How does "Socialized Healthcare" Compare to "Privatized Healthcare"?

[Annapolis]

Yeah...it's the same treatments here, idk if you're aware of that. Drugs and equipment costs significantly less since the government has all the leverage in terms of purchasing. There is no "death panels" or quota based care...I don't even know where you would come up with something that ridiculous.

I know you've heard a lot of what to say to avoid the argument but try to at least think about it before you resort to your standard retorts.

"The province compares the medical benefits of a drug to those of other funded drugs, and weighs the cost of drugs against their benefits. " https://www.cancercare.on.ca/toolbox...p/candrugsfaq/.

That is just Canada which was the first source I found. Whoever pays for expensive medications has to make a cost-benefit analysis. That is just economics. They wouldn't have to make this decision if they always just went with whatever drug gave the best indications for recovery. I'm not saying that the Canadian system doesn't work, it works well. Death panels doesn't describe this either, that's just the term you use to try to win your strawman and paint the other side as illogical. Decision of cost-benefit are made everywhere in healthcare. They are unavoidable. My point was that socialized healthcare does not mean that you avoid these decisions in some sort of utopian healthcare system. No such system exists.

[Tradewind]

No, that is Ontario. Ontario health care != Canada's...each province is responsible for the health care within their own borders. Also that doesn't mean that if you cost too much you won't get it. There are things called "generic" medications...which...guess what, are either made by the same companies who make the high priced brand name shit, or by other companies because the patent on the name brand has expired. You're misinterpreting the wording and also trying to argue "Canadian Healthcare" with someone who has lived in Canada for 30 years.

If a generic drug isn't working, they just move you to the branded one. It's really not a hard concept...

[Elegiac]

That is just Canada which was the first source I found. Whoever pays for expensive medications has to make a cost-benefit analysis. That is just economics. They wouldn't have to make this decision if they always just went with whatever drug gave the best indications for recovery. I'm not saying that the Canadian system doesn't work, it works well. Death panels doesn't describe this either, that's just the term you use to try to win your strawman and paint the other side as illogical. Decision of cost-benefit are made everywhere in healthcare. They are unavoidable. My point was that socialized healthcare does not mean that you avoid these decisions in some sort of utopian healthcare system. No such system exists.

Which is a truism and ultimately not an argument against socialized healthcare in any way; the critical point of distinction between it and the rubbish that Americans try to pass as a healthcare system is that under socialized systems people are guaranteed treatment period as opposed to no treatment at all.

[Masark]

You're misinterpreting the wording and also trying to argue "Canadian Healthcare" with someone who has lived in Canada for 30 years.

Yeah, but we Canadians can't possibly be a reliable source regarding Canadian healthcare because we've been brainwashed in the socialist way all our lives or something.

But treatments do need to meet standards of effectiveness for the cost, usually represented in $/QALY, to be considered as useful options.

[Tradewind]

Yeah, but we Canadians can't possibly be a reliable source regarding Canadian healthcare because we've been brainwashed in the socialist way all our lives.

But treatment do need to meet standards of effectiveness for the cost, usually represented in $/QALY.

No of course not, we're all brainwashed minions of King Harper. Socialism good!

[Annapolis]

No, that is Ontario. Ontario health care != Canada's...each province is responsible for the health care within their own borders. Also that doesn't mean that if you cost too much you won't get it. There are things called "generic" medications...which...guess what, are made by the same companies who make the high priced brand name shit. You're misinterpreting the wording and also trying to argue "Canadian Healthcare" with someone who has lived in Canada for 30 years.

They say on that page that Canadian healthcare does not pay for cancer medications. It makes recommendations based on what they feel is the best option. The territories are then responsible for paying for it. That's just what I got from the website. Is that entirely incorrect? Why does the website say that then? Why would Ontario be doing a cost-benefit analysis of drugs if the Canadian government paid for all of them anyway?

I agree you know more about living in Canada than I do, but generic medications are not always available. There are many medications, especially in oncology, that have patents still on them. In fact the newest drugs that are at the leading edge of healthcare will obviously be patented and often therefore be more costly.

I'm still not quite sure I'm understanding your point. Are you saying that Canada makes no cost benefit decisions in healthcare at all?

---------- Post added 2013-04-23 at 06:51 PM ----------

Which is a truism and ultimately not an argument against socialized healthcare in any way; the critical point of distinction between it and the rubbish that Americans try to pass as a healthcare system is that under socialized systems people are guaranteed treatment period as opposed to no treatment at all.

