> Because it is "socialized medicine" does not mean it is "free". Every
> worker there has to pay "National Insurance" based on their salary. I
> was comparing costs with friends and relatives over there, and many of
> them found they were paying more for their National Insurance than I was
> for an HMO here. Of course, there is also the horrendous waiting
> lists. When I had my recent surgery, the surgeon had trained at London
> Hospital and guaranteed I would have waited a minimum of 6-8 months for
> the same surgery in England.
This is a very good argument for NOT going to a national health plan in the
US like the one in England and Canada. I remember this back in the 1960s
when I lived in England and my wife was British. What a nightmare it was!
I've tried repeatedly to explain to the national health care program advocates
in this country that they aren't getting the full story about these systems!!
THe other thing which Buster doesn't mention here is that doctors under
these systems make considerably less money therefore there is no
incentive in those countries to become a doctor and many who do chose
that profession end up emmigrating to the US where they can make a
good living (after paying outrageous malpractice insurance fees!). What they
end up with is only a hand full of doctors that are of quality and each doctor
has to see literally thousands of patients!
Remember this the next time you hear a politician tout the Canadian or
British National Health systems as what we should emulate. She was
operating on only half the facts before when she suggested this. ;-)
Jim - 68 Midget in Dodge City