pakeha
Well-known
quote
`The United States could easily afford tax payer funded universal health care for the majority if not all of its citizen simple by reducing the defense budget to a '
Make that `offence budget! yes, stick ya nose out of everyone else`s business, and take care of business at home.
jeez, 23,000 nuclear warheads not enough????
Man, this is a long taxi ride.
`The United States could easily afford tax payer funded universal health care for the majority if not all of its citizen simple by reducing the defense budget to a '
Make that `offence budget! yes, stick ya nose out of everyone else`s business, and take care of business at home.
jeez, 23,000 nuclear warheads not enough????
Man, this is a long taxi ride.
gb hill
Veteran
Too bad that won't happen. When Bush sent our troops into Iraq after the dead started coming back in droves the Dems cried out to bring our troops home & wanted & still do hope to bring Bush up on war crimes. But now the tides are turned & it's a democratic Obama fixing to send 34 thousand troops into afghanistan....now it's ok!
Last edited:
dfoo
Well-known
Perhaps because you don't ever look at what the left has to say? Of course the right tells you how bad healthcare here is in Canada. What do you expect them to say?!?
I had a pain in my knee a few months ago. I went to see my GP, who sent me to the hospital to get an Xray. I went that afternoon, had my x-ray and called my GP the next morning. I went into see him, and it was sorted. Cost to me, zero.
My friend recently was in a motorcycle accident while trail riding. They couldn't get an ambulance into him, so they sent a rescue helicopter. He was airlifted to the hospital, had three surgeries to repair his leg, and now he is back home. Cost to him, zero.
My mother had bowel cancer two years ago. She was diagnosed, and was scheduled for surgery all within a couple of weeks. She was, thankfully, cured and has had no further complications. Cost to her, zero.
Want more examples?
gb hill
Veteran
No! I don't need any, that's good, but to say zero? The cost has to come from somewhere? I understand it's through taxes. Give me an estimate in what Canadians pay in taxes that goes directly into healthcare. What kind of saleries are the Doctors in Canada paid to Doctors here in US?
antiquark
Derek Ross
2006, per-capita spending for health care in Canada was US$3,678; in the U.S., US$6,714.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Canadian_and_American_health_care_systems
I'll keep looking for info about doctor's wages...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Canadian_and_American_health_care_systems
I'll keep looking for info about doctor's wages...
antiquark
Derek Ross
Here's a chart of doctor's wages:
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/15/how-much-do-doctors-in-other-countries-make/
Canada: $105,000
US: $160,000
Notice that the oddball is the US... maybe they're giving their doctors too much money?
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/15/how-much-do-doctors-in-other-countries-make/
Canada: $105,000
US: $160,000
Notice that the oddball is the US... maybe they're giving their doctors too much money?
dfoo
Well-known
I suspect you are really trolling, but nevertheless the information is out there to find if you are interested.
Start by looking at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada_Health_Act. That will lay the basic ground work of how the medical system works in Canada. The medical insurance is provided and administered by the provinces, not the federal government, so you'll need to check each province for further information. For example, for my province Newfoundland you can check http://www.health.gov.nl.ca/mcp/. For a list of fees & schedules for Newfoundland, look at http://www.assembly.nl.ca/Legislation/sr/regulations/rc030069.htm#top. For a description of Canadian taxation requirements look at http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/menu-e.html
Start by looking at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada_Health_Act. That will lay the basic ground work of how the medical system works in Canada. The medical insurance is provided and administered by the provinces, not the federal government, so you'll need to check each province for further information. For example, for my province Newfoundland you can check http://www.health.gov.nl.ca/mcp/. For a list of fees & schedules for Newfoundland, look at http://www.assembly.nl.ca/Legislation/sr/regulations/rc030069.htm#top. For a description of Canadian taxation requirements look at http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/menu-e.html
antiquark
Derek Ross
Top 10 life expectancies in the world
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancy
Andorra
Japan
Singapore
San Marino
Australia
Canada
France (metropolitan)
Sweden
Switzerland
Israel
...and in 34th place:
United States
You Yankees really aren't getting value for your money!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancy
...and in 34th place:
You Yankees really aren't getting value for your money!
Thardy
Veteran
No, most people cannot pay for any medical care out of pocket. There are too many entities involved in state of the art care.
The vast majority of people are perfectly happy with the way things are and will not tolerate the ways that costs can be reduced. If you look at the numbers, the cost of insurance has risen at a level pace with the cost of our high priced care.
Sorry to say that the statistics for the different payors, Medicare, medicaid , and private; only the private insurers actually reimburse hospitals at a rate which pays the hospitals' cost. The US government plans historically reimburse at a rate far below a medical facilities cost.
So if a facility would offer the newest, state of the art treatment for cancer it stands a good chance of not even recovering the cost from a govt plan in its current form.
Hmm. Disappointing in what way? The Bell breakup was 25 years ago. No question it drove rates down, and offered customers more choices.
Who would have ever thought that phone calls would be so inexpensive? My company used to incur $4k-$5K worth of toll free expenses per month in the early 90s. Now there would be no need to even have a toll-free number at all, since long distance rates are now so low they include it for free...
