Quote:

This doesn't make sense. The first sentence says "Paying for services rendered is not the problem" but the fifth sentence directly contradicts with "someone is sick and can't get treatment, because he/she has not enough money".



I expressed myself poorly. What I meant to say is, that people are willing to pay for health care (in a reasonable way).

Quote:

The gap is in not-quite-poor but not-rich-enough-to-pay and don't-have-other-means.



This is what I was driving at, I guess. I know some (not many) people in the US. They had severe problems with what you describe. Low-paying job, not enough insurance and then breaking a leg or something. Receiving medical bills for hundreds of dollars and no reserve to cough up the money.

Quote:

When I read papers that mention medical advances and such, they mostly come from two countries: the US and France. And when rich people from third-world countries travel for medical treatment they almost always go to France or the US. I would be interested in a description of the French system from an economic standpoint as to how they're apparently able to keep up R&D spending when other countries with socialized health care systems seemingly don't.



This explanation doesn't relate to 'a medical system that offers the same breadth and capabilities'. You refer to medical inventions/enhancements.
I think the reason people go to the US and/or France has more to do with the enormous private health care system in the US and the ties France still holds with a lot of developing countries.
I have no idea how the french system is organized and what the ratio is between public and private medical institutions.
_________________________
The only thing you got that I want, is your suffering.