Wouldn't it be nice to have an ultrasound and not know the price, nor care?
That's what countries with single-payer are like. America needs to give up on this nonsense. There should be riots.
That's what countries with single-payer are like. America needs to give up on this nonsense. There should be riots.
Additionally, lots of employers also love holding their employees hostage via healthcare and they spend millions lobbying to this end.
I have no idea what it costs but I guess out of pocket it would be about $20 "co payment", same as when I had a MR scan for my neck earlier this year. If you're out more than $200ish a year you don't have to pay the "co payments" anymore either, but that's only happened once for me.
If you need to go to hospital it's free regardless.
Norway here, guess we have a tax funded "single payer" system. Wouldn't have it any other way.
Also, the opportunity cost of sitting around with a broken hip waiting to be seen can be higher than going to a privatized country/province and paying for the surgery, in which case you're a super-sucker who paid extra taxes for decades just to end up paying out of pocket for surgery anyways.
Anyways, the US system is probably worse overall but it can work quite well (better than socialized medicine) for upper-middle-class people and above which is why it's still around.
I'm really sick of being told things are impossible in the US that are normal in other developed countries.
I have also seen my mother suffer for 6 months on a surgery wait list and then recover slowly and painfully in a room with 4 other people who were constantly screaming during the night. And she was a lucky one because the hospital was so overcrowded that other patients were living, sleeping, and recovering in the literal hallway. Google "hallway medicine Ontario" to see I'm not making this up.
It's not a perfect system by any stretch and it's much better than nothing but I bet upper-middle-class and above citizens in the USA enjoy better care.
I started chemo before my original appointment with that doctor. (Yes, it was mouth and neck cancer)
This example is bad. New Zealander here: a broken hip will be fixed in reasonable time, and I think if you have private insurance it likely would be diagnosed, fixed, and recuperated in the same hospital.
Private insurance does help if you need a hip replacement. On public, you will wait for a long time, and you will be in pain for a long time. Private is much more proactive at replacing a hip early.
However hip replacement is that common that I strongly suspect you would be financially better off paying for it when you need it (whether poor or rich).
If you are from the US, you should take care before projecting any experience you have of hospitals upon other first world countries. I think your system is so severely broken you cannot reasonably model anything about a foreign system.
Edit: I have friends that live in the US and work in tech and enjoy better care. Like I said, the Canadian system is much better if you're poor but the US system is better for tech-worker income and above. This is why it sticks around: powerful people and voters in the US are likely to be old or rich-enough and enjoy good care.
Someone in the dorm next to me in college died of an asthma attack because he couldn't afford the ambulance and took a cab.
The system is still the way it is in the US because of money.
The existence of a public system keeps the prices for the private system in line. They can't get too ridiculous because there is always the free option available.
In NZ, I have found that diagnostic on the public system to be plenty fast enough. Then when it comes to treatment option you can weigh a quote of getting it done privately immediately vs waiting for a specified amount of time.
And due to the public system I wouldn't even think twice about going to the doctor as soon as I have any kind of issue at all.
So it's preferable to have a system where people go bankrupt for routine care?
https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/10.2105/AJPH.2018.3049...
https://www.aan.com/PressRoom/Home/PressRelease/1178
> Previous studies have shown that the average wait times to see a neurologist are increasing. The average wait time for a new patient to see a neurologist in 2012 was 35 business days, up from 28 business days in 2010. The average wait for a follow-up visit in 2012 was 30 days, up from 26 days in 2010.
https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/hospital-physician-rel...
> The average wait for a new patient seeking an appointment with a dermatologist in a major metropolitan area is 32.3 days, according to a recent survey conducted by Merritt Hawkins.
... "We can book you in in 10-12 weeks."
Why is this so hard to understand? This is how it works when "throw more money at the problem" isn't an option.