There are a large number of Canadian patients who come to America for treatment because they would die before their turn in Canada.
Australia, however, has a parallel system of private and public health, so neither system is strained too much.
All due respect, but I have a lot of Canadian friends and that level of care isnt common. A buddy of mine royally messed up his arm, went to a clinic, sat and waiting for 6 hours, only to tell him after the appointment that they would have to schedule scans/x-ray series... but that the earliest they could schedule it was 6 months out. This isnt even the exception to the rule but very common. I think where socialized medicine sees some positive effects is in the negotiation of medicine/pharmaceuticals because the government basically says yeah no we arent going to pay your 2000% margin... but with the vast majority of other services you're not going to get great or quick care. Canada specifically has seen a huge exodus of physicians over the last 8 years specifically because they can go to almost any country and make more money.
You hear about doctors in Canada being paid huge sums of money to practice medicine but those sort of salaries are usually reserved for the ones who head up public service programs... and after you take into account the high taxes, most doctors in Canada make just a bit more than your run of the mill software engineer.
So look there are pro's and con's to the socialized market in Canada, but ITS FAR from perfect and ideal more for people who arent actually sick that often. Specifically, the public health services will actually ration certain more modern treatments as they are much more expensive. If you have cancer you are much more likely to get a 10-year-old chemo treatment versus targeted proton therapy. God forbid you need an orthopedic consult (one of the most common) because by the .Gov reports from the Canadian government itself the average wait time is 40 weeks... that's for just the CONSULT and does not include diagnosis and treatment.
So look I get that US healthcare charging and expenses are out of control and for a number of reasons, but I dont know if trying to replicate the Canadian model would be great in the long run.
In America's case in particular, the problems only got insane when the feds got involved.
Shit, as an Army medic I have access to awesome tools and drugs that are illegal to use stateside because of the FDA and bullshit hospital regulations.
We have scanners that we play with for fun that are only accessible to civilians at large hospitals solely because federal regs outlaw their use in smaller non-military installations.
Businesses have been shut down for undercutting major hospital costs.
Free market that is not.
deleted
· 5 years ago
Why is no country with socialized medicine moving towards a free market only system?
So, I got in a fender bender about 4 years ago and, per my insurance, I had to go to the emergency room. I waited 14 hours. When I had my kidney stone, I waited 9 hours. I took a disabled friend of mine to the emergency room and we waited 6 hours only to be told there was nothing they could do. I once watched a guy bleed out in the hallway of an emergency room because they didn't have room for him. The American medical and insurance system is fucked.
For somebody who literally works for the federal government you sure seem to think that they're responsible for all the bad stuff that happens. Also, no, private insurance having a virtual monopoly on healthcare isn't the government's fault. Shitty healthcare isn't a new thing.
Look at the regulations and monopolies established by government interference. A free market wouldn't be a starve or bleed out dichotomy, there'd be intermediate stops, alternative choices, and many more medical facilities.
I serve the United States to the end of National Defense, probably the one thing the feds are actually supposed to be in charge of
The FDA ties up perfectly good treatments behind a pay to win system, federal regulations shut down smaller and cheaper medical facilities, and drive up healthcare costs through excessive interference and recently by forcing people to buy policies they don't need or want from approved insurers.
I'm not an objectivist nut clutching the Anarchist's Cookbook waiting for The Man to come for me, I'm just a guy who'd rather people get what they need or want at costs that aren't artificially inflated to financially gut them.
▼
deleted
· 5 years ago
Corporate greed drives up healthcare costs. Shareholder focused capitalism has destroyed the middle class.
Think the FDA is bad? Read a little history and remember why we need regulation.
Government regulation is killing off the competition, and big corporations are just the ones with the money to grease the FDAs wheels greased to get their stuff approved, while cheaper alternatives are kept in limbo.
Have you been ignoring everything I said about what the laws already in place are doing?
▼
·
Edited 5 years ago
deleted
· 5 years ago
Why not? You ignore the reality of Shareholder greed, why shouldn't I ignore your bumper sticker talking points about vague regulations and the evil gubment.
Shareholders can be as greedy as they please, until someone offers a similar service for cheaper. Then they've gotta lower costs or raise the quality to remain competitive.
The regulation in place is killing off all potential competitors, effectively creating a trust amongst the big dogs so that they can raise prices as high as possible, rather than having to compete to show why their service is worth the exorbitant cost, or simply lowering the cost to what the service is actually worth.
I would much rather wait 8 hours to have a rabies vaccine delivered and administered and then 7 more hours over the course of 4 follow-up appointments than pay the average $3,800 for it. I saved $253 dollars an hour. I think it's worth it. Of course, some areas have longer wait times than others, but for a lot of people it ain't awful. I will eventually pay those nurses back in taxes, anyway
Australian who works in a public hospital here. Locum doctors here earn $3000 PER DAY. The system isn't perfect but people here don't die of easily treatable diseases like diabetes because they can't afford the medicine. Their insurance doesn't stop because their illness means they can't work anymore. My tax bill last year was about $5000 (i'm a low income earner). That gives me free roads, police, education and health. How much was your insurance?
Do the math. Take away the money from the rich, and they'll either take the money elsewhere, or stop being rich.
Why put in 100,000 dollars worth when you'll only take home 30,000, when you can instead put in 30,000 and take home 28,000?
Better yet, put in 100,000, put 70,000 where the powers that be can't touch it and take home 28,000.
Why not just let people put in 100,000 and take home ~93,000?
And in the interest of fairness people putting in 10,000 will take home 9,300 instead of keeping everything and passing the buck to somebody else.
Australia, however, has a parallel system of private and public health, so neither system is strained too much.
Shit, as an Army medic I have access to awesome tools and drugs that are illegal to use stateside because of the FDA and bullshit hospital regulations.
We have scanners that we play with for fun that are only accessible to civilians at large hospitals solely because federal regs outlaw their use in smaller non-military installations.
Businesses have been shut down for undercutting major hospital costs.
Free market that is not.
I serve the United States to the end of National Defense, probably the one thing the feds are actually supposed to be in charge of
I'm not an objectivist nut clutching the Anarchist's Cookbook waiting for The Man to come for me, I'm just a guy who'd rather people get what they need or want at costs that aren't artificially inflated to financially gut them.
Think the FDA is bad? Read a little history and remember why we need regulation.
Have you been ignoring everything I said about what the laws already in place are doing?
The regulation in place is killing off all potential competitors, effectively creating a trust amongst the big dogs so that they can raise prices as high as possible, rather than having to compete to show why their service is worth the exorbitant cost, or simply lowering the cost to what the service is actually worth.
2) ACA's record keeping system costs 150 bed facilities over 7 million dollars.
3) FDA approvals cost 19 million dollars.
Why put in 100,000 dollars worth when you'll only take home 30,000, when you can instead put in 30,000 and take home 28,000?
Better yet, put in 100,000, put 70,000 where the powers that be can't touch it and take home 28,000.
Why not just let people put in 100,000 and take home ~93,000?
And in the interest of fairness people putting in 10,000 will take home 9,300 instead of keeping everything and passing the buck to somebody else.