shrug Also Aussie, but voted UHC. I don’t have private cover, except ambulance, and see no great need of it outside of ambulance services.
Private cover, for the non-Aussies, also can* cover optical and dental care.
*And I think usually does, though I’ve never investigated it.
I voted for UHC. Which is great. all people and communities can use the promotive, preventive, curative, rehabilitative and palliative health services they need, of sufficient quality to be effective, while also ensuring that the use of these services does not expose the user to financial hardship.
I’ve only ever experience UHC, so I can’t really compare it to anything for a fair comparison, except what people have posted on this board, much of which horrifies me. Having to fight insurance companies when you’re seriously ill- even terminally ill- to avoid bankrupting your family is basically a circle of hell.
I will note that most of the complaints I’ve heard about the NHS seem to really come down to having one doctor making errors, and I’m not convinced that private doctors are any less fallible. You can always ask for a second opinion, or switch GP, under the NHS system, and you don’t have to pay for the privilege, even if they don’t always make that option obvious.
Thats actually just UHC, not a hybrid. Every UHC system bar Canada has private enterprise to fill in any cracks.
Thats incredibly rare. Most Canadians who get healthcare in the US are snowbirds or retired expats. A rough guess is that 1000 Americans filch free healthcare in Canada for every Canadian that travels to the US to pay for it.
I had a friend who emigrated to the US, but sent his wife back to the UK to give birth to their kids. Apparently meeting medical procedures concerned with child birth can bankrupt you in the US and he simply could not afford it. Conversely, I have a friend from the US who married and settled in the UK, had to stay overnight a few days in hospital when she gave birth and asked how much she had to pay, she expected a hospital bill. The staff were a bit bemused by this strange request and told her not to worry about it. She got the impression that they did not have anyone who was responsible for collecting fees, it is a public service and the public regard it in somewhat heroic terms. This pervades the culture in the UK. Popular TV entertainment is full of dramas set in hospitals, ,schools, police stations, fire stations full of noble heroes working for the common good and dealing with crises and emergencies. No-one minds paying taxes for the front end of essential public services as long as they deliver. When they let us down, there is a scandal and questions are asked in the Houses of Parliament.
The US is wealthy country, but it seems saddled with the worst all worlds with respect to healthcare. I am sure those with the resources appreciate being able to buy the best that money can buy. But the public seem to be paying too much for too little and must be in constant worry about their insurance coverage. The fact that insurance is often tied to employment contracts seems to give a lot of power to the ‘Man’ and probably spurs people on to find independence through enterprise. That insecurity gives the US an enviable economic dynamic but it comes at a human cost.
There is nowhere that has all the right answers and has the perfect system and there are issues with Universal Health Care that are hard to solve, but it addresses anxiety over paying for healthcare and this seems pretty high up on what people expect for a state to provide for the taxes they levy.
It is quite hard to understand some of the attitudes in the US that regard UHC with suspicion. I guess that comes from the vested interests that have much to lose if the system ever changes. Bevan in the UK had a devil of job dealing with the doctors to set up the NHS in 1948, some were dead against it. The famous quote is ‘I had to stuff the doctors pockets full of gold’ to get it up and running in the face of fierce opposition. But then again it was at a time in those bankrupt post war years when the state was big, centralised and had a generation of politicians who were dedicated to social reform. After fighting a gruelling war, it was what the public wanted. There must have been a lot of people suffering health problems as a result of war injury. Most of the West European UHC systems date from this time.
I suspect that in the US there will be an awful lot more pockets that require compensation to accept any change. It will take some remarkable political commitment to see it through. I do wonder if the political ingredients are there, but the US has shown in the past a huge flexibility and the capacity to meet big challenges if there is leadership.
You mean you couldn’t guess 
?
As a historical footnote, in the UK it was probably more that the Emergency Medical Service set up during the war to look after civilian casualties had been seen to work effectively, as an example of “big government” pulling the community together to win the war. The pressing needs experienced by the NHS turned out to be not so much war injuries as backlogs of conditions that impaired the quality of life and had been put up with because treatment was too expensive - cataracts, and (often mentioned) prolapses in women, and the like. And another factor affecting the design of the NHS was that the rules of eligibility for free treatment under the EMS had grown to something like 68 pages by the end of the war!
There is no ‘Canadian’ system. We have a different system in each province and right now, in Quebec, you can go to a private clinic for certain procedures and it may or may not be covered by Medicare.
Last year I had an ultrasound in a private clinic and an MRI in a hospital. The ultrasound was within days, the MRI in about 8 weeks (I was not an urgent case).
