The Keys to Private HEALTHCARE in SINGAPORE – VisualPolitik EN

The Keys to Private HEALTHCARE in SINGAPORE – VisualPolitik EN


A political threat looms over much of the
world. Developed countries as well as many emerging
countries, as in China’s case, are beginning to see the effects that demographic aging
and many public services’ unsustainability can cause with increasing concern. Along with pensions, health is another of
the fields that generate the most uncertainties and fears. An increasingly aging population and the emergence
of new and expensive medical technologies have raised some very important questions: Will we be able to pay for a quality health
care system or will we be condemned to a precarious health situation that affects our life prospects? Is there a successful model that can lead
the way? Are there alternatives? Well, in this video we’ll look at a system
that we may more or less like, but which we should definitely know about and take into
account throughout this debate. Let’s see it. Check out the following graph, it shows a
country leaving the Third World and becoming one of the richest areas on the planet. Thirty-five years ago, Singapore and Spain
had the same per capita income, today however the former more than doubles the Spanish per
capita income. In 2015, Singapore’s per capita income was
$86,100 per year and Spain’s was just $34,750. But, even if we took countries such as Finland,
Denmark, Sweden, Germany or the United States as examples, we’d be able to see that Singapore
is much richer than any of them. However, it’s often said that Singapore’s
example isn’t good enough because their wealth essentially comes from a financial
sector that is much larger than that of any of the aforementioned countries. That’s true, but no, that’s not the key
to this small state’s success. The weight of Singapore’s financial sector
isn’t big enough to explain such differences in per capita income. In fact, if we were to eliminate the effect
of these countries’ different financial sector sizes, Singapore would still be much
richer than all the others. Because actually, both trade and manufacturing
are more important in Singapore than the financial sector. We’re talking about one of the largest merchandise
exporting countries in the world. For example, the proportion of electronic
material that this country exports in relation to its GDP is larger than the proportion of
anything exported by countries like Spain, Sweden, Denmark, or even Germany. So, the question is: How did Singapore achieve
such a high level of prosperity? Well, if we wanted to simplify it, we could
say that Singapore is the second freest economy in the world according to the Index of Economic
Freedom published annually by the Heritage Foundation and the Wall Street Journal. Its public spending, for example, is half
of the US’s and a third of Sweden’s. Listen to the words of the historic president
of Singapore, Lee Kuan Yew, which successfully reflect the real foundations of this country’s
economic success. “When most of the Third World was deeply
suspicious of exploitation by western multinational corporations, Singapore invited them in. They helped us grow, brought in technology
and know-how, and raised productivity levels faster than any alternative strategy could. Lee Kuan Yew.) Singapore’s success is therefore not due
to the financial industry but due to the same reasons that have led to the growth of other
economies: legal security, low taxes, monetary stability and moderate regulations. A commitment to the free market that has made
this country become, in many areas, an example to follow. And we’re not only talking strictly about
economics, but also certain social issues, such as health. Yes, you heard it right, Singapore is also
a role model in terms of health policy. (AN IMPOSSIBLE CHALLENGE?) Let’s take a look, for example, at Spain’s
case, a country whose health system is considered one of the most efficient on the planet. Well, the problem is that, beyond being corrigible,
it isn’t sustainable. See, in just a decade, the total cost of the
Spanish health system has almost doubled, and everything indicates that as a result
of the aging population and the demand for new and expensive health technologies, this
trend will be unstoppable, and will continue to worsen year after year… And don’t think that this only happens in
Spain, not at all. Medical bills, that is the sustainability
of health systems is a widespread problem in other developed countries. So the question that arises is how can we
overcome these challenges and ensure the sustainability of health systems? A good model – which is never taken into
account – could perhaps be that of a completely free health system, a system in which demand
and supply are determined by the market and not in political offices. This could lead to some benefits: For one, more money for families thanks to
lower taxes, and a precautionary saving level against any ailments that may arise that’s
higher than the present one. This would allow for direct primary care payments
and insurance against minor ailments, common issues, and more expensive treatments. Another benefit would be a greater diversity
of and competition among different health centers, in such a way that, given the threat
of being displaced in the market, productivity, differentiation and innovation would be promoted. In other words, we’d achieve a wide range
of services that would positively impact both the quality of the service and lead to lower
prices. Competition is usually the best formula to
guarantee better goods and services for consumers. And health isn’t any different. However, nowadays, no country uses all of
these principles. And no, the US health system, as we’ll see,
isn’t precisely a free market model. Now, there is a country that has used some
of these characteristics. And it has done so with extraordinary results. Listen to Singapore’s case. (A MODEL FOR HEALTH REFORM) Right now, Singapore has the best healthcare
system in the world: it’s top quality and costs practically half that of Spain’s health
system, and less than a third of the US’s. But this isn’t just a matter of lower costs–it’s
also, and above all, about quality and results: See, life expectancy at birth in Singapore
is two to three years longer than in Britain or the United States. Its infant mortality rate is among the lowest
in the world and is almost half that of the United States, Great Britain, Australia, Canada
or France. And in general its mortality rates are impressive
compared to most Western countries. Now… the question we can ask ourselves is
how they achieved such success? Well in this case they have achieved it, fundamentally,
by using market criteria. First of all, the main feature of the Singapore
model doesn’t just lie in the fact that more than 60% of all health spending is private,
but that to a large extent, it is directly paid by users. That is, co-payment is the norm here. But, not everyone pays the same when they
go to a hospital. There are public and private centers, as well
as 5 levels, 5 classes: A, B1, B2 +, B2 and C. Each of these letters gives users a different
service: for example class A gets you a private room and a choice of doctor; while in class
C the room is shared and the doctor is assigned by the hospital. Of course, each class has a different cost. If a user chooses class A, they pay for everything,
if instead they choose class C, the government subsidizes 80% of the cost. But where do people get the money to pay for
healthcare? Well from the same place as in other countries:
from the wealth they generate, from their work. The difference is that the huge contributions
that governments usually collect, are saved in Singapore– in a mandatory way yes–in
special accounts under each citizen. They can only use these accounts for certain
purposes, such as paying their pensions, their children’s education, homes or health. In the case of health care, the account is
known as Medisave and is used to pay for doctor visits, hospitalizations, medications, etc.,
etc. This is the second key point of Singapore’s
medical system Thanks to this formula, demand is self-regulated
and people can manage how to spend the money they accumulate in these accounts – for
example by accessing different kinds of care, whether they want to receive or be hospitalized
in hospitals with fewer comforts but which are cheaper, or with more services and higher
costs – decreasing redundant and superfluous consumption. Another very important point is that, for
the most serious cases, there’s a universal public insurance known as MediShield Life
that hardly costs $16 a month for a-30 year-old. And with it, of course, comes the possibility
of hiring other private insurers that improve the services offered. Finally, the third leg of Singapore’s health
system is public expenditure itself: What happens if someone can’t cover their
medical bills? Well, to guarantee access to health care,
the government subsidizes hospitals and has a public fund, the Medifund, designed to pay
health bills for lower-income families. So, folks, this is how Singapore has managed
to create a relatively economical medical system, while achieving results and quality
levels that place it among the best health systems in the world according to the World
Health Organization and different rankings such as Bloomberg’s “Most Efficient Health
Care Systems”. However, despite all this, when we usually
talk about healthcare and the free market we automatically think of the United States
and not Singapore. And that is a serious mistake. (USA vs. Singapore) Indeed, the US doesn’t have a European-style
public health system. And since the country’s results are quite
deplorable, considering that it spends more than 17% of its GDP on its healthcare system,
which is twice that of most European countries, the debate on health seems settled: private
health care is worse than public health care because it costs twice as much and has similar
or even lower service levels. But this, as we saw with Singapore, where
60% of health spending is private, isn’t true. In Singapore, the health care system isn’t
only better, it’s one of the best in the world and involves much lower costs than in
other developed countries. The issue is that the US health system isn’t
only heavily intervened upon and regulated by the government, its cost is tremendously
socialized. See, 90% of all health spending is channeled
through two different agents other than the patient. Out of every 100 dollars spent in the US health
system, 45 come from insurance companies, 45 from state programs such as Medicaid, and
only 10 from patients’ pockets. Yes, public health spending in the United
States is in relative terms higher, for example, than in Spain. But we’ll talk about that in another video… The fact is that as we’ve seen, Singapore
sets a healthcare system model on the table that has a great combination of cost, innovation
and medical results. We may like some aspects of this system, and
not others… but I think it wouldn’t be unreasonable to take it into account when
talking about health, the future, and sustainability. So I really hope you enjoyed this video, please
hit like if you did, and don’t forget to subscribe for brand new videos. Don’t forget to check out our friends at
the Reconsider Media Podcast – they provided the vocals in this episode that were not mine. Also, this channel is possible because of
Patreon, and our patrons on that platform. Please consider joining them and supporting
our mission of providing independent political coverage. And as always, I’ll see you in the next
video.

