3 ms·

I distinctly remember reading a few years ago the arguments for socialized healthcare in American press, citing England’s successes with HHS system, among other

I distinctly remember reading a few years ago the arguments for socialized healthcare in American press, citing England’s successes with HHS system, among others. Does this new information change anything?

chillel 4y ago
12 years of Tories.
digdugdirk 4y ago
Having lived in countries with socialized healthcare and having also lived in the US, I'd greatly prefer a longer free waiting period as opposed to a nearly as long multi-thousand dollar waiting period: https://www.oecd.org/health/waiting-times-for-health-services-242e3c8c-en.htm https://www.oecd.org/health/waiting-times-for-health-service...
- VancouverMan 4y ago
  Socialist health care systems aren't "free". They come at a great cost, in the form of high taxation, government debt, inflexibility, and inefficiency. In Canada, for example, patients who have the financial means to do so will often seek treatment at private clinics in the US or other nations, rather than enduring the "free" socialist health care system in their province. To make matters even worse, despite paying high tax rates, many Canadians still rely on private health insurance to pay for the many routine vision, dental, and pharmaceutical costs that aren't covered by the socialist health care systems.
  - zamadatix 4y ago
    I do wish it were referred to as "single payer" or what have you instead of "free". Not because I think it's really fooling many people into thinking it somehow makes healthcare cost nothing to society as a whole but because it constantly detracts conversation into pointing out that it still bears a cost. I don't think any implementation of any healthcare model in any country is without people who wished it served them better who may be interested in pursuing alternatives to it. As such comparisons which only talk about how an option isn't without problems does little to really answer which options are preferable. At best this informational alone will only tell you half the story needed. I've never really seen a solid way to compare how effective different healthcare models are though. It's hard enough to detangle the impact of the funding model from other factors at one point in time let alone over decades between countries.
  - elcritch 4y ago
    > They come at a great cost, in the form of high taxation, government debt, inflexibility, and inefficiency. That sounds great on paper, but I've become skeptical of the catchphrase. Total tax rates in the USA don't seem that much lower for individuals. Many charts of tax rates are based on taxes as a share of GDP which IMHO isn't useful. I just looked up the tax rates in German and California (both high economic centers). It seems Germany is about ~38% vs a total rate in California of ~33%. There are states in the US that don't have income tax like Wyoming, but overall the state income taxes are about ~6-8%. Top tax rates in California are higher than in Germany too. Also the US corporate tax is 35%, of course only for those corps that can't afford setting up tax shelters, like Google and Apple, etc. In the EU it's 15%, though the use taxes are higher vs sales taxes. So taxes are a bit lower in the US they don't seem significantly lower, especially in states with high economic output (and jobs) like California and New York. I'm not pro high taxes. For example I'm a fan of lowering the US corporate tax and closing the tax haven / Bermuda tax shenanigans. It does seem that the US takes almost as many taxes but provide less services and bang for the buck at the same time. 1: https://bvcocpas.com/how-the-united-states-tax-rates-compares-to-germany/ https://bvcocpas.com/how-the-united-states-tax-rates-compare...
bsder 4y ago
IIRC, mostly it was Canada that people cited as a success. NHS was mostly cited as to what happens when you start defunding your national healthcare system ...
ilaksh 4y ago
I think that both types of systems have serious problems. It's not a matter of just adopting one extreme viewpoint or the other. I think it's a very challenging set of problems. It's almost as if everyone's view on many issues reduces down to "you just need to have competition" or "you just need to cooperate". They are more complex problems than that.
nine_zeros 4y ago
Even with one the best insurance in America, I struggle to find primary care doctors who will accept new patients. My next appointment is with a nurse practitioner in December.
DanBC 4y ago
No, it just means if you do it you need to pay for it, and the Conservatives have in real terms cut funding and increased bureaucracy.

chillel 4y ago

12 years of Tories.

digdugdirk 4y ago

Having lived in countries with socialized healthcare and having also lived in the US, I'd greatly prefer a longer free waiting period as opposed to a nearly as long multi-thousand dollar waiting period: https://www.oecd.org/health/waiting-times-for-health-services-242e3c8c-en.htm https://www.oecd.org/health/waiting-times-for-health-service...

VancouverMan 4y ago
Socialist health care systems aren't "free". They come at a great cost, in the form of high taxation, government debt, inflexibility, and inefficiency. In Canada, for example, patients who have the financial means to do so will often seek treatment at private clinics in the US or other nations, rather than enduring the "free" socialist health care system in their province. To make matters even worse, despite paying high tax rates, many Canadians still rely on private health insurance to pay for the many routine vision, dental, and pharmaceutical costs that aren't covered by the socialist health care systems.
- zamadatix 4y ago
  I do wish it were referred to as "single payer" or what have you instead of "free". Not because I think it's really fooling many people into thinking it somehow makes healthcare cost nothing to society as a whole but because it constantly detracts conversation into pointing out that it still bears a cost. I don't think any implementation of any healthcare model in any country is without people who wished it served them better who may be interested in pursuing alternatives to it. As such comparisons which only talk about how an option isn't without problems does little to really answer which options are preferable. At best this informational alone will only tell you half the story needed. I've never really seen a solid way to compare how effective different healthcare models are though. It's hard enough to detangle the impact of the funding model from other factors at one point in time let alone over decades between countries.
- elcritch 4y ago
  > They come at a great cost, in the form of high taxation, government debt, inflexibility, and inefficiency. That sounds great on paper, but I've become skeptical of the catchphrase. Total tax rates in the USA don't seem that much lower for individuals. Many charts of tax rates are based on taxes as a share of GDP which IMHO isn't useful. I just looked up the tax rates in German and California (both high economic centers). It seems Germany is about ~38% vs a total rate in California of ~33%. There are states in the US that don't have income tax like Wyoming, but overall the state income taxes are about ~6-8%. Top tax rates in California are higher than in Germany too. Also the US corporate tax is 35%, of course only for those corps that can't afford setting up tax shelters, like Google and Apple, etc. In the EU it's 15%, though the use taxes are higher vs sales taxes. So taxes are a bit lower in the US they don't seem significantly lower, especially in states with high economic output (and jobs) like California and New York. I'm not pro high taxes. For example I'm a fan of lowering the US corporate tax and closing the tax haven / Bermuda tax shenanigans. It does seem that the US takes almost as many taxes but provide less services and bang for the buck at the same time. 1: https://bvcocpas.com/how-the-united-states-tax-rates-compares-to-germany/ https://bvcocpas.com/how-the-united-states-tax-rates-compare...

bsder 4y ago

IIRC, mostly it was Canada that people cited as a success. NHS was mostly cited as to what happens when you start defunding your national healthcare system ...

ilaksh 4y ago

I think that both types of systems have serious problems. It's not a matter of just adopting one extreme viewpoint or the other. I think it's a very challenging set of problems. It's almost as if everyone's view on many issues reduces down to "you just need to have competition" or "you just need to cooperate". They are more complex problems than that.

nine_zeros 4y ago

Even with one the best insurance in America, I struggle to find primary care doctors who will accept new patients. My next appointment is with a nurse practitioner in December.

DanBC 4y ago

No, it just means if you do it you need to pay for it, and the Conservatives have in real terms cut funding and increased bureaucracy.