Hang on though, it's not as if there aren't problems with state provided health care in other countries (I know that's not what you were saying, but I think it's important to make this distinction). One advantage the U.S. has is that people can go to any doctor that they want to, provided that they have the money. Another advantage is that people think about whether or not they really need to go to the doctor and so doctors and hospitals are not inundated with people who are there for minor reasons that may or may likely clear up on their own. All I'm saying is that one is not necessarily better than the other, simply by virtue of one being what the other is not. Ideally, healthcare should allow people who need to see a doctor to go to one, while still providing doctors with the incentives to give quality care and without clogging up the system because healthcare is suddenly "free". The American system might work or at least work a lot better if costs weren't so insanely and artificially high. That's more of an issue with approved medical suppliers and drug companies, as I understand it. Drug companies need incentives to research a develop new drugs, so that's definitely a part of the problem that wouldn't be solved by free healthcare.
For state-covered, non-life-threatening treatments we can go to any doctor we want, but we might have to wait some time for the specialist we want. If you need urgent care in emergency at a hospital you get the best, for free, immediately, at least in Toronto. You do not get billed. Even brain surgery. Best care, several opinions, no bill. Are there problems? of course. Can we continue with an ageing population? Who knows. Maybe theadvancedapes or sounds_sound can chime in about his experience in Canada - although he's a healthy guy (or so it seems).One advantage the U.S. has is that people can go to any doctor that they want to, provided that they have the money.
There's a lot of misinformation being spread about the Canadian health care system. Canadians can go to any doctor they want. If they have money, they can join a for-profit Cleveland Clinic or one of their competitors.
The more I read your posts the more I agree with you about everything fellow Canadian. I absolutely hate it about how Canada is always brought up as an example about how bad a healthcare system can be. They say people are dying waiting in line for healthcare left right and center. There was a guy who died after a long wait in the emergency room like 6 years and people are still freaking out about it here in Winnipeg. And his was more caused by discrimination against him being homeless and native. Yeah we complain about certain parts in our politics, but we are just trying to make it even better. But our healthcare is streets ahead of the american system even with Obamacare.
Sure, but there are countries where this isn't the case. At the moment, in the U.S., part of the problem is that emergency rooms have to administer urgent care, whether or not someone can pay for it. This is why there are so many homeless admitted as John/Jane Doe. This is of course a problem for hospitals, but it's terrible for people being admitted as J. Doe because of course, the hospitals will not have access to their medical records. It must be harrowing enough to try to save someone's life, but to do so without even the possibility of access to a medical history must be much worse for the doctors. Anyway, the U.S. attracts high quality doctors and nurses of all kinds from all over the world in part because of the pay incentives. However the new system emerges, I hope that the quality of the medical professionals will stay the same or increase but for that to happen, there needs to be good incentives in place to attract them to the States to practice medicine. The issue of the age bubble needs to be taken into serious consideration and I hope that segment of the population will be well served by Obamacare without causing any other segment of the population to lack for anything.There's a lot of misinformation being spread about the Canadian health care system. Canadians can go to any doctor they want. If they have money, they can join a for-profit Cleveland Clinic or one of their competitors.
The US absolutely needs a state-run alternative to healthcare. The costs are a huge part of what's wrong in the US, and layers of administration and insurance companies contribute to that greatly. But it's not even the cost which is most horrific. Healthcare has become capitalism run amok in the US. Insurance companies, (thankfully not after 2014) could deny coverage to anyone based on pre-existing conditions, which estimates say could be from 20-50% of adults. So 20-50% of adults aren't even eligible for US healthcare or have to jump through hoops and hope for the best to get it. Pretty much the only option is to be on a grandfathered plan. That's absolutely ludicrous. It's one of the most ludicrous things that we as a society accept. The idea that US healthcare is not-so-bad relies on an idealistic view of the US system, i.e. where everyone actually has it and can afford it. But still ~15% of Americans go without it, with the brunt of them being the poor. It creates problems where hospitals will try to turn down patients without healthcare because the costs without it are insurmountable. It's absolutely not acceptable in a developed society. All the advantages of US healthcare would be well worth trading-in completely to fix its flaws. Let those things be luxuries if they have to be.
