• eltacopeludo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    61
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    4 days ago

    Mexican here. They are saying everything is free now, but there are not enough medicines, doctors or hospitals so is just a shallow gesture.

    • Rhaedas@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      48
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      It’s a step. Vs. medicines too expensive to buy, and doctors that you can’t see for months who run you through the mill to get their numbers up. I can’t say which is worse when the result is about the same. At least you have more of a chance now.

      • krisevol@lemmus.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        4 days ago

        Kaiser was excellent when they only provided service to kiaser members. When the government stepped in, the whole system went to shit. They still have the same amount of doctors so the only thing that happened in now everyone gets shitty service and long wait times.

        Sometimes the government getting involved isn’t a good thing.

      • Talentless Sculptor@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        4 days ago

        Mexico has around 25 Doctors per 100000 capita. That is lower than almost all European countries that averaged 40 Doctors per 100000 capita.

        When it comes to nurses, the comparison is worse. 29/100000capita in Mexico and over 100/100000capita in Norway, Finland, Sweden, Iceland, Denmark, Germany, Austria, Ireland, Switzerland, Belgium and the Netherlands. With no EU nation falling below 40/100000capita.

        https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/doctors-per-capita-by-country

        • Phil_in_here@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          3 days ago

          That is valuable context for sure, but the data doesn’t illustrate wait times.

          I’m from Canada which appears to have a similar ratio to Mexico (I don’t consider our basic healthcare a “shallow gesture”)

          Wait times are long here, but twice as many doctors & hospitals would make the wait times only half as long, which would still be counted in years in some cases. So I don’t believe that any country has “enough” or enough to make the wait times negligible, which is probably an unrealistic goal.

            • Phil_in_here@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              3 days ago

              I didn’t find the nurses figures on the link. Within 10% is similar for doctors, but 300% of the nurses is a big difference for sure.

          • sakuraba@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 days ago

            it’s a shallow gesture here because wait times are longer than reported, if you are lucky enough attended in time, and even then you will probably have to pay for every medicine and if you need surgery you will have to pay for any materials used too

            hope that clears the sentiment we have in Mexico regarding our public healthcare

        • Miaou@jlai.lu
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          4 days ago

          One probably needs to look at the demography as well. Half of Germany’s healthcare workforce is probably busy explaining retirees not to drink beer to swallow up their pills at any given time

        • Optional@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          21
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 days ago

          No we just don’t get medical care if there’s any way to avoid it. If it was free we’d have a doctor shortage instantly.

          • Dhs92@piefed.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            18
            ·
            4 days ago

            We already have a doctor shortage in a lot of places in the US, even without single payer healthcare :/

            Part of it is due to private equity destroying private practice and buying up healthcare providers

            • JoeBigelow@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              8
              ·
              4 days ago

              You’re being deliberately obtuse. You smarmily answered your own question in your previous drivel comment.

              • wpb@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                2 days ago

                Why do you think it’s not free? I’ve got my answer, it’s capitalism. Why isn’t it free according to you?

        • ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 days ago

          We pay out the ass and still have to schedule a surgery 4 months out or just argue with insurance denials for cancer treatment until we die first. Show up to an ER with something that won’t immediately kill you and be prepared to wait for 5 hours so a doctor can see you for literally 5 minutes. Nursing homes will bill you $4,000 a month to share a room while you wait to dies, with staff going down to like 2 people for 60 people after 7pm.

          The only ones there’s enough doctors for are the wealthy. Everywhere else your screwed, and also get billed into permanent debt. It’s like $15,000 just to have a baby. Heart attack will run you six figures .

    • naught101@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      4 days ago

      Free with crazy wait times is still surely better than expensive with crazy wait times?

    • PunnyName@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      4 days ago

      How is it a shallow gesture when people can now get the care, instead of just dying or suffering?

      • kobra@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        4 days ago

        Well their original comment alluded to people not being able to get care because there aren’t enough medicines, doctors, or hospitals.

        I hope they answer you, because I know nothing about what’s going on there, but I’m fairly certain that was their point.

