Comment by ceejayoz
8 days ago
Both setups have a "is this deemed medically necessary and be covered" step, yes. The key difference is that "yup, necessary and typically covered" in Sweden gets you the procedure. In the US, it doesn't. You need coverage (or you pay out of pocket) for anything to be covered.
No insurance? The only care you can't be denied over payment is emergency care. (And the definition is narrow - they'll give you pain meds and IV fluids for your cancer and send you home. They will not do surgery/chemo for it without payment.)
As a bonus, Sweden's setup costs half as much, with similar outcomes. That's inclusive of taxation. https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/2023/11/health-at-a-gla...
You’re right of course, but even this comparison gives an incomplete picture. An example is that many other countries can institute drug price caps because the US does not. It’s not unlike how NATO countries can historically pay less into defense because the US pays so much. There’s an argument those are essentially subsidizing lower costs abroad.
That’s not to say the US healthcare system isn’t in need of massive reform, just that it’s a much more complicated problem than many realize.