Just because a poster comes from [whatever country in question] does not mean they fully understand the tradeoffs of their country’s policies.
It’s the same as if a born-and-bred American said, “Social Security and Medicare are working great!” Yes, if the ignorant American only looks at the payout component of those programs, it would make sense for him to say they’re wonderful. It takes more intellectual homework to a deeper look at the broken funding and insolvency of those programs to make a more accurate assessment. Being an American recipient of that system makes you dumber not smarter.
So… being a proud French citizen offers zero style points. Sorry.
Being a French citizen means he/she knows if they’ve ever heard someone say, whether in person, on television, etc… “I can’t afford basic health care!!”. And they’ve never heard it. I live in Australia, and I have never heard it. It’s just not an issue. If a politician came on television here and said “I’m going to do something for all those people who can’t afford basic health care!”, the response would be scratched heads of confusion.
Again, you’re missing the point. Look at the very quote you’re using “I can’t afford basic health care” – that word “afford” is a tell-tale sign of being focused as the RECIPIENT of a government program. On the other hand, not as many quotes of complaints of how to PAY for it. Why? Because people don’t want to do their homework. Government programs are “free” so why bother thinking it through?
How many brain cells does it require to go into more debt? How many brain cells are required to counteract the tendency to go into debt? A lot more it looks like.
Being a citizen of a particular country does not offer any more insight into fiscal practicality of government program especially if that citizen is NET RECEIVER instead of NET PAYER of the program in question.
I’ll move to St Louis, MO in six months… you think that they will throw stones at me ?
As a matter of fact, three members of my close family are doctors, working half private and half hospital. And right now I work in a hospital in Switzerland. And I am having lunch with an American colleague every day. Turns out that I have a little bit of an idea of how things are running in some health care systems -and also about the mentality of people in various countries.
And btw, I admit that French should spend a little bit more on their health system.
And btw, I would suggest that you people have a look at the Swiss system too. I’m sure that you would like it !
You’re also presuming homogeneity among the “rest of the world,” which is ironically the flipside of the American-centrisim which you do doubt deride. The UK has nationalized healthcare, while Canada has a single-payer system. And Singapore’s healthcare, while universal, is bare-bones and arguablyless redistributionist than the US. Since many UHC activists are focused on equity, not efficiency, the nonprogressivity of the efficient Singapore system is hardly a point in their favor.
Is cancer survival rates the only favourable outcome you can assert for the US health care system ? Have you considered the number of undiagnosed cancer victims who can’t afford to be part of the stats, or rather stat, you are drawing your conclusions from ?
Lets be realistic here. There is no huge health care debate in Canada or in any other developed country. Sure, situations arise lack lack of MRI and Cat scan machines, but our governments are responding to the political voice. Who is responding to the dissatisfaction of Americans ?
Yes we have waiting lines for elective surgery, but we do get treatment when urgent. When I had a sore testicle, five doctors examined me and rousted a specialist out of his home in the evening to examine and treat me. I doubt very much I would have got the same response in the States.
Probably a combination of factors in Canada’s favor…
Does Canada offer more favorable tax treatment of businesses to encourage growth?
Does Canada spend billions fighting pointless wars in Vietnam and Iraq?
Does Canada have as many military bases around the world?
Do you spend as much on medical R&D (pharma, university funding, physician training)
Do your doctors make as much salary as the ones in USA?
Are your citizens as obese and unhealthy as Americans?
Do you have the same number of malpractice lawsuits?
Do the number of poor people in Washington state, Montana, and New York wanting to cross the border into Canada outnumber the poor people wanting to illegally enter from Mexico into the USA?
…and dozens of other factors
Australia has also been out-economic-growthing nearly every other first world country for years. We’re not even in recession at the moment, I think we’re the only developed nation who can claim this…? One of very few, at the least.
One of the tradeoffs of higher social spending is generally higher taxation, which generally translates into lower economic growth, lower standards of living, higher unemployment, less innovation and risk-taking, etc.
You can think your country has great social programs, and then complain bitterly about your country’s high unemployment rates, and never connect the two.
