Flipping channels tonight there was a discussion on PBS about US
health costs.

Some of the info was 'interesting'. Apparently there are many versions
of what for want of a better term we will temporarily call "Government
funded" health care. Ranging from where government owns and runs all
the hospitals right across to privately funded where by the governemnt
makes sure that service is provided. One instance mentioned was the UK
where 60% of the doctors are private being paid standard fees by the
government and 40% are salaried, working directly for the
government.

So will immediately point out that DOES NOT automatically mean the
government funding means that it RUNS the medical system. What it does
do in various models, in many 'western' countries is; a) Fund health
care b) Make sure it covers EVERYONE c) Imposes rules and conditions
by means of legislation on private providers, hospitals and the
insurance companies, who in some countries provide some medical
services or 'extras' such as additional payment for a private hospital
room.

During the PBS item it was mentioned that the starting point was 'How
do we cover everyone'; then go on from there with 'How much will cost'
and 'How do we make sure it's working successfully'. The result being
a healthier and more productive population. At a lower cost than
private insurance with bottom line profit incentive, plans.
..
Of one ranking of some 50 industrialized nations, the USA ranks 23rd
and also it's medical system does not cover all.

Of the PBS item didn't make many notes but a few numbers stuck in
mind.
In the USA due to the multiplicity of plans etc. administration costs
20% or more.
In (I think it was Canada?) administration costs 4%.
In Switzerland legislation says that if an insurance company does not
pay (agreed fee) coverage within 5 days the insured customer receives
next months total coverage 'free'.
Generally customers (patients) are treated according to need and
medical staff make the decisions as to type and amount of care needed.

Reason for posing the original question was because many are amazed
why the US public is not asking 'WHY NOT universal coverage. At a
reasonable cost'.

Here in Canada on my income (now mainly pension) of around $59,000
per year my total 'income' taxes are approx. $11,000 per year (single
widower in mid 70s). Almost equally divided between province and
federal. Since I also pay sales taxes on some of the remaining income
(of say around 48,000) but not on food and certain other items; if and
when I spend, it that's probably another approx. $4000. So one can
argue that one spends about 25% to 27% (depending on income bracket)
of total income to allow my government to run the country. And that
includes universal health care for everyone.

Came back from one of those 14 hour fasting blood tests today
(Friday); no charge, very little waiting (less than five minutes I
only got part way through one magazine article) and the decision when/
where to go was entirely mine. Occasionally someone will mention that
if you go for blood test on certain day of the week you may run into
people who have had transplants and that happens to be the day of the
week when there is certain clinic.

I decided to go to one of the hospitals where parking and distance to
walk into the blood lab is most suitable. There are at moment at least
three locations within this small city where on can go for blood
collection. On Oct. 2nd a new blood collection location will open in a
brand new building several miles closer to home.

The samples will go the central lab run by the Health Care
Corporation; and early next week my family doctor (GP) will get the
info and will phone me whether to make any changes to my medication,
and if necessary she will send a revised prescription to the
pharmacist I deal with. I have a Blue Cross insurance scheme that
covers most of cost; although in some countries the drugs are funded
completely by the government plan.

During the last 18 years have had two prostrate ops. couple of bouts
with heart fibrillation and prior to that maybe one health threatening
condition (probably meningitis?) that was attended to promptly. Yes
there are delays, I did have to wait a long time for an EKG but that
was in part because it was a follow and I was visiting relatives in
middle east. While in the middle east btw I had, as a non resident
(visitor) a simple INR blood test. It cost about $30 for the test and
analysis which we then transmitted back to my doctor here at home. In
Canada the blood test cost is part of the system. Well I have to use
gasoline to get there!

Other members of the family; now all grown up with families of their
own have also need health care from time to time also therapy after
being rear-ended, a softball face injury, child birth etc. And my late
wife received excellent cancer care etc.