5 ms·

There are just a few (under 5) countries in the world where you will get the same treatment for "free" as you'd get in the US. The price is >65% taxation. In mo

There are just a few (under 5) countries in the world where you will get the same treatment for "free" as you'd get in the US. The price is >65% taxation. In most of these "universal healthcare" countries, it's not that easy - a healthcare "insurance" is deducted from your wage, if you don't work, you have to pay it out of pocket (mandatory, but cheap - around $100 monthly). Social security programmes are useful just for literally homeless people, other people aren't getting much, really (you will not get anything if you have a job). In other countries with universal healthcare, the law says that you will get only "medically necessary" treatment, amd everything else needs to be paid out of your pocket - and in these countries, no private insurance usually exists, so have fun with that. Another point is quality of hospitalization care, again - there are less than 5 countries in the world where you'd get the same thing as in the US. In other countries you will share room with 5 other people, and be aware that usually at least one family member per patient is always present. Treatments such as colonoscopy are done in your room, btw. There usually is just one male and one female toilet and shower per ~10 rooms, of course used by the family members as well. The food is literally uneatable 99% of the time, 1% of the time you're lucky and it's plain bread and tea (nothing to screw up on that). Prepare yourself to be screamed at regularly by doctors and nurses. Prepare yourself to be bellitled at every opportunity. And prepare yourself that your family members might die because noone listened to them, and the only compensation you can get is the sentence "well, that's just the system, the government really didn't want that" - correct, no monetary compensation, no fines, no prison. Did I mention that there is no way to go private other than paying out of pocket, and of course who would run a medical company in a country with universal healthcare? Source: my whole life in a "universal healthcare" country. Edit: Let the downvotes flow, I just stated my experience, definitely a downvote-worthy comment, lol. Dumbass me thought we would discuss. Seems interesting tho. Almost every time I write my experiences with universal healthcare, I'm immediatelly (within 5 minutes) heavily downvoted, without any discussion. Hard denial? Universal healthcare definitely helps pharma and medical companies (they can overprice a lot, just like with any other governmental project). Lobby?

