 |
| Click above for the video |
This is prompted by your recent talk with Jimmy Dore. Talking healthcare, you plumped for the Swiss system. I think you may also have given Australia an honourable mention.
I wrote in the Comments that you ought to consider Hong Kong — where I now live.
Quick background to me: I have lived in: Tokyo (lived 3 years), Rome and Northern Italy (6 years), New York City (3), Bonn, Germany (1), Berne, Switzerland (1), Cape Town, South Africa (1), London (5), Australia (20), Hong Kong (36 and counting). Which ought to add up to around 76.
I've not used the healthcare systems of all equally, of course. In younger years I hardly thought about "healthcare". Whereas lately, in my eighth decade, I hardly stop thinking about it. I'm most familiar with the ones in the UK, Australia, Switzerland, and most of all here in Hong Kong.
The one here is a mix of private and public, that I think is just outstanding. Which I say from much personal use of it, plus the fact that my first wife was a doctor here, and my best man, an Aussie, was a decade or more an A&E doctor here at our teaching hospital, a world-renowned anaesthetist, who told me that the equipment and teaching (based on UK) was world best. As much as I know, I agree. I've had three heart ops, all done here, with the most wonderful treatment by staff, and the very best of equipment, as far as i could tell. At a price, I'm told by my American mates, was about a tenth of what they thought I would have paid in the US.
I see you're a Blue Check on X, so you get Grok 3. I suggest, if you're interested, to Grok "Tell me about the Hong Kong [or Switzerland] healthcare system". And if you want a comparison with Switzerland, Grok that as well. I've done so, and consider Grok's conclusions to be a fair summary.
Here's the cut & paste of Grok's "Verdict", the concluding para of its answer to my Question: "Are you able to give an opinion of which healthcare system is 'better', the Swiss or the Hong Kong?":
Verdict
- Switzerland's system shines if you value quality, choice, and speed, and can afford it. It's a premium model—high-cost, high-reward—ideal for a wealthy, decentralized nation where individual responsibility is emphasized.
- Hong Kong's system wins if affordability and basic universal access matter most. It's a leaner, government-driven model that punches above its weight for a dense, urban population, though it sacrifices speed and flexibility.
By the way: Grok seems to think that Life Expectancy and Infant Mortality measures are something of a proxy for determining how good a healthcare system is.Which is "better"? If you're a middle-class resident prioritizing top-notch care and don't mind paying, Switzerland's system feels superior. If you're focused on cost-effective coverage with solid outcomes, Hong Kong's public system delivers. Data-wise, Switzerland edges out slightly in quality and consistency (e.g., OECD rankings often place it higher), but Hong Kong's efficiency and longevity stats are hard to ignore. What do you think matters most—cost, access, or outcomes? I can refine this further based on your take!
The figures are:
Life Expectancy: Switzerland: Women 85, men 82. Hong Kong: Women 88. men 85.Infant Mortality, per 100k births: Switzerland: 3. Hong Kong 1.5
Both are world-leaders, but Hong Kong edges Switzerland.
Best wishes from Discovery Bay, Hong Kong! And keep up the good work. Much appreciated.
Pf etc...
PS: I noted you didn't discuss Gaza with Jimmy. I think I can guess why….
