this post was submitted on 20 Oct 2025
365 points (96.9% liked)

Cool Guides

5981 readers
515 users here now

Rules for Posting Guides on Our Community

1. Defining a Guide Guides are comprehensive reference materials, how-tos, or comparison tables. A guide must be well-organized both in content and layout. Information should be easily accessible without unnecessary navigation. Guides can include flowcharts, step-by-step instructions, or visual references that compare different elements side by side.

2. Infographic Guidelines Infographics are permitted if they are educational and informative. They should aim to convey complex information visually and clearly. However, infographics that primarily serve as visual essays without structured guidance will be subject to removal.

3. Grey Area Moderators may use discretion when deciding to remove posts. If in doubt, message us or use downvotes for content you find inappropriate.

4. Source Attribution If you know the original source of a guide, share it in the comments to credit the creators.

5. Diverse Content To keep our community engaging, avoid saturating the feed with similar topics. Excessive posts on a single topic may be moderated to maintain diversity.

6. Verify in Comments Always check the comments for additional insights or corrections. Moderators rely on community expertise for accuracy.

Community Guidelines

By following these rules, we can maintain a diverse and informative community. If you have any questions or concerns, feel free to reach out to the moderators. Thank you for contributing responsibly!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

So, it's the US in the same pot as most of Africa and the -stan lands.

[–] Lemminary@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago (2 children)

πŸŒŽπŸ‘¨β€πŸš€πŸ”«πŸ‘©β€πŸš€

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] rizzothesmall@sh.itjust.works 46 points 3 days ago (3 children)

It should be mentioned that the UK has it, but it's been enshittified for the last couple of decades to the point where it's now pretty much "if you're lower working class, you just die"

[–] inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world 21 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

And why you don't follow America's lead and elect conservatives into office with their terrible ideas and terrible followers.

ETA: Sorry that we infected your political discourse btw. No one deserves a Musk moron talking to their people.

[–] TheJesusaurus@piefed.ca 7 points 3 days ago

Kinda did. Keith is ostensibly labour, but this governments behaviour has been SHOCKING since taking office and they seemingly are happy to just charge to the right even though they won a historic majority and the tories have almost no political capital right now.

[–] TheJesusaurus@piefed.ca 8 points 3 days ago

Yeah not just the UK.

I have to say as an outsider coming in, I can only compare the NHS to the Canadian system. They are very similar from the user interaction perspective, I'm aware under the hood the way things are run is a lot different.

Both my kids were born on the NHS and my experience with it was largely positive. None of that is to say it's perfect or I don't see the clear direction from the Tories (and labour honestly, FFS) to defund, break, and sell off the NHS.

Just remember it's easy to complain.

The Canadian system imo is in perhaps a worse state with better funding and better labour availability. Our system is not anywhere near as modernized and we'll run as the NHS from a digital systems side and even just like hospital and clinic admin (again this is all just personal anecdotes from one guy who's lived a lot of time in both systems, please take all of this with a deer bait sized salt lick)

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 5 points 3 days ago (1 children)

All private-public systems go this route. I hear France is at risk like Spain and Brazil, and I am convinced it's bad by how hard Premier Smith of Alberta really pushes it.

[–] Damage@feddit.it 1 points 2 days ago

Italy the same, it's months-long waits to get a specialist visit, but of course private clinics can give you an appointment next week.
But hey, most national contracts include mandatory health insurance for employers, so you can go through that! Wait, why does that sound familiar...?

[–] femur@lemmy.ml 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I have noticed in Australia that Universal Health care is slowly becoming less universal (i.e. bulk billing has reduced significantly). So if we don't pay attention, we may become one of the grey countries

[–] null_dot@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 days ago

I was going to ask what universal actually means.

You're right that free GP appointments don't really exist anymore. However, anyone can roll up to emergency and be treated for free.

[–] LegoBrickOnFire@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I don't know if it makes sense to include switzerland. There is a mandatory health insurance. Is this really what "universal health coverage" means?

[–] null_dot@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 days ago

You could say the same thing about Australia really. 2% of your income unless you're very poor or very wealthy.