Daniel Yohans

100 thoughts on “The Keys to Private HEALTHCARE in SINGAPORE – VisualPolitik EN

  1. Josh K says:

    So no lets save up money that is never ever going to be enough to cover cancer chemo treatment when your <50, or cover a trauma bill from car crash etc. Good thing our manual labour workers most at risk of accidents are all under no-rights temporary visas, and we can kick them out once they have an accident to avoid any responsibility for rehab and long term costs.

  2. Grizzlyman Verneteil says:

    wait wait wait, this video isn't 100% against capitalism and 100% for socialised healthcare? Simon is litterally Hitler confirmed.

  3. Joel says:

    Fuck Europe!

  4. Paula Thomas says:

    And the big warning =: The USA where health costs here the social (medicare, medicaid) costs the most.

  5. Raphael cto says:

    now he is an asshole just by the introduction video

  6. Lin Hao Kingofpeking says:

    I've actually worked in Singapore for a while and it is efficient. However, the host of this video seemed to ignore the key part of the system. Yes most hospitals and clinics are private and compleat with each other. It is true that the costs are paid for by a combination public and private insurance. And yes many people have a kind of health savings account. But it's not uncommon for people to use that money on personal expenses such as a new phone or rent. What was ignored in this video is that there is huge government intervention in how much hospitals can charge and what they can spend their money on. There is a limit on how many MRI machines a hospital can have. Healthcare triage did a much better job covering the Singapore health care system.

  7. Feysel Difficile says:

    Like I said in a previous comment on a video which subject was about Singapour efficient housing problem management, we Africans have so many good things to learn from our asian friends rather than the pseudo-superior whites!

  8. Samuel Ramphall says:

    I know this model. I live in a country that uses the exact same model. It doesn't work. In the future, medium or long, they'll have a major crysis because of vertical and horizontal integration of the market actors, which will cause copayments to skyrocket, and year after year you'll see a collapse of hospitals because of the lack of medics willing to work for less than X (ludicrously high amounts of money) so lower sectors can't afford decent healthcare. Companies' profits will set records each year, while health indexes will plummit. This is happening right now where I live, and we've had this model for at least 35 years now.

  9. Desmond Powell says:

    Singapore is a small country. Due to the uncertainty of medical costs and regulations requiring healthcare coverage it becomes impossible to control medical cost factors the larger the population.

  10. Emanuel Scirlet says:

    A very similar system is in Switzerland.

  11. alexsandro pereira says:

    please make a video of Cape verd

  12. Marcos Speranza says:

    The point isn't off, and it is a system to be taken into account especially in terms of sustainability. The problem is that you're taking a country whose GDP per capita is double that of Spain and proposing it as a model for other countries. You can't use this model in a poor country without significantly lowering the health standards of the population. If everyone can afford the doctor, you can have everyone pay their own bills. If 30% of the population have to chose between doctors bills or school utensils, this system becomes problematic, precisely because that sustainability can only be assured for the rich part of the population, while excluding those who just don't make the cut.

  13. Ted Kaplan says:

    I think another factor is that Singapore has a disciplined population such that their emergency rooms are not clogged with idiots with minor complants.

  14. Robbibob says:

    Well, there is a massive problem with the comparisson of Singapore vs literally any not-entirely metroplitan country. If your entire country is a highly developed city, of course it is easy to achieve great HDI stats. It is impressive how they managed to do a truly good and successfull implementation of capitalism, which was probably made easier by them being a single massive city, but it's still very impressive. On the comparisson with the healthcare systems of Singapore and the U.S, this comparison is actually quite important. As far as I know, U.S citizens pay high taxes, without any of the benefits of having a well funded government, all of the money just disapears down some "administrative" process and then they have to pay for some ridiculously expensive health ensurances that might not cover them at all.

  15. nataelia umbra says:

    "historic president lee kuan yew "<—- not true bruh. he was never our president. please get your facts right.