_Codemonkeyism 8y ago
"In other countries with universal healthcare [...]" Not sure where you live or where you've been too, but you make some sweeping arguments about dozens of countries. Mostly everything you say is wrong about Germany (>65% taxation, no private insurance, share room with 5 people, treatments in your room, toilet not in the room, uneatable food, ...).
- TomMarius 8y ago
  Germany is one of the five countries, and it has the lowest taxes among them. The rest are Austria and Scandinavian countries where total taxation rate approaches 70% all things factored in (I'm counting indirect taxes as well). Isn't it interesting that the best healthcare system in the world is entirely privatized, in Switzerland?
  - lawlessone 8y ago
    >Isn't it interesting that the best healthcare system in the world is entirely privatized, in Switzerland? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_Switzerland https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_Switzerland They still have universal healthcare/ mandatory health insurance. I don't think the libertarian types would be too happy with that. and >Insurers are required to offer this basic insurance to everyone, regardless of age or medical condition. They are not allowed to make a profit off this basic insurance, but can on supplemental plans
  - klohto 8y ago
    And Czechia? Slovakia? Poland?
    - TomMarius 8y ago
      These are the ones I have 20 years of experience with. Want more stories? I have friends working in healthcare, you wouldn't believe what they say.
  - toomanybeersies 8y ago
    You can add Australia and New Zealand to that list too. Both have amazing public/private systems, where everyone has access to public healthcare, and if you want to pay the extra money, you can go private. They also have (very affordable and fair) health insurance if you want that extra security. The public hospitals are fine in both countries, you'll get the critical care you need, when you need it. There aren't people dying of cancer because the government can't afford treatment. Sure, it's a bit slow for non-essential and elective treatment (e.g. a hip replacement or other corrective surgery), but it does get done eventually and as I said you can always go private, which is a lot cheaper than the USA, as they have to compete with free healthcare. I'm really not sure why you keep quoting total taxation as some kind of negative point regarding countries with universal healthcare and functioning social welfare systems? Quality of life, both for individuals and for the whole population is a much more important measure.
SmellyGeekBoy 8y ago
Perhaps you're being downvoted because you're unable to back up any of these vague claims with facts. I'm not sure which country you're talking about but this doesn't reflect my experience of healthcare in the UK at all (presumably one of the 5 countries you mention). Our private healthcare system is truly world class and very affordable (it has to compete with the NHS, after all). Yes, medical insurance is available to cover this. That said, even the NHS will routinely cover treatments that aren't "medically necessary" - even cosmetic surgery in some cases where it will demonstrably improve the patient's quality of life. I don't believe there are any countries in the world with ">65% taxation". What is this figure even referring to?
Asooka 8y ago
I'm sorry for your loss, but you have to stop pretending that Florida is not part of the USA.
wildebaard 8y ago
I think most people do not see how this is somehow worse than being bankrupted for being sick. For the record, I don't either. I'll eat my dry bread if it means I can then continue to not spend the rest of my life paying back the bills.
- TomMarius 8y ago
  Noone in Switzerland spends their lifes paying bills. Perhaps the system as you implemented it is wrong, but not the general idea?
peteretep 8y ago
You’re being downvoted because you’re wrong, and anyone with any familiarity at all with the other systems knows you’re wrong. Let us consider: > Did I mention that there is no way to go private other than paying out of pocket, and of course who would run a medical company in a country with universal healthcare? Like many people here, I’ve held private insurance in the UK. The last time I paid for it, I think I paid £150/m for it, but I’ve had several employees cover it.
- TomMarius 8y ago
  UK does not have a universal healthcare system in a comparable way to continental Europe. It is excluded from what I said, but it's not much of a change - that makes it sixth in the world. Out of 195.
  - DanBC 8y ago
    How does the UK not have universal healthcare?
    - TomMarius 8y ago
      Sorry I was mistaken, however: Every commenter here is talking about their experiences in private clinics. These are not a part of most universal healthcare systems and it's polar opposite of what the USA liberals are proposing. That's why I didn't want to count UK in, however other commenters have proved to me that it was a mistake - if any homeless man is able to get such treatment, I have to agree it's universal - but is this true? Noone here confirmed that yet.
- jsmith99 8y ago
  Exactly. I've also had private health insurance in the UK in the past. It cost a lot less than £150/month and when I used it I generally ended up in posh central London hospitals that get enough of their business from rich Arabs that they boasted of their Dubai TV channels.
DanBC 8y ago
It would help if you could say which healthcare system you're talking about, because what you say bears no resemblance to the English NHS. I'm not sure why you mention the UK system because you don't appear to know anything about it. And that's one of the really confusing things about people who criticise the NHS: there are plenty of things that are real problems and that we're trying to fix, but these aren't the things they talk about. > Universal healthcare definitely helps pharma and medical companies (they can overprice a lot, just like with any other governmental project). Lobby? This point in particular is incoherent. Universal healthcare always has cheaper medication pricing than eg the US. The prices are open and available. Pick a med and compare.
- TomMarius 8y ago
  In the Czech Republic and most other universal healthcare systems you need to separate pharmaceutics sold to patients directly (prescription or over the counter) and pharmaceutics sold in bulk to (governmental) medical facilities, I meant the latter. These are considered two different fields of business here.
zwaps 8y ago
You are downvoted because you generalize your experience to every country except a vague set of 5... What you are saying is simply not true in most of Europe. Case in point, last year I have been treated for some serious health issue that would have immediately bankrupted me in the USA, forever. I was in the network of Charité Berlin, one of the biggest hospitals in Europe. The treatment and care was overall fantastic. Yes, usually it seems the universal healthcare moves slowly. But once I was diagnosed, things _kicked_ in, let me tell you. The operation was brought on within days, insurance immediately got out of the way, the aftercare and radiation was scheduled immediately - things just went automatic. There were no 5-people hospital rooms and of course every room had a bath and toilet - what are you talking about? The facilities and rooms were all top notch. Moreover, the doctors involved were Professors and otherwise top experts in the entire field, treating hundreds of tough cases every year. And you know what I payed? Nothing. Again, in the USA, all the operations, radiation treatment, medicine, expensive machinery used and months in the hospital... It would have cost literal millions. I probably simply would have DIED because I could never afford it. Here, however, I had close to the optimal (and positive!) experience that one could have in such a situation. So yes, if you have a common cold, you will probably get less "treatment" on public than on private insurance. But - from my experience - when you get seriously ill, the amount of ressources, personell and technology that hospitals like Charité can and will bring to bear to save your life, at no cost to you, borders on ridiculous. Seriously I often felt uncomfortable because of the amount of care. Those people seriously wanted to make sure I don't die, even though I am not important, don't have money and certainly not private insurance. This includes hospital staff AND the people from the public insurance. For the latter, I expected a lot of resistance to the cost - like a private insurance would do. Them trying to minimize the treatment. Instead, the people at the insurance immediately "stamped" everything, and even me asking timidly about the costs was met with non-comprehension. It was pretty clear, when things get serious, the public insurance officials care about your life, no matter how much you pay. Sorry but I feel rather passionate about this, and might I even say that I actually prefer public insurance for that reason. No where else would I have been important enough to live.
- jki275 8y ago
  You might qualify your argument by clarifying that you're basing your argument on the idea that you wouldn't have had private insurance in the US and that you believe there is no healthcare in the US outside of private insurance. The first is probably incorrect unless you're totally unemployed as most employers in the US provide private health insurance, and the second is truly incorrect as the vast majority of those who are not employed are covered by things like medicaid. We don't generally just let people die in the US because they don't have health insurance, and in fact hospitals in the US write off millions of dollars in care every year because the bills simply aren't paid -- but they still provide the care, simply shifting the cost to the government and to those of us who do pay the bills (and by extension our insurance companies). Most of the "facts" people believe about healthcare in the US are badly uninformed and based in the mostly false arguments of those who wish, at all costs, to abolish private healthcare in the US and replace it with medicaid because of their political ideology.

