Illness is allowed for healthy people

Organization of treatment, as well as the full prevention system, is simply a serious talk about organization and money, very large money. The constitutional provision imposing an work on the State to defend the wellness of citizens leads to the existence of a strategy based on public treatment and the financing of benefits, and private establishments are only a complementary element.

The Polish constitution is simply a bad, even exceptionally bad constitution. We have a straight elected president who can't do much. We have a government in charge of Parliament so that it itself runs this parliament. We have a referendum where 231 organization officers can throw a fewer million citizen signatures in the trash with 1 vote. We besides have the legislature at a large cost, which any amendment of the Sejm may reject. Who needs a higher chamber? Rich is simply a country that can afford specified a waste of money. It's all a small bit of a problem with the others. The same constitution allows for impunity-free violations by the government of the Law and earlier the PO to nationalise pension savings. The same constitution in its article 68 guarantees that Poles will never have a advanced level of wellness care.

In the past of the world, it has not happened that state authorities supply any high-quality service at a decent price. Most frequently it is the lowest quality at the highest price. No, it is not a Polish specificity, although our country in this shameful practice can be counted among the most prominent. The Polish wellness service is no exception. This Article 68 of our Constitution ensures that all citizen, regardless of the material situation, is given equal access to healthcare. In total, the Polish state even fulfills its commitment – all citizen has equally hopeless access to state wellness care.

Why the Constitution at the beginning of the article on wellness care? The framework of its operation and the definition as 1 of the obligations of the state towards citizens we have enshrined as a society in the basic law with 2 consequences. Treatment, especially serious diseases, is charged with apparent emotional loads. Unfortunately, emotions in a serious conversation only harm her. Organization of treatment, as well as the full prevention system, is simply a serious talk about organization and money, very large money. The constitutional provision imposing an work on the State to defend the wellness of citizens leads to the existence of a strategy based on public treatment and the financing of benefits, and private establishments are only a complementary element. This state strategy of both execution and backing leads to a repetition of all pathologies of the centrally planned economy – this central institution decides what will be provided and what will be the price. At the same time, any effort to change the state of affairs is confronted with political populism and for each subsequent government is simply a hot potato, thrown distant just to avoid being burned.

You're a fraud. Professional

The Polish wellness service is profoundly in the post-communist organizational system. The National wellness Fund, which claims to be an insurer, actually constitutes switch taxation money flow to hospitals. At the end of 2020, there were 898 general hospitals in Poland, the vast majority belonging to the local government – as a result, they are subject to the same political restrictions at local level as the central system. Most of these hospitals are besides local hospitals in areas of impact on a tiny population. The consequence of this is the low level of professionalisation of these facilities and the very advanced cost of living. Diagnostic devices in medicine usually cost quite a few money, and due to technological advancement they request to be exchanged all fewer years independently of actual consumption. In order for their acquisition to have a reasonable economical rationale, they must be utilized appropriately frequently – in a infirmary in a tiny town there will necessarily not be adequate patients requiring a study, e.g. a tomograph, so that the acquisition and maintenance of this tomograph makes sense. As a result, specified hospitals either do not have specified equipment or usage it disproportionately small to the possibilities, which makes the cost of the individual survey very high. On a macro scale – alternatively of having 1 device we have respective of them, wasting money. This state of affairs is 1 of the falls of the Polish People's Republic, more specifically the Warsaw Pact. advanced saturation of the country with hospitals was 1 of the country's preparations for war and treatment of russian soldiers. In the war plans this area of Poland was planned as the most likely site of the clash of NATO troops and the Warsaw Pact. Unfortunately, 30 years of democracy was not adequate for politicians to be sensible over ad hoc political populism. Any attempts to close hospitals are utilized by politicians to play on human emotions and to scare them with deficiency of wellness protection. As a result, alternatively of 1 professional infirmary in 3-4 counties we have after the infirmary in each of them. Only there's not much to cure.

The state's wellness protection enshrined in the Constitution is at the same time 1 of the biggest frauds of our country against citizens. The State, erstwhile undertaking any commitment and levying a taxation charge for it, shall at the same time undertake to comply with that obligation. erstwhile paying a wellness taxation called a contribution, I have the right to anticipate that I will receive medical assistance as part of public health. How it works in practice, we all know – it does not work. While an ambulance is most likely to arrive in an emergency and a infirmary forced to accept specified a patient will supply him as such, the chronic treatment is at most healthy for people. The patient is waiting for a visit to a household doctor, he will mention to a specialist, another specialist, possibly on the way to any tests. With a bit of luck, the patient may get a diagnosis next year, with bad luck he may not be able to make it. Only patients with adequate contacts or money have the chance of prompt and professional assistance. But why should I pay for what I've already paid for erstwhile I pay my insurance? The Polish State has deceived citizens again. At this point you can surely give quite a few reasons why queues are so long. besides small money, we don't have adequate doctors, or possibly it's the patients who abuse benefits, taking seats in line. Everyone has heard the communicative of pensioners coming only to measurement the pressure. If the scale of this abuse is so large, why does the strategy let it? Many years ago, banks faced the problem of long queues in branches – older people coming all day to pay tiny amounts from the account. A solution? Free payout limit and a tiny fee for each next. The lines are gone. There are most likely many arguments about the deficiency of doctors – looking at another European countries, the argument is valid. With an EU average of around 400 doctors per 100,000 inhabitants, Poland has only 238. On the another hand, France or Luxembourg are besides well below the average (about 300), and the strategy is much better. Better – not good. but for the number of places for students at medical colleges... the state. So far, there's always been more than places.