  16. Garrett Pohl says:

    The formatting is getting really weird.

  17. Felipe Behrens says:

    What happens if you’re unemployed?

  18. Felipe Behrens says:

    What happens if there is an emergency? Do they put you in the C ward and let you upgrade later?

  19. Ken In Atlanta says:

    Population of Singapore in 2018 5.8 million.

  20. Zenith Spectrum says:

    Can we say that Singapore's culture is more health-oriented than in the other countries? Drug addiction and alcoholism eventually translates to higher healthcare demand and cost. Can we also say that companies there have more conscientious contol of their healthcare prices (collective patriotism vs greed) to not abuse the cost? But a counter argument for their success is that there are always ways when you have the buck and this is glaringly true for Singapore. I heard that the cost of living there is like living in New York City. Compare CoL with neighbors Indonesia and Malaysia. Kudos to their president reponsible for their growth. Good leadership makes good countries.

  21. Stefán Örvar Sigmundsson says:

    This is the first time I dislike a video on this channel. The information is poorly presented, apples compared to oranges etc. For a private system, there sure is a lot of government spending and safety nets.

  22. wooo weee says:

    Problem here is that Singapore is a high iq population, and its "diversity" was managed by a race realist who in the end acknowledged it wasn't working so well with muslims, that religion doesn't assimilate, it assimilates you because its a one way valve of conversion. And even then, the fertility rate is basically cratered at this point, so the ponzi scheme isn't going to last.

  23. Dhaval Talati - Nemlabs says:

    Hey Simon, You xontinue to generate great content and very 'apt' videos for our time. The most I like about them is the respect you show towards your subject. talking of healthcare being fron the healthcare industry I often see clearly how bad some health policies in many countries and how totally un-sustainable it becomes. The US system is the case in point. We have often tried to highlight theae to governments and usual propensity is to nod and move on. Suffice to say there is a lot of inertia and that is partially due to big pharma lobby, may be this can be a subject for future video. i donot think the intention of big pharma is malafide, it is more to do with raising money for research and how often that investment dosnt do anything for their growth.

  24. Ángel De la verdad says:

    I'm a new subscriptor here! 🙂

  25. Louis Melahn says:

    When adjusted for purchasing power, the GDP per capita of Singapore is comparable to that of the United Staes (in fact, a little below).

  26. Gary Robinson says:

    Free market??? BS. Singapore made an agreement in the 60s between Government, Business and Workers. That is regulated for the good of all not just one sector. Singapore is a highly regulated society not a free for all. The local joke in Singapore it's Fine City, there're fines for everything. An intelligent and industrious population.

  27. ClassyJack says:

    I'm a little iffy about putting people's health completely in the hands of the "free market"
    Because the invisible hand has no issues pushing people off a cliff if that's what's profitable and I believe everyone should have access to quality health care regardless of income.

  28. Andreas Zimmermann says:

    How would the figures changes (in income) if you take the median income instead of income per capita witch is average?

  29. hloc says:

    3:14 – Lee Kuan Yew was the Prime Minister of Singapore… NOT the President….

  30. G00dEgg says:

    Just to update the maker of this video just in case you have no access to information that hasn't been made public. Singapore's Ministry of Health has shared its concern about rocketing medical cost to the Private Insurance Industry and Private Medical Institution. Apparently the system has been exploited by patients who became oblivious to the underlying cost because they pays very little and Practitioners charge as high as they can because the patient is oblivious. However Ministry of Health has step in and made significant changes to the private insurance industry and will clamp down on Private Medical Institutions in the coming year.

    Just a side note, Farrer Park Hospital might not be the best representation of Singapore Private Medical Industry. The better liked ones are Thomson Medical Group, Raffles Medical Group or even Mount Elizeberth Hospital and Gleneagles by Parkway Pentai Group.

  31. supbrotv says:

    Singapore is like a small city in one of american 50 states.

  32. Marcelo says:

    Anybody knows a channel like this one in french?

  33. chee hiong Yeo says:

    A few more points that were missed.

    1) Even though Singapore is small, comparing it to Hong Kong which is relatively similar in size and population density, its much easier to be within proximity of a public healthcare institute (ie. Polyclinics and Hospitals). – Having lived in HK for 4 months, I appreciate the effort the government has put into healthcare infrastructure.
    2) Singapore though is small, it has established 3 medical schools and pushing for more incentives for nursing and other healthcare professions.
    3) Like some of the comments, healthcare isn't an issue solely with the facilities but also a wholesome lifestyle.

