Just been dealing with the pharmacy and our health insurance

[xiphias]

Can anyone give me an example of ANY problem that we'd have with socialized medicine that we don't have right now with our current health care system?

I mean, if I'm going to have to go through byzantine, bizzare, arbitrary bureaucracy and have to bang my head against walls and argue with people to have simple, commonsense health care taken care of, I'd like to at least know that it was available to everyone.

Comments

[cellio]

Choice, both at the doctor level and at the plan level.

At least in theory, if I don't like the coverage I'm getting I can go buy a different plan. Now, because insurance is tied to employment (a bad thing), that's not always true in practice without spending huge piles of money, but the system does not preclude it. With socialized medicine, on the other hand, there is one plan, one standard of care, and if you don't like it that's too bad unless you're rich enough to go to another country for treatment (like some Canadians do in the US -- I wonder if they're lobbying against socialized medicine here 'cause it'll screw them up?).

My Canadian in-laws tell me that the waits for anything deemed "elective", no matter how severe, can be quite long. In a system where providers compete at least some, that time goes down.

I'd love it if we could reform health care in this country, kicking out the huge middlemen and letting people pay reasonable fees to doctors they choose. I don't think a one-size-fits-all plan is going to work, though.

[xiphias.livejournal.com]

I would like a socialized system with a private system beside it. Your taxes pay for one standard of care; you can choose to pay more, either for an insurance plan, or just out-of-pocket, for anything else.

[papersky.livejournal.com]

Exactly like in Britain.

[warren8472.livejournal.com]

If people could be given the choice to pay more for other services, why should people be obligated to pay taxes on any of it? Shouldn't they just pay into a private "system" on their own... and wouldn't allowing (or endorsing) a system other that the public system essentially be-- or inevitably lead to-- what we have now anyway?

Or am I missing the issue entirely here? My comparative health care policy knowledge is a bit rusty.

[xiphias.livejournal.com]

Because you want to ensure a minimum standard of health care for everybody in the society.

Now, what that minimum standard IS is, properly, subject to a great deal of debate and discussion. But the argument is that a society has a moral obligation to make sure that every member of its society has a reasonable chance to live a healthy, productive life.

[warren8472.livejournal.com]

And this hinges on the argument over what constitutes "making sure" and "reasonable chance", i.e., is giving everyone equal protection and an equal opportunity to succeed under the law enough, or do we go all Robin Hood and give services away, hoping people won't abuse it?

I'm not a big fan of legislating morality; some people's self-described moral obligation to do what's best for society is what gives us legislative gems like anti-flag-burning laws and the Defense of Marriage Act.

Similar to Israel

[shmuelisms.livejournal.com]

Here it is actually three-tiered in a sense. All of the "HMO" here MUST supply a basic "basket" of health-services, including thousands of common prescription-medicine for real-cheap (~3$ a prescription). The cost of insurance is salary-dependent in the form of a health-tax (stepped percentages, highest being 5% with a max-cap), so everybody has coverage. Additionally the HMO compete with each other offering additional services as part of the basic package, or additional coverage-plans. Beyond that you have private medicine, in which you can pay full price for whatever you want.

Most of the hospitals (first tier) are government run, and paid for their services by the HMO, which supply the common day to day services themselves (second tier), and finally the third, entirely private tier. So while our hospitals are somewhat over-crowded (and this is mostly infrastructure falling behind growth rates), we have one of the best health-systems in the world.

[micheinnz.livejournal.com]

Just like in New Zealand.