The important fact that seem to get missed in each rage against socialised healthcare provision, especially when lambasting the delays for routine procedures that do affect say the NHS, is that in most such systems there is nothing preventing the better off (or employers) having private insurance to speed the process up.
It’s also much cheaper because the emergency stuff is covered - Family cover for <£100 a month for example.
Boy. It’s like none of you have even heard of Freedom™.
Can confirm. The just-in-time (for me) arrival of ACA means I’m alive today. It’s that simple.
“Aspirational billing”
Because everyone wants to haggle about prices when they’re fucking dying.
The thing is that two other countries I know who share this religious belief don’t seem to have the same massive problem as the US. Both The Netherlands and Switzerland have a working healthcare system with insurance models which are able to bankrupt or kill you in case of a serious health issue, but which are not hellbound on doing so for all I know and experienced.
FTR, I used “religious belief” purposefully, since I am under the impression that Calvinism is at the root of this.
My plan, if I ever get cancer, is so much morphine and dying cheaply.
I refuse to put my family through medical bankruptcy.
FIFY
Roger That!
My plan is to keep get’n up in peoples face about MediCare for all, and I do mean up in their face. I survived, I fight.
Might want to do a little research into living conditions for our soldiers.
I worked in single payer care in the US for almost 15 years. It exists. You just have to give the military killing machine 20 years of your life or be an Indian (yes, many non-urbanized Natives use the term proudly) whose ancestors were robbed of their lands, killed, uprooted, or all all of the above.
Now, I’m out of that in the “real” world and I was first appalled at the cost of drugs. The thrust of my job now involves helping people avoid paying too much for “specialty” drugs. It’s hard, but we do it for both insured and indigent patients, through different mechanisms.
I haven’t seen it mentioned here, but want to point out that Medicare as it stands leaves 20% of charges for the patient. When you’re talking $120k per dose of Ocrevus, that still isn’t what I want to see for universal health care. The drug’s twice a year, or $48k to the patient. At that point, you hope you can get free drug or copay assistance from the manufacturer.
Medicare needs an upgrade before it’s really ready to be “for all,” but even what we have now is an improvement. We have the money. Bread and Meds, not Bombs!
IIRC, “Medicare for all” is intended simply as a way of referring to universal healthcare in terms familiar to Americans,
Moved to New Zealand from the US in 2005. We have a Medicare for All system. It works. Yes there are problems for example your nana might wait 6 months for her hip replacement, but she’ll eventually get it. And she won’t be denied coverage because she had a previous injury. Your kid’s insulin will never be more than $5 for a 3 month supply. And no, people with life threatening injuries or illnesses aren’t put on a waiting list. They are treated immediately.
But here is the best talking point: People here sometimes complain about it but no one (certainly not politicians) say, “Hey, let’s have a completely private system like they have in the US for people under 65”.
No one EVER says that.
My nephew is 4 months old. My sister just found out he needs a heart transplant. She’s a career counselor at a local community college; her husband’s a high-school swim coach. She’ll need to stay employed her entire life to maintain the insurance her son will need to cover his care for the next 20+ years, not to mention the very real risk of medical bankruptcy despite insurance.
Meanwhile she’s already juggling FMLA, commuting to the hospital to stay with the baby, working out a leave plan with her employer, and taking care of her older child. Oh, and both her older child and her husband are waiting on genetic testing to ensure they don’t have the same cardio risks.
Some “third world shitholes” have better healthcare.
Growing up, and having lived a part of my adult life in the US, I’ve seen the fundamental unfairness that exists in the US healthcare system. I’ve known people that have died, due to a lack of coverage, and I’ve seen people go bankrupt over it, too. However, what has proved the most appalling is the attitude that people have about the problem. The profiteering is blatant, and who cares if people die? It seems to be more important for the politicians to gaslight about death panels, and virtue signal about personal responsibility, while they’re in the pockets of insurance companies that make the life and death decisions regarding who gets care. And God help you if you don’t have coverage.
Nowadays, I’m just glad that I live in Canada, and not have to worry about this problem. But I do worry about my mother, as she has lots of medical bills that she simply can’t pay.
Lobbyists. Don’t forget about lobbyists.
Somewhat related, there’s a myth that in Canada (and in other countries with nationalized healthcare) that there are no medical bankruptcies. That’s simply not true.
The data is from 2005 in this study, but I don’t see why things would have changed much.
15% declared medical reasons the primary cause [of bankruptcy], although it was unclear from the data whether this was the costs of care over and above the Medicare system or income loss due to medical reasons, or some combination of both.
And also, the bankruptcy rate in Canada is only slightly less than that in the US. So, yeah, us Canadians have no right to be smug.
Even people who’d be surprised there are still medical bankruptcies under nationalised healthcare aren’t saying those systems are perfect. Just so obviously, and empirically better than the American system that it’s insane America has clung so hard to it.
Frankly 15% of bankruptcies being due to medical problems is a waaaaay better than two-thirds:
