8 ms·

Yes, in France its about 100 to 200 euros.

by mw67 13y ago

refurb 13y ago
That's the total cost to the French medical system for a normal delivery? I find that hard to believe. In Canada that rate is a couple thousand dollars. Or is that what the patient has to pay?
- galenko 13y ago
  Come to the UK, it's free.
  - lovskogen 13y ago
    It's also free in Norway.
    - ghayes 13y ago
      There is no free lunch?
      - petercooper 13y ago
        There might be. The US government spends way more money per head on public healthcare than the UK (and only slightly less than Norway) and that's totally separate to all the private spending! http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/jun/30/healthcare-spending-world-country http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/jun/30/healthc... Procedures are so expensive, doctors so highly paid, and insurers so profitable that the US is essentially subsidizing all that while still not providing universal healthcare. In the UK we're both taxed less AND don't have to have private insurance due to the above. (It does have some downsides though, particularly in not being able to easily 'shop around' or get access to cutting edge/experimental medicine.. it's a bit one size fits all.)
        aestra 13y ago
        Nobody in the United States gets access to cutting edge/experimental medicine either. Insurances just won't pay for it. They say "too experimental" and "not medically nessessary" is a reason not to pay. I am currently in a 3rd level of appeal to get my insurance company to pay for my medication they claim is "too experimental" (it isn't by the way!!!)
        switch007 13y ago
        A top-level policy with Bupa/Pru will get you easy access to top hospitals in the UK (including London), for diagnostics at least. I just got a quote for £70/mo (it will almost double if you claim, however). EDIT: hm, not sure about 'experimental', but top quality/teaching hospitals anyway.
    - klausjensen 13y ago
      It certainly is not. It is paid for by one of the highest tax rates in the world. I currently work in Norway and pay more than 50% in income tax and social contributions - and that does not even include other taxes and excise duties like the 25% VAT, the 9USD/gallon gas price (mostly tax) or the new car tax of something like 150-200%, property taxes, road taxes, vehicle taxes, alchold and tobacco taxes... So no, it is certainly not "free". (And yes, people in Scandinavia stating things are "free" is a rant-trigger for me.)
      - lovskogen 13y ago
        The norm is 36%, if you earn a lot you'll get taxed more. But your income never has a say in you wanting to have a child or not.
      - rnd33 13y ago
        And people in America stating that healthcare is not free is a rant-trigger for me. Everyone here knows that it's not "free" but subsidised by taxes. That's what "free" means when talking about healthcare, free at the point of service, and free as equally available to everyone. How else would it work? Are the doctors without pay and with no equipment?
        anoncowherd 13y ago
        It's an important point to make that even "free" healthcare is not actually free - the money has to come from somewhere, and most of it comes from forcefully confiscating it from people. Not only that, but if you're using money, it's much easier to use someone else's money instead of your own, you just won't be too careful about how you spend it. In fact, if you've got a "limitless" supply of other people's money, you just won't give a fuck about what you do with it. This is one reason why public healthcare (and public anything) turns to shit sooner or later.
        xxpor 13y ago
        So I assume you don't buy insurance, for anything ever, correct?
    - alnafie 13y ago
      Comparisons between countries like Norway and the US are a bit misguided IMO. It's hard to imagine that an oil rich country with a homogeneous society of 5 million people at the edge of the world can be fairly compared to the leader of the world's current Pax-Americana with a population of 300 million. Norway enjoys the benefits of being an almost-city-state as described in Antifragile by Nassim Taleb.
- seszett 13y ago
  Difficult to say if that's the case for hospitals, since they run on public money anyway, so they could run at a deficit and it would hide the higher cost than what they charge. But in all cases, social security pays exactly what you are billed. In most cases you pay yourself the hospital, clinic, doctor, whatever, and social security then gives you part of the costs (depending on the procedure) and if you have one, your private health insurance gives you the rest (or less, depending on your plan, of course). The tendency is at removing the unnecessary payment by the patient before being reimbursed, but for now this at least serves as a way to ensure you know exactly how much was paid for the procedure, and to prevent too many excesses (since, well, the patient has to be able to pay, even if he gets reimbursed).
- Havoc 13y ago
  >That's the total cost to the French medical system for a normal delivery? I find that hard to believe. Many EU countries are trying to boost their birthrates, so the state covers most/all of it.
- bambax 13y ago
  What the patient has to pay is close to zero, even with anesthesia (which is more or less compulsory -- you would have to make a big scene to avoid it) and complications. If you want a doctor to attend (instead of simply a midwife) you have to pay him out of pocket (but if you have private insurance it might cover that too). What it costs to the French medical system is anyone's guess. The French medical system is financed by the taxpayer. In theory, it's financed by a tax on salaries, but since it's in perpetual deficit and the deficit is covered by the state, it's in fact paid for by the taxpayer -- which is just as well, since everyone is covered. It's a system of fully socialized medecine; there are pros and cons to such a system; it's not all good, but it's certainly not as bad as the American system (before or after Obamacare).
TomaszZielinski 13y ago
Really? In Poland the state pays ~$500 and that's it. And they are not famous for being generous :)

Yes, in France its about 100 to 200 euros.

by mw67 13y ago

Yes, in France its about 100 to 200 euros.

