作為一個(gè)歐洲人，你會(huì)更喜歡美國的醫(yī)療體系嗎？（其二）
As a European, would you prefer the US healthcare system?
譯文簡介
網(wǎng)友：不會(huì)。作為德國人，我支付一定比例的收入作為保險(xiǎn)費(fèi)，并且?guī)缀跛械尼t(yī)療費(fèi)用都得到了覆蓋。盡管我的工資高于平均水平，但我每月只需支付300多歐元。當(dāng)然，我需要額外支付眼鏡、牙科修復(fù)器械或住院治療的費(fèi)用。對(duì)于處方藥或矯形器具，我也需要支付一些額外費(fèi)用。但也就這些了?？偟膩碚f，費(fèi)用非常合理......
正文翻譯
As a European, would you prefer the US healthcare system?
作為一個(gè)歐洲人，你會(huì)更喜歡美國的醫(yī)療體系嗎？
作為一個(gè)歐洲人，你會(huì)更喜歡美國的醫(yī)療體系嗎？
評(píng)論翻譯
很贊 ( 2 )
收藏
As a European, would you prefer the US healthcare system?
No. As a German I pay a fixed percentage of my income and have almost all expenses paid. I pay a little more than 300 Euros a month although I have an above average income. I have to pay extra for glasses, dental prostheses or when I have to go to hospital. I would have to pay a little extra for prescxtion drugs or orthotics. But that’s about it. All in all really affordable.
The US health care system actually is not a health care system, it’s a scam to squeeze as much money out of the patients as possible and if it cannot be avoided at all treat a few of them. That’s what you get if you turn everything into a business scheme.
作為一名歐洲人，你會(huì)不會(huì)更傾向于美國的醫(yī)療體系？
不會(huì)。作為德國人，我支付一定比例的收入作為保險(xiǎn)費(fèi)，并且?guī)缀跛械尼t(yī)療費(fèi)用都得到了覆蓋。盡管我的工資高于平均水平，但我每月只需支付300多歐元。當(dāng)然，我需要額外支付眼鏡、牙科修復(fù)器械或住院治療的費(fèi)用。對(duì)于處方藥或矯形器具，我也需要支付一些額外費(fèi)用。但也就這些了。總的來說，費(fèi)用非常合理。
美國的醫(yī)療體系實(shí)際上并不算是一個(gè)真正的醫(yī)療體系，它更像是一個(gè)騙局，目的是盡可能從患者身上榨取更多的金錢，而在無法避免的情況下才治療少數(shù)患者，這就是當(dāng)你把一切都變成商業(yè)計(jì)劃時(shí)所得到的結(jié)果。
Healthcare is the #2 reason I moved abroad from the US. In America, I would have to pay $800+ a month for the bare-bones basic plan, which barely covers anything. Now I pay $25 a month for a platinum plan which covers almost everything.
醫(yī)療保健是我離開美國移居海外的第二大原因。在美國，我每月要支付800多美元，卻只能得到最基本的醫(yī)療保險(xiǎn)計(jì)劃，而且?guī)缀跏裁炊几采w不了?，F(xiàn)在我每月只需支付25美元，就能享受到幾乎覆蓋所有內(nèi)容的白金計(jì)劃。
What was your #1 reason?
你離開美國移居海外的的第一大原因是什么？
My parents live in America.
我的父母還生活在美國。
I cannot believe how duped my fellow countrymen and women are right now. The blinders of American “exceptionalism” are opaque indeed.
我不敢相信我的同胞們現(xiàn)在被愚弄了。美國“例外論”的眼罩確實(shí)不透明。
National Insurance also covers pensions and certain welfare benefits. On the other hand, these things (and healthcare are also funded out of general taxation, so unfortunately it’s not as simple as NI = payment for healthcare. I believe that (in round figures), NHS funding is currently about 120 billion/pa, from a total government budget of around 2.1 trillion, so a little under 6% of total
國民保險(xiǎn)還覆蓋養(yǎng)老金和某些福利。另一方面，這些（包括醫(yī)療保?。┮彩峭ㄟ^一般稅收資助的，所以不幸的是，并不是國民保險(xiǎn)就等于支付醫(yī)療保健費(fèi)用。我相信NHS的資金目前大約是每年1200億英鎊（大致數(shù)字），總政府預(yù)算約為2.1萬億英鎊，約占總預(yù)算的不到6%。
10% in the UK (free if your out of work, under 25 in education, under 18 or an OAP). No Co-pays. Prescxtions cost a flat fee of ￡8.20 per prescxtion (free for out of work, under 25…etc)
Things not included in NHS is dental (costs ￡20 for a checkup, ￡50 for a filling, max cost is ￡200 for a root canal etc). Eye tests cost about ￡10 .
No fee to visit doctor, ER, to have an operation etc. No bills, no dealing with insurance companies and you don’t have to worry if your covered or not.
在英國，醫(yī)療費(fèi)用是收入的10%（如果你失業(yè)、25歲以下在學(xué)、18歲以下或老年人則免費(fèi)）。沒有自付額。處方藥的費(fèi)用是每張?zhí)幏?.20英鎊（失業(yè)、25歲以下等免費(fèi)）。
NHS不包括牙科（檢查費(fèi)用20英鎊，補(bǔ)牙50英鎊，根管治療等最高費(fèi)用200英鎊）。眼科檢查大約10英鎊。
看醫(yī)生、急診室、做手術(shù)等沒有費(fèi)用。沒有賬單，不需要和保險(xiǎn)公司打交道，也不需要擔(dān)心你是否被覆蓋。
We have no co-pays for doctor visits etc. We do pay out-of-pocket for prescxtion drugs.
我們看醫(yī)生等沒有自付額。我們確實(shí)需要自掏腰包支付處方藥。
I’m an American living and working in South Korea. I pay 5.08% of my pay into the healthcare system. There is a “co-pay” of about $3 when I go to a doctor. I’m also on a daily medication which costs about $4 for 100 tablets. In the US, 30 tablets cost about $10. And I can choose any doctor, including oriental medicine doctors. Oh…and the blood work I need 4 times a year? It’s about $20…which includes the $3 doctor fee. In the States, it’s double that…or more. Which healthcare system do I prefer?? Guess!
我是一個(gè)生活在韓國的美國人。我參保醫(yī)療保健系統(tǒng)支付工資的5.08%。去看醫(yī)生時(shí)有大約3美元的“自付額”。我每日也在服用一種藥物，100片大約4美元。在美國，30片大約10美元。我可以選擇任何醫(yī)生，包括東方醫(yī)學(xué)醫(yī)生。哦...我每年需要做的四次血液檢查，大約20美元——包括3美元的醫(yī)生費(fèi)用。在美國，費(fèi)用是那個(gè)的兩倍...或更多。我更喜歡哪種醫(yī)療保健系統(tǒng)？猜猜看！
I lived in the US for 2 years. Luckily whilst working for the British government, so they paid for a very high quality health insurance for us. ( which we could not have afforded ourselves)
Despite the gold plated health insurance, when my colleague had a (relatively minor) cycling accident, She had to prove insurance to the ambulance crew; at the emergency rooms; to the surgeon, we had to wait for the insurance bro confirm that she was covered, even though she had a completely valid insurance card and documents;
我在美國居住了兩年。幸運(yùn)的是，我那時(shí)為英國政府工作，因此他們?yōu)槲覀兲峁┝艘环莘浅?yōu)質(zhì)的健康保險(xiǎn)——這份保險(xiǎn)的費(fèi)用我們自己是無法承擔(dān)的。
盡管我們擁有這樣一份頂級(jí)的醫(yī)療保險(xiǎn)，但當(dāng)一位同事遭遇了一次（相對(duì)而言）小的自行車事故時(shí)，她不得不向救護(hù)車人員、急診室的醫(yī)生以及外科醫(yī)生證明自己的保險(xiǎn)有效性；我們還得等待保險(xiǎn)公司確認(rèn)她確實(shí)被保險(xiǎn)覆蓋——盡管她持有完全有效的保險(xiǎn)卡和相關(guān)文件。
The treatment, despite being in one of the best hospitals in New York, was not to UK standards; eventually she had to be taken back to the UK to have the botched repair to her wrist redone properly. It was discovered at that point, that though having paid for the better quality repair, the hospital had used substandard pins, and not actually carried out the complex repair that they had claimed. It took the British Government 5 years to get re-imbursed for the fraud, and to get damages to my colleague. ( whose wrist will never fully recover from the sub standard botched treatment)
她必須得到保險(xiǎn)公司的同意才能進(jìn)行每次后續(xù)預(yù)約復(fù)診
盡管是在紐約最好的醫(yī)院之一接受治療，但治療水平并沒有達(dá)到英國的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)；最終，她不得不被送回英國，以便對(duì)她手腕的失敗手術(shù)進(jìn)行正確的修復(fù)。在那時(shí)發(fā)現(xiàn)，盡管支付了更高質(zhì)量手術(shù)的費(fèi)用，醫(yī)院卻使用了低標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的固定針，并且實(shí)際上并沒有執(zhí)行他們聲稱的復(fù)雜手術(shù)。英國政府花了5年時(shí)間才從這起欺詐案中獲得賠償，并為我同事爭取到了損害賠償。（她的手腕由于那次低標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的失敗治療，將永遠(yuǎn)無法完全康復(fù)）
No one with a functioning brain would ever choose the US healthcare system. You have to wonder why ordinary US citizens have to put up with substandard care which is really just a con to make some rich companies even richer. Why are US citizens not actively campaigning for a health service which treats their ailments rather than helping itself to their savings?