In Canada’s case, we’re not running deficits and big debt for the simple reason that we’ve actually been dramatically shrinking the size of our government as a percentage of GDP. Canada is NOT an example of a big spending social welfare state. Canada’s taxes are less progressive than U.S. taxes, and our government spending is very close to the U.S’s on a per-capita basis. In fact, if Obama’s economic program is fully enacted, the U.S. will have a significantly larger government than Canada’s, higher tax rates, and more regulations.
There is no doubt the U.S. has a problem with skyrocketing health care costs. But the reasons for it are complex and not amenable to easy fixes. The U.S. has the most obese population in the world. Between S-Chip, Medicaid, Social Security, and the VA, the U.S. already covers almost 30% of the population under government-run health care. So this isn’t just a problem of free market health care.
For those who think that higher health care spending is an indictment of free market health care, how about this: The U.S. also spends significantly more than Canada on public education, and yet Canada routinely outscores the U.S. in educational testing. The U.S. spends over 4% of GDP on welfare. The U.S. has the second-largest public pension liability in the world, after France. The U.S.'s medicare system is insolvent, and Canada’s isn’t.
Why the differences? Why does the U.S. spend so much, and yet have worse outcomes in many ways than other countries? The problem isn’t just restricted to health care.
The items in red are the ways we are inferior to Canada. Which, bizarrely, doesn’t even permit private insurance.
And believe it or not, Europe does medical research.
As for technology, apparently Americans can’t design actual commuter cars. As much as we drive, & all compacts & subcompacts are designed overseas. Maybe our system** fails** at new tech, think of that?
An arguable, but fair point. To be honest, I lump Canada and the US together in my mind in most of these discussions (I know, I know…apologies Sam).
I was thinking more of the European countries.
And the medical tourists streaming across the US/Canadian border for treatments in the US would suggest that a certain lack of public option for healthcare exists in Canada.
I love the compact cars in Europe, especially the diesels. I owned one for 3 years when I lived there. Sam’s opinion was that emission standards (which is ridiculous, since I suspect the EU has equivalent-or-better standards than the US) and crash-worthiness standards were main reasons for their lack of import.
“Lower income people” in this case being 83% of the population of a wealthy social democracy. And [warning: numbers from memory] ~70% of German medicine is publicly funded vs ~44% in the USA & recently 100% in Sam Stone’s native Canada.
Nonsense. There’s a huge difference between society paying for something & a victim paying for something. One sense of “free” means “free of charge at point of delivery,” which Britain’s definitely is, & France’s comes rather near.
Which has very little to do with health insurance.
More amputations are performed in warzones than elsewhere, & soldiers get amazing prosthetic limbs! Trufax!
Oddly, they don’t get more pills for that. In fact, they may get less.
And a shortage of family doctors, which enables physicians to choose to drop all the patients with the insurance that doesn’t pay as well–usually a public system. The shortage hasn’t been addressed because the company that’s supposed to fund the training of doctors (the federal government) isn’t paying attention. They caused the price explosion, they can bloody well pay all my medical bills.
Actually, the medical tourism is not for all care, just a few procedures that are more available in the USA. It would be more disturbing if there were no movement of medical services across borders.
And an Albertan suspecting European emissions standards as unacceptable in the open country of the USA is surreal on multiple levels. I think the lack of Peugeots in the USA is probably just a small-minded & bizarre attempt at protectionism.
Actually, that’s exactly what’s happening in the USA. And we don’t even provide care for the productive members of society. We have, in fact, so much failure of growth that health care costs are at 16% of GDP & rising. The next closest country is Switzerland at 12%.
So we get full-on economic suicide: massive social spending without the safety net to keep working-class persons that suffer massive medical bills in the consumer class.
Cite? Never mind, here is one. The last 17 go back to 2002. Of those, 2 are from France, 1 is from Germany, 2 are from Austraila, 4 are from the UK, and 8 are from the US. As far as I can tell, none of the laureates from the US work for private industry (unless you want to count private, foundation-funded research centers.) I’m not going to look at their papers to see the acknowledgments, but I strongly suspect almost all got funded by the good old Socialist research (otherwise known as NIH.)
I looked at the bios of the non-US laureates, briefly, and it doesn’t look to me as if they did their work in the US.
I’m from Missouri (admittedly the other side). I would ask if you can get Sarko to buy us back from Washington DC, because our leaders don’t know what they’re doing.
