Kalivha wrote:
I don't really see what you're trying to say - people affected by economic hardship are more likely to opt for public health insurance?
I'm saying that the existence of public health care makes the demand for health care less flexible than it would otherwise be. In terms of wait time, we're talking about non-emergency care. If people have to pay for their own health care, they will take cost factors into consideration when determining if they *really* need that care. When it's "free", they don't. So they'll continue to show up for their 6 month checkup which statistically isn't going to show any change, and in general schedule appointments for things which they might not need as often or even at all.
Which affects the cost (and resulting waiting time when cost is a factor) for everyone.
Quote:
If that's what you're saying, that's the whole idea behind it. It's there to provide for people who can't go for the better option, and provides a baseline. A shoddy baseline is better than none, and I would never go as far as calling the NHS "shoddy".
For many of us, it's a freedom issue. I'd rather have the freedom to choose when/where to go see a doctor for something (and pay for it myself) than be forced into a system where it's all paid for, but I'm stuck dealing with the yahoos who figure that if something is "free" they'd better get their moneys worth.