4 ms·

Switzerland might be a good example (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_Switzerland https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_Switzerland): Healthca

Switzerland might be a good example (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_Switzerland https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_Switzerland): Healthcare in Switzerland is universal and is regulated by the Swiss Federal Law on Health Insurance. There are no free state-provided health services, but private health insurance is compulsory for all persons residing in Switzerland (within three months of taking up residence or being born in the country).

davidw 9y ago
Interesting - the article doesn't seem to mention what happens if you're indigent. Also looks like it is highly regulated, between required coverage, not discriminating against existing conditions, and the "copay" (US term): > and by a charge of 10% of the costs over and above the excess. This is known as the retention, and is up to a maximum of 700CHF (PPP-adjusted $429) per year. That is absolute peanuts in terms of costs in the US.
wcummings 9y ago
How does this compare to the ACA, which also features a mandate?
- beat 9y ago
  It's complicated. But I think it's important to note here that, pre-ACA, the American system had two major flaws - high cost, and incomplete coverage. The ACA chose to address coverage first, rather than cost. The CDC reported the results here: "More recently, the percentage of uninsured adults aged 18 to 64 decreased, from 22.3% in 2010 to 11.9% in the first 3 months of 2016. During this 6-year period, corresponding increases were seen in both public and private coverage among adults aged 18 to 64."
jonknee 9y ago
It's privatized, but not private like you would think of in the US. For example, insurers aren't allowed to profit off of the basic insurance everyone is required to get, they can only profit off of expanded coverage. They also have Medicare-style price controls which is obvious, but not private in the sense we use in the US.
- int_19h 9y ago
  So basically the big reason why it succeeds where ACA does not is because it regulates the prices?
  - jonknee 9y ago
    That along with a real mandate and the fact that Switzerland is a tiny place (similar in population as Virginia, though 1/3 the physical size).
    - beat 9y ago
      I've seen the geography argument brought up for a "Why no national insurance companies?" Apparently, network stuff is so localized that it's very hard to set up a national-level insurance company. Although I suspect state-by-state laws play into it as well. At any rate, the sheer geographic size, plus the large population, plus the legalistic bizarreness of our federal/state divide, leads to a chaotic system, and we can't easily just legislate that away.
      - int_19h 9y ago
        But why would a national insurance company be a prerequisite for quality healthcare in at least some states?

davidw 9y ago

Interesting - the article doesn't seem to mention what happens if you're indigent. Also looks like it is highly regulated, between required coverage, not discriminating against existing conditions, and the "copay" (US term): > and by a charge of 10% of the costs over and above the excess. This is known as the retention, and is up to a maximum of 700CHF (PPP-adjusted $429) per year. That is absolute peanuts in terms of costs in the US.

wcummings 9y ago

How does this compare to the ACA, which also features a mandate?

beat 9y ago
It's complicated. But I think it's important to note here that, pre-ACA, the American system had two major flaws - high cost, and incomplete coverage. The ACA chose to address coverage first, rather than cost. The CDC reported the results here: "More recently, the percentage of uninsured adults aged 18 to 64 decreased, from 22.3% in 2010 to 11.9% in the first 3 months of 2016. During this 6-year period, corresponding increases were seen in both public and private coverage among adults aged 18 to 64."

jonknee 9y ago

It's privatized, but not private like you would think of in the US. For example, insurers aren't allowed to profit off of the basic insurance everyone is required to get, they can only profit off of expanded coverage. They also have Medicare-style price controls which is obvious, but not private in the sense we use in the US.

int_19h 9y ago
So basically the big reason why it succeeds where ACA does not is because it regulates the prices?
- jonknee 9y ago
  That along with a real mandate and the fact that Switzerland is a tiny place (similar in population as Virginia, though 1/3 the physical size).
  - beat 9y ago
    I've seen the geography argument brought up for a "Why no national insurance companies?" Apparently, network stuff is so localized that it's very hard to set up a national-level insurance company. Although I suspect state-by-state laws play into it as well. At any rate, the sheer geographic size, plus the large population, plus the legalistic bizarreness of our federal/state divide, leads to a chaotic system, and we can't easily just legislate that away.
    - int_19h 9y ago
      But why would a national insurance company be a prerequisite for quality healthcare in at least some states?