|
|
Post by aquaduct on Nov 9, 2009 19:51:35 GMT -5
'The point is that if they gave you the $10 G's in salary (which they won't do), would you be better off taking that chance.' Not me. Thing is if you take the chance and lose, you are bankrupt. If you don't take the chance and lose, your extra costs are spread out among thousands of other people. Nobody goes bankrupt. Also, I have a good idea what my medical costs are. I have close to $30,000 in prescription costs a year. I would sign up under that plan if they gave me my $10k and the $10k of about two or three other people. Again, you missed the part about insuring against catastrophic loss. My family's medical care probably averages about $10,000/year (I've got reasonably expensive drugs, too) of which I already pay for about $2500 worth of that in co-pays. I could probably get an insurance policy that covered anything over $10K for a fraction of the $4800 I pay for the current insurance. Under that scheme (with the $10K boost in salary), I'd be up about $7500/year on average. Of course, that can't happen. But it's an interesting thought. |
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Nov 9, 2009 19:54:35 GMT -5
I find it appalling that medical insurance is so expensive in the States. It's hard to imagine from my perspective. Just out of curiosity, how much per capita does the Canadian government spend on medical care annually? |
|
|
|
Post by bamfiles on Nov 9, 2009 20:04:21 GMT -5
Wikipedia says that for 2006 anyway Canada spent 55% of what we spend per-capita. Average life expectancy was about 3 almost 4 years longer in Canada but the reasons were unclear. U.S. ranked 1st in responsiveness out of 191 countries, Canada 7th. Interesting article but then it's Wikipedia so I can't vouch for the numbers. They credited the WHO but I can't vouch for their numbers either.
|
|
|
|
Post by sekhmet on Nov 9, 2009 20:15:41 GMT -5
Based on WHO`s report in 2000: www.photius.com/rankings/healthranks.htmlThe US is ranked 37th and Canada is ranked 30th. All of Europe and Japan beat us out. They not only took into consideration the existence of good health care facilities and good research but also the ability of a country to deliver it to the population. This is not to say that US universities and hospitals are not top notch as evidenced by John`s list above, but that you could have heaven in a jar but if only the elite can access it only the elite will benefit. Which is too bad. Or not, depending on whether you are one of the elite or if you care about anyone besides yourself. |
|
|
|
Post by bamfiles on Nov 9, 2009 20:29:48 GMT -5
You seem to think people don't get health care here. They do. Most of my wife's patients have no health insurance because they're either poor, illegal, druggies or a combination of the above. The care they get is the same as anyone else's other than they may be in 4 bed rooms rather than 2 bed rooms. The problem is that they can't pay so the hospital is bankrupt. It's illegal not to admit them and treat them. Her hospital just merged with a group of hospitals on the mainland to try to share the risk. The area we're in can't support a hospital but needs one anyway and there is only one for 75 miles north and 60 miles south of here. There's only water east and west of here. This isn't really an access issue it's a who's going to pay issue. The government already mandated the care. They just aren't paying for it. Even with the new legislation whatever it is, they're not going to pay for the illegals but we'll still have to treat them. Since the uninsured have to come in through the E.R. to get treatment, that's the most expensive way to do it but at least for the illegals, that's not going to change either way. In reality, most people come in through the E.R. because primary care doctors don't have office hours 7x24 and there aren't enough clinics to triage the problems so it all goes to the E.R. Money is the issue.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cornflake on Nov 9, 2009 20:31:06 GMT -5
I'm trying to quit posting on this thread but, for whatever it's worth, my criticisms of the US healthcare system were never aimed at doctors and hospitals. Besides the insurance crap you run into there, and the rudeness that has become the norm among staffs in medical offices, my experience with both doctors and hospitals has been good, and I have no reason to think that ours are not among the best. It's our system for getting their services to people that sucks.
|
|
|
|
Post by RickW on Nov 9, 2009 20:34:33 GMT -5
Bruce, what we're saying is, we get covered here. We all do. And I'm not in danger of going bankrupt. I pay more in taxes. I would pay more in taxes, any day, to not have to worry about it, like folks do in the US.
We're not perfect. Debating quality is pointless. But me and mine don't have to worry about it. Sek doesn't have to worry about it. And that is way, way better than the US.