That's the total cost to the French medical system for a normal delivery? I find that hard to believe. In Canada that rate is a couple thousand dollars. Or is that what the patient has to pay?

galenko 13y ago
Come to the UK, it's free.
- lovskogen 13y ago
  It's also free in Norway.
  - ghayes 13y ago
    There is no free lunch?
    - petercooper 13y ago
      There might be. The US government spends way more money per head on public healthcare than the UK (and only slightly less than Norway) and that's totally separate to all the private spending! http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/jun/30/healthcare-spending-world-country http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/jun/30/healthc... Procedures are so expensive, doctors so highly paid, and insurers so profitable that the US is essentially subsidizing all that while still not providing universal healthcare. In the UK we're both taxed less AND don't have to have private insurance due to the above. (It does have some downsides though, particularly in not being able to easily 'shop around' or get access to cutting edge/experimental medicine.. it's a bit one size fits all.)
      - aestra 13y ago
        Nobody in the United States gets access to cutting edge/experimental medicine either. Insurances just won't pay for it. They say "too experimental" and "not medically nessessary" is a reason not to pay. I am currently in a 3rd level of appeal to get my insurance company to pay for my medication they claim is "too experimental" (it isn't by the way!!!)
      - switch007 13y ago
        A top-level policy with Bupa/Pru will get you easy access to top hospitals in the UK (including London), for diagnostics at least. I just got a quote for £70/mo (it will almost double if you claim, however). EDIT: hm, not sure about 'experimental', but top quality/teaching hospitals anyway.
  - klausjensen 13y ago
    It certainly is not. It is paid for by one of the highest tax rates in the world. I currently work in Norway and pay more than 50% in income tax and social contributions - and that does not even include other taxes and excise duties like the 25% VAT, the 9USD/gallon gas price (mostly tax) or the new car tax of something like 150-200%, property taxes, road taxes, vehicle taxes, alchold and tobacco taxes... So no, it is certainly not "free". (And yes, people in Scandinavia stating things are "free" is a rant-trigger for me.)
    - lovskogen 13y ago
      The norm is 36%, if you earn a lot you'll get taxed more. But your income never has a say in you wanting to have a child or not.
    - rnd33 13y ago
      And people in America stating that healthcare is not free is a rant-trigger for me. Everyone here knows that it's not "free" but subsidised by taxes. That's what "free" means when talking about healthcare, free at the point of service, and free as equally available to everyone. How else would it work? Are the doctors without pay and with no equipment?
      - anoncowherd 13y ago
        It's an important point to make that even "free" healthcare is not actually free - the money has to come from somewhere, and most of it comes from forcefully confiscating it from people. Not only that, but if you're using money, it's much easier to use someone else's money instead of your own, you just won't be too careful about how you spend it. In fact, if you've got a "limitless" supply of other people's money, you just won't give a fuck about what you do with it. This is one reason why public healthcare (and public anything) turns to shit sooner or later.
        xxpor 13y ago
        So I assume you don't buy insurance, for anything ever, correct?
  - alnafie 13y ago
    Comparisons between countries like Norway and the US are a bit misguided IMO. It's hard to imagine that an oil rich country with a homogeneous society of 5 million people at the edge of the world can be fairly compared to the leader of the world's current Pax-Americana with a population of 300 million. Norway enjoys the benefits of being an almost-city-state as described in Antifragile by Nassim Taleb.
seszett 13y ago
Difficult to say if that's the case for hospitals, since they run on public money anyway, so they could run at a deficit and it would hide the higher cost than what they charge. But in all cases, social security pays exactly what you are billed. In most cases you pay yourself the hospital, clinic, doctor, whatever, and social security then gives you part of the costs (depending on the procedure) and if you have one, your private health insurance gives you the rest (or less, depending on your plan, of course). The tendency is at removing the unnecessary payment by the patient before being reimbursed, but for now this at least serves as a way to ensure you know exactly how much was paid for the procedure, and to prevent too many excesses (since, well, the patient has to be able to pay, even if he gets reimbursed).
Havoc 13y ago
>That's the total cost to the French medical system for a normal delivery? I find that hard to believe. Many EU countries are trying to boost their birthrates, so the state covers most/all of it.
bambax 13y ago
What the patient has to pay is close to zero, even with anesthesia (which is more or less compulsory -- you would have to make a big scene to avoid it) and complications. If you want a doctor to attend (instead of simply a midwife) you have to pay him out of pocket (but if you have private insurance it might cover that too). What it costs to the French medical system is anyone's guess. The French medical system is financed by the taxpayer. In theory, it's financed by a tax on salaries, but since it's in perpetual deficit and the deficit is covered by the state, it's in fact paid for by the taxpayer -- which is just as well, since everyone is covered. It's a system of fully socialized medecine; there are pros and cons to such a system; it's not all good, but it's certainly not as bad as the American system (before or after Obamacare).

TomaszZielinski 13y ago

Really? In Poland the state pays ~$500 and that's it. And they are not famous for being generous :)