Is healthcare cheaper in Sweeden because it's nationalized?

by **blaeey** » Sat Apr 28, 2012 5:31 pm

Or because Sweedish citizens can't sue a government-run hospital for 20 million for medical malpractice?

by **zadok** » Sat Apr 28, 2012 5:37 pm

b

by **hussein** » Sat Apr 28, 2012 5:45 pm

Yes, and because they have high taxes to pay for it

by **salvadore94** » Sat Apr 28, 2012 5:48 pm

Malpractice makes up a tiny percentage of the health care money America spends each year. Nationalizing the malpractice insurance industry would take the enormous profits out of it and reduce costs for the doctors. That wouldn't really translate to reduced costs for patients though.

by **shaddoc98** » Sat Apr 28, 2012 5:51 pm

Because it is nationalized the government does not require a huge profit margin

by **augustus** » Sat Apr 28, 2012 6:04 pm

Elmendorf wrote that newly available research prompted CBO to update "its analysis of the effects of tort reform." The agency's conclusion: A package of reforms that included a $250,000 cap on damages for pain and suffering and a $500,000 cap on punitive damages "would reduce total national health care spending by about 0.5 percent."

by **chatima** » Sat Apr 28, 2012 6:06 pm

Neither

It's cheaper because a Shaman casting "heal" spells and using magic powders doesn't cost a whole lot.

by **artzai** » Sat Apr 28, 2012 6:14 pm

Malpractice costs amount to less than 1% of US medical costs. The reason our system is so expensive is ours is run by "for profit" companies, with huge numbers of people involved in selling coverage, billing, claim investigations, and more. On top of that, our biggest health care companies seem to feel oblicgated to pay hundreds of millions of dollars to their executives. In the medicare system, 95% of money spent goes to patient care. In the private insurance medical system, only 80% goes to patient care. 20% is wasted on overhead.

Advertisments:

Useful Links: