4 ms·

Trust me it doesn’t work perfectly in other countries. Yes, americas system is messed up but in countries like Sweden you will still have to navigate the system

Trust me it doesn’t work perfectly in other countries. Yes, americas system is messed up but in countries like Sweden you will still have to navigate the system to actually get the healthcare you need. There are people who are denied healthcare in Sweden because the govt has deemed that it’s too expensive to save them (while people with similar conditions and a good insurance in the US are covered).

dmix 11mo ago
Also inflexibility, large backlogs, quality of staff, etc. In Canada all of our best doctors go to the US and there's often nurse shortages. It's not just a private incentive either, the US gov pays out far more in public healthcare coverage as a percentage of GDP and per capita than Canada and almost all of Europe. Despite their reputation the US doesn't have a lack of public healthcare spending (ranking #1-3 in the world). It's just their system's insurance regulation is extremely convoluted, creating risky edge-cases and perverse incentives. If they fixed that they would by far have the best healthcare system in the world.
- watwut 11mo ago
  USA spends the most to get worst results. Spending just dont go to people who meed healthcare. And usa have shortage of nurses. And waitlists. And people actually bankrupt by medical bills. It was number 1 reason for bankrupcy.
chii 11mo ago
> There are people who are denied healthcare in Sweden because the govt has deemed that it’s too expensive to save them but how many people are deemed too poor to save in the US, when sweden gov't would've easily have had the same medical procedure provided at low cost?
inferiorhuman 11mo ago
All of that happens in the US, the big difference is that if you get care you stand a good choice of going bankrupt. The largest single reason for bankruptcy in the US is medical care and of that group the largest chunk is folks who previously had insurance but no longer do.
xnorswap 11mo ago
That may be, but I'm speaking from experience in my country. Almost 10 years of treatment for a health condition, and the only forms I've ever filled in were: 1. Legal risk document to say I understood the risks of treatment 2. Change of address form 3. Form to say I wouldn't impregnate people while on a certain medication And honestly, that's it. I've genuinely been able to focus on my health without being bothered by forms.
testing22321 11mo ago
My mum was diagnosed with stage four lung cancer. Almost three years of radiation, chemotherapy, trail drugs, appointments etc. free transport and accommodation at the major city four hours away when required. Insane prescription drugs that seriously raised the eyebrows of the pharmacist every month. Never paid a cent, never had a single call or piece of paper for logistics or payment or any of that bs. She was a teacher her whole life, middle class, no private insurance ever. It can be, and is, phenomenal in countries that do it right. Aim higher.

dmix 11mo ago

Also inflexibility, large backlogs, quality of staff, etc. In Canada all of our best doctors go to the US and there's often nurse shortages. It's not just a private incentive either, the US gov pays out far more in public healthcare coverage as a percentage of GDP and per capita than Canada and almost all of Europe. Despite their reputation the US doesn't have a lack of public healthcare spending (ranking #1-3 in the world). It's just their system's insurance regulation is extremely convoluted, creating risky edge-cases and perverse incentives. If they fixed that they would by far have the best healthcare system in the world.

watwut 11mo ago
USA spends the most to get worst results. Spending just dont go to people who meed healthcare. And usa have shortage of nurses. And waitlists. And people actually bankrupt by medical bills. It was number 1 reason for bankrupcy.

chii 11mo ago

> There are people who are denied healthcare in Sweden because the govt has deemed that it’s too expensive to save them but how many people are deemed too poor to save in the US, when sweden gov't would've easily have had the same medical procedure provided at low cost?

inferiorhuman 11mo ago

All of that happens in the US, the big difference is that if you get care you stand a good choice of going bankrupt. The largest single reason for bankruptcy in the US is medical care and of that group the largest chunk is folks who previously had insurance but no longer do.

xnorswap 11mo ago

That may be, but I'm speaking from experience in my country. Almost 10 years of treatment for a health condition, and the only forms I've ever filled in were: 1. Legal risk document to say I understood the risks of treatment 2. Change of address form 3. Form to say I wouldn't impregnate people while on a certain medication And honestly, that's it. I've genuinely been able to focus on my health without being bothered by forms.

testing22321 11mo ago

My mum was diagnosed with stage four lung cancer. Almost three years of radiation, chemotherapy, trail drugs, appointments etc. free transport and accommodation at the major city four hours away when required. Insane prescription drugs that seriously raised the eyebrows of the pharmacist every month. Never paid a cent, never had a single call or piece of paper for logistics or payment or any of that bs. She was a teacher her whole life, middle class, no private insurance ever. It can be, and is, phenomenal in countries that do it right. Aim higher.