What is the reason they should offer services at a loss? It's not good for the companies or their shareholders or their customers, if they aren't around long enough to continue operating.
If people are making their own decisions, shopping doctors and hospitals like they do when doing other major purchases ('voting with their feet') it will force the health providers to offer better value at a better price, if they want the business.
When I was in the hospital a few years back, I remember looking over the bill and seeing $10 for a single Tylenol pill. It's this kind of nonsense that must end. I have no problem against a health providers making a profit, but the system as it exists today insulates the patient from the purchasing decision. This is akin to the tax withholding system--if people actually had to write out a check for their taxes, instead of having it withheld from a paycheck, they would be MUCH more attuned to how much taxes really are.
How about adding some meat to back up your position.
Sure, I'm all for looking at other ideas. Having done so shows me our system is in need of an overhaul, but not a takeover. I'm also a realist, not an idealist. I love the idea of no poverty and health care for all, however, history shows that in spite of government's good intentions, social programs consistently do only one thing: take money from hard working Americans and squander it. Good intentions, but incompetence in execution.
I am a firm believer that if an employee fails to do his job, they should be fired. The government has failed to do the job in so many areas -- they too need to be fired. Enough is enough. Starting with 'social security' (an oxymoron if there ever was one) as the supreme example of failure; a bankrupt system. Where are the true leaders who will fix it? There are none. There are only the Gores who want to put it into a 'lock box' because they don't have the balls to admit that it's an utter failure. It's a travesty of huge proportions, that so many millions of people have had their hard-earned money taken and will never see one penny in return.
I see politicians with an jaded view. Politicians who promise to 'lead the most honest, most open and most ethical Congress in history' and then proceed to try to ram-rod bills through in the dead of night on a weekend. Doesn't speak very highly of the bill, when they have to resort to such tactics.
I find it extremely alarming when the White House advertises for snitches, and then even starts spamming political messages!
Sorry, it's just hard to trust these people with these kinds of actions. Maybe government is not evil, but one thing is for certain: it's performance is atrocious. I do not trust it. I spend my own money more wisely than any bureaucrat, and will always get more for every dollar spent.
Last edited by a moderator:
Exactly right! Most Americans are overweight pigs. Seriously.
Thardy
Veteran
The lady who took my payment via credit card in that BC hospital I went to said that people in Canada pay for compulsory insurance.
I asked if Canadians ever just didn't get on the govt plan. We have many people here in the US who are too lazy to sign up for the free or reduced plans that are offered.
She said her son, dropped his plan because "being young he felt it was a waste of money since he never used it". Oh, he wasn't being a good citizen, he grew weary of paying premiums. The govt put him back on the plan and took the money out of his wages.
I said to her "I thought it was free"? "Nah it's not free, but many people in the East get it for free." She said with a tone of disgust in her voice.
N
Nikon Bob
Guest
GB
You can refer here to get info on tax freedom day in various countries http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_Freedom_Day . Canada's was 06 June in 2009 and the US's was 13 April in 2009. Based on those figures, we pay higher taxes. Do not forget that we pay no private insurance premiums to cover hospitalization, doctors visits/fees, there are no deductibles and so on. You would have to add to the USA's tax freedom day the cost of all the additional health care premiums that have to be paid in the US. I am going to guess that it works out pretty evenly in the end. Nothing is free but in our system everyone, working or not, poor or not is eligible for the same health care.
To add to what others have said, personally I have had 3 children delivered in hospital and received no bill, I have had diagnostic procedures done in hospital and received no bill. I could go on with instances like my friend being diagnosed with a heart ailment that required open heart surgery and this was done with no bill to him. I might add that the time from diagnosis to surgery in another city 1 and 1/2 hours away by plane and return home was about 1 week. I think that I am ahead of the game so far and so is my friend as far as getting what we paid for in taxes.
I am not suggesting that what we have should be what you should have. That would be far too presumptuous on my part. There are similar systems throughout the world but all operate slightly differently. The biggest thing for me is that I have no fear of ill health other than ill health it's self.
Bob
Thardy
Veteran
Top 10 life expectancies in the world
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancy
Andorra
Japan
Singapore
San Marino
Australia
Canada
France (metropolitan)
Sweden
Switzerland
Israel
...and in 34th place:
United States
You Yankees really aren't getting value for your money!
In the book the "Business of Health", economists Robert Ohsfeldt and John Scheneider found that if homicides and accidents were factored into (or out of I should say) these statistics, the US would be number one in life expectancy.
Too much violence and accidents we have.
antiquark
Derek Ross
I think she was telling you a story. There is no compulsory insurance. Health care is taken from your income tax. Maybe her son attempted some tax evasion.
wgerrard
Veteran
The problem is, of course, endemic and there is enough responsibility for everyone to take a share, including patients. But, for-profit insurance companies merit the attention they are getting because their fundamental nature -- profit is a requirement -- conflicts with their customers' need for medical care. We don't even necessarily need to attribute any malevolence to the insurance companies. They must go for the money or they will cease to exist. They could be staffed by monks and saints for all the difference it would make.
