278
Those in countries with universal healthcare, what's it like? (lemmy.world)
submitted 6 months ago by to c/asklemmy@lemmy.world
270 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

As an American I'm curious what it's like if you need to go to the doctor and how much you pay from say a broken arm to general checkup. Also list what country please

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 35 points 6 months ago (7 children)

UK.

There were complications when my wife gave birth. 2 weeks in hospital, some surgery, and nurses and midwives on call 24/7. The biggest cost was me stress buying snacks for my wife (until she told me to stop!). Even parking was reduced to £11/week, since she was in for multiple nights.

Another occasion. I had a benign lump in an annoying place. It took 14 months to get through to get it removed. It's only when I went in I realised it was not a 5 minute snip. Around an hour for a plastic surgeon to properly remove and stitch it up.

The NHS has its problems. Mostly caused by previous governments trying to starve it (to let their mates sell us for profit healthcare). The system and staff are absolutely awesome.

If I'm asked to point out what makes me proud to be British, the NHS is the prize jewel in that particular crown.

Cost wise, we pay national insurance, a fixed percentage of income. ("Payment by ability, treatment by requirement.") Prescriptions are £9.90 each, or £120/year. They also wave the fee for a lot of groups who might have problems with it. It's massively more cost effective than the American system.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 6 months ago (3 children)

    we pay national insurance, a fixed percentage of income

    With no limits? One of the many problems with the us system is we don’t do this.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    There are some limits to it, and ways around it for the rich (as per usual ☹️).

    The cost still mostly scales with your income, rather than how much care you need.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago

    I don’t understand why so many of my fellow citizens wouldn’t want this

    I guess we sort of have some, in that if you’re on Medicaid or on one of the exchanges, you get subsidized coverage based on your income

    But higher income people don’t pay more, plus I imagine that at some point you have enough income that you wouldn’t need health insurance….. and people wonder why our system is so expensive

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    When I was born I had a cleft palate, which then lead to ear issues and braces. When I started work (23 years ago) I had a leg pain issue that was never diagnosed, but went away….to generalise, I’ve never had an issue getting an appointment, I or my parents have never had to pay anything (Prescriptions aside), with my leg I think we had to wait up to 3 months for certain appointments, like the op, ~90~% stuff was quicker.

    I rang my new doctors after 8am on Monday, triage call Wednesday, doctors appointment Friday noon. I’d only joined a couple of days before. It’s underfunded and understaffed, but the NHS is a diamond. Absolutely baffles me that people think a for profit service could be better.

    Hope you don’t mind me jumping on your comment.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago

    UK here too and agree with the everything but the national insurance part is a common misconception. The amount you pay in national insurance has no direct tie to benefits or the nhs, and has not been connected for a long time.

    All national taxes go into a big pot which the government allocates any way it wants in the budget. For example, the recent class 1 employers national insurance rate increase from 13.8% to 15% does not mean that increase in funding goes directly to the NHS.

    The amount of years that you paid national insurance for in your life does effect the amount of pension you received. Once you've worked x number of years, you receive the full pension available. The amount you paid has no impact. In fact, you just have to have been paid a salary of the lower threshold, which means technically you don't pay any national insurance, for that year to be marked as qualifying. Lots of owner managed business pay themselves salary of the lower threshold (£6.5k), then pay the rest in dividends - results in them meeting the pension eligibility for that year, pays no national insurance, pays no income tax, and then pays the lower income tax rate for dividends.

    Fun fact, once you hit the legal retirement age, you stop paying national insurance even if you carry on working. This makes it a regressive tax!

    Successive governments have not made this clear because it is politically easier to raise national insurance rates ("helping the NHS") than income taxes, even though income tax is a more progressive tax and it all goes to the same pot.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent