Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyIlliterate
That may be, but it is also because other nations aren't willing to put forth the effort or money to do so, while simultaneously reaping the benefit(s) of the protection and power that the US provides.
Here is a listing of "the principal defence forums, arrangements and agreements" that Canada has with the US:
http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/news/arti...nship/hob7hd8s
How much do you think it would cost Canada to run even a portion of this stuff on their own? And do you think that Canada could realistically fund national health care for its citizens at the same level that it does now while also paying for its increased, go-it-alone, defense obligations?
Or perhaps we should just look at NATO spending. As noted in this article ( http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/cana...ding-1.3664272), the funding benchmark for member countries is 2% of GDP. What does Canada contribute? 0.99% of GDP. Again, do you think that Canada could realistically fund national health care for its citizens at the same level that it does now while also making the expected 2% of GDP contribution to NATO? |
You are suggesting that the US can't have a single payer health care system because of defense spending?
Or that they can't pay for poor people's health care because of war?
As I understand it, and feel free to correct me on this, because I am on my phone and can't look it up, the cost per person treated for single payer systems is less than for the US system. The US system costs less, per capita, because people go untreated.