How's your health care system and does it break your pockets to pay for Universal Health Care?

Question

I live in America and I think we should have the health programs you have, but people here say the health care is substandard and/or the taxes to provide such services seriously cripple the pocket? Is any of this true? Thanks.

If you don't have insurance here, you could lose your home and life savings if you ever became seriously ill. Many people here work but their employers do not offer health insurance and the premiums are so high, many families can't afford to pay for them.

Answer 1

Great and it is cheaper than the US system. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care#Economics

Our system has problems (I should know, I work in it) but it is better than that the US has. Infant mortality rates http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_infant_mortality_rate in the UK are lower than in the USA, and life expectancy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancy is higher as well. In fact, the USA has the worst figures of most western European democracies.

Yes there are waiting lists, and yes treatment is rationed. But like in the USA, you can get private health care as well. And if you pay for private medicine, you can bypass the waiting lists.

Answer 2

Our National Health service is not as bad as people like to make out! The national Insurance is taken out of your wages automatically and not bad considering what you get in return.
I always say at least it's there and I for one am thankful it is! I've needed three Ceasarian sections and a further 10 operations and now have a heart condition, I can't even get private insurance whether I want it or not! Think how much that would have cost me in the USA!!!
It's not the standard of care that is poor, not at my local hospital anyway! It's the general way the hospitals are run now! It used to be that all the staff worked for the hospital now so much as been taken over by private companies who are more interested in making money than in providing a good level of cleanliness, food etc!
Perhaps the ones who DO moan should try living where there isn't an automatic right to expect treatment!!!

Answer 3

This is an excellent question. The answer depends on your individual situation. If you have the option of getting a job that offers health insurance, do it. Otherwise, look into getting a low-cost insurance plan with a high deductible and take care of yourself. Your money will be better spent on eating healthy foods, working out regularly, and visiting a doctor at least once per year. American health care is broken. If you're interested in joining a discussion about American health care, visit www.reinventhealthcare.com

Answer 4

The UK system is not great.
It consumes (and wastes) a truly huge amount of money. And, like any bureaucracy, it exists mainly to serve those who work in it.
The majority of middle class people have private medical insurance, which makes the service to them even more expensive as they pay twice.
The majority of the facilities have a distinctly third world feel about them. Many hospitals are dirty and many have a serious problem with MRSA probably as a direct result.
You are treated as a supplicant NOT a customer - in all cases.
Some of this will depend on where you live. As usual, the richer the area, the better the hospital.
A lot of the problems are caused by a huge influx of immigrants which have completely swamped the NHS and many other public services which because they are bureaucracies cannot react quickly enough.
Compared to a truly third world system the NHS looks very good, and the US system does have serious cost issues. But it does not compare very well with the health care systems in most developed countries.
The UK system is greatly admired across the world, But NEVER copied. I wonder why?

Answer 5

As a low income Brit I'd say NO It does certainly not break my pocket for "pay" for Nationalised Health Care! Paying for private healthcare would though. I don't think theres any way my family, who are low wage earners, could ever afford to do so. I don't think it would even be an option for us.

I get sick I go to the doctor. My baby gets sick I take him to the doctor. No fees, no worry about insurance, no "co-pays", "deductibles" etc.

When I had my baby I had excellent care and didn't pay anything for it!

Yes we pay taxes. But in all honesty our taxes are not that high - not as high as the anti-National Healthcare lobby in America claim they are anyway. I think that we probably pay less in just taxes than you pay in taxes, healthcare insurance, deductibles and so forth.

Put it this way - the NHS was set up by a great Welshman named Aneurin Bevan in the late 1940s. He had seen poor people's children dying because they could not afford to pay doctors' fees (it happened in my own family) and beleived this state of affairs was MORALLY WRONG in a civillised country. So he set up the NHS. And God bless him for it! I would not be alive today neither would many many British people, were it not for the NHS.

We still have private healthcare so if you have the money to do so you can pay the fees or get insurance, and "go private", no ones stopping you. But for everyone else we have the NHS. And most people are entirely happy with it!

The right wing American media are apparently filling you with BS about how we all have to "pull our own teeth" because we can't get an NHS dentist (utter CRAP!!! Noone I know has ever pulled their own teeth and emergency dental treatment is always available to everyone free of charge on the NHS), how we have to "wait ages to see a doctor or have an operation" (again, mostly rubbish, some overfull GP surgeries have a few days wait for an appointment but I guess busy private practices do too. You only "wait" for an operation on the NHS if its "non urgent" and you always have the option to pay and have it done privately) and how the NHS care is "substandard". Again, rubbish. I had the most excellent care when my son was born.

I think every country should have an NHS. I feel very sorry to read about American people who go bankrupt because they have cancer or the American child who died of a tooth abcess because his parents could not afford to pay private dental fees. To me thats immoral and very very wrong. I hope for all your sakes you get an NHS like you deserve.

Although no doubt the right wing Americans reading this will call me "Socialist Scum" and go on about how Socialism "doesn't work/why should I pay for some goddamn lazy bum to have healthcare blah blah yada yada drivel drivel" . . . .

OH and as far as treatment on the NHS being "rationed, refused etc" this is usually only in cases where the treatment has not been proven to work or when there are mitigating cases (such as a very obese woman wanting IVF treatment that is unlikely to work until she looses weight or a smoker who needs to stop smoking in order for the treatment to work). In these cases then the person can just do it the American way and pay privately, so I fail to see the difference really.

Answer 6

I completely agree that I don't want the government to run the health care system. You are right on when you state that we could be creating a monster, it seems as though the word "government" is synonymous with mismanagement. A government that can give you everything can ALSO take everything. I am NOT willing to give up another right to it. PERIOD. What I feel is needed is to go back to the model that we had BEFORE capitalists got a hold of it. The concept behind insurance BEFORE it became a "for profit to stockholders" industry was for all to pay a REASONABLE sum into a pool that was then available to those who NEEDED it. It created a source of money that could then be wisely managed and used by those who needed it. A trust, if you will. It was a system that worked very well until some opportunist saw that pool of money and decided that it shouldn't be left sitting there when they could get their hands on it. Thus, the HMO was "born" and it has been the spawn of the devil. Health insurance SHOULD NOT BE A "FOR PROFIT TO STOCKHOLDERS" industry. PERIOD. Our money is diverted to stockholders - when stock is involved the first responsibility is to the stockholders, NOT the patients. WRONG model for this subject. Answering to stockholders when you sell soda or cars is one thing, but there isn't enough money to satisfy stockholders AND take care of patients. By removing these "sticky-fingers" from the equation, we go back to something that worked very, very, well. Although the capitalists scream bloody murder about lawsuits, the actual amount is about 1% of the health-care dollar. I agree that frivolous lawsuits should not be allowed, I'm not sure I agree with the punitive damages "clause" you mentioned because lawsuits are really the only way to get some to clean up their act. Judges USUALLY are pretty good about throwing them out, and if we had a law that said if you sue frivolously, YOU pay both your lawyers AND the "other sides" lawyers, it would leave the tool available to keep dangerous drugs and procedures in check. It's dangerous to allow billion dollar drug companies or bad doctors in practice because they KNOW that it will only cost them a small amount IF THEY ARE CAUGHT. Punitive damages help keep us from being used as guinea pigs for corporations. Right now, almost 50% of our health care dollar goes to executive salaries and ADVERTISING. What a waste! Why should drug companies be advertising to US? They should be educating doctors about their product, NOT turning us into hypochondriacs by sitting around watching their commercials and deciding we need their product. By educating the doctors about their product does, they have the audience they need to sell their product and it wouldn't cost anywhere near what it does now. The doctors would then be able to decide if you need their product or not. I'm with you on the unbelievable cost of today's "insurance" - it's just not affordable anymore, plus it's become absurd, you need insurance for every little thing, if you don't cover you eyes, ears, feet, etc.... they don't have to pay. Unbelievable. I thought I was having a heart attack, went to my local ER, was sent by ambulance to a hospital downtown and my insurance company REFUSED payment because I didn't call them for approval FIRST. Right, everyone having a heart attack thinks "call my insurance company for approval FIRST." WOW!

Answer 7

in the US we are already paying more per person than ANY of the countries that have Universal Health care

the biggest reason is becuase we have so many people that are unisured that clog up the emergency rooms (at thousands of dollars a day) instead of going to an HMO becuase they do not have one

it would actaully be cheaper in the US to have Universal Health care of basic level than what we do today

Answer 8

No my goverment health care does not emty my wallet I`m self employed and if i lived in the states i would have to pay for pivate health care and it would cost about 80% of the income taxes i`m paying now

Answer 9

our health system would be fantastic if we didnt allow the whole world to just fly into the country and recieve treatement. out of every one million pounds spent on people falling ill from anouther country. we get about £3000.00 back. if America in going to have health care they need to do three things. make it us citizens only. refuse health care to people from outher countrys without checking their insurance. and put good harsh laws in place to stop the theft and corruption by upper management that is now destroying our NHS.

Answer 10

We pay (roughly):
Employers NI: 11% (That's money an employer can't pay to us)
Employees NI: 11%
Base rate 25%
Then when we buy most things there's a further 17.5% VAT
except petrol which has about 80% tax
Which is a LOT of tax to pay our government to go to Bali and just agree to arrange for more talks