Anyone else see Sicko?

[Wrangell]

Is that why Canadians come to the US for surgery by the thousands every year?

Nice try.

I suspect it is much less than those who have medical claims denied by U.S. insurance companies each year or the number of Americans going into bankruptcy because they have to pay for their own medical care.

Our population is just over 30 million. A few thousand of us may opt to seek US surgery for a variety of reasons - but you guys have around 47 million people alone with no insurance at all...not too mention the thousands who have insurance and may still be driven to financial ruin due to medical illness that is not covered.

In any event....I think you're ignoring the 800 lb gorilla in the room.

-We Canadians believe every single Canadian has a right to expect a guarantee of medical care - and our system reflects that philosophy

-Americans don't believe every single American has a right to expect a guarantee of medical care - and your system reflects that philosophy.
​

 

[goergen1]

-Americans don't believe every single American has a right to expect a guarantee of medical care - and your system reflects that philosophy.

and that the U.S. doesn't feel ALL of it's citizens have a right as Americans to a guarantee of medical care....which sadly ......speaks for itself.

This is because we (or at least people in the circle that I travel in) believe that health care is a service that should be paid for. Like hiring an accountant, or someone to fix your car. You pay someone for help.

This is also because we believe in people taking personal responsibility for their own lives. Instead of relying on the collective. That is the American way.

So, I'd suggest that in this context, any desire by the U.S. to take care of " its weakest and most vulnerable members " certainly is not what you'd call an American " strong suit "

As for my own heartless opinion. Only the strong survive. If the weak and vulnerable are unwilling to change their situation, it the their fault, and the resulting consequences are theirs as well.

I want to pay for my own health care. I do not want others to do it for me or for my family. I want to earn it. If one day I am unprepared, that is my fault as well and I have accepted that responsibility.

 

[Wrangell]

This is because we (or at least people in the circle that I travel in) believe that health care is a service that should be paid for. Like hiring an accountant, or someone to fix your car. You pay someone for help.

This is also because we believe in people taking personal responsibility for their own lives. Instead of relying on the collective. That is the American way.

I know it's the American way - that is part of the problem.

And it's why you guys got into the mess you're in with respect to health care in the first place. The American way simply does a lousy job of delivering and managing health care overall to it's citizens as compared to most other industrialized countries. Even if people are " taking personal responsibility for their own lives " by having health insurance - there is still no guarantee they will not one day face financial ruin due to the whim of an insurance company.

As i said before, of all the major industrialized nations, the only one without some form universal health care is the U.S. The rest of the world views health care a basic human right - look up the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

It seems the US views health care as a ' privilege ' for the fortunate who can afford it - and not a ' right ' for all. If you are among the underprivileged in the U.S. and can't afford it - you're out of luck.

" Let all bear in mind that a society is judged not so much by the standards attained by its more affluent and privileged members as by the quality of life which it is able to assure for its weakest members " - H.E. Javier Perez de Cuellar
​

As for my own heartless opinion. Only the strong survive. If the weak and vulnerable are unwilling to change their situation, it the their fault, and the resulting consequences are theirs as well.

Thank You.

This sad rationale says more about about Americans' attitude toward the health of their fellow citizens than anything I could ever come up with. I guess some Americans are more ' equal ' than others eh ? ..............

" The moral test of a government is how it treats those who are at the dawn of life, the children; those who are in the twilight of life, the aged; and those who are in the shadow of life, the sick and the needy, and the handicapped " - Hubert Humphrey


" Of all the forms of inequality, injustice in health care is the most shocking and inhumane." - Martin Luther King, Jr.
​

I want to pay for my own health care. I do not want others to do it for me or for my family. I want to earn it. If one day I am unprepared, that is my fault as well and I have accepted that responsibility.

You can do all that good stuff and still be denied certain medical treatment and be driven into bankruptcy at the whim of an insurance company.

The rubber really hits the road when - heaven forbid - you AREN'T able to pay for you own health care, or you AREN'T able to earn it......the reasons for which may not be your fault at all. Getting a life threatening illness or suddenly being unable to work or being screwed by an insurance company is - not YOUR fault.

 

[deschain]

A few things to be noted about all the "financial ruin" caused by medical care.