That's the fundamental issue here: How can a health care system based on profit deliver a product that will, in many cases, have to be sold at a loss? Obviously, I don't believe that it can. That doesn't mean I'm anti-market. It means I acknowledge the limitations of the market.
If we remove the people-in-the-middle of health care, the people who today stand between us and our doctors -- the insurance companies -- that would free up an extraordinary amount of money for us to keep in our pockets. People who actually provide medical care have every right to earn a comfortable living. it's difficult and vital work. But, no insurance company employee has ever treated anyone. Their profits -- our money -- contribute nothing to the health or welfare of Americans.
As illustrated elsewhere, my annual health insurance cost is about 40 percent of my annual federal tax bill. I expect that's par for the course for other mainstream middle class folks who have either group or private insurance. Wouldn't it be better to eliminate that annual insurance burden, increase my tax bill by some smaller amount, and allow me to continue seeing the same doctors as I am now? There's nothing standing in the way if we eliminate the lost revenue that's sucked up by for-profit insurers.
On pay caps: I don't know if either bill deals with pay caps.In any case, without seeing specifics, I'm not sure I'd support pay caps. I do know that its difficult to get people to become general practitioners. Doctors come out of med school so burdened by debt that most go into higher-paying specialities. It's a particular problem for states with many small towns and rural counties, like North Carolina. No one wants to work and live in the boonies.
antiquark
Derek Ross
Something's funny about their methods:
http://blogs.wsj.com/numbersguy/does-the-us-lead-in-life-expectancy-223/
So they're saying two things here:
1. Remove homicides etc from US statistics, and their life expectancy rises by 1.6 years. OK, I can believe that.
2. Remove homicides etc from Japan statistics, and their life expectancy FALLS by 2.7 years. That's right, in Japan, being murdered will make you live longer! Total nonsense!
No, there is some weird statistical jiggery pokery going on there. Someone once said: there are lies, damned lies, and statistics.
There is a fundamental mis-understanding of insurance here. Insurance is essentially statistics -- actuarial science.
The key isn't removing profit from insurance companies, it's making changes so the buyer (the patient) knows what they are buying, and how much it costs. They need to be part of the equation. I said this above, they need to 'vote with their feet.'
Every day people ask me about getting deals, whether it be on a car, or a camera, or a house. People should be able to shop their health insurance, and their health care providers in a similar manner.
The system is full of corruption today. Many chiropractors for example, will charge you one rate if you have insurance, but they'll charge you a lot less if you have to pay out of your own pocket. Many people will go to the chiro as many times as they can until their insurance runs out (most companies have caps on chiropractic.) When the insurance runs out, the chiro will cut the price so the patient can afford care, because the chiro knows the patient will start shopping for a better deal...in a properly designed system, the price should be exactly the same, and the patient should be in control as if they are spending their own money. This is one of the prime methods to keep costs in check.
The key isn't removing profit from insurance companies, it's making changes so the buyer (the patient) knows what they are buying, and how much it costs. They need to be part of the equation. I said this above, they need to 'vote with their feet.'
Every day people ask me about getting deals, whether it be on a car, or a camera, or a house. People should be able to shop their health insurance, and their health care providers in a similar manner.
The system is full of corruption today. Many chiropractors for example, will charge you one rate if you have insurance, but they'll charge you a lot less if you have to pay out of your own pocket. Many people will go to the chiro as many times as they can until their insurance runs out (most companies have caps on chiropractic.) When the insurance runs out, the chiro will cut the price so the patient can afford care, because the chiro knows the patient will start shopping for a better deal...in a properly designed system, the price should be exactly the same, and the patient should be in control as if they are spending their own money. This is one of the prime methods to keep costs in check.
Last edited by a moderator:
wgerrard
Veteran
My phone bill has steadily increased for years, and i barely use the thing.
they shouldn't, and they can't, as I've said repeatedly. For-profit health car cannot provide adequate health care for everyone. That's my goal. Your goal seems to be to make rich people richer.
You reading from an old Bush speech?
Let me know how you shop for doctors when a truck t-bones your car. or, when you collapse with a heart attack. Stuff happens that no amount of planning can deal with.
Bottom line: You have failed to explain how for-profit halth care can deliver adequate care. The rest of can only conclude you think that isn't important. [EDIT: Assertions in your last post that the need for profit is not the issue are bogus. Businesses in a market economy cannot exist without profit. You know that. Nothing you have suggested would enable or encourage insurers to sell their product at a loss. We can't get universal health care from for-profit businesses.]
Last edited:
climbing_vine
Well-known
I wonder if that backs up the idea that Japan has better health care. Follow this: if taking out murders and accidents (M/A) lowers the mean (life expectancy stats use mean, not median) age of death, it means that a disproportionate number of people that have already lived longer than the mean are dying of M/A. The corollary to this, of course, is that they must have excellent care in order for so many to make it past the mean age only to then die falling off a stool in the kitchen. What an indignity!