[fndrplayer13]

Health care isn't scarce in most of the first world. Many first world societies offer health care to all of their citizens, and those visiting their country. Much as we view education as a fundamental human right in the United States and no longer treat it as scarce, most other societies view healthcare as a fundamental human right. As a society and political system the United States has actively made the choice to pursue a profit-based, insurance-centered care model that is purposefully scarce.

Which is to say, I completely disagree that there is no other option.

[zip1234]

There are a limited number of health care practitioners, health care facilities, etc. The demand for health care is unlimited as people get older.

[dv_dt]

And yet in nations like Japan, where there are proportionately a greater number of elderly than in the US, their healthcare delivers at a much lower cost (by half!) as well as a higher life expectancy. This despite a decades long economic stagnation, as opposed to the curious economic "good times" in the US which seems to decrease our life expectancy and increase our health care costs.

[Notorious_BLT]

Many first world societies have unreasonably long waiting periods to receive specialist attention and care. For example, Canada's average wait from referral to specialist appointment was 10.2 weeks in 2017, up from 3.7 in 1993. The average wait period for treatment was 10.9, up from 5.6 in 1993. 4.1 weeks for a CT Scan, 10.8 for an MRI. Some types of treatment require almost a year of waiting. Hope you aren't in a hurry to get your health issues resolved.

It IS scarce in the short term. Not everyone can get treatment right away, someone will have to wait. And the wait times seem to gradually trend upward, which would indicate (at first glance at least) that it cannot keep up. There's no magical solution to getting everyone timely care.

[phil248]

"Hope you aren't in a hurry to get your health issues resolved."

You make it sound so scary, but you make no mention of health outcomes. I don't care if an appointment happens in 10 minutes or 10 weeks, so long as the outcomes are positive. Wait times alone are not a meaningful metric to me.

[passing_by_and]

Well, the parent is illustrating a basic point of freshman economics. We ration scarcity with cost (money) or time. In this case Canada chose to be "fair" and ration scarcity of medical care with lines.

Your comment belies a belief that peoples time or comfort are worth nothing. Should my children wait a year or more to have a specialist examine a chronic skin condition that thus far cannot be treated and causes severe itching? In Canada the answer is yes. Ever dealt with a toddler that can't sleep and you can't help?

Acute care here is the same. People die waiting at emergency. 24 hour waits for patients not bleeding out on the floor happen (but usually we can keep it down to 12).

[phil248]

"Your comment belies a belief that peoples time or comfort are worth nothing"

You mention nothing about comfort, just wait times, which is essentially my point. Are people being left in extreme discomfort? If so, that is a problem. Health outcomes help paint that picture, and in most first world systems outcomes are good.

[glhaynes]

Should my children wait a year or more to have a specialist examine a chronic skin condition that thus far cannot be treated and causes severe itching?

That sucks for there to be long waits, but the alternative being evaluated (the USA's system) has lots of people not ever getting treatment.