>>Also if your system works for all why would a Union go on strike because they are losing the "benefit" of having health care paid for?

The question of whether healthcare is available to all is a different question from the question you posed. Lets assume you work for an employer who does not pay for health insurance. Does that mean you do not have access to health care? No it doesn't. What are your options . . .

Well you could buy insurance yourself. But that costs money. Can you afford insurance? Yes but you might have to give something else up. Perhaps you can't take that vacation to LAs Vegas or you can't buy a new car, or you have to live in a smaller home. MAybe you can't afford the insurance that allows to go to any Dr. anytime with no copayment. Maybe you have to have a deductible. Maybe you have to take the insurance that requires you go to certain Dr.s.

Perhaps I don't buy insurance myself. Rather than shell out all that money for insurance I put it aside. Then when I go to the Dr. I pay him with my money.

SO THE ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION WHY WOULD A UNION GO ON STRIKE OVER THIS IS . . .

It is the equivalent of a pay cut. Yesterday i got paid $100 + health insurance whcih would cost me $20. If you stop paying my health insurance and I have to pay for it, you have cut my pay by $20.

Of course people are more sympathetic to my cause if I say that the mean management people are depriving me of healthcare than if I say they are cutting my pay. ( In the case of Vegas I am reading the dispute as not being that Management wants to cut off the healthcare benefits, it is that the Union is seeking an increase in the contribution from the employers)

What about people who can't afford insurance and can't afford to pay for their medical care? Without even discussing why it is they can't afford insurance lets discuss their options.

Well first for those who meet the qualifications we have Medicaid. Medicaid is our government program providing medical care for the indigent.

Next we have a variety of other government programs including Medicare and various other programs which provide for healthcare.

In addition many states have additional programs which provide for health insurance coverage for children as well as adults.

There are many public and privately funded clinics and other institutions available to provide medical care without regard to the ability to pay.

Public Hospitals do not turn away patients in need of medical care due to an inability to pay.

I am glad you are skeptical of what I am saying, I just wish you would apply the same skepticism to the claims that there is a healthcare crisis in the US. If there is a healthcare crisis it is not about people being denied medical care.

You asked about my healthcare. I pay for it. My insurance is paid by my employer but that is part of my compensation for my labor, therefore I pay for my insurance with my labor.

but I didn't always have insurance. In fact my most expensive medical treatments both occurred when I had no insurance.

The first was the result of an injury I suffered in a fireworks accident (I was struck by a professionally conducted fireworks display), In that case my medical expenses were paid for by the liability insurer of the arena/and the liability insurer of the fireworks company. HAd they not had insurance they would have had to pay it themselves.

The second occurred at a time when I was unemployed. I needed surgery (non-elective) had no money, no insurance, no income, and due to a bizarre accounting method I would not qualify for medicaid until another 10 days had passed. Despite this fact the surgery was performed. It took a while but I ultimately paid every single bill from that surgery. BUT THE KEY IS THAT THE MEDICAL CARE WAS PROVIDED WITHOUT REGARD TO MY ABILITY TO PAY.

Lastly I didn't say Canada was run by a Socialist government. My reference to Socialists was to those here in the US who seek to impose a socialist system starting with healthcare.