even in the U.S. elective procedures are being shelved...just like in the U.K...so, to use the current situation with the NHS as evidence (w/o noting the comparable U.S. delays) is misleading...and certainly not a justification for deciding which HC system is "best".
Now, as to the judgement of which approach might be better for us (USA), I'm not 'pimping' for a version of the NHS...I am however shining a light on the facts that we pay 2X per capita more than what any other country does (and growing), and tens of millions of our citizens don't have a family doc to see, get checkups and treatments (early) so as to have the same quality and length of life as the families next door.
Another perspective is to view our HC system as an "Overhead Account" for USA, Inc., which is in competition with all the other Worldwide "Incs". If you were an outside consultant, you'd strongly encourage your client to make major changes, at least I would. This situation is not sustainable, it's growing and the "status quo" ain't cutting it...time for action...we'll have many more opportunities to carry on this conversation...but thanks for responding.
The book by Steven Brill doesn't advocate for 'Single Payer HC' either...it shines a light on the problems with American HC and suggests what he believes are workable solutions...I highly recommend it (available 'used' on Amazon for ~$10.00).
Sorry for the late reply, but Zoom calls, dinner and the 'Left Coast' locale makes 'flowing dialogues' difficult...hopefully doesn't bother you.