If you look at what my first statement was, I said that "socialized medicine does not spend any amount of money to keep anyone alive for as long as is possible". Then tradewind seems to be telling me that in Canada any procedure is covered regardless of the expense or how likely it is to help you. I'm finding that hard to believe, but we'll see.

---------- Post added 2013-04-23 at 06:52 PM ----------

No of course not, we're all brainwashed minions of King Harper. Socialism good!

This is unfortunately another strawman. I'm really not against Canadian healthcare. I'd just prefer to have a discussion about it than be dishonest.

[Elegiac]

They say on that page that Canadian healthcare does not pay for cancer medications. It makes recommendations based on what they feel is the best option. The territories are then responsible for paying for it. That's just what I got from the website. Is that entirely incorrect? Why does the website say that then? Why would Ontario be doing a cost-benefit analysis of drugs if the Canadian government paid for all of them anyway?

"The NDFP does not fund IV cancer drugs administered in private clinics. "

Please actually read your sources.

Healthcare in Canada is administered on a per-province basis; the federal government just funds it and sets a certain set of guidelines that have to be followed.

---------- Post added 2013-04-23 at 03:55 PM ----------

If you look at what my first statement was, I said that "socialized medicine does not spend any amount of money to keep anyone alive for as long as is possible". Then tradewind seems to be telling me that in Canada any procedure is covered regardless of the expense or how likely it is to help you. I'm finding that hard to believe, but we'll see.

The truth of the matter is that it varies by system; and if it comes down to it most systems will offer some form of treatment regardless of whether medications are patent or not.

[Masark]

They say on that page that Canadian healthcare does not pay for cancer medications. It makes recommendations based on what they feel is the best option. The territories are then responsible for paying for it. That's just what I got from the website. Is that entirely incorrect? Why does the website say that then? Why would Ontario be doing a cost-benefit analysis of drugs if the Canadian government paid for all of them anyway?

I agree you know more about living in Canada than I do, but generic medications are not always available. There are many medications, especially in oncology, that have patents still on them. In fact the newest drugs that are at the leading edge of healthcare will obviously be patented and often therefore be more costly.

I'm still not quite sure I'm understanding your point. Are you saying that Canada makes no cost benefit decisions in healthcare at all?

It's a bit complicated.

Canadian healthcare is operated by the provinces, in accordance to certain minimum standards created by the Federal government.

Payment for treatment (to the doctors, etc.) is done by the provinces, but funding for said payment is both from the provincial governments and from the federal government in the form of transfer payments and equalization. The federal government provides (some of) the money and the provinces decide how to spend it.

[Annapolis]

"The NDFP does not fund IV cancer drugs administered in private clinics. "

Please actually read your sources.

Healthcare in Canada is administered on a per-province basis; the federal government just funds it and sets a certain set of guidelines that have to be followed.

---------- Post added 2013-04-23 at 03:55 PM ----------



The truth of the matter is that it varies by system; and if it comes down to it most systems will offer some form of treatment regardless of whether medications are patent or not.

It seems that whoever funds it eventually, it still has to be approved by this program in Canada. The program that approves the drugs weighs their efficacy and their cost. Why does it matter if there is a middle man. Does what you said disprove that there is a cost-benefit analysis going on?

[Elegiac]

It seems that whoever funds it eventually, it still has to be approved by this program in Canada. The program that approves the drugs weighs their efficacy and their cost. Why does it matter if there is a middle man. Does what you said disprove that there is a cost-benefit analysis going on?

Does what you say ultimately constitute an argument against socialized medicine? (Hint: It doesn't.)

[Annapolis]

Payment for treatment (to the doctors, etc.) is done by the provinces, but funding for said payment is both from the provincial governments and from the federal government in the form of transfer payments and equalization. The federal government provides (some of) the money and the provinces decide how to spend it.

I figured it was something along those lines. Somewhat like how medicaid works in the U.S. But it still seems like at some point someone along the line is making a decision about how effective a treatment or medication is and if it is worth the cost. It doesn't say anything bad about Canadian healthcare, just that it isn't a perfect healthcare system where the cost doesn't matter.

[Elegiac]

I figured it was something along those lines. Somewhat like how medicaid works in the U.S. But it still seems like at some point someone along the line is making a decision about how effective a treatment or medication is and if it is worth the cost. It doesn't say anything bad about Canadian healthcare, just that it isn't a perfect healthcare system where the cost doesn't matter.

But it is a -better- system either way, so your point is moot.

[Annapolis]

Does what you say ultimately constitute an argument against socialized medicine? (Hint: It doesn't.)

