anything even more elaborate argumentation/evidence than that.

"... healthcare ... pool ..."

You really don't want to go there. (Hint: apprx. all "insurance" programs provided by governments aren't insurance.)

I have been led to believe that it is theoretically possible for individuals to voluntarily pool their interests, buy mass-made products - even information products.

"Have you ever tried to get a choose-your-own-channels TV package? It's expensive ..."

Boo hoo, first world problem. In this context, the only alternative you can conceive of are government-mandated bundles? I think the problem lies with your lack of imagination (and/or awareness of actual alternatives already available), and your quaint faith in the unfailing wisdom of our betters in government.