You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: A decentralized solidary group as an alternative to health insurances. Artabana.
I think that centralized, public health monopoly like NHS (GB) or NFZ (Poland) is still the most valuable option for patients.
Here are the benefits of public (government controlled) monopoly:
- Everyone has the same rights - the same insurance. There is no way, you can be tricked by the insurance provider. You can never loose your insurance. You will always receive exactly the same treatment nevertheless of your social position or actual situation. Richer people pay bigger fees, but everyone is treated equally.
- Easy for patients - you simly go to the hospital, receive no bills, no one is calculating if your treatment should be refunded or not - even if your treatment is very costly.
- Cost effective - eg. in Poland National Health Found (NFZ) consumes only 1,8% of insurance fees, while 98,2% goes to the hospitals. National Provider cannot generate any profit.
- Monopoly can negotiate best prices. - eg. a hip deformity operation in USA costs more than 200 000$, while in Poland it costs around 5 000$. (The drawback is that in monopoly system doctors and hospitals are poorer than in private insurance system, but nevertheless, the % of success is similar in most procedures.
So, as you can see, this is the most equal system for patients.
Theoretical and objectivly you are absolutly right. But practically we live in a highly subjective world which messes up that ideal. That's why this system here makes much mire sense for people who have their own idea how health should look like.