It is the best rated in the world and is 40% cheaper than the US based on percentage of GDP. So why don't we simply adopt it and have the best demonstrated system for 40% less than what we are paying now?

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2007/08/11/frances_model_healthcare_system/

http://atlantis2.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=4546219n

http://www.photius.com/rankings/healthranks.html

Interesting article Slowhand, thanks.

Seems like an oxymoron to me. Most things are killing us, yet we want to pay to stay alive. One more way to suck every dollar out of us before and even after we die..jmo

Look up Denmark's They supposedly have one of the best systems in the world....

OK - maybe Denmark's would be good. But why reinvent the wheel?
Let's just take somebody else's model which is cheaper and more
effective than our own, reproduce it in the US and improve it
here along the way where we can.

In principle, we could have 1) universal healthcare, 2) large
cost savings 3) a model system to use as a pattern and 3) improved care all in one fell swoop

This sounds very appealing to me.

Anyway - the question on this thread is about the French system.
What is wrong with the French system if anything?

We can have another thread about the Danish system...

What are you talking about?

My cousin lives in Germany. He had an almost fatal car accident there.
He was in a comma. He got excellent care there.

I can also name you several people that got excellent care here in the U.S. as well...

"However, the average American physician earns more than five times the average US wage while the average French physician makes only about two times the average earnings of his or her compatriots. But the lower income of French physicians is allayed by two factors. Practice liability is greatly diminished by a tort-averse legal system, and medical schools, although extremely competitive to enter, are tuition-free. Thus, French physicians enter their careers with little if any debt and pay much lower malpractice insurance premiums."


There will never be any tort reform if Democrats have any power.

I would much rather see lower tuition costs across the board to allow everyone the chance to go to college. Having to incur thousands of dollars of debt to go to college is very discouraging, and helps to keep dumbing down the population. An educated public wouldn't sit back and allow the government to do the crap they have been.

The french, le eww.

This is true.

This, selfishly, is also one of my fears.

If i were only going to make 90 or 100 thousand dollars a year as a physician, i would think twice about subjecting myself to such a committed lifestyle, and such overwhelming training.

The average cost of our local medical school is $236,000. That's just four years. Factor in the cost of getting a bachelor's degree beforehand and you have at least $250,000. Now, take into consideration that if you went to school for 4 years, instead of 8 you would be making money over this period of time instead of collecting debt, and now you lost incentive.

Most people don't even factor in the residency after medical school. This is the period of time you work as a doctor, but make between 30,000 and 45,000 a year. This would last 2 years for general practice, and 4 years for many specialties. Surgery has a 6 year residency and nuerosurgery has a 7 year residency.

I have a second cousin, who is a vascular surgeon. He pays six figures a year just in malpractice insurance. Then, you have to factor the insane income taxes the U.S. has on our bracket system. This same physician probably pays 70% of his total income in taxes (state income) + (federal income) + (social security) + (medicare, etc). So take home, your average physician probably only brings home about a sixth of his average annual income.

Guess what. Looking at the big picture, if you want the economy to do well, you simply lower taxes (along with government spending). I could break this down if anyone needs to know why this is true. But, when the economy does better, expenses like healthcare can be afforded. When PEOPLE afford them, instead of Uncle Sam, the bills actually get paid. When the bills get paid, the system works much better. Interesting aint it?

Guess what. Looking at the big picture, if you want the economy to do well, you simply lower taxes (along with government spending). I could break this down if anyone needs to know why this is true. But, when the economy does better, expenses like healthcare can be afforded. When PEOPLE afford them, instead of Uncle Sam, the bills actually get paid. When the bills get paid, the system works much better. Interesting aint it?


Except that not all people will be able to afford health insurance still. Even when our economy was booming there are those who cannot afford health care. So you still did not solve this problem with your "solution".


We are the greatest nation in the world and we should have universal health care in this country.

If the French are working it then we need to look at their way of doing it.

How much did each of them pay for it though?

Not so sure the French are doing so well... are you?

Another thing to consider is that French live a different life-style than Americans. They tend to have less health issues than Americans. They eat better and live better. Overall, they are much healthier than Americans.

In America, if we want to decrease health costs, we first need to start at home and change our lifestyles. Advocate for health in all areas.

*hops down off her soapbox*

I'm sure a little more than the French, i will give you that. But compare that to the average annual take-home pay of the french. You may still have the upper hand on this one, as i have not done any homework on that issue.

One thing you fail to understand (you are not alone) the only way you can truely make a system "better" which essentially means the cheapest possible cost, for the best possible care, is to make it more efficient. In fact, the cheapest cost for the best outcome is the goal of any economic system. Kinda makes sense yes?

Efficiency is what i preach. Not against universal healthcare, unless it is innefficient. In this case, everyone should be against it, if we want to be the "Greatest Nation in the World".

I think we can have an efficient system. We need to start with some trimming though. Maybe analyze the failure points of our own system and begin to correct them?

Medicare is one of many huge reasons for the high cost of healthcare. Medicare is government run. Problem is they don't pay their bill. Just like medicade, and many state-run "free" healthcare insurances. Maybe if we cut back on some of our other spending, (like starting wars with every nation that looks at us cross-eyed), we could afford to fund the system we already have.

Another big addition to the cost are the rediculous malpractice suits doctors have to face. This starts a practice called "defensive medicine", which is extremely inefficient and acounts for nearly 20% of total healthcare costs.

Another thing we should look at is pharmacuetical companies. Just switching to generic brand medication, you could save another 20-25% of the total cost of healthcare.

Any two of these steps alone, i believe, would completely solve our healthcare "crisis", and everyone would receive quality healthcare that dwarfs that found in Europe.

Everyone complains about the VA healthcare system. Wonder if anyone ever took the time to acknowledge the fact that VA is a "free" government run system.

Things that make you go hmmmm.....

Too bad we are more focused on making ourselves a Welfare nation, instead of making ourselves a prosperous one.

You my dear, hit the nail on the head!


Preventive medicine has the potential of decreasing the total cost of healthcare by as much as 60% or more.

Unfortunately people don't want to take care of themselves, instead the want to be taken care of...

But we want an efficient and effective healthcare system regardless of the level of prevention, n'est ce pas? so let's put it in place now and stop screwing around!



times a wastin'!

The French health care system has been quantitatively measured to perform significantly better than our own, delivers universal coverage and costs 40% less as a fraction of GDP. If we simply directly adopted their proven model and decided not to waste any more sessions of Congress on it then we would likely have the most effective and efficient health care system in the world in a couple of years AND it would be 40% cheaper. We are talking about a savings of 4% of our GDP which is a savings of approximately 0.4 x $14,000 Billion = $5,600 Billion ANNUALLY.

I'm taking the values cited in the above websites for the cost as a fraction of GDP and multiplying by the GDP figures from this reference:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)