For natural reasons, the usage of healthcare increases with age, and appropriate prevention in younger years delays the onset of diseases at a later age. At the same time, the deficiency of adequate treatment in people of working age reduces their productivity and thus provides little impact to the strategy than they could have been if these people had returned to work faster. The strategy itself suffers from the thought that people working, who have no time for treatment, will benefit from private treatment. The state does not even hide how unfair it is to its citizens. Moreover, the state has not been able to clearly specify what will be and what will not be financed by public money for years. While in the case of common diseases there is simply a list of which medical procedures are financed, in the case of uncommon diseases it is the discretion of the NFZ. A fund financed by a compulsory taxation contribution against which I have no alternate or choice. The definition of a set of guaranteed benefits would clearly indicate the obligations of the State and the rights of insured persons and besides make a commercial insurance market, possibly as an introduction to insurance in the future. You can't treat everything for free, it seems like everyone knows the truth, and yet they pretend to be different. Why do you wait for months through the NFZ, and can you go privately? On the private market, if there are longer queues, it's only for highly valued doctors. Well, the rates paid by the NFZ are much lower than those paid privately in the office, it's hard to blame the doctor for wanting to make money. Many of them work in a infirmary only for development, or to support their own private practice. Not 1 of us has encountered a situation where you can go to the same doctor privately without a queue, and the procedure will be in the hospital, funded by the NFZ. frequently much faster than the authoritative channel. We spent little than 5% of GDP on wellness protection in Poland for years from the state budget, now approaching 7%. In Western countries, the EU is above 8%, let alone absolute levels. The difference in costs is not proportional due to the fact that while staff salaries or another surviving costs are appropriately higher, equipment or medicines are the same and cost similar. This, however, is not the specificity of Western countries, of a different history. The Czech Republic spends more than 9% on public health. May I? You can, but you can. It is presented respective times as a model that Switzerland spends just over 2% for this purpose. The reason is trivial – most basic healthcare services are at least partially paid. There are besides mediocre people surviving in rich Switzerland, the strategy being designed to make the state liable for expensive, serious medical procedures. However, basic and at the same time inexpensive healthcare is financed from the patient's pocket, or his private and voluntary insurance. These services cost a fraction of a major operation, while their scale causes a certain advanced cost of the system. Moreover, the remuneration from their own money or insurance with completely free marketplace conditions means that people do not abuse benefits to the degree that this is the case in Poland. The request to pay for the service besides motivates to take care of its effects – it is easy to observe homeless people neglecting post-operative wounds, sometimes to extremes. They were given medical assistance free of charge, as it were, at the expense of others who had not received assistance at the time. The effect? The neglected postoperative treatment, in practice unsuccessful, did nothing. A completely missed concept is that people cannot afford specified services. Dental treatment is mostly private and costly in Poland – despite all this, people treat these teeth. Furthermore, the argument about universal poorness is simply a unique demagogue over the emergence in wages and pensions of the past decade. Poland is no longer a mediocre country where no 1 can afford anything – let us halt with this false rhetoric erstwhile and for all. Of course, there are mediocre people in Poland, but they besides live in Switzerland, Germany, Scandinavia and all another country in the world. Social welfare, not a basic strategy aimed at the general public, is the origin of specified support.

Monster grows

The answer to Polish problems was to increase expenditures – Polish Ład. The PiS is simply a organization utilizing the lowest instincts for its immediate political goals. Under the pretext of expanding spending on wellness care, he raised taxes on Poles, advertising this as an increase in the tax-free amount. Of course, he did not say anything about abolishing the deduction from the wellness contribution – in practice raising taxes. A wellness contribution is nothing but a taxation on purpose. No free amount, no collection limit. A high-class money earner must pay multiple times what a earner pays a minimum individual without education. He has the same rights to the same hopeless benefit. In practice, he pays for something he won't benefit from – he'll go private. With large creativity to make different horrors, humanity did not invent anything inferior to socialism. Both at the level of cool calculation and emotions.

Among Western countries, the most privatized is the American system. You can argue for a long time whether the worst president in United States past was Franklin Delano Roosevelt or Barrack Obama. Both combine to appear from the Democratic Party. The first destroyed the American dream and economical freedom, the political work of the second life was Obamacare – the irreversible demolition of American wellness protection. With the American system, it is hard to find another than emotional arguments against. You don't have insurance, you don't get help. If you don't have money, will you get food at the store? If you crash a car and don't have a car, will anyone else pay but you? Yeah, we're talking about wellness and life, but it's yet a service like any other. There's no area for emotion in this conversation. Before Obamacare, about 10% of Americans had no access to the doctor – they just didn't go to him, sometimes their full lives. What changed? Well, the another 90% present have poorer care or pay more for it than before Obamacare. Is this a good human consequence to emotional anxiety about medical assistance? Taking distant people's property to give to those who can't gain it is no social justice, it's just stealing and social fraud.