There are gov't (therfore tax payer) funded programs (Medicare/Medicaid/CHIPS) to help those who cannot/do not pay for their own services. The coverages are actually pretty decent on them. My state offers vaccinations to all children for free as well.

Hospitals are required to help you if you come into the ER, even if you don't pay. My sister has to deal with them all day long. People who go to the ER for free medical care. So no, you are not just left on the street to die if you don't have insurance or can't pay.

Also, interest cannot be charged for medical services, and you have the right to pay off the costs slowly. Very slowly, in fact. Many people may have thousands of dollars in medical bills, but can set up a payment plan of very little per month (with no interest) and pay it out slowly. So, no, you are not expected to cut a check for $10,000 before they let you leave the hospital.


So, while we may not force everyone to cover medical expenses for everyone else 100% all of the time, we have some decent programs in place to help people out.

 

[Wrangell]

A few things to be noted about all the "financial ruin" caused by medical care.

There are gov't (therfore tax payer) funded programs (Medicare/Medicaid/CHIPS) to help those who cannot/do not pay for their own services. The coverages are actually pretty decent on them. My state offers vaccinations to all children for free as well.

Hospitals are required to help you if you come into the ER, even if you don't pay. My sister has to deal with them all day long. People who go to the ER for free medical care. So no, you are not just left on the street to die if you don't have insurance or can't pay.

Also, interest cannot be charged for medical services, and you have the right to pay off the costs slowly. Very slowly, in fact. Many people may have thousands of dollars in medical bills, but can set up a payment plan of very little per month (with no interest) and pay it out slowly. So, no, you are not expected to cut a check for $10,000 before they let you leave the hospital.


So, while we may not force everyone to cover medical expenses for everyone else 100% all of the time, we have some decent programs in place to help people out.

Fair enough.

Tell me - let's say you either involuntarily entered a hospital ( i.e due to an emergency ) or voluntarily sought medical treatment ( see a GP , specialist, hospital visit etc. ) or you knew you had to had to have some elective surgery done which required an extended hospital stay.

I assume you simply show someone you have insurance before you consume any of these medical services - and that's it ? Is that how it works ?

I assume you never have to review your coverage before hand or even wonder if the medical service is going to cost you anything above and beyond what insurance covers - is that correct ?

 

[Tanizaki]

Nice try.

It was not a try. It was a statement of fact.

I suspect it is much less than those who have medical claims denied by U.S. insurance companies each year or the number of Americans going into bankruptcy because they have to pay for their own medical care.

This is a red herring, and unresponsive.

Our population is just over 30 million. A few thousand of us may opt to seek US surgery for a variety of reasons - but you guys have around 47 million people alone with no insurance at all...not too mention the thousands who have insurance and may still be driven to financial ruin due to medical illness that is not covered.

Red herring again!

In any event....I think you're ignoring the 800 lb gorilla in the room.

Which is that Canada is a Made in Taiwan version of the US? No, we are all too aware of that.

-We Canadians believe every single Canadian has a right to expect a guarantee of medical care - and our system reflects that philosophy

-Americans don't believe every single American has a right to expect a guarantee of medical care - and your system reflects that philosophy.
​

Correct, we do not believe that there is a right to have someone else to pay for your health care. Similarly, there is no right to have strangers pay your grocery bill, rent, or water bill. We are industrious, which is why you speak of American technology, you find men on the moon. Canadian technology gave us the hockey puck.

 

[Wrangell]

It was not a try. It was a statement of fact.

Just as 47 million " un-insured " Americans and the potential for medical cost related bankruptcies exists in the US is a statement of fact.

This is a red herring, and unresponsive..

Not a red herring at all.

Medical claims ARE denied by U.S. insurance companies each year and Americans DO face the possibility of going into bankruptcy because they may have to pay for their own medical care - because their insurance company won't pay.

Red herring again!

Not a red herring at all.

We have thousands who can opt to seek surgery out of Canada rather than waiting to have it in Canada.

You have millions who have insurance and are denied certain medical procedures by insurance, or can't pay for the medical services because they have no coverage at all.

Which is that Canada is a Made in Taiwan version of the US? No, we are all too aware of that.

Canadians simply view guaranteed heath care as human right - Americans don't ( unless you're being held in Gitmo of course )

I find it odd Americans think it is their right to bear arms " A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed " - but not their right to have guaranteed health care.

