Why an MRI costs $1,080 in America and $280 in France

In the philippines an MRI in the provinces costs just under $60. (But if you go to the capital, Manila, the price jumps to a whooping $150) In Ukraine it costs about $90 for an MRI, and i dont know if its B.S. or not, but I heard someone say an MRI in australia is about $20, but i havent checked that out yet.
 
Quote from noob_trad3r:

In europe college is free so doctors can charge less. In the US the debt load of medical school means they have to charge more.
The cost of a degree varies over Europe from free to way on up and doctors do have to pay for further qualification out of their own pockets after graduation in the UK.
I was surprised by the number of US students in Scottish universities
and colleges especially in post-grad courses.
 
Quote from Stok:

Uh huh...and the guberment is better to run it? Every venture besides the Military, the guberment is a total failure and corrupt.

Police, courts, paying for care and treatment of disabled people, ensuring old people have at least minimal pensions, allocating common resources to avoid over-use (tragedy of the commons, overfishing etc) - these are all things, apart from the military, that the government does better than the private sector. So your blanket statement is just wrong. No surprise, since it's made on pure ideological assumptions rather than any kind of impartial study of the evidence.

And going by the data, government in non-US 1st world countries runs healthcare not only much cheaper, but in some ways more effectively than the US system. You cannot just dismiss this huge discrepancy by saying "doh, how can the government solution be better?" because the facts show that in one way - pure cost - it is hugely better (even though in other ways it is worse, e.g. research or high-end treatment or waiting lists). You actually have to answer to the facts and defend your position, you don't get to do a Rush Limbaugh and just spew out some brainless unsupported soundbite based on nothing but pure prejudice.
 
Quote from just21:

The french system is social insurance. The medical practitioners are self employed. Because it is low cost with no monopoly, unlike uk, you take more than one opinion.

Yes, that's why it performs much better than the flawed UK system. It's kept some of the benefits of a free market system (e.g. competition) whilst attending to the social justice mandate that most people feel about healthcare.
 
Quote from masterm1ne:

..... Actually the military is full of failure, and possibly corruption (depends on definition).

Indeed. In any given armed conflict, the military failure rate is an incredible 50%!
 
Quote from frogtrader:

Unfettered economic growth in the healthcare sector is the solution. That means hundreds/thousands more medical schools, all growing and competing with each other, and millions more doctors practicing and competing. Government intervention makes care more expensive. The care in France is not less expensive. French people pay for it with higher taxes, high unemployment, low opportunity, and rationing.

French get higher life expectancy, and medical expenses are not the number 1 cause of personal bankruptcy as they are in the USA (most of which bankrupts had health insurance when they got ill). In fact, almost no one in France (or anywhere else in the 1st world ex-USA) goes broke due to medical bills.

Your claim that government intervention increases cost is also contradicted by the facts. For example, Singapore has lower taxes than USA but healthcare is cheaper - by a factor of 3-4 (measured by spending per capita PPP adjusted) there too. And health stats in Singapore are better than the USA - longer life expectancy, lower child death rate, lower adult death rate.

The UK with its much-derided NHS spends 1/3 what the USA does per capita on health, yet has higher life expectancy and lower child death rates. And the UK has lower tax rates than France, and an unemployment rate almost identical to the USA (8.4% vs 8.3%).

So, it's pretty clear that you are just spouting opinions without any regard for the facts. The facts show that the USA has an incredibly expensive healthcare system, yet has an incredibly unhealthy population. They are paying Ferrari prices and ending up with Skodas. The most likely culprit is that the system of healthcare provision is allowing the medical industry in the USA to earn large economic rents relatively unconnected to the quality of service they provide. If there is a way to fix that, then there is a duty to find this out. The people can then decide if they want better health and lower prices, or whether they want to preserve the liberty of the medical profession to keep earning its economic rent. But at least it will be an informed choice.
 
Quote from oldtime:

all I know is, I was in a bad accident and woke up in the hospital. They wanted to do an MRI. I said ok. The MRI room was only about 20 feet from my hospital bed, but they wouln't let me walk to it and made me ride in a wheelchair.

When they told me they wanted to keep me over night I just said, "fuck it" and walked out.

The security guard came out while I was waiting for the cab and said, "We can't force you to stay, but you do need to check out."

The nurse at the desk was really shitty, mainly because I hadn't taken out all those things they put in your arm, so I ripped them out and scratched my name on a form and left.

8 hours in the hospital and the bill was over ten grand. And the one that got me was a bill from some outfit in Florida charging me $250 for a twenty foot wheel chair ride from my bed to the MRI room.

They called it "wheelchair rental"

At $250 a pop, why don't they just buy a wheel chair?

And this shows that the idea it's a free market system is complete BS. You never consented to paying a dime, so under a true free market system your bill would be $0. Unconsenting bills make it a system of force, no different to taxation, except with taxation there is at least some democratic accountability.
 
Quote from highballs:

obviously you don't pay CASH for your medical care, do you? every test, every visit..cash. nah you don't, you are SUBSIDIZED in some way, someone else is picking up your tab :D

private insurance is not a subsidy.
your use of obviously shows the same lack of expertise and knowledge,
 
Quote from Ghost of Cutten:
French get higher life expectancy, and medical expenses are not the number 1 cause of personal bankruptcy as they are in the USA (most of which bankrupts had health insurance when they got ill). In fact, almost no one in France (or anywhere else in the 1st world ex-USA) goes broke due to medical bills.

Your claim that government intervention increases cost is also contradicted by the facts. For example, Singapore has lower taxes than USA but healthcare is cheaper - by a factor of 3-4 (measured by spending per capita PPP adjusted) there too. And health stats in Singapore are better than the USA - longer life expectancy, lower child death rate, lower adult death rate.

The UK with its much-derided NHS spends 1/3 what the USA does per capita on health, yet has higher life expectancy and lower child death rates. And the UK has lower tax rates than France, and an unemployment rate almost identical to the USA (8.4% vs 8.3%).

So, it's pretty clear that you are just spouting opinions without any regard for the facts. The facts show that the USA has an incredibly expensive healthcare system, yet has an incredibly unhealthy population. They are paying Ferrari prices and ending up with Skodas. The most likely culprit is that the system of healthcare provision is allowing the medical industry in the USA to earn large economic rents relatively unconnected to the quality of service they provide. If there is a way to fix that, then there is a duty to find this out. The people can then decide if they want better health and lower prices, or whether they want to preserve the liberty of the medical profession to keep earning its economic rent. But at least it will be an informed choice.
+1
 
Back
Top