In a nationalized healthcare system, you need to know who’s who – otherwise the device could never find a way determine who’s entitled. The structure depends how the device is created and designed, but with a nationalized healthcare system you is likely to be tracked by the state where you reside and how you move in a fashion that is unseen in America. The nationalized healthcare system becomes a car for population control.

If you leave the United States and are no more a resident of the state, even though you are a citizen and might maintain a driving license, you will need to report immediately if you wish to steer clear of the 13% healthcare tax. I use the amount 13% because it is in Sweden to exemplify the actual tax pressure that is laid upon you for the nationalized health care.

Let’s say you moved and you do not want to pay for the 13% tax for services you do not receive, can receive, or desire to taken out of the tax roll. The mammoth entity has no interest to let you go so easy. You will end up having to reveal your private life – partner, dwellings, travel, money, and job to prove your case that you’ve the right to leave people healthcare system and do not need to pay for the tax. When you yourself have to get an appeal, your information might be a part of administrative court documents which are open and public documents. When you return to the United States, you is likely to be automatically enrolled again and the taxes begin to pile up.

Public universal healthcare has no fascination with protecting your privacy. They need their tax money and, to fight for your rights, you will need to prove that you meet certain requirements never to be taxable. For the reason that process, your private life is up for display.

The national ID-card and national population registry that includes your medical information is a foundation of the nationalized healthcare system. You will see where this is going – population control and power to utilize the law and healthcare access to map your whole private life in public places searchable databases owned and operated by the government.

By operating an impeccable population registry that tracks where you live, who you live with, whenever you move and your citizen status including residency the Swedes can separate who is able to receive universal healthcare from those not entitled. The Swedish authorities will know when you yourself have a Swedish social security number, with the tap of the keyboard, more info about yourself than you are able to remember. The Swedish government has taken sharing of information between agencies to a brand new level. The main reason is very simple – to gather healthcare tax and suppress any tax evasion.

It’s heavily centralized and only the central administration can alter the registered information in the data. So if you wish to change your name, even the slightest change, you’ve to file an application at a national agency that processes your paperwork. This centralized population registry afford them the ability to ascertain who’s who under all circumstances and it is necessary for the national healthcare system. Otherwise, any person could claim to be entitled.

To implement that in the United States takes a new doctrine for population registry and control. In an American context that could require that each existing driving license must be voided and reapplied under stricter identification rules that could match not just data from Internal Revenue Service, state government, municipal government, Social Security Administration, and Department of Homeland Security but almost any agency that delivers services to the overall public. The reason why a brand new population registry could be needed in the United States is the truth that lax rules dating back again to the 1940s up before the War on Terrorism, and stricter identification criteria following 9/11, has made a significant percentage of personal information regarding individuals questionable.

If America instead neglects maintaining secure records, determining eligibility for public healthcare wouldn’t be possible and the floodgates for fraud would open and rampant misuse of the device would prevail. This might eventually bring down the system.

It’s financially impossible to produce a universal healthcare system without clearly knowing who’s entitled and not. The system needs to have limits of its entitlement. A social security number wouldn’t be enough as these numbers have already been given out through decades to temporary residents which may not really are now living in the United States or might today be out of status as illegal immigrants.

The Congress has investigated the cost of many of the “public options”, but nonetheless we’ve no clear picture of the actual realm of the group that could be entitled and under which conditions. The risk is political. It’s super easy for political reasons to extend the entitlement. Politicians might have a hard time being firm on illegal immigrants’ entitlement, as that could put the politicians on a collision course with mainly the Hispanic community as they represent a significant area of the illegal immigrants. So the easy sell is then that everyone that is a legal resident alien or citizen can join according to one fee plan and then your illegal immigrants can join according to a different fee structure. That assumes that they actually pay the fee which is really a wild guess as they are likely to be able to access service without having to state that they’re illegal immigrants.

It would work politically – but again – with no impeccable population registry and control over who’s who on a national level, this is unlikely to succeed. The system could be predestined to fail because of insufficient funds. If you design a system to offer the healthcare needs for a population and then increase that population without any additional funds – then naturally it’d result in a diminished degree of service, declined quality, and waiting lists for complex procedures. In real terms, American healthcare goes from being truly a first world system to a third world system.

Thousands, if not really a million, American residents live as every other American citizen but they are still not in good standing using their immigration even if they’ve been here for ten or fifteen years. A widespread healthcare system will raise issues about who’s entitled and who’s not.

The choice is for an American universal healthcare system to surrender to the truth that there’s no order in the people registry and just provide healthcare for everybody who shows up. If that is performed, costs will dramatically increase at some level according to who’ll grab the bill – the state government, the federal government, or people healthcare system.

Illegal immigrants that have arrived within the last years and make-up a significant population would create a huge pressure on a universal healthcare, if implemented, in states like Texas and California. If they’re given universal healthcare, it would have been a pure loss for the device as they mostly benefit cash. They’ll never be payees to the universal healthcare system because it is dependant on salary taxes, and they do not file taxes.

The difference is that Sweden has minimal illegal immigrants set alongside the United States. The Swedes do not provide healthcare services for illegal immigrants and the illegal immigrants may be arrested and deported if they need public service without good legal standing.

This firm and uniform standpoint towards illegal immigration is essential in order to avoid a universal healthcare system from crumbling down and to steadfastly keep up a sustainable ratio between those who pay into the device and those who take advantage of it.

The working middle class that would be the backbone to pay for into the device wouldn’t only face that their existing healthcare is halved in its service value – but most likely face higher cost of healthcare as they will be the ones to pick up the bill.

The universal healthcare system might have maybe 60 million to 70 million “free riders” if based on wage taxes, and maybe half if based on fees, that won’t pay anything to the system. We already know that approximately 60 million Americans pay no taxes as adults add to that particular the estimated 10-15 million illegal immigrants.

There is no way that a universal healthcare system may be viably implemented unless America creates a population registry that may identify the entitlements for each individual and that will have to be designed from scratch to a high degree as we can’t count on driver’s license data as the standard could be too low – a lot of errors.

Many illegal immigrants have both social security numbers and driver’s licenses as we were holding issued without rigorous control of status before 9/11. The choice is you had to exhibit a US passport or a valid foreign passport with a green card to have the ability to register.

Another problematic task is how many points of registration. If the registration is performed by hospitals – and not really a federal agency – health care monitoring system using iot then it is highly likely that registration fraud could be rampant. It could be super easy to trespass the control of eligibility when it is registered and determined with a hospital clerk. This supports that the eligibility needs to be determined by a main administration that’s a vast access to data and information regarding our lives, income, and medical history. If a unitary registration at a medical care provider or hospital would guarantee you free healthcare forever and there’s no rigorous and audited process – then it is certain that corruption, bribery, and fraud could be synonymous with the system.

This requires a significant degree of political strength to confront and set the limits for who’s entitled – and here comes the true problem – selling out healthcare to get the votes of the free riders. It’s apparent that the political power of the “free” healthcare promise is very high.

A promise that may not alienate anyone as a stronger population registry would upset the Hispanic population, as many of the illegal immigrants are Hispanics – and many Hispanics might be citizens by birth but their elderly parents are not. Would the voting power of the younger Hispanics act to place pressure to extend healthcare to elderly that aren’t citizens? Yes, naturally, as every group tries to maximize a unique self-interest.

The risk is, even having an enhanced population registry, that the number of entitled would expand and put additional burden on the device beyond what it was designed for. That may come though political wheeling and dealing, sheer inability from an administrative standpoint to spot groups, or systematic fraud within the device itself.