I am sick an tired of these surveys and polls that give supports for policy makers in Finland. Similar story goes for NATO support – a hot potatoe in Finland.

and when raising taxes, there’s always the consolation, that it will hurt my rich neighbour more.

Why is it wrong to ask people if they would be willing to pay more for better healthcare other things being equal? This post is even more ridiculous than usual.

““Would you pay higher taxes so the state can try to fix your inadequate healthcare system -OR- Would you rather save on taxes and let poor people rot.””

The first part of this is right, but the second part should read “or would you rather keep taxes as they are with no change in the healthcare system?”.

Finnsense – But what makes you think that throwing money at the healthcare system will change much if anything in the healthcare system? Didn’t Finns just take a poll about pay for nurses that indicated that their pay shouldn’t be raised? The major problem the system faces currently is a shortage of staff, particularly nurses, and if better pay isn’t in the offing and you can’t find the people to fill open positions, what is the money supposed to be paying for? You’ll still be waiting in long queues in the Helsinki area for care.

Why not encourage people to save their money without raising taxes to use towards the private sector where there aren’t such waiting queues and often better treatments? The government should be thinking about creating more jobs and getting the 25% youth unemployment problem solved rather than dumping the problem of revenue drops onto the hardworking people who already pay quite much of their paychecks.

Uh oh… I think Finnsense actually supports the abduction of babies to whorehouses!

My point is that more money can go to healthcare WITHOUT raising taxes and WITHOUT cutting income supports for poor Finns.

If only there wasn’t a link between spending money on a national healthcare system, and having a national healthcare system, then this post might make sense.

Somone call the cops… the state is robbing me.

“But what makes you think that throwing money at the healthcare system will change much if anything in the healthcare system?”

That’s not the question that is asked. The question is hypothetical. Would you pay higher taxes to get better healthcare? On the practical level I’m sure more moeny spent on training, staff (from abroad if needs be), technology and equipment could improve the system. It could be wasted but it needn’t be.

Phil,

I believe there is a direct relationship between the quality of a service and the resources invested in it. Obviously, if things can be done more efficiently they should be but we don’t need a poll to tell us whether we should try to do that. We do need a poll to see whether people are willing to pay more for healthcare. The evidence from countries with better healthcare than ours is that it is expensive. Americans pay 13% of GDP on health and the French 10%. We spend 7%.

oh yeah, well i’m a fag

In Finland there is a relationship between payment and receiving in tax form. Heck, health-care there is 10 times better than the U.S.A. They also have better school systems and roadway improvement systems than the U.S.A.

suomeksi amerikassa

man i m sick of these taxes..!!!

Italian secretary of Economy just said – Paying taxes is a wonderful thing-.

Worlds smallest political quiz.

Finnish healthcare system is the worst in Europe. It might be better than the US system, but why do you always compare it to the US? The US is not the only country in the world. Finland can learn more from other neighbor countries, if they want to learn. Well, I doubt about the latter possibility though.

If only there wasn’t a link between spending money on a national healthcare system, and having a national healthcare system, then this post might make sense.

Huh?

We do need a poll to see whether people are willing to pay more for healthcare.

Sure, but the question they ask is very misleading. I think a better question would be, “Should the state provide you with better healthcare?” How the state should improve its healthcare is an entirely different question.

Worlds smallest political quiz.

No way, here’s the smallest political quiz: “Yes or no?” That’s it, just yes or no, then a question mark. We’ll put the YES’s over on one side, and the NO’s on the other. Let’em fight it out.

Me? I’m on the fence. Maybe yes, maybe no. “Undecided” as they say.

I would not go as far to say that the question was very misleading. Perhaps they should ask 2 questions “Should the state provide better healtcare?” followed by “Would you be happy with increased taxation in order to pay for this?” Perhaps then you might get a clearer answer.

Incidentally, Nelonen is reporting that a third of municipalities are considering raising their tax rates.

The question wasn’t misleading it was perfectly straightforward. Just because you wanted to ask a different question it doesn’t mean the original question was bad. The question “Should the state provide you with better healthcare?” is a moral question about the role of the state. The question they asked is a purely practical question and is very clear.

Lingli – Having used both sides’ health care systems, I’d say the US is far better and I pay a lot less for it. In Finland, if I wanted any kind of care within 6-12 months, I had to and did use private services that I paid for out of pocket on top of the tax extracted from my paycheck. Here, I get an appointment within a week usually and at most I have a $10 co-pay. The roads and schools, well, they vary from state to state.