任何一個(gè)理智的人都絕不會(huì)選擇美國的醫(yī)療體系。你不禁會(huì)問，為什么普通的美國民眾要忍受這種質(zhì)量低下的醫(yī)療服務(wù)，這實(shí)際上不過是一場(chǎng)騙局，目的是讓一些富有的公司變得更加富有。為什么美國公民不積極爭取一個(gè)真正能夠治療他們疾病的醫(yī)療服務(wù)，而不是讓這個(gè)系統(tǒng)掠奪他們的積蓄？
We are actively campaigning, but we’re an oligarchy. Even if 90+% of the public want something, if the donor class sees no profit in it, we don’t get it. The donor class is composed entirely of people who either directly profit from or can trivially afford the current system. They will continue paying our Congress to keep it that way & right-wing pundits to fear-monger about rationing, conveniently burying the fact that our system is also rationing, but by wealth instead of need.
我們確實(shí)在積極爭取改變，但我們的國家實(shí)際上是一個(gè)寡頭統(tǒng)治。即使超過90%的公眾支持某項(xiàng)政策，如果那些金主階層認(rèn)為其中無利可圖，我們就無法實(shí)現(xiàn)它。金主階層完全由那些直接從現(xiàn)行體系中獲利或者能夠輕易承擔(dān)現(xiàn)行體系費(fèi)用的人組成。他們會(huì)繼續(xù)向國會(huì)支付資金以維持現(xiàn)狀，并雇傭右翼評(píng)論員散布關(guān)于配給制的恐慌情緒，巧妙地掩蓋了一個(gè)事實(shí)：我們的醫(yī)療體系實(shí)際上也在進(jìn)行配給，只不過它是根據(jù)財(cái)富而不是需求來分配資源。
People in the USA aren't comparing it to the NHS, they're comparing it to what they hear about Canada's health care system, multi year waiting lists to get an MRI, people dying before they get needed surgery, having to travel to the US to get a diagnosis before a potential problen gets serious. And for medical professionals, getting paid ridiculously little. Whether or not any of this is valid is irrelevant, it's many people's viewpoint.
美國人民并沒有將他們的醫(yī)療體系與英國國家健康服務(wù)（NHS）相比較，而是與他們所聽聞的加拿大醫(yī)療體系相比較，比如要等待多年才能排到核磁共振成像檢查，有人在等待必需手術(shù)時(shí)去世，或者不得不前往美國以在潛在問題變得嚴(yán)重之前獲得診斷。對(duì)于醫(yī)療專業(yè)人員來說，他們得到的報(bào)酬卻低得驚人。無論這些說法是否屬實(shí)，這都是許多人的看法。
Canuck here. I've only ever had to wait a couple months for an mri and that's because it wasn't super urgent. As for huge waiting lists that is also propaganda. Canadian doctors don't make as much as American doctors, but they don't start their careers with huge student debt nor do they need to shell out for very expensive malpractice insurance, nor have to deal with multiple insurance companies meaning they have a larger support staff to pay.
我是法裔加拿大人，我等待核磁共振成像檢查的時(shí)間最多也就幾個(gè)月，那是因?yàn)榍闆r并非特別緊急。關(guān)于所謂的長等待名單，那也是宣傳的一部分。加拿大醫(yī)生的收入確實(shí)不如美國醫(yī)生高，但他們?cè)诼殬I(yè)生涯起步時(shí)不會(huì)有巨額的學(xué)生債務(wù)，也不需要支付昂貴的醫(yī)療事故保險(xiǎn)，而且他們不需要與多家保險(xiǎn)公司打交道，這意味著他們需要支付的輔助人員費(fèi)用較少。
Because the politicians make to much money off keeping the status quo in place. And most likely they pay nothing for their health care. One other point most politicians are lawyers.
政客們因?yàn)榫S持現(xiàn)狀而獲得了大量的金錢。而且他們很可能為自己的醫(yī)療保健支付的費(fèi)用微乎其微。另外，大多數(shù)政客都是律師出身。
No one with a functioning brain would vote for Trump or support the current Republican party but yet there they go…..
任何理智的人都不應(yīng)該投票給特朗普或支持現(xiàn)在的共和黨，但現(xiàn)實(shí)卻是他們確實(shí)這么做了。
last year 4 million people visited the US for health care. 16% from the EU. They had no insurance and paid full cost. The year before Mick Jagger came to new york for his heart surgery. He paid $300,000+ for his care although it was “free” back home in the UK
去年有400萬人來美國就醫(yī)，其中16%來自歐盟。他們沒有保險(xiǎn)，需要自費(fèi)支付全部費(fèi)用。前一年，米克·賈格爾（Mick Jagger）來到紐約進(jìn)行心臟手術(shù)。盡管在英國他的手術(shù)是免費(fèi)的，但他在這里支付了超過30萬美元的醫(yī)療費(fèi)用。
I am grateful for the fact that I can receive treatment for my asthma and anxiety/depression for free at point of purchase/acquirement and that if I do fall seriously ill, I know that I can receive treatment for that condition and not be bankrupted as I’ve already contributed to the NHS in the UK through taxes and national insurance payments over the years.
我感到非常慶幸，因?yàn)槲铱梢栽诮邮芟徒箲]/抑郁治療時(shí)不需要支付費(fèi)用，而且如果我真的病得很重，我知道我能夠得到必要的治療而不會(huì)因此破產(chǎn)。這是因?yàn)槲叶嗄陙硗ㄟ^納稅和國民保險(xiǎn)為英國的國家醫(yī)療服務(wù)體系（NHS）做出了貢獻(xiàn)。
正如我所說，我有哮喘，我聽了不少、也讀了不少哮喘患者因買不起預(yù)防和急救用的吸入器，只有在哮喘發(fā)作到危及生命時(shí)才去治療的故事。我感到欣慰的是，即便我破產(chǎn)了，我仍然能夠獲得免費(fèi)的抗抑郁藥物。我對(duì)美國醫(yī)療保健行業(yè)的做法感到憤慨，因?yàn)樗袷且粋€(gè)以剝削人們、盡可能多地獲取金錢而提供盡可能少醫(yī)療服務(wù)的行業(yè)。
I am a Dutch national who has lived in the US since 1984. The US healthcare system is without a doubt the most uncaring stupid system in the world. A little background, I've lived in and partaken in three different universal healthcare systems in the world: the Dutch, French and German so I know a thing or two about socialized medicine. It really is fantastic and very affordable.
我是一名荷蘭人，自1984年起就居住在美國。毫無疑問，美國的醫(yī)療保健體系是世界上最不人性化、最愚蠢的體系。背景是這樣的，我曾在全球三個(gè)不同的全民健康保險(xiǎn)體系中生活并享受過服務(wù)：荷蘭、法國和德國，所以我對(duì)公共醫(yī)療體系頗有了解。它真的非常棒，而且非常經(jīng)濟(jì)實(shí)惠。
The Lancet published a survey of healthcare systems.
18 of the top 20 were Western European. The US was in as No. 35.
《柳葉刀》發(fā)布了一項(xiàng)醫(yī)療保健系統(tǒng)調(diào)查。
在前20名中，有18個(gè)是西歐國家。美國則排在第35位。
The US costs $10k, mostly from individual or employer contributions. And it leaves millions uninsured and millions more with high deductibles.
那些更昂貴的歐洲醫(yī)療系統(tǒng)——它們提供全民醫(yī)保，且自付額低或沒有——每人每年的花費(fèi)大約是5000美元。有些國家甚至只有3000美元。這些資金主要來源于稅收，有時(shí)還包括一些額外但可負(fù)擔(dān)的個(gè)人保費(fèi)。例如，在英國，費(fèi)用全部包含在稅收中；在荷蘭，除了稅收外，還有在職人員每月大約100歐元的保費(fèi)。
而美國每人每年的花費(fèi)是10000美元，主要來自個(gè)人或雇主的貢獻(xiàn)。即便如此，仍有數(shù)百萬人沒有保險(xiǎn)，更多人面臨高額自付額。
So no, I would not prefer the US system.