I was fortunate enough to be eligible for a not for profit insurer, so my private health was a fair bit cheaper then the big players. On top of that, I would have had to pay the Medicare surcharge otherwise, which lowered my cost of cover again. It definitely provided optical and dental cover, the level depends on how much you’re prepared to pay. Dental particularly had payment caps, but I was able get new glasses for about $20 out of pocket.
I’m luckily pretty healthy, but the couple of times I had to use the emergency room, being seen within 10 minutes (even for minor complaints as far as ‘emergencies’ go) was great. And the one minor surgery I had, the benefits were worth it, fastracked surgery, my own surgeon, a private recovery room.
Having said all that, I’m still all for a UHC, and happy to pay for it.
Someone in Canada who doesn’t want to wait and goes to pay for it in the US (or anywhere else) is not sucking a penny out of the system. They are actually ADDING money to the system. They still paid taxes in Canada, but aren’t getting the corresponding benefits from their provinces’s health care system.
I don’t know if this is really a fair poll. I don’t think any sane non-rich person would prefer the US system.
I have heard a few bad stories about the NHS, mostly wait times. However cheap private insurance on top of that can solve that issue.
It seems the comparison should be something like
single payer
single payer with private insurance options
multi payer
US system
I doubt anyone picks the US system (except maybe a handful of very rich people, or very ignorant people).
Me, too!
I have had multiple kidney stone attacks in Canada. Comparing this to my mother’s experience with a kidney stone while in Florida (**with **medical insurance coverage for her trip), I’ll take the Canadian UHC system every time!
Don’t remember the source now (probably Tumblr), which said that stats about Canadians going to the U.S. include people who were in the U.S. for other reasons (e.g. visiting girlfriends) that had to go to the hospital/doctor for emergency care.
That means they would have counted Bob’s trip to the E.R. when he had a seizure while visiting me before we got married. Which B.C. healthcare then paid for.
I have experience of both the US and UK systems.
I live in the UK.
Last year I had mysterious stomach pains. My doctor recommended a series of tests and said it could be many things (including bowel cancer or gallstones.)
Fortunately it turned out to be gallstones!
During one month I had:
This all cost me … £0 (like everyone else here, I’d prepaid by taxes through my working life)
When I visit the USA, I take out $1,000,000 in health insurance (and pray that will be enough.)
Luckily I’ve only had one (minor) problem - I cut my toe slightly.
A doctor spent 12 minutes inspecting the wound, disinfecting and bandaging it.
It cost me:
$285
@ Grim Reader - Thanks for clarifying - I do change my vote to a “bar Canada” hybrid system, allowing for a private insurance overlay. I didn’t pick up that was implicit in the options.
@Ricky Jay - Good point about people leaving being better for the Canadian system. My reasoning on this was that when you have citizens that are willing to spend their personal money to pay for faster and / or better services, then telling then that they must send those dollars and profits to the US, thereby not reinvesting in the the Canadian system it’s a loss to Canada. The funds and profit dollars could be used to keep the best quality doctors in Canada and fund additional infrastructure to better the overall system for everyone. I’m happy to agree to disagree on this.
@Barbarian - You’re 100% right. My apologies - I was being Ontario centric. My primary experience is with the very broken Ontario system. I can’t speak for how the rest of Canada runs things, although I don’t believe anywhere in Canada allows for any private overlay.
5 for the U.S. version…and at least two were mistakes.
It’s not a loss to Canada when the line jumpers spend to get faster service in the US.
In fact, I would posit the reverse is true. Every nation, no matter the system has people who feel entitled, by wealth or connection, to be served ahead of others. Those are the very people who put pressure on the government to install a second their level of service just for them. Canada is better off having them go elsewhere rather than letting them undermine the current system.
The hard truth is that Canada sleeps in the shadow of the elephant. Any for profit overlay, no matter how it’s applied will most assuredly end up being dominated by American healthcare giants/abusers. The only advantage in that precarious position, is that for those with desperate need to be served faster/first, to be ‘elite’ is, that it’s right there just across the border. More than happy to take your money.
Our system need never accommodate those seeking more elite access, as a result. We might as well take advantage of that perk, since we have to live with the very real danger their style of ‘health management’ finds a foothold here. Through campaign funding for the likes of Doug Ford. If he can sufficiently damage the system in Ontario he might just be able to get that thin edge of the wedge in, and profit in the doing, I’m certain!
What??! I’d be dead 4 years now if I’d had to wait that long.
That wait is for very low-priority cases. Depending on the situation, the wait can be as long as it takes to wheel up the gurney, for the patient currently in the machine to be done with his own MRI, and for the machine to get adjusted to the new settings.
But of course, if what you want to do is complain, saying “OMG, my mother has to wait 6 months to see her gastro!” is a much better complaint than “my mother sees her gastro every 6 months.”