Perhaps a better question is ‘Why should you pay more for healthcare when your politicians seem to live far better than your average citizen while services keep getting cut and taxes continue to increase?”

“Finland can learn more from other neighbor countries…”

Indeed, that’s what the taistoites were trying to bang into our heads all through the 70′s.

It’s always good to learn from neighbours. But it’s also worth noting, they could learn also from us. All 10 of the top 10 most efficient hospitals in the Nordic countries are in Finland. Although, somehow I suspect these 10 are not run by Helsinki and Uusimaa healthcare district!

Yleisradio: Finlands sjukhus effektivast i Norden(Publicerad 2007-09-20)

Man vill ofta förklara Finlands effektivitet med de lÃ¥ga lönerna inom hälsovÃ¥rden men nu hade lönerna lämnats utanför jämförelsen. Informationen samlades in pÃ¥ 187 sjukhus under en femÃ¥rsperiod. Island stÃ¥r utanför undersökningen.

The question wasn’t misleading it was perfectly straightforward. Just because you wanted to ask a different question it doesn’t mean the original question was bad.

Their question was just as valid as my higher taxes vs. abducted babies question. They pulled the old straw man trap kinda.

“Their question was just as valid as my higher taxes vs. abducted babies question. They pulled the old straw man trap kinda.”

Except yours was an OR question with no causal relationship between the two. If you say “no” to the higher taxes in your example the babies get it. If you say no to the higher taxes with their question, nothing changes. You just get the same healthcare.

Seriously, you’re scraping the barrel here.

The UK has poured billions of pounds into healthcare since the Labour party took voer, and apparently services are no better or in some ways worse.

“I believe there is a direct relationship between the quality of a service and the resources invested in it.”

Finnsense you dont make any sense. Your statement above is completely incorrect

“Finnsense you dont make any sense. Your statement above is completely incorrect”

Nothing more to be said then – matter closed. Unless of course you have some kind of argument.

“The UK has poured billions of pounds into healthcare since the Labour party took voer, and apparently services are no better or in some ways worse.”

Obviously you can always waste money. However, doctors have received large pay rises in the UK which will not improve healthcare but is arguably the right thing to do.

#21
Yes, Antti.
I remember reading “Nykyaika – The Modern Times” -magazine at relatives and wondering how everything could be so fine and wealthy there and why we are still here.
For some reason my dad refused to move in the USSR, thought.

(Finnish) polls are often just like that — the “correct answer” is included to the question. Another way is to just leave out the answer you don’t want to hear, e.g.
“How much should the taxes be raised so that we could do X?
A) They need to be raised a lot
B) They are OK as they are now or should be raised only a little
C) Neither of the above / Undecided”
– How about lowering? That’s left out, of course. Or if it’s included, it’s grouped together with another option, like “undecided”, so it will never be really interpreted as lowering. If you want to keep taxes as they’re now and answer B, it’s interpreted as raising a little.

Here another survey question: Would you like to see KELA cut down on bureaucracy and modernize so that it can use the tax money in a less wasteful and better targeted way for actually fulfilling its objective of helping to cure sick people? Even leftists would need to answer YES YES YES

As bafana (#30) points out, bad management and old-fashioned systems are a large part of the problem.

#29: “Poll questions and the answer options provided may be misleading/ poorly constructed/ ideologically motivated in which of the following countries?”

A) Only in Finland
B) Mostly in Finland
C) In addition to Finland, also in some other Socialist/Welfare Statist countries
D) Undecided

No. I think that they should cut down on the bureaucracy and modernize the system and thake the money from there. (I want a flat tax.)

“As bafana (#30) points out, bad management and old-fashioned systems are a large part of the problem.”

Nice rhetoric but the US system is the world’s least efficient because it multiplies bureaucracy.

@30,
The Kela does not pass the laws it has to administer; any change would have to start with a political decision to simplify the system. So let’s rephrase the question: ‘Will you as a voter elect a parliament that will pass new laws reducing the need for bureaucracy?’

There are still ways to save even more money in the healthcare system, I have heard. One expert suggested using an independent unit to source the supplies, equipment, etc. for the healthcare industry, and go for the best price/quality compromise. I suspect there are some ripoffs going on in the sourcing. I remember years ago trying to source rubber squirt bulbs for one company. (The kind that are used to clean ears.) The Finnish medical supplies company wanted 100 marks a piece for them.

