[CuriousSkeptic]

First of all, being a reader of hn in Sweden probably means your monthly salary is in the top 10%, which of course colors your view of society.

It also means that you’re taxed higher. While most people pay 31% in commune tax, the top earners pay an extra 25% adding to the resentment.

I think most people agree that the quality of health care is an issue, but pretty divided on how to go about things. About 50-50 split.

Fun fact, since the election in September the Riksdag still hasn’t been able to elect a prime minister due to being to divided on such issues. The only thing they do agree is to not to collaborate with SD, giving both sides roughly 40% support for their favorite candidate.

Wikipedia had a nice map of the situation. We hn 10%ers tend to live in the more densely populated blue areas, again giving a pretty distorted view of things.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018_Swedish_general_electio...

[geomark]

"I think most people agree that the quality of health care is an issue..."

Really? I thought that good healthcare was one of the major positives of the high taxes paid in Sweden. That was alluded to in the article and I have seen positive comments in the past about it. I guess that is due to the 10%ers being the ones commenting(?). But then I don't understand how there is uneven distribution of quality healthcare.

[CuriousSkeptic]

Not uneven in that regard.

One of the issues being debated is the uneven quality between geographic regions. Not a new issue though, a more contemporary issue the lack of care givers and long waits that seems to be a problem in general.

If I were to guess a combination of the large age group just retiring and an attempt to allow more private health care options from a few years back started a vicious circle of relatively low wages and increasingly stressful working conditions driving competent people to seek out private employers instead.

Apparently it’s not uncommon for nurses to leave an employment, only to come back as contractors for the same job with twice the salary.

If that is the case I’m sure it’s mostly a temporary mess that needs to stabilize into some new configuration.

But the private options seems to be doing a good job, in general the people around me seems to be happy with their service at least. But to access those services you need the typical insurance through your employer, defeating the entire point of a public health care system to begin with.

So any resentment among the 10% probably stems from fear of not having a private option for things like cancer treatments if the current mess in the public system continues.

That said, the public system does an excellent job of all standard physical care I’ve needed so far. Have had some unlucky encounters with incompetent people, but can’t blame the system for that.

The psychiatric care looks like a complete failure though. If you have any anxiety or depression to deal with you’re on your own. The treatment plan is basically for a GP to administer prescription medicine and sick leave. If you do manage to be remitted to a specialist their main function is to evaluate to which degree you’re faking it. (In Sweden your either working or a lazy freeloader, “arbetslinjen” is very strong) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arbetslinjen