[ SECRET POST #2394 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2394 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.













Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 038 secrets from Secret Submission Post #342.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 1 2 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

Medicare isn't the panacea it's made out to be, however: Just ask the people still waiting to be seen at the local Outpatients clinic at the only hospital in my town -- these are people who do not have a GP because there are not enough non-specialist Drs. because medicare pays the specialists better -- the people in the "free" clinic (who pay for it with their taxes) who have been sitting there 8+ hours at least.

Not that I'm saying I prefer privatized nedicine (ugh, no); just that people who tout "universal healthcare" as the be-all and end-all forget or gloss over the fact that, in some places, universal healthcare is also universally bad.

[thene]

Yeah but private healthcare is actually worse, in terms of both absolute outcomes and efficiency; in the USA the over-60s (ie. Medicare recipients) are the only group that rate their health coverage as more 'satisfactory' than not, and the private healthcare system is thought to be a major reason why even well-off Americans live shorter lives than similarly well-off people in other developed countries. For these privileges, the US spends 2.5x as much of its GDP on healthcare as the OECD average, while most other OECD health systems deliver better outcomes and longer lifespans. tl;dr private healthcare is the objectively worst, even for the people who can afford to use it.

[(Anonymous)]

That sort of depends - if you're rich *enough* the private healthcare in the states is pretty much the best thing ever. It's just that the "rich enough" bar is *so* high that most people get screwed over.

[(Anonymous)]

"Universal healthcare" is not the same everywhere.

Obviously there are ways to do it badly. But, frankly, for a lot of people that's going to be better than the *nothing* they'd get otherwise.

[(Anonymous)]

Yes but in Britain it works, I haven't lived under another system except Australia which was a sort of hybrid and I remember having to pay and then getting some money back but not all. Anyhow living in Britain I feel very lucky, I've recently had MRIs and some other tests, no problems, all done in good time. I've never had anything but good care. I also work in an NHS service and we give really good care to our patients.