        • sakuraba@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          that’s the reality here, there are not even enough beds for people coming to any public hospital

          people are expected to sit in chairs for hours or days waiting for surgery

      • dustyData@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        4 days ago

        Because healthcare has been free in Mexico for decades. This seems like the usual political posturing. Saying “healthcare is free” is an empty statement if people are turned away at the point of service because of a lack of medicine or service providers. Give them three months and then check again. Then you’ll know if it was a shallow gesture or not.

        • wpb@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          16
          ·
          4 days ago

          But a cursory google search shows that it isn’t currently free for everyone, and in particular tied to your employment status. This means that in your negotiations with your employer, your health is essentially a bargaining chip (and this is bad for you and your salary for obvious reasons). The new system abolishes this tie to employment. This is a huge step for workers and the unemployed alike. This is not a hollow gesture.

          • daizelkrns@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            3 days ago

            It is not part of your negotiations with your employer. You get health insurance through IMSS (social security) by law. It is not optional and the service is not tied to your salary. You can make millions, or minimum wage, your IMSS coverage would be the same.

            We’ve had another coverage called “seguro popular”, this has been free and not tied to employment since early 2000s. It was revamped and gutted by the previous president. The only requirement to get coverage was to not have coverage by IMSS. So, employed, you get IMSS. Unemployed, you got seguro popular.

            So it is an empty gesture

            • wpb@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              Yes it is. A repeat of a previous comment:

              If you lose your job, you lose your coverage. That makes it a bargaining chip. The employer has one up on you in negotiations. When I negotiate my salary (my health insurance is not tied to my employment), I know that if I can’t work it out with my (potential) employer, and I get sick, I’ll be fine. Not so if my coverage was tied to employment. The pressure to accept an offer that’s worse for me would be much higher.

          • blujan@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            4 days ago

            It is linked to employment but equal and mandatory for all employees, so not quite a bargaining chip in the way it is in the usa

            • wpb@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              11
              ·
              4 days ago

              If you lose your job, you lose your coverage. That makes it a bargaining chip. The employer has one up on you in negotiations. When I negotiate my salary (my health insurance is not tied to my employment), I know that if I can’t work it out with my (potential) employer, and I get sick, I’ll be fine. Not so if my coverage was tied to employment. The pressure to accept an offer that’s worse for me would be much higher.

    • wpb@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      Paying for some supply through progressive taxes is better than everyone paying a flat rate, even if that supply is scarce.

      • eltacopeludo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        I’m with you. I’m glad I pay taxes and they should make everyone’s life better. The thing is we already had a good enough public healthcare system, but at the moment is falling way short of what it should be. It is worse than before, and there is an issue when critical medications are not in supply.

    • Annoyed_🦀 @lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      Sounds like everywhere with actual free healthcare tbh. Here in Malaysia the healthcare has been free for decade, but doctor shortage, wad shortage is the common theme plaguing the sector, so the wait time for non-emergency treatment tend to be long. If you want quick service you can visit private healthcare.

      This doesn’t seems like a shallow gesture, this could actually pave the way for the future when the issue is under control.

      • sakuraba@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 days ago

        The issue won’t be under control anytime soon if ever, public healthcare has just been declining for the past two decades in Mexico and this won’t fix anything in practice, just in paper

      • eltacopeludo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        Obviously I can only speak for myself and my perception. If reports are to be believed, I live in one of the most dangerous regions in the world. You can google el bajío or guanajuato. Day to day life is very good for me. I have a good enough job and my city is cheap compared to Mexico city. Distances are short and walkable. I have kids and there are many public places for them to play sports or just hang out.

        Hard violent crime has slowed down. There were many drive by killings, at least 2 or 3 a week just a year ago, but now I hardly ever hear gunshots or news about new deaths. The main issue at the moment is paying for “protection”, its happening everywhere and some business cant afford it. Despite of it, many new restaurants, cafés and other small business are opening.

        As for healthcare, which was the subject of this post, I can get a private appointment with a really good doctor in less than a couple of days if not urgent, and it costs from 800 to 1200 pesos. Medicines go from really generic cheap, think about 200 pesos, to 3000 depending on what is needed.

        If you have any more questions for anything that may tickle your curiosity Ill be glad to answer as best as I can.

    • huppakee@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      But now you can say your healthcare system is as good as the one in the UK, which is nice. It’s not like the US can say that.