They will take you but then send you a bill.

As a first time visitor to this country many years ago I went an clinic because I had severe strep throat. Waited 1 hour, then some intern saw me for 5 minutes. Gave me a codeine pill and later sent me a bill for $400. That was 1990's $400 dolars, and I had a stipend of only $200 month as a student.

That right there is fucked up. Actually, I would rather they just turned me a way -- "Sorry bud, this will be more than you can afford".

I know what people will say "Oh you don't have to pay, declare bankruptcy or call and haggle with the hospital". But you know where you haggle with the hospital -- in a 3rd world country when you are bribing the doctors to not kill you. You haggle there as well, and you also have to haggle here to get he "special, I can't pay" rate.

correct. But when you get the bill later, you will probably end up in the ER again. Number one reason of bankrupties in the US is medical bills.

Unbelievable that you would get charged for someone saving your life.

It is in Canada as well. It's the fact you can't work that bankrupts people, not the medical bills.

Are you sure it is the number one reason in Canada? The first source I could find that provide a percentage breakdown was from 2011 and had medical reasons as #4:

http://www.creditcards.ca/credit-card-news/top-ten-reasons-w...

1. Overextension of credit (22 per cent of all Canadian bankruptcies).

2. Seasonal employment (15 per cent).

3. Job loss (12.8 per cent).

4. Medical problems (11.3 per cent).

...

This is clever sophistry.

However, in Canada, a debilitating injury might necessitate bankruptcy because of bills that you can't pay thanks to a medical condition which precludes your usefully working.

In America, a debilitating injury might necessitate bankruptcy because of bills that you can't pay thanks to a medical condition which precludes your usefully working AND an usurious hospital bill.

An emergency room is not healthcare. I wish people that so readily trot out this retort could understand the difference.

Sure, but won't you be in debt for possibly a few decades?

I mean, let's be real, which is worse, dying or being in debt?

Isn't not dying AND not being in debt an even less worse option?

Sure, but the money needs to come from somewhere.

Well, people in most countries apart from the US seem to manage it. I really have no clue what your point is.

Most countries apart from the US? Really? Most of them?

A. It's not most. Not even close.

B. If you take the countries that do have socialized medicine, and add the criterion that the funding is not in constant jeopardy, there are very, very few countries that "manage it".

> Most countries apart from the US? Really? Most of them?

Most developed countries. In fact, I'd go as far as to call it a qualifier to be a developed country.

But try to only have the kinds of emergencies that require no follow-up care.

Exactly, I want to see how well showing up to ER for chemotherapy works.

Great for childcare if your kid camps out in the NICU, for burns that require 3 weeks to be walkable again... Really, why would anyone want to streamline delivery of care when we can dispense it in the most staggeringly expensive and inefficient way possible? It's just a mystery to me.

I was replying to a message saying "Americans live in fear of getting in an accident".

Everyone lives in fear of getting in an accident. Therefore, I assumed that what codegeek meant was that Americans live in fear of getting in an accident because they won't get treatment. But that is obviously not the case, so I'm not sure what codegeek's point was.

Serious accidents require both emergency treatment and follow-up treatment. Here's a scary example of getting one and not the other: http://www.nbcnews.com/id/4954303/ns/health-health_care/t/wo...

Ah yes, the good old "let's hold up the most inefficient and expensive delivery mechanism known to man", and ignore that every hospital in America would shut their ER down if they could, because they lose money faster than the Pentagon.

The only reason those ERs are open in the first place is that you can't be accredited as a general hospital without one (which has specific tax benefits). Anyone who uses this example is either woefully ignorant or a troll.

This is true, but if you have a chronic condition (unmanaged diabetes, mental illness, .. cancer) you'll just get enough to put you in a stable condition and out you go