Moreover, erstwhile organising and financing wellness care, the state is not limited to offering a despicable quality at a ridiculously advanced price. The State claims the right to further restrictions on civilian liberties and freedoms for the protection of this system. Under the pretext of safety, driving in belts, helmets, protective vests, taxing sweetened drinks or introducing another limits of substances in foods is required. quite a few this, possibly even most, is objectively good for us. Only what right does the state in any way force us to care for ourselves? Why does a government authoritative who lives on our taxes even dare to care about how we care about our own health? After all, if we harm anyone, it's our own fault, and this country has no right to even be interested. The strategy seeks to defend itself and proceed to devour civilian rights. We just survived the Covid-19 pandemic. highly contagious viral disease, but mortality at about 2%. The restrictions introduced in almost all Europe fulfil practically all the criteria for crimes against humanity described by global law. The paradox is that the only country that respected human rights at the time was Belarus. The bans on crossing borders, utilizing restaurants or even leaving the home controlled by electronic surveillance were introduced not by Alexander Lukashenko, but by Mateusz Morawiecki, Emmanuel Macron, Angela Merkel and the remainder of the leaders of EU countries. The Belarusian population is no worse present than ours. Today, erstwhile there is no uncertainty that the reaction to covid was at least exaggerated, no consequences were drawn against the authors of the crime. For this we bear the consequences all the time – from debt, inflation and the upcoming crisis. Comparing demographics with the reported number of covid deaths, we see how many victims have been subject to restrictions. The victims, not Covid, but the fact that those with another curable diseases did not receive timely help. They did not receive due to the fact that under the dictated dictation of doctors of members of the medical board at the premiere the full wellness service was switched to Covid. Primum non nodere – First of all, do not harm – these words have been spoken by all doctor since ancient times, taking the Hippocratic oath. erstwhile someone's mother, father or daughter left unattended died of heart illness or cancer, the face of the regulation – prof. Krzysztof Simon – appeared in the ads of the masks. The masekium proved to be more crucial than the lives of 38 million Poles.

Has this been the case worldwide? possibly it's besides much to justice the process by the prism of 1 man without a moral spine? Let us leave Belarus, the United States, especially in the Republican states, have shown that a different script is possible. Although in the first wave of the epidemic we faced akin restrictions as in Europe, in subsequent relapses these restrictions were incomparably smaller and did not lead to violations of fundamental human rights. The American private wellness service passed this test incomparably better than its European – state counterpart. We have lost 2 years of life, money and a chance to explain to the public that the only chance of a good wellness service is to privatise it.

What's stupid? Do the same and anticipate another effect

The story and political lie is that there is simply a free wellness service in Europe. There is no service that would be free. We pay for everything – straight for the service, in subscription, insurance or in taxes. It is not, of course, that the State has no function to play. In large centres, treatment is simply a profitable business, with little density the infirmary may have a problem with profitability. It is besides essential to guarantee a coherent rescue strategy and it is hard to believe that in a large area anyone outside the state can organize it. Even the GOPR and TOPR operating associations be thanks to state grants and philanthropy, and their operation is sanctioned as part of the rescue system. Similarly, the State could intervene to guarantee that there are patients in places where they would not be commercially created and to regulate medical insurance. Regulate to guarantee their availability, but leave commercial and free marketplace implementation. Nor is it actual that a man without insurance will not be helped if he needs to save his life. Today, at least theoretically, uninsured persons are required to reimburse treatment costs. First aid is given and then a bill is issued – not all will regulate it.

The argument raised in the debate about the deficiency of treatment for mediocre people or even treatment for the rich is cynical demagoguery. Why? due to the fact that only wealthy people can number on treatment in Europe. The benefits offered by the national wellness service are of mediocre quality and limited accessibility. The strategy does not warrant assistance despite advanced and unfair charges.

Nevertheless, we naively believe that the state will supply us with aid and that the privateer cannot be trusted. Why this belief in a miracle? The curse of reality? Let us accept facts – wellness care will not function well until it is privatised. It's not an issue of ideology, callousness or sick will. The State is incapable to supply anything of good quality at an acceptable price. wellness services will either be private or hopeless – there is no another alternative.

Expositions:

– The National wellness Fund, which claims to be an insurer, actually constitutes switch taxation money flow to hospitals.

– erstwhile paying a wellness taxation called a contribution, I have the right to anticipate that I will receive medical assistance as part of public health.

– The definition of a set of guaranteed benefits would clearly indicate the obligations of the State and the rights of insured persons and besides make a commercial insurance market, possibly as an introduction to insurance in the future.

– The strategy seeks to defend itself and proceed to devour civilian rights.

"It is besides essential to supply a coherent rescue strategy and it is hard to believe that in a large area anyone outside the state can organize it.