No, you make more money by dumping those that are seriously ill and most likely terminal at an early stage. Sorry but your fairytale world is just not fact.. it is pure fiction.They make more money by having healthy people under their insurance plans, so it only makes sense to make sure people get healthy quicker.
Ah you found it. At least they got that footnote right, although I never thought I would see a supposed serious think tank use a date site for expats as source material...
Listen I can easily concede that there are waiting lists in Spain because every system has waiting lists even the US system. As for the information in this document, I can not confirm any of the material in it from any sources nor from personal experience. My family and I have always received access to specialists when we needed it, and yes when there was no direct need then we waited a few weeks and that is somehow bad? That I wait 2 to 4 weeks for my yearly check up is some how bad? If I do have a serious issue (god forbid) then I will get the treatment I need and I will get it fast.
You seem to be focusing a lot on waiting lists and nothing on the costs of things. Facts are facts. The US spends more per capita than anyone by far, and yet the return is not exactly "huge".
But for the sake of argument..
Guide to the Spanish healthcare system (page 3) < Healthcare | Expatica Spain
from the same dating page.
Fine if you can provide evidence that retirement facilitates costs are included in the over all US healthcare bill then fine. But remember if you can take out those, so can we if they are included in ours .. right?So we can't use our cultural differences to support our health care system but it counts for you.
I got it, you have a double standard in your measurements of quality.
Seeing as the U.S. has retirement facilities that provide general health care to it's residents would add on to the cost of overall health care.
So far I've pointed out your double standard and have spoon fed you the information directly from the source.
Something you could of found yourself.
It's a health care issue as these places provide health care in the U.S.
So you can't always make a straight comparison with cost because we do things differently than you guys do.
It's incredibly short sighted to this without putting it into proper context.
And where is that happening? Not here. You have a choice, use the public system and deal with the limited waiting lists, or pay your way to get ahead of the line. What is wrong with that? It is happening every day in the US. People with money are paying for the right to behead of the line and curve when it comes to healthcare, where as those with no insurance have to wait to get real sick and end up in the emergency room for treatment.How is it right to make someone pay taxes for a UHC system and then force them to go outside of it and pay again to get needed treatment?
Considering you suppose come from the party of financial responsibility.. Okay let me spell it out. The total population is 150.000 people, in 2 enclaves on the African coast. They are several hundred miles apart from each other and several hundred miles from the Spanish mainland. So you are saying that it is cost effect to put 2 MRI machines in these 2 provinces to cater for 70ishk people each? And if it means that those 2 machines are then not put in areas will millions of people? Are you serious?So it's ok that it doesn't have these things because its apart of Africa?
It is part of the Spain, do you have something against North Africans or people who live there?
And? My numbers are universally accepted.. from 2 international sources and they get their information from local governments, aka the Spanish and US governments... why are you linking that report? Just admit that the Cato report is based at best old information and at worst on false information.I can't read Spanish very well but this seems to be the direct paper published in 2006.
You have pointed out jack**** expect you found the dating site article.I've pointed out several of your mistaken "flaws" and have further linked you to the direct places to further read the information.
No you cant, but that some how should mean that we should not care for people who get sick?You can't make people take care of themselves, even if it is cheaper it won't make someone stop eating garbage, stop being alcoholics, stop doing drugs, etc.
You can't change this with any health care system except one that makes examples out of stupid choices.
Why? Those taxes go for coverage for him, his 3 kids and his wife. What is wrong in that? The knee surgery was paid by his company because they wanted him back faster than the 1 month or so he would have to wait for the surgery in the public system. Is that some how a crime now? That was a business call by the company he works for. It was cheaper for them to pay for his surgery to get him back, than find a replacement for the limited time he was out. I seriously cant believe that you would be against such a thing nor be critical of it... pathetic.I hope your uncle is better as I have had 3 knee surgeries and it can have a life long impact.
It's wrong for him to have to pay taxes for health care and then have to pay again to get quick service.
Lack of waiting lists? Dont you mean shorter waiting lists? Or are you claiming there are no waiting lists in the US?The lack of waiting lists is one and the higher cost is another.
WHO ranks use number 1 in timely care.
Still Waiting For Mammogram - New York Times
Daily Kos: State of the Nation
That is one hell of a long time.. far longer than in Europe...
And yet it uses it as an excuse for more babies die right after birth in the US. That American women choose to give birth to children they know have a very poor chance of living, rather than abortion. Question is then, how many of these "cases" are there in the US?It takes no stand on abortion other than to say that people in Europe and Cuba are more likely to use it to get rid of problem pregnancies than they are here, it is a cultural and policy difference.
It doesn't say that abortion is right or wrong.
But okay how do you explain why more mothers die at birth in the US than in most European countries?
So you agree it is a huge cost, and yet you dont want to do anything about it.. /clap. Almost every medical expert agrees that preventive care is the best way to cut costs.I agree the cost is huge, there is a purpose for it though.
That is to slow demand and have services ready for people who need them and not for people with stupid **** that don't need a doctors services.
You are blaming your government for this? Does government not require rules and regulation to be handed down from legislators and then funding attached? And then it is some how the governments fault that your congressmen are either lazy or dont care? You do know that your "right wing" lot had 6 years of absolute rule to do something about this right, and what did you do?Your right, the government drops the ball on this as well, yet another reason I am against government health care.
Ibid is scholar speak for "look at last footnote" and the footnote before that, states.. WHO, nothing else. This article has serious issues with its footnotes.It is a WHO report, see Ibid and previous entry.
Not to mention the WHO report it supposedly cites is what.. almost 10 years old?
How about something newer?
Why Not the Best? Results from the National Scorecard on U.S. Health System Performance, 2008 - The Commonwealth Fund
Kinda blows your whole world view out of the water... but hey.
And it aint over here?!?! Give me a break lol...Doctor/patient confidentiality is very big in the U.S.
Give me a break, it is right wing period. Putting new words on the same thing, does not mean that it is any different. Just look it up on the web and you get things like Reagan, Goldwater and other Republicans, and Cato linked to the Republican revolution and such.It is not a right wing think tank, for the love of everything holy, it is a libertarian think tank and I have checked the sources and have provided them for you.
Libertarians do not equal right wing, republican, or conservative.