Doctors aren't paid when you are healthy. How would you suggest fixing such a system? Because if you figure it out, there's a whole system of auto mechanics that could probably benefit from the solution.
It is not necessary to have to propose a solution before highlighting flaws or having an opinion about some thing. This is arguing in bad faith. Besides, you only have to read any article like this to find examples of other healthcare systems that have better outcomes for less spending
Second, you've not only massively oversimplified, you have also made a false equivalence. Doctor's aren't the only ones getting paid, the CEOs take home billions, as do shareholders. If you think going to the hospital in the US is the same as taking a car to a garage in the US, then you are greatly mistaken. To equate the 2 is either unthinkingly glib or willfully disingenuous.
Isn't it worst that doctors are paid if you are not healthy? Doesn't it create an incentive for them to prevent you from being completely healthy?
Anyway, most countries in Europe pay their doctors regardless of you health status and that money comes out directly of taxpayers' pockets whom most of them are 100% happy to make it that way
But doctors in Europe are paid a pittance in comparison.
Like less than a third or even a quarter of US wages.
That's the real issue - they will never want to take a hit to living standards. It was possible in the UK because it was directly after the war and the Blitz had killed hundreds of thousands of people, and there was a real threat of communism.
Whereas the USA is nowhere that situation today. Things are going very well for the majority of people so drastic change would be very hard.
> That's the real issue - they will never want to take a hit to living standards.
So what are they gonna do? Refuse to treat people and starve themselves to death? They'll be replaced by people willing to earn less and who probably care about the work they do rather than just caring about earning a fat paycheck - those exist, as other countries prove. Seems like a win to me.
Yeah, go on strike, or refuse to work with the public health system, etc.
Britain had all of these issues and it cost a lot of money.
There's also other issues - like the NHS doesn't cover circumcision unless there is medical need (this is not so controversial in the UK, but would be in the USA), and it does cover gender transition surgery, etc. (despite covering no other cosmetic surgery, and nowadays not covering dentistry or opticians) - all of these issues are controversial and difficult.
Doctors are paid to be doctors. And there is always a fraction of the population that aren't healthy. Just like you insinuate with your car mechanic analogy, it's probably a good idea to have a system that doesn't give doctors incentive to give patients more expensive treatment, and instead have incentives to reach good health outcomes.
I have heard similar arguments from pseudo-medical practitioners and I am going to assume you are not trolling.
There are huge logical gaps in your statement.
1/ Being alive is a constant fight against diseases, aging and myriad other illness.
2/ In any reasonable population, there would be a percentage of people who need more medical care than others.
3/ Children and old people are more vulnerable.
4/ Given these above, the doctors cater to people who need the medical care.
5/ The world is not static. You can eat something bad and get sick. The doctors and by extent, the entire healthcare system is not a sterile environment to put people in.
Why not propose an alternate system where doctors can be proactive in asking people to take care of themselves - maybe like asking them to take a vaccine?
Doctors aren't paid when you are healthy. How would you suggest fixing such a system? Because if you figure it out, there's a whole system of auto mechanics that could probably benefit from the solution.