• Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    3 hours ago

    Having lived in two countries with universal healthcare, that meme is absolutelly true and you’re the one bullshitting.

    The most “extreme” it can get in such systems is that they won’t pay for very expensive treatments (i.e. the kind of stuff that costs a million dollars per shot) if a person can keep going with cheaper ones even if they’re not as good.

    Even then, sometimes they will if it’s actually worth it (as in: for something that’s a cure, not for something that just keeps the patiet going and is only 10% better than the next best option whilst costing 1000x more).

    That’s “your quality of life won’t be as good if you have a chronic disease that makes your life miserable and the best treatment in the market is insanelly expensive because they’ll only pay for a not as expensive one”, not “death panels”.

    People in those countries absolutelly aren’t going bankrupt due to being denied life-saving treatment and having to pay for it from their own pocket.

    As for any complains you might have heard from people in countries with universal healthcare, them complaining about it is like people in Scandinavia complaining about public services: relative to what they have there are bad parts, which is something altogether different than it being bad relative to the World and when it comes the healthcare the US is 3rd World when it comes to results delivered relative to the amount spent in it.

    • FundMECFSResearch@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      3 hours ago

      Sorry then.

      I guess me living my entire life in a system with universal healthcare, being denied treatments that could have prevented me going deaf and needing a feeding tube is all in my imagination.

      The treatments for these werent extreme. It was a fairly simple drug therapy that costs around 5’000 Euro per year and is sold in my country.

      It just isn’t on the list of drugs covered by public health insurance. As I’m surviving on 12k per year disability benefits, I could not afford the treatment.

      But just because it never impacted you you assume my experience doesn’t exist, because you have the privilege that the system never didn’t work for you, so you assume it works for everyone.

      • Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        23 minutes ago

        I’m talking about Universal Health Care systems (for clarity: totally free healthcare for residents in that country), not Public Health Insurance systems.

        Europe is unfortunatelly also riddled with the latter system and having lived in countries with one kind and countries with the other, they’re quite different and the system with Insurance is invariably worse in terms of denials of coverage as well as cost (also because nowadays they all have laws that force every resident to have health insurance, which as result is more costlier than before those laws - as I saw first hand when I lived in a country with such a system when such a law came into effect), whilst UHC tends to have longer waiting lists (think 1 or 2 years of wait for some cirurgical procedures).

        Absolutelly, some of the absurdities of the US system are also present in the so-called “Mixed” Systems (i.e. the ones with healtcare insurance but more regulated and with a public option for some) and if you look at the kinds of governments in those countries for the last 3 decades, you’ll notice they’ve been invariably neoliberal mainstream parties (setting up such systems is part of the broader tendency in Europe to privatise just about everything that has been going on since the 80s and was copied from the US).

        IMHO, except for the long waiting times, the problems with Healthcare systems in part of Europe are the result of them having been transformed to become more like the US system in the last 3 decades.

      • szczuroarturo@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Exatcly they dont know shit. While american healthcare system is clearly fucked there are many problems in european healthcare ( very country dependent tho ) ranging from lack of qualified doctors and long waiting times to very expensive treatments not covered in eu for some reason ( the one ive seen the most being uber expensive often experimental treatment where you usualy have to go to america ).

        • Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          15 minutes ago

          From what I’ve seen, treatments not being covered are only the case were those treatments are very expensive and there are other effective treatments (though less effective) which are much cheaper.

          There’s also often a delay between a new and very expensive experimental treatment coming out and it becoming covered because it won’t be covered if it doesn’t demonstrate that it’s advantages over the other available treatments are sufficient to justify the additional cost.

          Mind you, I’m talking about Public Healthcare Systems, not the so-called Mixed Systems that have mandatory Health Insurance (usually highly regulated and with a Public Insurance option for the less well off) - Mixed Systems have some of the same problems as the US System at least in my experience living in countries with one and with the other kind of system.

          • Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 minutes ago

            The UK NHI doesn’t work well because the neoliberal parties in successive governments (both the Tories and New Labour) have been defunding it so that they can - like Thatcher did with the railways - once its quality has fallen due to lack of funds claim that it’s bad because of Public management whilst it would be much better if it was Private because the Private Sector is much more competent, and privatise it.

            Just like the US has fatcats that are perfectly happy to mass murder people for personal profit, so does the UK (and the British Political System is almost as bad as the American, so it’s definitelly sold to the highest bidder) and plenty of those jhave wet dreams of the country having 13% of its GDP flowing through a Private Healthcare sector like the US were they can make billions of pounds doing exactly the same as the fatcats do in US Healthcare.

            Source: I lived in Britain for over a decade.

            By the way, you “read that the UK NHI doesn’t work very well” is exactly because the UK media is overwhelmingly owned by tax avoiding billionaires who are part of the above mentioned fatcats who see themselves as profiting massivelly from Britain having a Healthcare System like the US. It’s not by chance that the level of trust of Britons in their Press is one of the lowest in Europe.

            The exact same kind of tactics were deployed by Tatcher back when she wanted to privatise the Railways with the result that satisfaction with the Railway system in the UK is now even lower than when there was a public operator even after Thatcher defunded it to claim “Public is Bad, Private is Good” to amass enough public support to privatise it.