Among the constant debates for the improvement of health insurance and coverage is an argument that comes back over and over: do socialist countries have better health insurance? The responses we hear are rarely based on fact, but merely on which side of the argument we are. It sounds better to say that they do, if we want reforms to go through. But if they don't, then perhaps the current system isn't all that broken. But what is the real truth, do they have better coverage? It turns out it's slightly more complex than it would appear.
First of all, in a more socialist country like Canada, health insurance is indeed a universal right. Every Canadian citizen has health insurance, and can go to a pubic hospital to get treated without paying anything out of pocket, simply by showing their government issued insurance card. But this is just the surface. The truth is, not everything is covered. There's a very fine line drawn in the sand between what is covered, and what isn't. Typically, serious health issues are covered. This does not include glasses for eye sight issues, or visits to the dentist, or beauty treatments. It also does not cover experimental treatments, which is a big drawback. In the US, if a doctor thinks a certain treatment is better than another, he can suggest it. In a Canadian hospital, the government determines what is and isn't covered. Even if a treatment is seen as safe, until the Health Ministry decides to cover it, then it's out. Of course, because there is universal coverage, that means few people have extra insurances to cover those experimental procedures, so usually that means they need to be paid out of pocket.
Then, we need to look at the cost of such a system. Taxes in Canada are much higher than in the US. People can easily pay 35% or higher in income tax. Then, there's a federal sales tax of 5%, plus a provincial tax of around 8%, on most goods purchased in Canada. Then, many additional taxes have been added. For example, in Quebec, to cover the cost of drugs, unless you have a group insurance, all citizens have to pay close to $500 (depending on various factors) per year to pay for it. Finally, the quality of the service is a big negative of universal coverage. Public health care involves very long waiting lists. People can wait months for common treatments, simply because the hospitals are administered by the government, and bureaucracy can slow things down. As a result, more and more private health clinics have been created, and those don't have such broad coverage. Many things have to be paid out of pocket, or by a private insurance.
Overall, universal health coverage is great in principle, and indeed it means people get their serious medical conditions treated regardless whether they are rich or poor. But there's a lot of caveats, and it's important to know them before brandishing such a system as the perfect way to do things.
First of all, in a more socialist country like Canada, health insurance is indeed a universal right. Every Canadian citizen has health insurance, and can go to a pubic hospital to get treated without paying anything out of pocket, simply by showing their government issued insurance card. But this is just the surface. The truth is, not everything is covered. There's a very fine line drawn in the sand between what is covered, and what isn't. Typically, serious health issues are covered. This does not include glasses for eye sight issues, or visits to the dentist, or beauty treatments. It also does not cover experimental treatments, which is a big drawback. In the US, if a doctor thinks a certain treatment is better than another, he can suggest it. In a Canadian hospital, the government determines what is and isn't covered. Even if a treatment is seen as safe, until the Health Ministry decides to cover it, then it's out. Of course, because there is universal coverage, that means few people have extra insurances to cover those experimental procedures, so usually that means they need to be paid out of pocket.
Then, we need to look at the cost of such a system. Taxes in Canada are much higher than in the US. People can easily pay 35% or higher in income tax. Then, there's a federal sales tax of 5%, plus a provincial tax of around 8%, on most goods purchased in Canada. Then, many additional taxes have been added. For example, in Quebec, to cover the cost of drugs, unless you have a group insurance, all citizens have to pay close to $500 (depending on various factors) per year to pay for it. Finally, the quality of the service is a big negative of universal coverage. Public health care involves very long waiting lists. People can wait months for common treatments, simply because the hospitals are administered by the government, and bureaucracy can slow things down. As a result, more and more private health clinics have been created, and those don't have such broad coverage. Many things have to be paid out of pocket, or by a private insurance.
Overall, universal health coverage is great in principle, and indeed it means people get their serious medical conditions treated regardless whether they are rich or poor. But there's a lot of caveats, and it's important to know them before brandishing such a system as the perfect way to do things.
SHARE