  34. zoperxplex says:

    If you spit in Singapore the authorities will wack your naked ass with a stick because the whole government is fucking gay.

  35. Denis Rahim says:

    why there is no video on Brexit :????

  36. DJ says:

    this is nothing.. india just started world's biggest health care program

  37. Pac Man says:

    The problem with US healthcare is NOT that it is privately based. It is a forced payment in which NO ONE knows the actual cost of your hospital fees until the hospital make some generic number. You need an IV? Well it takes a nurse 15 minutes to set up, the IV bag of $5, a medical doctor's notes for freakin 30 minutes!? (longer than the actual set-up) to actually do. "That is $1,500 please." There are only 2 problems here and 2 problems alone. Have the hospital and everyone tell the patient's how much everything costs upfront and stop making Doctor's write everything (medicare/medical/other insurance). It is seriously that simple.

  38. ducky 181 says:

    This video is indeed interesting and does contrast the difference between American and Singapore based health care models however not trying to sound bias but I believe my country Australia offers one of most effective and systematic health care systems that would be more suitable to America based economic social structure than Singapores.

  39. kartik anand says:

    Please make a video of India now, in 2018. Post GST and demonetisation and all the other policies under PM Modi. We also jumped 30 ranks and ended up 100th on the Ease of Doing Business rank in just a year. Love your videos!

  40. bishop panta says:

    Could you please do a video on countries that have been driven by agriculture. It would be really helpful

  41. zedestroyer says:

    Bargain for better healthcare prices and services when your dying or when you have your child sick is like trying to get the best smartphone for the money you can expend with it … and a city welfare system is just like a country, that was both high and low dense populated areas.

    What a ignorant and biased video.

  42. Jeff Relf says:

    _
    There's more than one way to run a country.

    Singapore, Japan and China are (cheaper/better) because they don't have
    to service a veritable sea of "undesirables" — they're homogeneous,
    more collectivist, less individualist.

    In contrast, India and America are more _ diverse, less Hitleresque,
    with higher highs, and lower lows — the richest and the poorest, together,
    more individualist, less collectivist.
    _

  43. TheDarkever says:

    The more I learn about the world, the more I realize than nearly every idea can span from being very good to very bad. It all depends on HOW it's implemented.

  44. Kinny Riddle says:

    Seeing as you've now done a video about Singapore, when will you be doing a video about Malaysia, covering its recent landmark election and how it affects its relation with China?

    PS Lee Kuan Yew is PRIME MINISTER of Singapore, NOT President.

  45. gib666 says:

    Propoganda

  46. Fer Gar says:

    Try to compare Singapur which a country is joke ,
    The best health systems in the world according to the UN are nordic Countries and Europe which are mostly publics , they got the highest rates of life expentacy , and infant mortality , The average espendding money per person is about 5000 $ per year , they cover the 100% of the population and you dont have to answer question about your medical records .
    However in the US the average spendding per person is about 9500$ per person and according to UN numbers they are in the 34 position in the ranking. They pay much more to have a worst product,

  47. Rustoo says:

    Waiting to see followup videos on this topic…especially on healthcare in countries like India, Brazil, China, etc

  48. PetziPotato says:

    Goddamnit, the loud music is back

  49. Rey Torres says:

    I always hate comparing a very small country like Singapore to a very large country like the USA. It makes no sense to me to make comparisons.

  50. JNS says:

    Very interesting. Portugal needs urgent reform and effectively responding to the question "and how do the poor get healthcare?" is a pressing matter. The problem with private-based healthcare systems is that they only function in near-perfect free markets, free from crony capitalism and excessive regulation, which is the example of Singapore.

  51. Jaden Grant says:

    Singapore's success is attributed to the fact that they had strong, but fair leadership in Lee Kuan Yew, and no democracy.

  52. Charles says:

    The free market is always the answer!

  53. VA505 says:

    Who pays the doctors? Are they private or government employees?

  54. Nelson Swanberg says:

    This begs the question what percentage of a mature economy's GDP needs to be manufacturing, mining, welling or agriculture to ensure the growing prosperity of the general population? Off the cuff answer 15%-25%.

    As we've moved from the farm to the factory to the office and now behind a computer it is easy to understand why the corporation has grown in power and influence. Corporations bring jobs and prosperity but corporations are not people and should not govern!. When you allow corporations to whipsaw populations using wages as a comparative advantage it ends up being a race to the bottom of the barrel for all of humanity. Whose loss was Singapore's gain?

    What high-income wage earners in AmurdiKKKa must fear most is a single payer health insurance system with the premiums based on income. Otherwise known as an income tax. Isn't that fair? A single payer system is the answer. The rest of the developed world already knows this. A single payer system eliminates the cost of paper work and administration and the profit incentive for insurance companies not to meet their obligation coverage. In a country with as high, an average annual income as we have in the US every citizen deserves the same health insurance Congress gave themselves.

    How to reduce government and drain the swamp! It is time to make the HoRs a volunteer body that does not meet, is not paid and only votes remotely on bills originating in the Senate. Cuts the HorS right out of the Federal budget. Have only one Senator from each state and cut the Senate budget in half.

  55. Elias Aceves says:

    So insurance companies are to blame for making the US private health system deplorable?

  56. Pascal Steiner says:

    Is there a reason why you not name Switzerland in the rankings and so on? The healthcare system from Switzerland is as good as Singapore's…

  57. Erik S says:

    How to improve things? "more free market, less regulation" yup, seems to be simon's answer to everything.

  58. ChristianIce says:

    Private Healthcare only is a dumb idea.
    Private insurances make more money by denying more care. It's simple math and logic and it's irrefutable, they need the competition of the public sector.
    That said, almost all the countries with public healthcare have the option of adding private insurances or going to a private hospital, so Singapore has what a Medicare for All would look like in US.

  59. Fraser Blackman says:

    "life expenctancy at birth is 2 to 3 times longer than in the Britain and the United states" 7:00, what do Singaporeans live to 160 years old.

  60. smile444 says:

    so people are required to put money into a common account, from wich they can only get money for healthcare reasons , have access to a state-run insurance build to be cheaper that privates ones, and heavyly subsidised low-tier healthcare that everyone can afford and finally poor people can get their healthcare free ?

    In what way this system and public healthcare are different ?

  61. Fast Picanto says:

    too many hidden taxes or cost in singapore, like petrol tax, service tax, sin tax for tobacco n liquor , gst, gantry, etc ….

  62. Caesar2k1 says:

    From my understanding, Singapore’s healthcare system is not entirely free market. As mentioned in the video, the state does have some programming to subsidize consumption for low income residents, but it also regulates pricing and certain services for some consistency. The private sector does play a role, but one where it can innovate if possible and cover areas where the public sector can’t adequately cover. In the US, the private sector has a large lobby which prevents innovation and efficient regulation of healthcare. Also, Singapore is a densely populated city state that allows for a concentrated market. On the other hand, the US is more spread out with large rural areas and several metro areas through out the country, allowing for a more spread out market. Lastly, healthcare is an inelastic service that everyone needs. In with certain healthcare “products,” like a primary care physician or old age facilities, it might be somewhat ok to “shop” around, but other “products” like if you need an ER, you really can’t shop around as easily

  63. Ivan Broes says:

    Return corporation to honesty with producing health foods and drinks, rather than getting people to eat more, and more junk food — from my experience how difficult it is to stay healthy!

  64. Another NPC says:

    You could just have explained the workings of the system instead of filling 80% of the video with just talk. People here want to find out how the system works. And Lee Kuan Yew was a prime minister (and a very good one and one of my personal political heroes) – not a president.

  65. YouTube Potatoe says:

    Coming from a Singaporean. Singapore achieve this because of the people here. All the good things you guys hear about Singapore, it comes fundamentally from the people. If you replace all the Singapore with people from the west, the whole system will breakdown. If you transplant Singaporeans to another small country, we will achieve the same.
    If you want to know how we can achieve all these things, it's better to understand us, rather than looking at the policies, the system, etc. And when I say "understand us", I do not mean those vocal minorities, who have adopted the western ideology. Understand the silent majority and you might find the answer.

  66. vesogry says:

    10:45 – What have you just said? How a smart person can say such things?

  67. Astrid says:

    Lee Kuan Yew is the prime minister of Singapore, not the President.

