Slimebeast said:
Khuutra said:
TheRealMafoo said:
Khuutra said:
TheRealMafoo said:
So in the UK, you can't go to any hospital you want? It's based on where you live?
|
This is one of the weirdest assumptions about socialized healthcare. I mean, I know insurance companies have approved lists of hospitals that you can or can't go to, but I've never heard of that sort of thing in socialized countries - though, granted, the only ones I've bothered to look into are Canada and the UK.
|
I asked the question because the issue if wait times comes up a lot, but he never has them. If his hospital never has wait times, why don't people just go to his hospital?
The only reason I could think, was you could not go to just any hospital.
And education is socialized in the US, and you can't go to any school. Your choices are based on where you live.
|
Yeah, but you can't equate "this issue is well-documented" with "this issue comes up more often than it doesn't". Hell, Kingston General's wait times were never too bad any of the times I had to go there, either for myself or when taking people who lived in residence. And that's in a college town where people get sick about as often as you please.
Your reasoning does not seem to hold water, since you can go to different hospitals. So what would the reason be? I think it's more likely that the answer is convenience: people just like going to hospitals that are closer, usually.
And I know education is (mostly) socialized in the US, but that ain't got much to do with systems outside of the US, now do it?
|
In Sweden (socialized health care) people in general can't choose a hospital or specialist. You can under certain conditions, but it's usually complicated - there's a general rule: only if your county's hospital(s) have a wait time of more than 3 months, you are allowed to seek treatment in another county's hospitals or specialists (but in practice they cheat with those 3 months, which become 4-5 months).
|
Doesn't seem so dumb a question now, does it Khuutra? ;)
