An American doctor told me that the only reason other countries could have universal health care was because the United States was paying for their defence. Did anyone else hear that?

An American doctor told me that the only reason other countries could have universal health care was because the United States was paying for their defence.  Did anyone else hear that?

An American doctor told me that the only reason other countries could have universal health care was because the United States was paying for their defence.  Did anyone else hear that?

The argument is specious and starts from questionable assumptions. I see two of them.

1/ The defence of these countries would be expensive and would only benefit them.

No, it’s to be put into perspective. The countries thus “protected” keep an army and buy mainly American, it’s a win-win situation. In fact, Trump has put pressure on NATO member countries to buy even more US armaments. The process is so forced that France protested via its defence minister who said

.

This makes the USA, among other things, by far the ’s largest arms manufacturer and seller.

it really cost the USA to ensure this defence? I’m not sure, it allows them to maintain vassals and an advantageous hegemony. Are the protected countries really saving by being under Uncle Sam’s thumb? That remains to be proven, and it depends on the country. France retains military independence while having social . We could very do without NATO while keeping our social .

2/ The USA would therefore be forced to adopt a liberal system that would cost less.

Now it’s simple: it’s not . Their care system is the most expensive in the world, one of the least efficient.

NOTHING justifies the continuation of such a bad system except to continue the benefits of a few, including American .