It seems, Americans view health care as a privilege.....not a right...unlike guns.

Correct, we do not believe that there is a right to have someone else to pay for your health care.

Which is why your health care system is in such crisis, which is why 47 million of your citizens have no insurance.

You have a right to bear arms .....but no right to guaranteed health care. Go figure.

As I said before, I agree with the maxim " a society is ultimately judged by how it treats its weakest and most vulnerable members "."

In the context of health care, I think the manner in which the U.S. " treats its weakest and most vulnerable members " ....sadly, speaks for itself

Similarly, there is no right to have strangers pay your grocery bill, rent, or water bill.

Agreed.

We are industrious

So are we...look at our GDP stats as a country.

which is why you speak of American technology, you find men on the moon.

Good point ...if you guys can put a man on the moon ....how come you can have such a sub-optimal health care system ?

Go figure.

Canadian technology gave us the hockey puck.

Among other things.....eh !:canadaf:

 

[calcium]

Even if people are " taking personal responsibility for their own lives " by having health insurance - there is still no guarantee they will not one day face financial ruin due to the whim of an insurance company.

You can do all that good stuff and still be denied certain medical treatment and be driven into bankruptcy at the whim of an insurance company.

This is what I don't like about our system. If it was as simple as everyone paying for their insurance and getting the treatment that they have a right to I wouldn't have a problem. It's when people are screwed out of payment for something that they should have covered that I don't like.

 

[deschain]

Where exactly are these millions and millions of people filing bankruptcy and dying in the streets because of healthcare?

Not only do we have forms of free healthcare available to the underprivileged, we also have entire hospitals that are charity based. There are Veteran's hospitals, and hospitals run by religious organizations. St Jude's Childrens Hospital specializes in the treatment of cancers in children - and they don't turn away children whose parents can't pay.

So, it is most certainly not that simple. You are not just left to die at the whim of an insurance company or for lack of money. You really have to search for people who had something (of any imporance - they don't cover boob jobs) that the ins company just flat refused to pay. In fact, I've never personally heard of any, other than the ones on some Dateline special (or Michael Moore) - in other words, hyped up bias media sources.

Considering the underprivileged in this country can get healthcare, welfare money, food stamps, college grants and scholarships, subsidized housing, and hell, even free breakfast and lunch at school, it's not accurate at all to say that we just completely ignore our poor.

 

[goergen1]

being screwed by an insurance company is - not YOUR fault.

First off. Being screwed by an insurance company and being screwed by your own government (NHC people you know it happens in your countries as well) are the same thing.

If it were up to me there would be no health insurance, no NHC and people would have to figure it out.

Here is my big question.

WHAT IS WRONG WITH ASKING PEOPLE TO TAKE CARE OF THEMSELVES?

I feel that part of the downfall of family values is related to the increasing dependancy on the government. I do not want to turn to government. I do not want them in my business or personal affairs. It used to be that if people had health and financial problems they could go to friends and family for help.

Now they go to the government. Asking for hand outs. Even family may ask to be paid back. Not the government. It takes responsibility off of people to fend for themselves and creates dependency on a government that in truth no living person should want because historically speaking it always ends up turning south.

With the messes and money wasting governments have a tendency for, why would anyone want to give them more power, responsibility, or leverage over us?

The government is not here to provide for its citizens. It's purpose is (should be) basic structure, and that is all.

 

[Tanizaki]

Just as 47 million " un-insured " Americans and the potential for medical cost related bankruptcies exists in the US is a statement of fact.

Yes, but relevant to what?

Not a red herring at all.

Yes, it was. I mentioned the thousands of Canadians who come to America for surgery, and you responded by talking about how many Americans lack medical insurance as if one explains the other.

Medical claims ARE denied by U.S. insurance companies each year and Americans DO face the possibility of going into bankruptcy because they may have to pay for their own medical care - because their insurance company won't pay.

I could be wrong, but I bet Canadian insurance companies deny claims, too. I am confident there is no insurance company on the planet that advertises, "We will never deny a claim".

Not a red herring at all.

Yes, as explained above.

We have thousands who can opt to seek surgery out of Canada rather than waiting to have it in Canada.

