Finland ranked seventh in the world in OECD’s student assessment chart in 2018, well above the UK and the United States, where there is a mix of private and state education

  • Quokka@quokk.au
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    Poor Finland.

    Imagine if the funding being used so your employer could get you to see a doctor in 20 minutes, was available for everyone, as a public service.

    Instead you’ve split your healthcare in two, and as such you’re going to have people poached away from offering the best care to everyone.

    • MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The system isn’t that split. In fact, it can work the other way around, in that a public doctor can send you to a private one when warranted, and the public system will then cover the cost.

      In emergencies you can also walk into the ER of a private hospital and have the cost covered under the public system.

      If you want to pay for a doctor to calm your hypochondria right now while small talking about something meaningless… Why not?

      Also, my employer providing me with healthcare, isn’t optional, it’s legally mandated. If you have a job, you have the option of going to whatever private provider your employer has contracted. This is to make sure whatever sick leave you end up needing, is taken care of in a timely fashion so you can get back to work asap.

      The only reason you can’t just walk into a public hospital and see a doctor the way you can with a private one, is that the public sector will actually make sure you need the care then and there before spending its resources on you. It’s triage, on a national scale.

      The private and public sectors are integrated and inter-operable. This means the private sector hasn’t become a price-gouging insurance mine-field. Instead it’s more like an extension of the public system, serving as a more expensive but expedited channel, used where warranted.

    • Srovex@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I guess the rationale is that you give precedence to the people paying for the healthcare (middleclass workers) to get them back to contributing to workforce (and earning those tax euros) as soon as possible. Also the decision is done by the companies (trying to keep their employees in working condition, also a big perk when employees are comparing different employers) and not the government so you can’t just decide to move the money like you just described.

      • redfellow@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Companies are by law required to offer health care. So when you’re working, you can choose which to use. Often work place healthcare is for those more urgent, yet smaller things. If you get cancer, you go to the public system or pay for private care.

        But everyone here can get free care, which is the key take. You can just get some things faster via the workplace, or you can also pay to get a team of specialists or whatnot.