As I understand it, in the US the very poor can just turn up at the hospital because the hospital must treat them and they have nothing to lose, because they have nothing. Rather, it’s the low and low-middle income Americans - the precariat - that have problems because they can’t afford decent insurance - as you note they’re under-insured, if they’re insured at all - and when they do have a big problem they lose everything.
Well as I understand it, the hospital/emergency room must stabilize them. Which means that a lot of conditions only get their immediate symptoms treated rather than the causes. Also, nothing prevents them from handing the patients bills that may topple a precarious economy afterwards. But I don’t actually have anything but theoretical knowledge of that, maybe someone here knows more?
In Spain something like that would usually be handled by the GP, but one issue I found in my limited experience with the US system is that they referred you real quick, and sometimes to specialties which didn’t seem to make sense to us foreigners. I suspect at least some of the people involved were backscratching like crazy, though.
That there are delays in some treatments and tests is acknowledged by everyone, since they are provided based on medical assessment instead of ability to pay. But whether that consistutes a “serious risk” is your opinion, not necessarily borne out by the facts.
It is a fact that you said poor childless adults in Alabama get Medicaid and it is a fact that they do not. No opinions involved - yet you won’t admit your error; instead you change subjects.
It’s embarassing.
NHS is awful. Me and my Swiss girl friend have had nothing but bad experiences with them. The doctors and nurses make you feel like an utter piece of shit for having the gall to waste their time, not matter how serious your illness, the attitude is unbelievable.
All steams from lack of competition.
Healthcare in Switzerland it like night and day. I think most people are afraid of a predatory American system, but Switzerland has proved you can have affordable, efficient and high quality health care that the government protects against excessive prices hiking etc.
Given that my own experience with Swiss healthcare was “just go over the border in France”, I can’t claim it was my favorite place for that.
If we in the UK put 10% of our salaries into healthcare I have no doubt that it would surpass even the Swiss.
So a free clinic and hospital care don’'t count if they’re not handled by Medicare. Got it. You want to argue the semantics of Medicare vs my actual point of care available to the poor. As arguments go, yours is without merit and it’s embarrassing you keep trying to score some bullshit point. You’re wrong. We take care of the poor.
The only true nationalized health care we have in the US is the VA system. Unlike private insurance programs, they manage the doctors and facilities. They have not done well of late and the delays killed people.
The problem with threads like this is that every statement made is taken as an absolute. If I point out the delays in NHS care then suddenly it’s the worst thing in the Universe. It doesn’t matter that twice I said they’re private insurance makes it the best of both worlds in the UK. You can get efficiently delayed care or you buy private insurance.
When it comes to health care, private health care does a better job of reducing delays. Universal health care is more efficient.
So have you abandoned your erroneous position that “the actual delays posted by the NHS represent a serious risk in health” then?
…Medicare? It runs some free clinics now, eh?
Switzerland is only affordable if you compare it with the stratospheric costs of the USA. If you take the US out of the equation it stands out as the most expensive model on earth. Earlier we’ve discussed how much better the NHS could be if it was funded as well as the German or French systems.
The Swiss system costs even more than the German and French systems. In terms of dollars spent per citizen it is in fact close to the total spending of the UK and France.
It is often talked up by the US health insurance industry, because it is compulsory for-profit insurance so the health industry can expect good profits there. It also puts a lot of the financial burden of healthcare onto the citizens.
Magiver, what you are ignoring is that universal healthcare is also better at reducing delays for medically urgent issues than poorly regulated and/or non-universal private insurance with spotty coverage.
You are also arguing on the presumption that healthcare for the poor in the US is anywhere near as good, something you’ve repeatedly failed to back up.
No one says’ NHS’, it’s ‘The NHS’. And no one says “with them”, as if its a phone company contract.
It’'s interesting your experience was 100% uniform - all those doctors and all those nurses.
Must be all the steams.
I’ve certainly had some doctors (GPs and specialists) who were incompetent, jerks, or both, but that covers a subset of every human population.
So we all agree then. We should adopt an NHS like system And let people buy private insurance if they want. Sounds good to me.
We do though, don’t we? Total earnings something like 1,000 billion, NHS spending roughly 125 billion. That’s 12.5%.
The total revenue for the government is around £769bn. Less than half (£319bn) comes from tax and NI. The rest comes from indirect taxes (VAT, duty etc) and taxes on business.
I don’t see how that changes anything. VAT and duty are paid by UK citizens too (mostly.) Corporation tax is paid by shareholders, a good portion of whom are also UK citizens, or is passed on to customers, again many of them in the UK.
The NHS costs roughly 3000 per person in the UK. The Swiss system costs, I believe, roughly 8500 per person. When you multiply the difference up by the number of citizens, it is a godawfully large number.
It’s almost as if it could be more complicated.
Why don’t you try Google; type in ‘NHS GDP’ and click the ‘Images’ tab.
Switzerland has about twice the income per person that the UK does, so the difference is not as dramatic as your numbers suggest. Naturally, richer countries spend more per person.
up_the_junction, to the extent that I can make sense of what you posted, I don’t see how it addresses anything I have posted above. I am not making or implying any point about the appropriate level of public healthcare spending in the UK. I simply questioned the assertion that public healthcare costs Swiss employees more, relative to their income, than it does British people.