If Canada's system is so dandy, why is there a wait for surgery at all?

You have millions who have insurance and are denied certain medical procedures by insurance, or can't pay for the medical services because they have no coverage at all.

So what?

Canadians simply view guaranteed heath care as human right - Americans don't ( unless you're being held in Gitmo of course )

Yes, guaranteed health care is not a right of any sort.

I find it odd Americans think it is their right to bear arms " A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed " - but not their right to have guaranteed health care.

Why? One is in the Constitution, the other is not. The American view of rights is derived from the classical liberal view of rights. In other words, we believe in negative rights, not positive rights.

It seems, Americans view health care as a privilege.....not a right...unlike guns.

You don't have a right to a free gun. You have to buy it yourself. Why should anyone pay for someone else's gun?

Which is why your health care system is in such crisis, which is why 47 million of your citizens have no insurance.

What is the crisis?

You have a right to bear arms .....but no right to guaranteed health care. Go figure.

I am sorry you have an issue with guns and feel the need to introduce it as a red herring. I guess you aren't from Saskatchewan.

As I said before, I agree with the maxim " a society is ultimately judged by how it treats its weakest and most vulnerable members "."

I agree with this maxim "It is a good thing for an uneducated man to read books of quotations." - Winston Churchill.

In the context of health care, I think the manner in which the U.S. " treats its weakest and most vulnerable members " ....sadly, speaks for itself

Why is the context of health care the determining factor? Why not in the context of housing or football stadiums?

Agreed.

If there is no right for a stranger to pay my water bill, why should there be a right for him to pay my medical bills?

So are we...look at our GDP stats as a country.

Your GDP per capita is only $35,600. We're at $44,000, chump! (that's in real money, not Canadian "dollars")

Good point ...if you guys can put a man on the moon ....how come you can have such a sub-optimal health care system ?

It is a false premiss that it is sub-optimal. IF it were, why do Canadians opt to avail themselves of it?

Among other things.....eh !:canadaf:

Canada is the only country in the world that gets pushed around by a French minority. That is the saddest thing I've ever heard.

 

[goergen1]

I assume you simply show someone you have insurance before you consume any of these medical services - and that's it ? Is that how it works ?

Actually, Yea, that is how it works. You walk in, show your card, and you are good to go. People getting screwed are the people who have crappy insurance plans and did not look at it before they signed on.

I assume you never have to review your coverage before hand or even wonder if the medical service is going to cost you anything above and beyond what insurance covers - is that correct ?

You do not if you have a proper policy. I know that my wife and I will never spend over $5000 on medical expenses in any given year. We did our research and know our policy very well.

If people do not know what their policy covers that is their fault and they deserve the trouble they get in for not paying attention to their own lives.

We also have what is called a health savings account. We put money in every month, before tax (that means it is a tax free account) and it earns interest as well. Over time the amount increases and if there are emergencies then we have money. (as I said above we will never pay over $5000 in a year anyway)

If we reach retirement age and have not used all of the money then we can draw off of it as income. If we do not do that then it can be willed to our children or grand children.

 

[Wrangell]

Yes, but relevant to what?.

To your point.

Yes, it was. I mentioned the thousands of Canadians who come to America for surgery, and you responded by talking about how many Americans lack medical insurance as if one explains the other.

You cited the alleged thousands of Canadians who come to America for surgery as some indication of a weakness in our system and I cited the millions of Americans who either don't have coverage or get screwed by insurance companies forcing them toward potential financial hardship - an indication of an equal if not much more significant inherent weakness in your system IMO.

Granted, there are weaknesses on both sides. I simply view the US policy of being tolerant of inequality that exists for it's citizens ( when it comes to health care ) a comparatively more significant weakness.

I could be wrong, but I bet Canadian insurance companies deny claims, too. I am confident there is no insurance company on the planet that advertises, "We will never deny a claim".

Perhaps you missed my point.

We don't require medical insurance ( unless we travel abroad ) up here in Canada for medical care - you guys do. We simply have health card with our photo ID on it and simply show it each time we visit a GP or enter a hospital etc. etc. - we don't receive any direct charges as patients for medical care.

If Canada's system is so dandy, why is there a wait for surgery at all?