[–] Damage@feddit.it 1 points 2 days ago

Isn't that the same thing by another name? I pay mandatory taxes to support national healthcare

[–] Derpenheim@lemmy.zip 19 points 3 days ago (1 children)

FUCKING 1883

WE DIDNT EVEN HAVE CARS YET

THEY HAD UHC

[–] alsaaas@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 3 days ago

It was only enacted by Bismarck because they banned the whole SPD for a few years and didn't want their heads chopped off.

It was already a compromise at the time not only the reason of it's implementation, but also execution

[–] CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social 26 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Surprised by Estonia tbh. Both because they seemed like the type of country to have UHC, and because I had thought they were considered a developed country these days.

[–] Goodeye8@piefed.social 16 points 3 days ago (2 children)

That did look weird so I decided to dig into it a bit. Unless I'm missing some vital information it seems like they don't have universal healthcare on a technicality. Universal Healthcare is based on residency but Estonian healthcare is based on contribution. I'm probably grossly simplifying the system but the short gist is, if you work and pay the social tax you're covered by healthcare. The only ones not covered by healthcare are unemployed people who haven't officially registered themselves as unemployed, people who work illegally and people who work but just refuse to pay social tax. In every other aspect it seems to function like universal healthcare.

Seems exactly like the kind of system that would give Americans a hard-on due to "illegal aliens working illegally" not being covered by healthcare. But I guess that would be way too functional for working-class Americans so of course that can't be done.

[–] dubyakay@lemmy.ca 7 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Yeah this chart is bs. Based on the Estonian criteria you've mentioned, both Canada and Hungary would not count as having universal health care. Even though in practice, Hungary actually offers better services than certain Canadian provinces and territories, but Canada is marked on this map while Hungary isn't.

[–] Evil_Shrubbery@thelemmy.club 11 points 2 days ago

Here is a more representative map:

(wiki/Universal_health_care_by_country)

[–] boonhet@sopuli.xyz 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Another Estonian chiming in here, the criteria above are about right. Being in school (incl university), or over the retirement age, or disabled, are some other criteria that also give you healthcare.

Anyway, something else to consider is that China's system is similar to the American one, in that 1) Insurance isn't guaranteed to everyone and 2) Some people have mandatory insurance, but it's private, through the employer, as well as 3) you still have to pay out of pocket too. Yet in comparisons, their system is praised, while the US system is criticized. I personally think neither is great (even if the Chinese system is better). As such, if China is marked as universal health coverage, you can also mark US as having it, since they're only 3 percentage points apart in the actual coverage (92% for USA vs 95% for China), neither country has 100% coverage. Neither do we in Estonia have 100% coverage, but at least here it's fairly easy to get for anyone except poor entrepreneurs (if you're on the board of a company, or own a company, but can't afford to pay minimum wage's worth of social tax on yourself, you don't get healthcare, because you can't register as unemployed). This seems weird, as in "what do you mean poor entrepreneurs", but thing is, a lot of people are hustlers, and if you're hustling, it's best to have your own company for 1) VAT refunds if applicable and 2) to protect yourself in terms of liability, as well as 3) to simplify taxes and accounting (companies usually prefer dealing with other companies rather than private citizens). Registering a company costs like 200€ and almost anyone can do it, there are no annual fees either.

I have aunts in China right now, China's system is basically just Obamacare, and its recent; in 2010 when my family left mainland China, that didn't even exist yet.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] alsaaas@lemmy.dbzer0.com 13 points 3 days ago

Also all of eastern Europe and all ex-Soviet republics used to have UHC, well until economic shock therapy, I.e. illegal theft of public property through shock privatisation, from which they are still recovering lol

[–] aeronmelon@lemmy.world 18 points 3 days ago (3 children)

Thus, is the US a developed nation after all?

[–] Nanook@lemmy.zip 14 points 3 days ago
[–] GuyLivingHere@lemmy.ca 8 points 3 days ago

At this point, I think a better term for both the US and Canada would be 'post-industrialized', rather than 'highly developed'. Honestly, we are both sliding backwards in terms of human development.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world 13 points 3 days ago (2 children)

And what Idiot Americans still don't understand is that there are multiple ways of having universal healthcare.

[–] DarkFuture@lemmy.world 10 points 3 days ago

American here.

