Reality disagrees with your assertion.

Just about every country that has a public health system run by the government spends less on health care than the United States does. Hell, we spend less on health care than the United States Government alone spends on health care per person, not even thinking about counting the amount of private monies spent.

If you don't think an American can handle it, just outsource it to Australia, Canada, the UK or anywhere else that spends less on health care than you do. We've literally got decades of experience with reasonable cost health care provision.

The article is terrible. Bootrec /FIXMBR to the rescue.

Many of those things that the poster stated came from scientists, not the media until they picked it up. Much like that poster, I also remember "all the rainforests will be gone by 2000," "Canada will be a desert because we're cutting down all the trees." And if I go get my grade school notes from the 1980's I can find more. Including the source of them. Usually out of some scientific journal.

With most countries, liability is decided by the courts, not the doctors and insurers. So you can count on the medical professionals caring for you, but the state or insurers may sue you for some of the cost if it is warranted (and there are damn few cases where it is). The only limitations on the NHS, as with most countries is with eligibility, only citizens, tax paying permanent residents and people who are citizens or permanent residents of countries with reciprocal agreements with the NHS are covered. As an Australian, I can travel to the UK and be covered under the NHS because Australia and UK have a reciprocal agreement with medical systems (so an Englishman is covered under Australia's medicare in Australia)

However even if you're ineligible, they're not going to leave you to die on the pavement. They'll just issue you with a bill afterwards and because the NHS has no profit motive, it wont be as high as countries with an entirely private system.

OTOH, we dont have the issue of "well you're costing us too much and threatening our profits, so we're not going to insure you any more".

Oh, easily. People who don't get paid tend not to provide service. If you think you're going to go to the hospital and get whatever is medically necessary and now and again the hospital gets stiffed, I think you're wrong. There will be some sort of coordination where the hospital will find out or know in advance what they'll get paid for, so that single payer becomes the de facto controller of your care.

It's not much different than insurance now. The typical policy has things it just won't pay for, limits on some things, things which require preapproval (and sometimes they say no). You can switch doctors all day long and that won't change what your insurance policy pays for. If you want that, you need to switch insurance policies or companies...unless you can't, because there is only one.

Of course you have people who are not happy with their healthcare... They actually used it.
I can promise that any problems they have are NOTHING compared to the USA.

No, you can't, actually. The US is where they went when they weren't satisfied with Canadian care.

I'm really sorry for what you experienced. That must have been a nightmare. It sounds like outright fraud...but that's not a systemic problem with US healthcare. One of mine spent a month and a half in the hospital, a reasonable portion of that in the NICU. Aside from one medical record error which was the fault of a transcriptionist, the care and payment was flawless. To this day I don't know what all that cost, but I wasn't making much at the time, and whatever it cost me wasn't enough to remember.

Then that would be interesting, IF they could guarantee that it wouldn't ever be worse. If you've ever paid attention to my (US) government, you'd know that's not the case. Case in point, I think the ACA is, on balance, a good thing, but there's a very vocal minority who would repeal it in a heartbeat if they could.

It's the IF that's the problem, though. I don't live with a government that has a track record of doing things well all the time. Sometimes they do, sometimes they don't.

Arsehole Puckering Up! :P :P :P

Still trucking along on a Phenom II X6 1045T... 6x2.8 GHz or 3x3.2 GHz still seems like a lot. I can't remember the last time I was CPU-bound. I have to spend more than a hundred bucks on a GPU, I guess.

I've used my Nexus 7 that way, and it works reasonably well. The biggest problem, as always, is that apps that are optimized for the small displays of most mobile devices simply don't work that well on larger screens. I have used it quite frequently with a Bluetooth mouse and keyboard and RDP software to work on our terminal services server, and there really isn't any noticeable difference between that and a PC remoting in. It's rather a special case, to be sure.

That's out of nowhere to you, but the computer is going to be able to see in the dark far outside the range of your headlights. Its headlights are going to be a convenience to other drivers, and an IR source for its night vision — which will have automatic gain control far outside the range of your pupils. It'll also likely have radar and lidar so even if it can't see the cow, it'll know it's there.