Well the NHS uses a figure of approximately £30,000 per QALY such that they'll spend a hell of a lot on treatments that will save a child's life but less on giving a 98 year old 2 extra months. It seems to mesh well with what people actually want. Adjust for available budget.
Question I'd like to see asked: 'If health care is a right, what's the maximum amount that the gov't should spend on any one citizen? One million? Ten million? A hundred million?'
-
-
-
If politicians admitted that this is the plan, then fair enough. But they won't tell the truth about it.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@primalpoly man, I generally love your approach, and contributions but this question seems to really blunt any nuance with regards to the shifting costs of something as complex as health care, specifically when so much of it can and probably will be optimized in near future. -
I just want candidates to tell the truth: gov't health care means health care will be rationed, and some people will be denied care, and will die because of it. Just be honest.
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Forced labor for doctors is the answer
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
If healthcare is a right,fully subsidised. Majority won’t care about their health.Cause they don’t have skin in the game.
-
Even if you arent paying directly for treatment doesn't mean a person enjoys being unwell.
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Not really how it works though, is it? In a public system (eg Oz) they have a fixed amount of doctors & staff, whom essentially decide amongst themselves how to split a fixed pool of time, more than of money.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Cold but I love it
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.