Read 1384 times

  • fka
  • Veteran

    • 167

    • September 05, 2019, 06:37:44 pm
    • Seoul
Re: Brits react to cost of US medical care
« Reply #80 on: December 10, 2019, 03:14:28 pm »
And it's inefficient to operate an insurance system if people who aren't making expensive claims don't put regular money into the pot.


  • stoat
  • Super Waygook

    • 426

    • March 05, 2019, 06:36:13 pm
    • seoul
Re: Brits react to cost of US medical care
« Reply #81 on: December 10, 2019, 03:17:21 pm »
Quote

For people under age 35 and older than about 10, with no significant health issues, any health coverage outside of catastrophe is probably unnecessary. NHS is inefficient for such people. Even 35-45 can often get away with it. The thing is, after 45, health care costs per person per year on average likely skyrocket. Same if they have kids and are younger.


Tell that to the ambulances and medical staff parked in UK city centres every weekend patching up the falling down drunk and injuries from fights.

The U.K.'s population has gone from 50-70 million since the NHS was founded and people are living 15 years longer.  Nowadays 300,000 people a year are entering the country putting further massive strain on resources. Of course no one will be allowed to say the latter fact has anything to do with waiting times. They'll just go on about how many doctors and nurses we've pinched from poorer countries.
« Last Edit: December 10, 2019, 03:23:37 pm by stoat »


  • stoat
  • Super Waygook

    • 426

    • March 05, 2019, 06:36:13 pm
    • seoul
Re: Brits react to cost of US medical care
« Reply #82 on: December 10, 2019, 04:06:57 pm »
Nobody ever died waiting for cataract treatment in the UK or Canada.  Why do people want to harp about waiting lists for non-life threatening treatments?

As soon as someone says something like this nowadays, you can bet stats will be produced that show  lives are lost as as result of the government not spending enough money on something.

E.g the Tory government 'killing' 140,000 people through their austerity policy.

I'm pretty sure a few pensioners can be shown to have come a cropper as a result of walking around blind for 15 months.

Anyway, since when has people dying been the only indicator of policies the public should complain about?. Would you tell parents whose local primary school doesn't have any places for their kid to stop harping on about non life-threatening stuff?
« Last Edit: December 10, 2019, 04:09:38 pm by stoat »


  • SPQR
  • Super Waygook

    • 272

    • March 08, 2018, 07:04:54 pm
    • Canada
Re: Brits react to cost of US medical care
« Reply #83 on: December 10, 2019, 04:10:49 pm »

More Americans Delaying Medical Treatment Due to Cost

https://news.gallup.com/poll/269138/americans-delaying-medical-treatment-due-cost.aspx

"Income Gap Widens for Cost-Related Delays for Serious Conditions"

"Delayed Care Up Most Among Those With Pre-Existing Conditions"



  • JNM
  • The Legend

    • 4169

    • January 19, 2015, 10:16:48 am
    • Seoul, South Korea
Re: Brits react to cost of US medical care
« Reply #84 on: December 10, 2019, 04:23:27 pm »
For people under age 35 and older than about 10, with no significant health issues, any health coverage outside of catastrophe is probably unnecessary. NHS is inefficient for such people.

but you don't get to choose



Thatís how public funded systems work.

Everybody pays into it, so itís there if you need it.

If you donít have kids, your taxes still support schools.

Donít drive? Why should you pay for roads?! /s


  • oglop
  • The Legend

    • 2628

    • August 25, 2011, 07:24:54 pm
    • Seoul
Re: Brits react to cost of US medical care
« Reply #85 on: December 10, 2019, 05:27:09 pm »
yeah. you could make the same argument for the police, firefighters, welfare, etc.

"i've never had a fire. why am i paying for someone else to have their fire put out?"


Re: Brits react to cost of US medical care
« Reply #86 on: December 10, 2019, 05:51:57 pm »
For people under age 35 and older than about 10, with no significant health issues, any health coverage outside of catastrophe is probably unnecessary. NHS is inefficient for such people.

but you don't get to choose



Thatís how public funded systems work.

Everybody pays into it, so itís there if you need it.

If you donít have kids, your taxes still support schools.

Donít drive? Why should you pay for roads?! /s

yeah thats what i meant. sorry, my post was vague. i meant you don't get to choose if you get sick or not