3 ms·

You've described a system wherein waiting lists are pervasive. Why do you think it's working? (This doesn't imply I think the American system is working. On th

You've described a system wherein waiting lists are pervasive. Why do you think it's working? (This doesn't imply I think the American system is working. On the contrary, I think it's a mess.)

johan_larson 10y ago
"Pervasive" sounds like an overstatement. Most conditions don't have waiting lists. But a few do. In the medical field, I don't think it's possible to give people everything they want, because some people want everything done to keep them alive but some treatments are horrendously expensive. Any funding system is therefore going to have some sort of shortfall; someone isn't going to get everything they want. The best that can realistically be done is to ensure that the shortfalls between want and get are never too severe, and are generally distributed in some fair and sensible way. As far as I can tell, the Canadian system meets those criteria. To be clear, I do think the Canadian system could be improved. To give just one example, I think it should be legal to pay for your own medical procedures out of pocket. If you have the funds to pay the full freight, who are we to stop you? But that would mean a two-tier system, one for the rich and one for the rest of us, which is currently politically unacceptable in Canada.
- edblarney 10y ago
  " Most conditions don't have waiting lists. But a few do." Almost all conditions have delays that are considerably longer than other systems. Just getting to see a specialist for something benign can take months. If you have highly specialized needs (such as a sports injury) - it can be very problematic. "I think it should be legal to pay for your own medical procedures out of pocket. " Some degree of privatization would be a good start.
eatmyshorts 10y ago
I suppose it's better than getting rejected for treatment. Or having a huge out-of-pocket co-pay. Or having to fight each bill that comes through that claims insufficient coverage--a single hospital stay a while back resulted in 42 separate bills! Look, with a limited supply of money, care will always be rationed at some point. Rationing hip replacements so that truly urgent healthcare can be administered with less rationing seems to me to be a better alternative to the US system, where even people with "good" healthcare coverage end up going bankrupt when dealing with severe illness.

You've described a system wherein waiting lists are pervasive. Why do you think it's working? (This doesn't imply I think the American system is working. On the contrary, I think it's a mess.)

johan_larson 10y ago

"Pervasive" sounds like an overstatement. Most conditions don't have waiting lists. But a few do. In the medical field, I don't think it's possible to give people everything they want, because some people want everything done to keep them alive but some treatments are horrendously expensive. Any funding system is therefore going to have some sort of shortfall; someone isn't going to get everything they want. The best that can realistically be done is to ensure that the shortfalls between want and get are never too severe, and are generally distributed in some fair and sensible way. As far as I can tell, the Canadian system meets those criteria. To be clear, I do think the Canadian system could be improved. To give just one example, I think it should be legal to pay for your own medical procedures out of pocket. If you have the funds to pay the full freight, who are we to stop you? But that would mean a two-tier system, one for the rich and one for the rest of us, which is currently politically unacceptable in Canada.

edblarney 10y ago
" Most conditions don't have waiting lists. But a few do." Almost all conditions have delays that are considerably longer than other systems. Just getting to see a specialist for something benign can take months. If you have highly specialized needs (such as a sports injury) - it can be very problematic. "I think it should be legal to pay for your own medical procedures out of pocket. " Some degree of privatization would be a good start.

eatmyshorts 10y ago

I suppose it's better than getting rejected for treatment. Or having a huge out-of-pocket co-pay. Or having to fight each bill that comes through that claims insufficient coverage--a single hospital stay a while back resulted in 42 separate bills! Look, with a limited supply of money, care will always be rationed at some point. Rationing hip replacements so that truly urgent healthcare can be administered with less rationing seems to me to be a better alternative to the US system, where even people with "good" healthcare coverage end up going bankrupt when dealing with severe illness.