If the insurance is fixed price (eg. pay $X and get $Y services), then yes. If it's a tax, you pay percentage of what you earn, and if you earn above average, you'll also be paying above average insurance rate but still getting average service.
With health care, average is just what health care is. Being rich shouldn't get you better actual health care. Cancer is cancer. A broken bone is a broken bone.
Everything else is bells and whistles. Want to pay to get that MRI next week instead of in two months? Fine. Want to pay for an fancy room? Fine. You still get the same health care, though. Even if you pay more tax
> Being rich shouldn't get you better actual health care.
Why not? If the healthcare is perfect, then there's no need to pay for better helathcare... but if it's not (eg. long wait times, outdated procedures,...), if someone pays to get a dentist tomorrow (instead of waiting 6monts for a government one), why not?
Being rich shouldn't mean that you get better health care because your net worth doesn't make you a more deserving human than someone poor. Being poor doesnt mean you should suffer or get substandard care.
And to be fair: I have socialized medicine, but I only got that lucky in my 30's after I moved from the US. I don't have long wait times for a doctor's appointment: Non-urgent has more wait time. (And it's OK: It doesn't matter if I have a cervical cancer screening tomorrow or in 2 months). I can get into the dentist urgently if needed.
If I need to wait for 6 months to get a surgery, it means it isn't urgent and there is a safety net to get me through. IF you don't have a safety net, wait times are cruel. All that said, there is a private option here and folks do pay to skip some wait time - I'm generally against this as again, your net worth shouldn't determine whether you get care due to humanity and all - but I'm fine with folks paying for general bells and whistles. Sure, have a fancy room with fancy food if you want.