I'm not saying that "US healthcare is not-so-bad." Clearly the policies in place have allowed businesses to take advantage of the system much to the detriment of the citizens, believe me, I know first hand and at the moment I am definitely at the lowest end of income spectrum and I don't have healthcare. "Trading-in completely" without figuring out how that system will operate and what the possible repercussions would be in a variety of scenarios could result in a system that fails just as utterly as the one we have now. I have the luxury of being relatively young and healthy, so from where I sit, I would rather a well-thought out and conceived state-run healthcare be put into place in a manner that will ensure its success, even if it isn't put into place overnight. The transition period will likely be messy and leave a lot of people with a sour taste in their mouth, but hopefully if the new system is well-crafted, those kinks will be able to be resolved quickly.
|One advantage the U.S. has is that people can go to any doctor that they want to, provided that they have the money In the UK we currently have a mix and match system of medical care. You can use the NHS for anything you want to and supplement it with Private medical care to get what you want and then jump back to NHS lines. So whilst I agree that this is an advantage, you can get both benefits and neither issue that way. I think a mix of Private-Public healthcare is the best approach to any system; it allows freedom from being locked into certain medical treatments and it doesn't bankrupt you from medical bills. You're bang on about people going to the doctor about nothing though, I spent a day with a Nurse in a local surgery for experience and quite a few of the cases were people complaining about nothing at all. Lot of genuine cases too though, I'd rather that risk than someone losing out on healthcare. When I was in the US with my family we saw a minor accident and my Dad immediately went to call 911 to get an ambulance and was urged not to by everyone involved. It was so surreal from our culture that someone had a broken arm and went "I'll sort it out at home" rather than go into hospital for it. It's been weird growing up and having to decide "Is this worth an ambulance" but it'd be so much worse if I had to think "Can I afford an ambulance" on top of that.
Yeah, definitely. Where I live now, it's about $1400 for an ambulance, but in some states/cities, it's much higher. I think a mix is the right way to go too, but somehow I don't think finding the right mix for the U.S. will be so easily accomplished. It's tempting to want to change everything, but the reality is that when even one thing changes, there are a lot of things that have to adjust. I'm glad that it's an issue that the public is concerned enough about that political action is being taken, but of course this means a whole lot of talking before anything is done. In the meantime, I guess those of us within the States just have to do what we can to stay as healthy as possible until whatever the new reality will be emerges.
Really? Let me share this story... A couple weeks ago, my mom fell ill. She thought it was a bad case of food poisoning and it would pass. For 12 hours, she was bleeding from an area, well, you should not bleed from. She called her gastroenterologist; he was on vacation. She asked to see his partner or the physicians assistant. The office said no, she could only see her physician. She called her primary care doctor. He told her to go to the ER and referred her to another specialist. She went to the ER. They took excellent care of her. She was supposed to make an appointment with the specialist in 2-3 days to go over test results. When she called to make the appointment, the doctor refused to take new patients. Meanwhile, Mom's antibiotic is running out. Because the specialist would not see her, they would not refill her medication. She had to call the ER to get a refill. After, again, fighting with the new specialist to make an appointment, she ended up with one -- a month after the initial incident. Ultimately, three weeks after going to the ER, she had to wrangle with the hospital to get her test results -- negative for infection -- sent to her primary care doctor and her own gastroenterologist. Oh, did I mention my mom has insurance? And that she pays a premium of over $600 a month? Even with money and insurance, when she really needed care without worry, she got the runaround. For all the people who say the system in Canada or the United Kingdom is a mess, guess what? There are problems here, too.One advantage the U.S. has is that people can go to any doctor that they want to, provided that they have the money.
Sorry to hear about your mother, but you're taking one line of what I wrote out of context and not really addressing the meaning of that line. Having insurance is not the same as having enough money to see any doctor available. You can bet that very wealthy people have better access to doctors and medications, not to mention priority because of their wealth. I am not saying that the U.S. system is good or that it works or that it's not that bad, I'm simply saying that the system on its own is not the entirety of the problem. Systems have advantages and disadvantages and simply switching to another one will not solve all the problems. Also, I never mentioned Canada. Not once. And yet, several replies treat my comment as if I had. I don't understand. There are more countries in the world than the U.S., the U.K. and Canada.