You mean kind of like how I've been saying that I'm not against the Canadian system of healthcare? I've said that at least 2 separate times. Like I said before my initial response was about how socialized medicine doesn't escape making cost-benefit analyses. If you don't believe that, go back and check. I promise I'm not pulling your leg.

[Tradewind]

I figured it was something along those lines. Somewhat like how medicaid works in the U.S. But it still seems like at some point someone along the line is making a decision about how effective a treatment or medication is and if it is worth the cost. It doesn't say anything bad about Canadian healthcare, just that it isn't a perfect healthcare system where the cost doesn't matter.

It's not a case of "is it worth the cost" but "what is the most cost effective." There is a subtle difference between those statements. If a generic drug treatment is just as effective as a brand name treatment but costs 1/5th as much, that's just good oversight. It doesn't mean that they are completely exempt from more expensive treatments. The worth of the treatment is not a deciding factor in whether someone gets it or not, only if it's effective.

And the NDFP is an Ontario program, not a national program.

[Voidism]

I'm really surprised by how strong the opposition to "socialized" healthcare is in America. Why is that really? I mean, if they looked outside the US border they'd see that it works. What's even more surprising is that they don't have any problems what so ever to pay 1,4 million usd for a single tomahawk missile.

[Cthulhu 2020]

I'm really surprised by how strong the opposition to "socialized" healthcare is in America. Why is that really? I mean, if they looked outside the US border they'd see that it works. What's even more surprising is that they don't have any problems what so ever to pay 1,4 million usd for a single tomahawk missile.

Fox News. Propaganda.

The rest of the world loves it. The people with billions of dollars spend millions of dollars to make middle class conservatives believe it's a bad thing.

[obdigore]

Fox News. Propaganda.

The rest of the world loves it. The people with billions of dollars spend millions of dollars to make middle class conservatives believe it's a bad thing.

Its more lower class conservatives. People that subsist on government subsidies that go out and vote against them because its 'MURRICAN'. The era of McCarthyism is dying and hopefully soon we can deal with reality instead of fear-based thinking.

[Chrysia]

Its more lower class conservatives. People that subsist on government subsidies that go out and vote against them because its 'MURRICAN'. The era of McCarthyism is dying and hopefully soon we can deal with reality instead of fear-based thinking.

Eh, they're doing a pretty good job of stirring up shit against Muslims now that the "Red Scare" is more or less puttering out.

[RicardoZ]

Prescriptions: Very little, £5 to £10 mostly.

Lab Work (blood tests, x-rays, etc.) Free

Hospital stays: Free

ER visits: Free

Dental treatment is not free but is very cheap, £50 for a root canal but you may need to wait a while on a waiting list, emergency treatment such as toothpain is usually same day or day after.

Vision and hearing: Free but NHS glasses look really shit, most buy their own.

Don't make the mistake of thinking those things are "free". Somebody is paying for it.

[Vulcanasm]

Asked this within another thread and only got a few responses, so I thought I'd start a new thread to make it the focus.

So I am curious, and since the subject a hot topic on these forums as of late, I have no reason not to ask it here.

In the countries that have socialized state run healthcare, how much do you pay for things like prescriptions? Lab work? Hospital stays? ER visits?

The average US for these (generally) with health insurance:

Prescriptions: $10 - $30 (Generic to Name Brand, if covered) or up to THOUSANDS of dollars (if not covered)

Lab Work (blood tests, x-rays, etc.) $30 - $50

Hospital stays: 10% - 50%

ER visits: $50 - $100 + 20% - 50% of the cost of procedures

What's it like in other countries where healthcare is socialized?

Hey, US citizen here, living/working in Canada and covered by Alberta health care. I don't know how useful this is, but here's what I've seen.

Prescriptions: Generally, divide what you'd pay in the US by 2. They're not covered by Alberta's health care, but some provinces might cover them. Supplemental insurance reimburces 80%, though -- no questions asked, online claims paid through direct deposit, next business day.

Lab Work (blood tests, x-rays, etc.): Free, so far.

Hospital stays: No experience, can't say. I think they're covered for most conditions.

ER visits: Free. The disadvantage is the wait -- typically double the times of the US.

Dental: I think health care was just expanded to include free basic dental. I know supplemental coverage reimburces for dental, vision, and other services (e.g. custom orthotics), but there are strict annual caps.

NOTE: The details of Canada's health care system(s) are determined on a province by province basis. As I understand it, Alberta's is among the most basic.