Wait times for surgeries vary depending on the circumstance. Our country has varying wait times for certain surgeries as I'm sure your country does - and I suspect the 30+ countries that ranked ahead of the US in terms of overall health care ( US ranked 37th in one study if i recall ? ) also have wait times to varying degrees as well. Some shorter, some the same, some longer.

But, my point is, that anyone in Canada who needs surgery - gets surgery. It is not always the case in the U.S. that anyone in the US who needs surgery gets surgery - owing to insurance and /or financial constraints.

In any event, I never said our system was ' perfect ' or ' dandy ' - simply as good ( if not better ) than yours.

Yes, guaranteed health care is not a right of any sort.

Well, virtually every other major industrialized country disagrees with that view - as does the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in my view.

Why? One is in the Constitution, the other is not. The American view of rights is derived from the classical liberal view of rights. In other words, we believe in negative rights, not positive rights.
You don't have a right to a free gun. You have to buy it yourself. Why should anyone pay for someone else's gun?

I didn't say anything about a ' free ' gun or ' free health care ' for that matter. Nothing is ' free ' .

As for rights, while it seems many Americans agree with you " guaranteed health care is not a right of any sort " it would seems to me some of your brethren see the right to bear arms as some sort of basic ' unalienable " / guaranteed / classical liberal etc. etc. human right.....

" The Tennessee Firearms Association holds that every American is endowed with certain unalienable rights, granted to us by our Creator, and made our birthright by the sacrifices of the men and women who founded this state and country. The right to keep and bear arms is one of those unalienable rights; one that our government has no authority to infringe or take away "​

........to the extent that if the right to bear arms is seen as a basic " unalienable " individual or collective right by some, I fail to see how health care doesn't also fall under the same umbrella as an example of an ' unalienable right ' ( as per the UN Universal Declaration ) as some Americans perceive bearing arms to be.

What is the crisis?

Well, to get a ' primer ' on some of the major issues that might define whether there is a crisis or not ....go see a movie out there called " Sicko ".

And if you distrust Moore and it's a professional's opinion you need ( despite your apparent disdain for quotes ) Marcia Angell, MD Editor-in-Chief New England Journal of Medicine also seems to support the notion that you have a ' crisis ' .....

" We certainly are in a health care crisis. If we had set out to design the worst system that we could imagine, we couldn't have imagined on as bad as we have "​

Check out Dr. Angells' article for further indications of the crisis. In a nutshell, as a country, you guys are paying 2X the amount for health care per person for pretty much the same level of health care ( if not less ) than we here in Canada, France, Australia, Britain etc. who do it at around half the cost of you guys.....in other words, your health care system is extremely inefficient.

For all that money you spend, it is still the case that ( compared to other major industrialized nations) 46+ million Americans are un-insured and millions more are under-insured.

I am sorry you have an issue with guns and feel the need to introduce it as a red herring. I guess you aren't from Saskatchewan.

Not a red hearing at all....and I don't have an issue with guns. Frankly, the fact that so many of you Americans have such a ' love affair ' with guns ( particularly hand guns ) - whereas we don't - pleases me to no end.

In any event, the point I was making related to what Americans view as guaranteed rights and what we here in Canada - and the UN - view as basic human rights. The the right to bear arms was cited to underscore the different interpretation and inclusions we employ when speaking of rights.

btw - what does Saskatchewan have to do with anything ? Red herring ?

I agree with this maxim "It is a good thing for an uneducated man to read books of quotations." - Winston Churchill.

Obviously you got that Churchill quote from reading " books of quotations " eh ?

Why is the context of health care the determining factor? Why not in the context of housing or football stadiums?

Because, we are discussing ' health care ' in this thread - that IS the context in this case.

However, how a society " treats its weakest and most vulnerable members " in ALL contexts also speaks for itself IMO.

If there is no right for a stranger to pay my water bill, why should there be a right for him to pay my medical bills?

The ' right ' would be for every American to have a guarantee of health care - how you guys decide to pay to make sure that right is guaranteed is up to you guys. Up here we do it thru taxes and transfer payments from our federal government.

Your GDP per capita is only $35,600. We're at $44,000, chump! (that's in real money, not Canadian "dollars")

What's with the ' chump' reference ?