A significant percentage of us can barely read. Understanding even one form of UHC is asking too much from such simpletons.

[–] Rothe@piefed.social 5 points 3 days ago (2 children)

And that socialised heatlhcare exists alongside private options. Countries with universal healthcare has more options and freedom of choice than countries with only privatised healthcare.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 3 days ago

The public option was the US's chance to get their foot in the door and possibly eventually take over completely.

But Joe Lieberman killed it.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] spittingimage@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago (3 children)
[–] bountygiver@lemmy.ml 7 points 2 days ago

There's 18 pixels of NZ, highlighted in red for having UHC

[–] Trainguyrom@reddthat.com 2 points 2 days ago

But New Zealand was entirely made up by Peter Jackson for the LOTR series! They call themselves Kiwis for Pete's sake and you expect me to believe this island off the coast of Australia is real? Sounds no more real to me than the Island of Sodor, or the Isle of Man!

[–] aeternum@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 2 days ago

!mapswithoutnz@lemmy.nz is a better way to link, so that people can just click the link and be taken to the comm on their own instance.

[–] wuphysics87@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 days ago (2 children)

"Developed" vs. "Undeveloped" is highly subjective and seems very vaguely racist. Don't we have a way to quantify rather than qualify such a thing? Sonething like GDP per capita?

Also. Stop saying "third world countries". Third world countries are countries which aligned themselves with neither the Axis nor Allies during ww2.

[–] Tudsamfa@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

"Third world" refers to countries not aligning themselves with either NATO or the Warsaw Pact during the cold war, not WW2.

[–] shawn1122@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 days ago

High middle and low income.

[–] Bamboodpanda@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago

Don't forget that the US also pays the most for healthcare.

[–] altphoto@lemmy.today 5 points 2 days ago

There's some variability in quality:

Here's a fellow brown person saying "I don't want to die" as an example. I remember "el seguro" was never enough when things really mattered.

[–] BigDiction@lemmy.world 8 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Hold up, North Korea has universal health care?

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 7 points 3 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Yep.

We're ashamed to admit it's the same system Canada uses; just with more investment.

Edit: oh, and also Cuba! But Cuba is doing far better than expected given its poverty level, because Cubans are super-human.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 8 points 3 days ago (2 children)
[–] IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world 25 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Whenever people say Americans don't have a tax payer funded universal healthcare, that's BS.

American taxes go to Israels universal healthcare.

they really enjoy it

[–] chunes@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Americans also paid to institute UHC in Iraq after the invasion.

funny how a whole nation can bribe US politicians to get free healthcare, whole US citizens get fuckall

[–] DeathByBigSad@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Lol, we got American Politician Andrew Cuomo is busy running for Mayor of Tel Aviv

[–] Sunshine@lemmy.ca 6 points 3 days ago

Hopefully canadians are not stupid enough to vote away their universal healthcare.

[–] SatansMaggotyCumFart@piefed.world 6 points 3 days ago (1 children)

That’s part of why America is the greatest nation in the known universe.

It’s Darwinism but only the rich survive.

[–] MichaelHenrikWynn@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 days ago

No, it is not Darwinism, for in his The Dsecent of Man from the 1870s Darwin extended natural selection to include emotions; it is the individuals who are to reproduce that transmit their genes to the next generation. And the process of dating does not proceed by rape. Then there is a debate concerning "group selection", and whether there is a selective mechanism at that level. Then it shifts a little back and forth, with inheritance of acquired characteristics (Lamarckism) making an occasional comeback until the modern synthesis between Darwin and Mendel in the 1930. But these days, horizontal gene transfer and several other mechanisms continue to blur the image a little. And Gould's old calculations that made directed evolution improbable have also been challenged in computer models, and where they have landed, I do not actually know, since it has been some years since I even thought about this subject. What you are talking about is probably Herbert Spencer, who by some weird coincidence (or perhaps it was intended?), is buried next to his ideological opposite, Karl Marx, in a London cemetery. It is from Spencer that many such things have emerged. His influence upon the robber barons and the shaping of the American right was considerable.

[–] DarkFuture@lemmy.world 5 points 3 days ago

USA USA USA U.....oh.

Oh shit.

load more comments
view more: next β€Ί