_Codemonkeyism 8y ago

"In other countries with universal healthcare [...]" Not sure where you live or where you've been too, but you make some sweeping arguments about dozens of countries. Mostly everything you say is wrong about Germany (>65% taxation, no private insurance, share room with 5 people, treatments in your room, toilet not in the room, uneatable food, ...).

TomMarius 8y ago
Germany is one of the five countries, and it has the lowest taxes among them. The rest are Austria and Scandinavian countries where total taxation rate approaches 70% all things factored in (I'm counting indirect taxes as well). Isn't it interesting that the best healthcare system in the world is entirely privatized, in Switzerland?
- lawlessone 8y ago
  >Isn't it interesting that the best healthcare system in the world is entirely privatized, in Switzerland? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_Switzerland https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_Switzerland They still have universal healthcare/ mandatory health insurance. I don't think the libertarian types would be too happy with that. and >Insurers are required to offer this basic insurance to everyone, regardless of age or medical condition. They are not allowed to make a profit off this basic insurance, but can on supplemental plans
- klohto 8y ago
  And Czechia? Slovakia? Poland?
  - TomMarius 8y ago
    These are the ones I have 20 years of experience with. Want more stories? I have friends working in healthcare, you wouldn't believe what they say.
- toomanybeersies 8y ago
  You can add Australia and New Zealand to that list too. Both have amazing public/private systems, where everyone has access to public healthcare, and if you want to pay the extra money, you can go private. They also have (very affordable and fair) health insurance if you want that extra security. The public hospitals are fine in both countries, you'll get the critical care you need, when you need it. There aren't people dying of cancer because the government can't afford treatment. Sure, it's a bit slow for non-essential and elective treatment (e.g. a hip replacement or other corrective surgery), but it does get done eventually and as I said you can always go private, which is a lot cheaper than the USA, as they have to compete with free healthcare. I'm really not sure why you keep quoting total taxation as some kind of negative point regarding countries with universal healthcare and functioning social welfare systems? Quality of life, both for individuals and for the whole population is a much more important measure.

SmellyGeekBoy 8y ago

Perhaps you're being downvoted because you're unable to back up any of these vague claims with facts. I'm not sure which country you're talking about but this doesn't reflect my experience of healthcare in the UK at all (presumably one of the 5 countries you mention). Our private healthcare system is truly world class and very affordable (it has to compete with the NHS, after all). Yes, medical insurance is available to cover this. That said, even the NHS will routinely cover treatments that aren't "medically necessary" - even cosmetic surgery in some cases where it will demonstrably improve the patient's quality of life. I don't believe there are any countries in the world with ">65% taxation". What is this figure even referring to?

Asooka 8y ago

I'm sorry for your loss, but you have to stop pretending that Florida is not part of the USA.

wildebaard 8y ago

I think most people do not see how this is somehow worse than being bankrupted for being sick. For the record, I don't either. I'll eat my dry bread if it means I can then continue to not spend the rest of my life paying back the bills.

TomMarius 8y ago
Noone in Switzerland spends their lifes paying bills. Perhaps the system as you implemented it is wrong, but not the general idea?

peteretep 8y ago

You’re being downvoted because you’re wrong, and anyone with any familiarity at all with the other systems knows you’re wrong. Let us consider: > Did I mention that there is no way to go private other than paying out of pocket, and of course who would run a medical company in a country with universal healthcare? Like many people here, I’ve held private insurance in the UK. The last time I paid for it, I think I paid £150/m for it, but I’ve had several employees cover it.

