3 ms·
AIUI, this is very difficult to do: the estimate is going to be based on a superficial (in the literal, physical sense) examination of the problem, and once the
by danaris 1y ago
AIUI, this is very difficult to do: the estimate is going to be based on a superficial (in the literal, physical sense) examination of the problem, and once they are actually in there doing what they need to do, they may very well find that there is more that needs doing than they expected.
They can't exactly pause the surgery and get you to consent to an extra few thousand dollars' worth of work.
This is another example of why healthcare really, genuinely is best left as a single-payer government-funded service. People can get the care they need to be healthy, without ever needing to worry about the uncertainty inherent in the price of such a service.
- maerF0x0 1y agoYou're focused on the sparse exceptions, i agree there should be carveouts. I'm talking in the wide, vast, main.
- danaris 1y agoIn the wide, vast, main, we're still better off with single-payer healthcare.
- maerF0x0 1y agoAs someone who has lived in single payer single provider. I couldn't disagree more. Nearly every Canadian I know grumbles about the healthcare system. The patients, the workers...
- danaris 1y agoSomething can be well worth grumbling about, and still be better than other systems elsewhere. There's plenty of actual data on this. Relying on what "nearly every Canadian you know grumbles about" when the topic is "are single-payer systems, on average, better than the clusterfuck the US has", isn't sound reasoning.
- maerF0x0 1y agoIt also has a values based bent to it. Things like: 1. We value the average outcome more than the outcome the (tax)payer receives 2. We value equality of outcomes, a rich person cannot pay more to get more 3. We fix the amount we'll spend and then prioritize the sickest person. You may not get any help until you're the sickest person. Personally, those 3 violate my values.