No offense but OP is right and you are wrong. Health care in Scandinavia is great in many ways and not so great in others. People do suffer, even die, waiting in line for public treatment, and health care lawsuits aren't really a thing.
I live here. Never heard of anyone who died waiting for care. It's extremely rare.
There are sometimes investigative journalism of malpractice cases in the media, but that happens on the private sector too. Yes, many people are often frustrated when they have to wait for their non-acute check up times, but "people dying in queues" as something that would be normal here in Helsinki is a total myth.
Finland is not Scandinavia and its systems are not necessarily comparable. You have shortcomings in any healthcare system, but I'd take this and all its flaws in a heartbeat over the absolute shitshow that is the US healthcare system.
Finland is very much Scandinavia, but that's a complete side note.
The point is, it's absolutely not true that health care in Finland or the rest of Scandinavia is anywhere near as good as popularly imagined by Americans or even by many Scandinavians themselves. Anyone who moves to Scandinavia thinking the high taxes will give complete access to instant top notch treatment in case of cancer or many other conditions will have been straight up misled and deceived.
Pointing that out doesn't imply thinking US health care is preferable or better - I certainly don't.
> Anyone who moves to Scandinavia thinking the high taxes will give complete access to instant top notch treatment in case of cancer or many other conditions will have been straight up misled and deceived
If you want top notch anything, it's pretty obvious that the privilege is accessible only to billionaires. There's no roof on how much money you can spend on any service. The point of the public health care system is that a basic level of care is guaranteed to everyone, not to provide the most opulent service that money can buy.
It's a bit messier than that though. When spoken in English, Finland is often included in the term. However everyone here knows it's not realy. We instead use "Nordic countries" to include Finland and Greenland.
While not a part of the geographic area called Scandinavia, Finland is very much a Nordic country.
The healthcare system here is pretty comparable to the other Nordic countries, although there are some differences. The quality of care depends a lot on your particular health issues and the place you live, though.
Sure, people may be satisfied with their system, but that's all they know. And that goes both ways, for Americans and others.
As someone who has experience both the US system and a universal system, there are things you get in the US system (if you have insurance) that you won't get in other systems.
> As someone who has experience both the US system and a universal system, there are things you get in the US system (if you have insurance) that you won't get in other systems.
I've used the NHS and the parallel private system in the UK. With private medicine everything happens quicker: initial consultation, treatment, operation etc. Inpatients tend to get private rooms, with a food menu, and routine meds like sleeping pills are handed out more freely. However, there are things the UK's private system can't do, probably because it makes no commercial sense. The really big stuff - major surgery like transplants - only happens in the NHS. Roughly one third of UK govt spend is the NHS; ~130B GBP last time I looked. So only the NHS has the financial, human and technical resources for eg heart transplants. Another important point is risk appetite. Private hospitals can choose not to do risky stuff to avoid litigation. The NHS is govt backed, so can take more risk. Ultimately the NHS is budget constrained, so can choose not to offer new and expensive treatments. IMHO the US system can deliver better results than the UK if you're very wealthy. However the UK system will be better for 99% of the population. Disclosure: I'm a British citizen working for a US bank in London, and I benefit from my employer's excellent private healthcare scheme.
I think it's fair to say that the US has the very best healthcare available - but not for everyone and overall healthcare outcomes aren't that great when compared with a lot of other countries
> People do suffer, even die, waiting in line for public treatment
Never heard of anyone dying waiting for public treatment here in Finland. If you have some life threatening issue you will get treatment right away.
I would say the only one coming anywhere close to that here is the somewhat bad access to mental healthcare that can end up in suicide if left untreated. But based on the amount of homeless people with severe mental illness on the streets of America I don't think things are better there (though beating USA in health care is a really low bar)
Yes if you have some non-urgent problem you might have to wait a few months in the public health care (if you have the money/insurance you can go to the private sector)
