Is it about the way taxes are distributed? Well, that could be said about all kinds of things: a portion of taxes goes to public education, even if a taxpayer doesn't have children. What's the difference? That's the nature of a tax system. A portion of my taxes goes to build roads I will never drive on, but I know they are needed so I don't complain about it. To put it simply, all tax moneys collected are divided and used to pay for all kinds of things the country or province needs. Perhaps I don't particularly wish to have my tax dollars spent on supporting the military, but we don't get to pick and choose which programmes we wish to support. That's not how it works.
And there seems to be some misconception that the government gets to control my health care. Rest assured: the Prime Minister does not sit in on my pap tests, nor does the Premier of the province tell me which drugs I can and cannot take. No government official decides which doctor I see, and government workers don't have access to my medical files.
I saw a documentary on TV a number of years ago about a public health care Bill being presented in the state of Oregon. I found it very interesting that the loudest opponents to the Bill were..... The Insurance Companies. Gee, I wonder who stands to lose the most should the state offer public health care? And so the fear-mongering began, and the Bill did not pass.
Here's the thing: Bottom line. We're a family of four. We pay $114.00 per month (it was only $108 until a couple of months ago), and that's it. I can go to any doctor, have blood tests, X-Rays, Ultrasounds, MRIs, Bone scans, see specialists, basically have all my health care needs addressed. AND I DON'T HAVE TO PAY ANY MORE than that $114. [I pay a small fee to go to Physiotherapy, or massage therapy, and the like, but that's it]. I have given birth to two children and it didn't cost me a cent extra. (That number is lower for people of lower income). Where's the problem here?
Wouldn't it be nice for Americans to NOT be locked into seeing only a doctor that is covered by their health insurance? or to not have to go to a particular hospital that is covered by their health insurance? or to receive necessary surgery and treatment without worry that their insurance will cover it? To receive health care even if they can't afford health insurance?
It seems to me that the American system has a lot more limitations than ours. I think there's a lot of miscommunication out there.