[jfim]

Why would it be bureaucracy? In places with universal healthcare, you go to the doctor, show your card, then go to your appointment. Go to the pharmacy with your script, show your card and pay whatever is left to pay, if any.

That's it. No open enrollment, no surprise bills, no trying to figure out which ppo or hmo works best, no wondering if it's in network or not or any of that BS.

[glenngillen]

The apparent fear of universal healthcare many Americans seen to have is incredible.

And to call it out in a thread where someone has literally shared that they're forced to attend a pointless appointment at an exorbitant cost like that isn't itself some form of wasteful bureaucracy. But if the time and money is going to a corporation instead of the government it's better :/

[vjvjvjvjghv]

The US has managed to combine the worst aspects of universal/socialized health care with the worst aspects of an attempted free market system. It’s quite an achievement.

[anal_reactor]

It works as intended. It's a part of cutthroat capitalism. The goal here is to make sure that basic service is unevenly distributed so that people who don't have it are motivated to work extra hard and get it.

[iamnothere]

There’s no “cutthroat” about it. The system intentionally removes as much competition as possible. It’s cushy, taxpayer-funded socialism for the rich. (Also known as corporatism.)

At this point, China is doing capitalism better than us in its consumer industries. They actually have real competition, so fierce at times that the government worries about what it calls “involution”, or destructive competition (which Marx predicted as the end state of capitalism). Of course, its healthcare system is not run through capitalist competition like its consumer industries; it is fully state managed.

Some real competition might actually help if we’re going to keep pretending to be capitalists. Or we could move from socialism for the rich to socialism for the people. I don’t really care which as long as we move on from the current dysfunctional system.

[dash2]

> In places with universal healthcare, you go to the doctor

NHS experience: you might have to wait two weeks to see the doctor, and it will be a ten minute appointment. (Which in this case might be fine.) If you can use a nurse things tend to be much easier.

[HWR_14]

For a checkup? Or if you are sick?

[roryirvine]

The NHS relies on heavy triaging - so, for primary care, emergency cases will be seen immediately (either at a hospital or at the nearest GP surgery with an available slot), urgent will be seen same day (at your usual GP surgery), and non-urgent medical problems (eg. back pain that isn't getting worse) might take 2-3 days.

But everything else (eg. discussing blood test results, medication reviews, mental health issues) will get dumped into the "routine" appointment bucket and, yes, will often take 1-2 weeks.

You do hear occasional horror stories about the triage process, but my experience has been pretty reasonable. For example, I lost my voice last year but had no other symptoms - so I expected to have to wait a few days to be seen. But I was treated as an urgent case since it affected my ability to work, and got an appointment that afternoon.

[HWR_14]

These timelines sound remarkably similar to pretty much every other timeline for medical care I've heard in other countries.

[dash2]

I've had a checkup with the NHS once or maybe twice in my life, and it was not with a doctor. (I'm not saying that it should be, maybe a nurse and a blood pressure check is all you need?)