>>>>>Errr... your definition of great health care for free only means emergency healthcare. The problem comes with treatment. It interesting to see that one living in the US can be so misinformed about the situation. But I guess you've got nothing better to compare with ....
>>>>
>>>>I have to agree with Walter. The U.S. has excellent emergency healthcare and testing and treatment. The ability to receive (*read afford*) treatment for expensive diseases and long-term illness is another matter. For a start, read this:
>>>>
>>>>http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06339/743713-84.stm
>>>
>>>So you agree that "great health care for free only means emergency healthcare"? It means, at minimum, you saying that Medicaid providing healthcare for miliions of families is just an emergency. Do you still persist in this estimate? Are you aware that hundreds of hospitals and zillion medical offices serve primarily medicaid recipients, especially in urban areas?
>>
>>No, I'm saying that there are obviously problems with the system. There are people who don't qualify for Medicaid or Medicare but who cannot afford health insurance. If health insurance is not provided by your employer, the premiums often are far too expensive and not something a family could afford on their own. I know of one family who could not afford the 1200.00 /mth for it. Health insurance is often twice the cost of a mortgage payment or rent now. That means those families are not insured and will only get emergency treatment not costly medications and treatments if they suffer a serious illness or condition. The treatment and medicine is available - sometimes the best in the world. It doesn't mean anything if you cannot afford it.
>
>Walter said that free medical service does not exist except in emergency room and you said that you agree with him. Re-read the previous messages, please. It it the clearest thing to notice.
>In regard to affordability issue, I mentioned many times that country may afford volume of medical services not exceeding volume of wealth this country creates, making also necessary deductions for other needs. It means that medical care will be always limited for some/many people regardless how healthcare care system is arranged in particular country. Our healthcare system provides unlimited healthcare service for needy people, and limited one for people with money. Again, I have to repeat point that I made to W. (just because you agree with his point, i.e. disagreed with mine): you may like this situation (when needy people get it for free and others not) or you don't like it, your choice, but it cannot be called 'greedy capitalism' anyway.

There are problems in every system. I don't claim that the socialized medical system is better, only that our system needs help because too many fall through the cracks. However, waiting for care is not the same as receiving care:

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1118582
http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/10/15/england.dentists/index.html
http://www.jdentaled.org/cgi/reprint/69/9/987.pdf
http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/healthcare/
http://www.liberty-page.com/issues/healthcare/canwait3.html
http://www.preferredmedical.co.uk/medical-insurance-4-why-buy-pmi.php
http://www.spinalcordresources.com/?p=77
http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0168851002001203
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/4975055/Hospital-waiting-lists-will-soar-due-to-European-laws-surgeons-warn.html


One snippet:

According to a BBC report in March, 2008, the average waiting time for treatment on the NHS had risen from 41 days in 1997-1998 to 49 days in 2007.(1) Some average waiting times for specific surgeries in 2004 included:

Cataract surgery – 8 months' wait on average
Hip replacement surgery – 11 months wait on average
Knee replacement surgery – 12 months wait on average
Surgery on a slipped disc in your back – 5 months wait on average
Surgery to repair a hernia – 5 months wait on average
While none of these conditions could be considered life-threatening, they all involve some amount of discomfort on part of the sufferer.