I have seen those kinds of loaded questions in Finnish surveys. They spend a lot of money on the surveys, and the quality of the results is worthless. If the opposing view was presented more clearly, you know the results would be different. It is not democracy – just getting the kind of answer you want to hear.

Nice rhetoric but the US system is the world’s least efficient because it multiplies bureaucracy.
– maybe it is the multiples that is needed in finland to reduces the lines????

– Instead of raising taxes, how about determining how much it would cost families to get insurance for private care and then reduce taxes to provide families with that amount of money to purchase the insurance, the price of which would probably go down as more people use it, increasing it’s efficiency.

You all have lines.

We all have a market based system.

No need for a survey to ask if the system sucks. We use our feet, if it does.

There are now ads on TV from doctors willing to give you their cell and text message addresses if you change doctors.

Gee, do you all have that?

hfb….it may have just been my insurance that made it cheaper for me in finland. you’re right on the politician thing too.

It seems that the evil welfare-statist propaganda has made it to American media as well (is KELA the culprit?)

http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2004-03-16-healthcost_x.htm

Good that someone’s doing all right, though (no match to Finnish politicians, but anyway…)

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06108/683054-28.stm

How come many here seem to think that cutting slack bureaucracy and modernizing equals an adoption of the US health care system by KELA? Where is the connection?

getting US Health care system, means the doctor gives you his cell number.

I have two doctor cell numbers now, how many do you all have? (No text numbers, as they are older doctors).

Good joke on the Presidental debates last night.

When asked about “Hillary Care” the republican answer, was, if we go that direction, then all those Canadians will have to find another place to get medical treatment.

High taxes = poor healthcare and long waits. My advice is: Don’t get sick in Finland.

“I believe there is a direct relationship between the quality of a service and the resources invested in it.”

Indirect one, yes. If there are incentives to make a service better/faster/etc then probably you get individuals that are willing to work harder for greater reward. Also, in this case, more investment in education and equipment probably equals to greater accuracy, ie. less misdiagnoses or other mistakes. However, quality isn’t a problem – capacity is.

The real problem with the state-supplied healthcare is very simple: inefficiency. So far our healthcare has been pretty cost-effective because the number of people working there is so low. However, the service is rubbish. If you go to the hospital or any other public medical centre because you have something simple and minor that any idiot could diagnose, eg. inflammated eye, you will need to wait for some two hours to see a doctor, who then will diagnose you and write a prescription for the meds in less than five minutes. Which makes you wonder: once you entered the waiting room in the hospital, only four people were called in. So, is it so that if the patient’s not about to die or at least suffering horrible pain, it’s ok to keep him waiting, because it’s not like you’re going to get anything more by working harder and/or because you’re not going to get fired anyways.

I have never waited at a private practice for longer than 15 minutes; not for x-ray, not for CAT scan, not for anything. Early this year, I had my knee operated at the public side of the fence. It only took about 2 months to get an MRI, 2 months to realise there indeed was something wrong after I had only been checked by some half-dozen doctors, then 5 months’ queue to get over with the surgery. And then, after all those months of waiting, they announce that I’ll have to wait another week for the surgery because the doctor isn’t there on that day (oops!) and he only picks knees on like tuesdays and thursdays on even weeks. Finally on that day I was told to come to the hospital at 7 am. I waited until noon to get my first meds before the surgery which was at 1 pm. All very nice, I only had to pay about 300 euros for the whole show (you could easily add a 0 there if done privately, probably more than that) but it took 9 months and in the end I felt like I was being bounced around by an amateurish, inexperienced bunch who didn’t plan anything before they did it, and didn’t really have any idea what to do. Medically the treatment was very good, but administration looked like something that could have been created by a few third-graders.

I bet Finland could save hundreds of millions, not just in healthcare but everywhere, if we got rid of some of the bureaucracy

bafana:
“Where is the connection?”

Try #20.

How is it possible to get rich in Finland..i am paying way too much taxes…

What is the salary of project managers in Nokia?

Kiitos

“How is it possible to get rich in Finland..”

http://www.veikkaus.fi

“What is the salary of project managers in Nokia?”

Definitely http://www.veikkaus.fi

haranguer fasting outbrave elasticness xerophile mensurableness chloralide belemnoid
Timed Command
http://www.homestead.com/voiceartcommunications/VOICEARTCOM.html

haranguer fasting outbrave elasticness xerophile mensurableness chloralide belemnoid
Paul Tod Rallying
http://whitedawn.com