nm, dumb question.
And already answered
Thanks!
GQ answer instead of IMHO -
Canada has a Health Standards act. All citizens are entitled to the same level of care. A doctor cannot be part of UHC and also be a physician who charges more than the fee schedule - they are either in or out. If they are out, their patients do not receive any reimbursement either for their medical costs. Since anything necessary is covered, no employers or insurance companies offer an option for medical coverage that duplicates Medicare. This is specifically to prevent a system like the UK, where the same doctor will see you on NHS in 6 months, or …“we have an opening next week if you can pay a lot more.”
Not even the Conservative party advocates removing UHC - that would be political suicide, it is very popular, even when we are criticizing it. What some free-marketers do advocate is allowing for-profit "clinics’; all hospitals are run on budgets allocated by the provincial governments. The Canada Health Act forbids for-profit. “Clinics” would perhaps do assorted procedures like minor surgery or tests like CAT scans and MRI’s. Others see this as the thin edge of the wedge. Allow a private company to charge substantially more for an MRI, and then the government will say “we don’t need as much MRI equipment”, causing longer wait times for UHC MRI’s, and driving more well-off people to the private clinics. Then we end up much like urban public schools in the USA - everyone is paying for them, but the top half of society don’t care how they work because they pay out-of-pocket for something better - then whine about the taxes they pay for a service they don’t use. This becomes a deadly spiral Canada seeks to avoid.
The downside of free Medicare - if you need treatment now - car accident, heart attack, etc. - you will get as good as we can give. If it can wait - it does. Treatment wait list times and emergency room wait times are the two major complaints about health care here. My former boss waited 16 months for a new hip, because he was only in moderate pain… then when it was time after 6 months, prep evaluations found he had two screws in his thigh. (“Well duh! That accident when he was 20 is why one leg is shorter than the other and the hip has worn badly…”) So 4 months before he got the screws removed, then back at the end of the line for a hip.
OTOH, for both him and for my wife’s 80-year-old grandfather who fell and shattered his hip, and got a new one that same night - no bills at all. The most expensive part was paying $4/hr to park at the hospital so we could visit him.
There are the occasional free-market commentators and agitators who may say doctors should set their own fees, but nobody who takes that position has a political career afterwards.
Fun note - regressive politicians took advantage of control of hospitals to demand all abortions be done in government-controlled hospitals, back in the 70’s and 80’s. This backfired when the Canadian Supreme Court decided that if the law said it was a government service, everyone was entitled to it without cost and it must be equally available everywhere. (At the time, whole areas of the country made it difficult or impossible, while doctor committees in other areas rubber-stamped any request) Since neither side would agree on a compromise law, we have none. UHC provides abortions on demand.
Plus, in Canada, the ‘I will pay handsomely for instant access!’ argument is a hard sell due to American ‘pay to purchase’, care being available right across the border, Just jump a flight and get out your wallet!
But the “pay” required to play is so high that for most significant treatments you can’t afford it unless you are the 1%. Not sure what a hip replacement costs, but I’m guessing north of $100,000US. Not too many people have that kind of disposable cash. And as mentioned, basically no employers offer American-coverage health insurance.
Yes, indeed, the cost is VERY high. The direct result of introducing ‘profit‘ into healthcare. If you’re advocating ‘pay for access‘ you’re initiating the very condition that causes that number to be so high.
The cost is certainly NOT going to be subsidized by an existing socialized system’s extensive infrastructure, just so you can access that 1% club, at a discount.
The whole deal with, ‘pay to access‘ is, it’s expensive, and the profiteers set the, (ever skyrocketing), rates. Those machines are sitting empty, Precisely so they can be accessed at your whim. That doesn’t come cheap!
But I can understand that it’s annoying to not be able to afford the care you want.
If I had a million dollars spare to go to the US and possibly get the best care that money could buy…I’d donate it to the NHS, which gave me fantastic care in my childhood when my single-parent mother had no way to afford it.
Good luck finding anyone outside of the US that advocates the costly, wasteful and inhumane system of (only) private health insurance.
a big part of the problem is that so many here have health insurance through their employer, and said employer pays a big chunk of their premiums. they don’t see what their health insurance actually costs.