zlacker

Is this not only reductive reasoning, but also both devils advocating, and functionally an artefact of the US health system economics?

>>ggm+(OP)
> Is this not only reductive reasoning

Maybe. Reductive reasoning is usually a good idea.

> devils advocating

No.

> functionally an artefact of the US health system economics?

So what? If and when you manage to fix the US health system for the working poor then it might become reasonable to provide free healthcare to the disruptive homeless, sure. But until then it isn't.

>>lmm+N9
I think we have fundamentally different views on this. It's also true that disruptive homeless have to be managed in state funded healthsystems worldwide and that includes denying them service when they do bad things, I'm not naieve enough to believe somehow this is a uniquely american problem (disruptive people) but I do think the aspect of reductive health economics here is a pretty unique problem to the US health economy. And I say that living in an economy which has private emergency services alongside the public ones. We just don't have the same problem at scale, because we don't have the underlying health charge model.