這意味著美國每年在醫(yī)療保健上的花費(fèi)比擁有類似系統(tǒng)的歐洲國家多出1.5萬億美元。這相當(dāng)于國防預(yù)算的兩倍。
所以，不，我不會(huì)傾向于選擇美國的醫(yī)療系統(tǒng)的。
A recent Harvard University study showed that medical expenses account for approximately 62 percent of personal bankruptcies in the US. Interestingly, the study also showed that 72 percent of those who filed for bankruptcy due to medical expenses had some type of health insurance, thus debunking the myth that only the uninsured face financial catastrophes due to medical-related expenses.
最近哈佛大學(xué)的一項(xiàng)研究顯示，在美國，大約62%的個(gè)人破產(chǎn)是由醫(yī)療費(fèi)用引起的。更值得注意的是，研究還發(fā)現(xiàn)，在因醫(yī)療費(fèi)用導(dǎo)致破產(chǎn)的人群中，有72%的人實(shí)際上擁有某種健康保險(xiǎn)，這打破了一個(gè)普遍的誤解，即只有未投保者才會(huì)因醫(yī)療費(fèi)用而面臨財(cái)務(wù)崩潰。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處
In my experience most people are effectively underinsured when it comes to healthcare. Even today with the ACA, the popular plans carry high deductibles in the $5–10k range for a family.
Googling around for how many American household actually have the $5–10k sitting a bank account, that number is well under 50%. It's worse if you consider that accidents in December can easily max out two years worth of deductibles.
If your “protection against catastrophe” is an insurance plan that that will leave you broke anyways, that's technically underinsured. Even if it's all many people can afford.
根據(jù)我的經(jīng)驗(yàn)，大多數(shù)人在醫(yī)療保健方面實(shí)際上保險(xiǎn)覆蓋不足。即便是在平價(jià)醫(yī)療法案（ACA）實(shí)施的今天，流行的保險(xiǎn)計(jì)劃對(duì)于家庭來說，自付額仍然高達(dá)5000到10000美元。
如果你在網(wǎng)上搜索，會(huì)發(fā)現(xiàn)實(shí)際上擁有5000到10000美元存款的美國家庭比例遠(yuǎn)低于50%。如果考慮到12月份發(fā)生的意外可能會(huì)迅速耗盡兩年的自付額上限，情況就更加嚴(yán)峻。
如果你的“災(zāi)難防護(hù)”保險(xiǎn)計(jì)劃最終會(huì)讓你身無分文，那么實(shí)際上你就是保險(xiǎn)不足。即便這已經(jīng)是許多人所能負(fù)擔(dān)的全部保險(xiǎn)了。
Just to give an example for you readers on Quora: Here in the US, I have to pay $5,400 a year in health care premiums, set to be $6,300 next year, out of my salary, to cover my family. And my employer pays the insurer the same amount on top of that.
我給Quora的讀者們舉個(gè)例子：在美國，我每年需要從我的工資中支付5400美元作為健康保險(xiǎn)費(fèi)用，明年這個(gè)費(fèi)用將上漲到6300美元，用以覆蓋我全家的保險(xiǎn)。同時(shí)，我的雇主也要支付相同數(shù)額給保險(xiǎn)公司。
盡管我已經(jīng)支付了高額的保險(xiǎn)費(fèi)，但我仍然需要為任何非例行體檢的就診支付40美元（或更多）的自付費(fèi)用。孩子生病了？需要額外支付40美元（總費(fèi)用200美元中的自付部分）。如果是去急診室，自付費(fèi)用則是100美元。手術(shù)或住院治療則需要支付共保費(fèi)用（即我需要支付一定比例的費(fèi)用，有些手術(shù)高達(dá)20%），直到我達(dá)到年度免賠額3800美元，而這個(gè)免賠額明年還會(huì)增加。
Yea America…
我擁有的算是“優(yōu)質(zhì)”保險(xiǎn)。然而，在選擇醫(yī)療服務(wù)提供者方面，我的選擇并不多：只有兩個(gè)選項(xiàng)，因?yàn)檫@是我的雇主協(xié)商好的合作伙伴。大多數(shù)雇主通常只與一家保險(xiǎn)公司協(xié)商。
是的，這就是美國……