  68. Matt L. says:

    3:45…. hold on a second… Did you just admit that the key to any countries economy success is and I quote "legal security, low taxes, monetary stability and moderate regulations" ? So, if we all know this, can we just have governments focus on these things and ONLY these things!? Would love to have a per capita GDP of ~90k a year. That would be great for almost all parties involved.

  69. Hyojoo Song says:

    I love your videos mate. You're doing a brilliant job! But just a tiny bit of feedback.. Your head is too close to the camera..

  70. Ilya Merzlyakov says:

    I do not understand why the fully socialized healthcare system is a holy cow for such a number of people. There is not a single example of such system being successful.

  71. dsngsodg says:

    Simon, that of Singapore is a HEAVILY regulated system. You need to be a little more objective, please. Don't try to convince people, you do much more good to the world by informing better. Cheers.

  72. Gwee Jia Han says:

    Singapore's system is not that hard to implement in the USA, you already got the 401K matching system in some companies and states that is basically the Singapore's CPF contributions system. Except in Singapore, the law states that all companies must have the "401k matching system" or what we call CPF contribution for any employee on payroll who makes more than $450 monthly. In singapore, the employee contributes 20% of his payroll to CPF and his employer matches it with 17%. The money is then saved up for retirement same as 401k but it can also be used for a plethora of things like housing, medical bills, investments etc. SO ACTUALLY SINGAPOREANS are paying with their PENSIONs.

  73. Kurt McCown says:

    The United States healthcare system doesn't fail because it is "largely socialized". It fails because there are restricitions on selling insurance across state lines, there are next to no regulations on the amount of care to be provided, no controls on cost of insurance, no ability for the government to mandate price ceilings to prevent price gouging, not ability for individuals to band together to demand more care, and no mandates or subsidies designed to remove the incentive for companies to deny coverage. All of these things are bought and paid for proposals by pharmaceutical companies and healthcare providers. The private system is so broken in this country, that the only way out is to remove the machine completely and start over. we legalized bribery in the USA though, so fat chance of that anytime soon.

  74. vilijn nelis says:

    Exactly the same system exists in Belgium

  75. Zero Cool says:

    what song is it at the 3-minish mark simon? i love all your CHANNELS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  76. Supplement Trade says:

    https://www.supplementtrade.com/praltrix/

  77. Alphonse Duponey says:

    Only 10% from patients' pockets because most of them cannot afford the costs of healthcare. That's what insurance are made for. And that's the capitalist system that you cherish. The truth is that the big pharma are phagocytising the money both in North America and in Europe.

  78. Kee Chung Low says:

    Its prime minister lee kuan yew, not president

  79. inzagi999 says:

    Yea… there is an issue there…how many new drugs does Singapore produces per year and how many USA produces…essencilaly, it is easy for Singapore or any other country for that matter that has socialised health care to have cheaper health care than the US and that the US is by faaaar the biggest producers of new drugs than the rest of the world combined…funny enough that literally nobody ever mentions that when discusing health care and it's costs… btw. not an American…just being objective, or at least trying to..

  80. vamtire says:

    We were forced to study the cons of NHS early on as students

  81. EA 333 says:

    Switzerland NEVER had "FREE" healthcare, and only got universal healthcare since 1996, and that's only by compelling every citizen to purchase a basic package from one of the government-approved PRIVATE health insurances. Besides that, except the teaching/university hospitals, (which are no more than 6-7 in the entire country), all other hospitals and clinics are private. Yet, Switzerland has got one of the best systems in the world. Then, the Netherlands privatized their ENTIRE health care system about a decade ago, and they are now among the top-5 countries with the best health care. Socialized health care is a humanly good thing, but it is simply not sustainable over longer periods of time. Australia might not be suffering now, (which I doubt), but you'll see in 10-20 years. The British NHS is crumbling, the Canadian system is and always was shitty, the French system is on the verge of a collapse, in Russia and Brazil it has never worked properly, South Korea and Japan also started having some problems since recently, Sweden has got many problems with its entire welfare system and decided to privatize its pension funds a few years ago… and it's only bound to continue that way, until they realize they have to privatize their system. Growing yet aging population, expensive treatments, immigration… all those are factors which exacerbate the socialized health care systems around the world.