I think the present Bill is not the best answer. Universal single payer is the best, with the option to go elsewhere if you can afford it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cornflake on Nov 9, 2009 20:59:47 GMT -5
As long as I'm breaking my resolution, Rick, I agree with every word you said.
|
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Nov 9, 2009 21:36:08 GMT -5
Wikipedia says that for 2006 anyway Canada spent 55% of what we spend per-capita. Average life expectancy was about 3 almost 4 years longer in Canada but the reasons were unclear. U.S. ranked 1st in responsiveness out of 191 countries, Canada 7th. Interesting article but then it's Wikipedia so I can't vouch for the numbers. They credited the WHO but I can't vouch for their numbers either. Should be a fairly straight-forward question, particularly since it's single payer. How much of the Canadian government spending goes to health care? Then divide by how many people (CIA factbook will have that). |
|
|
|
Post by Supertramp78 on Nov 9, 2009 21:40:44 GMT -5
In 2006, per-capita spending for health care in Canada was US$3,678,; in the U.S., US$6,714.
|
|
|
|
Post by dradtke on Nov 9, 2009 22:31:21 GMT -5
Seems to me that this is exactly what the current reform bill is supposed to do, enlarge the group and lower costs...
|
|
|
|
Post by Supertramp78 on Nov 9, 2009 22:46:38 GMT -5
Speaking of enlarging the group, I was kind of perplexed with the outrage over the idea of letting illegals BUY into the healthcare program. People were going nuts over that. They can buy private insurance now but it doesn't help me much but if there was a really big plan that everyone was in it would benefit me to have illegals buy into that plan. The bigger the pool, the lower the premiums per person. But noooooo!
|
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Nov 10, 2009 7:00:32 GMT -5
In 2006, per-capita spending for health care in Canada was US$3,678,; in the U.S., US$6,714. Thank you. So, since my insurance covers 4 people (3 would be the minimum for family coverage), the $15K figure is pretty reasonable compared to Canada, whose government would spend ~$11K covering me for the same thing. Makes it even better when I consider that per capita annual incomes here are about $9000 more. So the math works out to I make about $36,000 more than the average Canadian supporting a family of 4, and I (and my employer) pay about $6500 more for medical coverage and co-pays than the Canadian government pays. Of course, if I went to a system like I proposed, I could pretty easily spend less on health care (cheaper drugs and annual doctor visits instead of quarterly, etc.) and probably make money on the deal, but as it sits, everything seems pretty reasonable in comparison to our exalted nieghbor from the north. So what exactly can possibly be in Pelosi's bill that would do me any good? |
|
|
|
Post by Doug on Nov 10, 2009 7:19:22 GMT -5
If you are going to try for universal health care the only sensible plan is to nationalize the entire health care system from the janitors in hospitals right up to the drug companies and hospitals.
|
|
|
|
Post by theevan on Nov 10, 2009 7:19:58 GMT -5
So what exactly can possibly be in Pelosi's bill that would do me any good? It appears that question may be rendered moot, as the house version will be significantly gutted/altered from the senate version. Thankfully. Uh, I hope. |
|
|
|
Post by omaha on Nov 10, 2009 7:27:08 GMT -5
So what exactly can possibly be in Pelosi's bill that would do me any good? That's the question right there: What do we get and what does it cost? |
|
Dub
Administrator
I'm gettin' so the past is the only thing I can remember.
Posts: 20,465 
|
Post by Dub on Nov 10, 2009 8:21:49 GMT -5
If you are going to try for universal health care the only sensible plan is to nationalize the entire health care system from the janitors in hospitals right up to the drug companies and hospitals. Great idea! You read it here first, folks. - Dub |
|
|
|
Post by millring on Nov 10, 2009 8:24:29 GMT -5
If you are going to try for universal health care the only sensible plan is to nationalize the entire health care system from the janitors in hospitals right up to the drug companies and hospitals. Great idea! You read it here first, folks. - Dub still.... a fella can dream that maybe they'd prove that they can stop a 60 billion dollar per year hemorage in the healthcare payment program they already run BEFORE they take over all the rest? Maybe? Is that terribly unreasonable? |
|
Dub
Administrator
I'm gettin' so the past is the only thing I can remember.
Posts: 20,465
|
Post by Dub on Nov 10, 2009 9:17:37 GMT -5
still.... a fella can dream that maybe they'd prove that they can stop a 60 billion dollar per year hemorage in the healthcare payment program they already run BEFORE they take over all the rest? Maybe? Is that terribly unreasonable? I like that dream too. As long as we're dreaming we may as well go for the whole enchilada. - Dub |
|
|
|
Post by RickW on Nov 10, 2009 11:00:24 GMT -5
Really, how else are they going to stop it, if they don't take complete control? They could also mess it up royally, but unless they control all the costs....
BUT... you don't want to own all the infrastructure. Large groups of government employees in low paying jobs tend to form unions and demand transformation into high paying jobs. Then your costs go back up.
|
|