TomMarius 8y ago
UK does not have a universal healthcare system in a comparable way to continental Europe. It is excluded from what I said, but it's not much of a change - that makes it sixth in the world. Out of 195.
- DanBC 8y ago
  How does the UK not have universal healthcare?
  - TomMarius 8y ago
    Sorry I was mistaken, however: Every commenter here is talking about their experiences in private clinics. These are not a part of most universal healthcare systems and it's polar opposite of what the USA liberals are proposing. That's why I didn't want to count UK in, however other commenters have proved to me that it was a mistake - if any homeless man is able to get such treatment, I have to agree it's universal - but is this true? Noone here confirmed that yet.
jsmith99 8y ago
Exactly. I've also had private health insurance in the UK in the past. It cost a lot less than £150/month and when I used it I generally ended up in posh central London hospitals that get enough of their business from rich Arabs that they boasted of their Dubai TV channels.

DanBC 8y ago

It would help if you could say which healthcare system you're talking about, because what you say bears no resemblance to the English NHS. I'm not sure why you mention the UK system because you don't appear to know anything about it. And that's one of the really confusing things about people who criticise the NHS: there are plenty of things that are real problems and that we're trying to fix, but these aren't the things they talk about. > Universal healthcare definitely helps pharma and medical companies (they can overprice a lot, just like with any other governmental project). Lobby? This point in particular is incoherent. Universal healthcare always has cheaper medication pricing than eg the US. The prices are open and available. Pick a med and compare.

TomMarius 8y ago
In the Czech Republic and most other universal healthcare systems you need to separate pharmaceutics sold to patients directly (prescription or over the counter) and pharmaceutics sold in bulk to (governmental) medical facilities, I meant the latter. These are considered two different fields of business here.

zwaps 8y ago

You are downvoted because you generalize your experience to every country except a vague set of 5... What you are saying is simply not true in most of Europe. Case in point, last year I have been treated for some serious health issue that would have immediately bankrupted me in the USA, forever. I was in the network of Charité Berlin, one of the biggest hospitals in Europe. The treatment and care was overall fantastic. Yes, usually it seems the universal healthcare moves slowly. But once I was diagnosed, things _kicked_ in, let me tell you. The operation was brought on within days, insurance immediately got out of the way, the aftercare and radiation was scheduled immediately - things just went automatic. There were no 5-people hospital rooms and of course every room had a bath and toilet - what are you talking about? The facilities and rooms were all top notch. Moreover, the doctors involved were Professors and otherwise top experts in the entire field, treating hundreds of tough cases every year. And you know what I payed? Nothing. Again, in the USA, all the operations, radiation treatment, medicine, expensive machinery used and months in the hospital... It would have cost literal millions. I probably simply would have DIED because I could never afford it. Here, however, I had close to the optimal (and positive!) experience that one could have in such a situation. So yes, if you have a common cold, you will probably get less "treatment" on public than on private insurance. But - from my experience - when you get seriously ill, the amount of ressources, personell and technology that hospitals like Charité can and will bring to bear to save your life, at no cost to you, borders on ridiculous. Seriously I often felt uncomfortable because of the amount of care. Those people seriously wanted to make sure I don't die, even though I am not important, don't have money and certainly not private insurance. This includes hospital staff AND the people from the public insurance. For the latter, I expected a lot of resistance to the cost - like a private insurance would do. Them trying to minimize the treatment. Instead, the people at the insurance immediately "stamped" everything, and even me asking timidly about the costs was met with non-comprehension. It was pretty clear, when things get serious, the public insurance officials care about your life, no matter how much you pay. Sorry but I feel rather passionate about this, and might I even say that I actually prefer public insurance for that reason. No where else would I have been important enough to live.

jki275 8y ago
You might qualify your argument by clarifying that you're basing your argument on the idea that you wouldn't have had private insurance in the US and that you believe there is no healthcare in the US outside of private insurance. The first is probably incorrect unless you're totally unemployed as most employers in the US provide private health insurance, and the second is truly incorrect as the vast majority of those who are not employed are covered by things like medicaid. We don't generally just let people die in the US because they don't have health insurance, and in fact hospitals in the US write off millions of dollars in care every year because the bills simply aren't paid -- but they still provide the care, simply shifting the cost to the government and to those of us who do pay the bills (and by extension our insurance companies). Most of the "facts" people believe about healthcare in the US are badly uninformed and based in the mostly false arguments of those who wish, at all costs, to abolish private healthcare in the US and replace it with medicaid because of their political ideology.