  82. Jonathan Sam says:

    Lee Kuan Yew was the Prime Minister

  83. Z says:

    You failed to consider food culture. Western food is relatively 'new' and high in animal proteins. Name any large primate that consume large amount of animal proteins? Only the westerners. Ancient Asian food is high in plant matters and carbs. The bad news is young Asians are eating like westerners.

  84. Ahmed Swealem says:

    Amazing 👏👏

  85. Dalton Goh says:

    LKY is not a president, his a Prime Minister

  86. Rishi Sahgal says:

    It's important to note that although Singapore has a hybrid private public system, the government does intervene directly by setting price bands and lists for medications, thus reducing one of the core cost drivers of medical care

  87. Raggaa Muffinn says:

    Lee Kwan Yu said Lee Kwan Yu?

  88. jeezwobbles says:

    I am Singaporean and I love my country, and am supportive of almost all of its policies. This video has naturally been very satisfying to watch as it is full of praise. But I feel that other countries should not look up to Singapore's systems like it's perfect. Many of Singapore's policies work because we are a small country that is really very much easier to manage as compared to large countries. It is precisely because we are small that we are able to enforce our laws much more efficiently and stuff. It ain't easy for large countries to do the same. And yes, while our systems are actually, in theory very robust, and in practice quite effective, let's not think that it is perfect without loopholes. There are still groups of people who fall through the gaps and struggle to afford medical treatments. Singapore is seeing a change with a new generation of leaders rising up, it will be interesting to see how our country fairs in the next 50 years

  89. lagofala says:

    Lee Kuan Yew was the prime minister, not president.

  90. lagofala says:

    Note that Singapore has 10% rate of medical inflation, partially due to medical tourism.

  91. Naŋ Ĭļĕÿ says:

    Singapore is neither liberal nor conservative: They execute gun users.

  92. plain J says:

    Why guys here so positive about Singapore? I felt I was almost getting a depression as living in a city like imprisoned makes human going really insane and chewing a gum on the street is illegal in Singapore. You should know that. I felt my privacy was too much invaded and girls are uglier than whatever you imagine. You have no business to move to there unless you are a loser or a CEO unwilling to pay tax a lot for your compabny.

  93. Shanlie Berondo says:

    Make a video about the Philippines

  94. The UnknownSG says:

    President? Do you mean prime minister?

  95. Manuel Santos says:

    Some may see this as an advert for health care privatization but in Singapore the public system is very strong, there is heavy regulation, control over salaries, the market fails in health care, bulk purchasing power, etc. Unlike in the US the state still plays the dominant role.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WtuXrrEZsAg

  96. Sharann says:

    @VisualPolitik EN 4:30 Yes total expenditures may have doubled but you forget to mention the Healthcare costs in relation to GDP, as it is stable at 8%-9% of Spains GDP since decades. So it is clearly sustainable, even if the population is aging, because the productivity raises and with that the purchasing power. So the more Productive a Country gets, the more people can be supported by one.

    But you werent the first fooled by that, the conservative party and ''social'' democrat party used this fallacy here in Germany (Schöder and Merkels era) as well to cut government spending and open up the market for private companies, wich ended up increasing the cost for the citizens and increased tax revenue.

    And in Comparison to Spain we pay 11% of our GDP for Healthcare, but the Singaporean System might work too, where they only spend 5% of their GDP for Helthcare even if its Heavily regulated.

  97. Ripple Rick says:

    Is Lee Quan yui a playable character in mk11?

  98. samassey7 says:

    I feel like I learned nothing and was possibly tricked here. Is this some sort of brain washing video? This guy never got a bill from an American Hospital.

  99. Kazz Stalk says:

    It was clear as water that he was saying that Singapore's system is the MOST free market compared to the others, not that it is a free market in absolute terms…

    The system is working fine and it is sustainable unlike other models, which will have plenty of troubles when elders count as the majority of the population (in relative terms). Despite that, there are still people talking highly of european systems, almost like wanting to replace it, while DOWNPLAYING (yes) the singaporean one, the one that's better overall (more so in the long run) in spite of its flaws… How ironic, so called "proggressives" going against proggress.

    Also, this is not something impossible to be applied in the US as so many people claim. You can apply it on a state or municipal level, while you can still have a more traditional system for rural areas. Cities like New York, LA, Chicago are quite dense; most people live concentrated in cities so the model implementation is viable, and tons of money and time could be saved.

  100. Carlos Modena says:

    Excelente!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *