I’m glad I found this rebuttal to Umair Haque’s ongoing rants against American capitalism. I suspect the real purpose of his exorbitant claims is to increase publication of his articles (and pay) rather than to express his actual beliefs. In that respect he is a capitalist instead of a socialist.

He has great regard for UK’s public funded National Health Service (NHS)that charges no fee for services except for eye exams, dental care, prescriptions and some aspects of long term care. Charges for the exceptions are less than from a private provider and there is no charge for low-income patients (similar to U.S. Medicaid). The NHS is overloaded in spite of increased outsourcing and privatization. Costs continue to escalate and funding is adequate for the demand. Consequently, services and patient care is deteriorating. There are long waits for ambulances to respond to emergencies and there are long trips to transport patients to hospitals with available space for care. Wait times for cancer patients to see a doctor can be two months. Wait times for non-emergency surgeries are excessive and doctors are leaving the occupation because they are overworked and feel that patients are not getting proper care.

Sweden presents a good example of public funded (social) medical care. Programs were implemented in the ’70s and ’80s and during the first decade had positive results. The system began crashing after debt-fueled inflation in the ’80s. The ’90s were stained with a massive economic crisis. Banks were on the brink of collapse. To reform and save its economy, Sweden reverted back to its capitalist structure. I think a past example of “Medicare for All” is more credible than a philosophical proposed implementation.