Actually, I was thinking more in terms of GDP as it pertains to the feasibility & sustainability health care funding - i.e. as deficit or surplus as % of GDP, net debt-to-GDP etc. etc.

As for Canadian dollars - we simply have a different currency than you do ...currently at about 95.5 % U.S.

It is a false premiss that it is sub-optimal. IF it were, why do Canadians opt to avail themselves of it?

Sub-optimal a false premise ?

No - it is a premise based on existing comparative evidence and stats ( i.e OECD for example ) and of course learned opinions ( i.e see Dr. Angell above ) that it is not all it can be.

But if you want to operationally define " optimal ", think of it in terms of efficiency. In the US, something like 16 % of your GDP is spent on health care. Now for that, you only get health coverage for about 85+/- % of all your American citizens. By comparison, here in Canada we pay about 10 % of our GDP for not only the same quality of health care as you do but we get that sort of same quality care for all 100% of our citizens. Our system is simply more efficient.

Canada is the only country in the world that gets pushed around by a French minority. That is the saddest thing I've ever heard.

What does our French heritage - French is one of our official languages here in Canada after all - have to do with evaluating our universal health care system ? Now THAT is a red hearing.

 

[Wrangell]

Actually, Yea, that is how it works. You walk in, show your card, and you are good to go. People getting screwed are the people who have crappy insurance plans and did not look at it before they signed on.

Which is really at the heart of my point.

Up here, there aren't different levels of care / coverage depending on how much to you can afford for a " non-crappy " plan or " crappy " plan. We're all covered for everything - we're all considered to be equal in terms of the medical services we can receive.

Nobody gets " screwed " simply due to their financial situation - i.e coverage , ability to pay.

You do not if you have a proper policy. I know that my wife and I will never spend over $5000 on medical expenses in any given year. We did our research and know our policy very well.

If people do not know what their policy covers that is their fault and they deserve the trouble they get in for not paying attention to their own lives.

Again, we don't ever have to be concerned about " IF " something is covered or not - all of it is. What is covered, what isn't covered is simply something that never ever enters our mind in Canada. Sorry to hear about the $5,000 per year. By comparison, I've got 4 kids - and I think I may have spent about $ 300 of out of pocket medical expenses for them in the past 18 years. Medical costs simply aren't an item for our family to ever worry about in our cash flow budget.

We also have what is called a health savings account. We put money in every month, before tax (that means it is a tax free account) and it earns interest as well. Over time the amount increases and if there are emergencies then we have money. (as I said above we will never pay over $5000 in a year anyway)

Again, we have no need for such an account up here.

If we reach retirement age and have not used all of the money then we can draw off of it as income. If we do not do that then it can be willed to our children or grand children.

Interesting. Sort of like a 410 k eh ?

For a normal healthy middle income couple - $100,000+ per year - how much might typically accrue in that account by the time you retire in your view ?

And what happens if - before you retire - your medical costs greatly exceed the amount you have set aside as savings and you don't have any other source of funds to pay for you medical costs ?

Then what ? Could this lead to what you referred to earlier as " people getting screwed " ?

 

[deschain]

And what happens if - before you retire - your medical costs greatly exceed the amount you have set aside as savings and you don't have any other source of funds to pay for you medical costs ?

Then what ? Could this lead to what you referred to earlier as " people getting screwed " ?

Which is why he mentioned the maximum out of pocket expense on his policy, he could have millions worth of healthcare - but only pay a certain maximum, in his case $5000.


Health insurance works similarly to any other type of insurance. When you agree to a policy (more expensive is not always better) - you agree to those terms. What is and isn't covered is given to you in writing in your policy (just like home or auto insurance). So, the ins company cannot on a "whim" just deny your claim b/c they felt like it. They are legally bound to the terms of the policy. If they don't pay for something they are supposed to - that is why there are people like Tan - lawyers. So, no, people aren't really going into bankruptcy on the whim of an insurance company.


At the heart of all this are two very different forms of thought.
1-That healthcare is a right, and therefore paid for by all those who work to cover everyone, working or not. and
2-That medical services are a service like any other, reserved for those who earn the money to pay for it (sort of).

I say "sort of" because even though that is the idea behind our healthcare system, it isn't that cut and dry - considering the numerous programs and such for those who cannot afford insurance (again, in the end, people can end up with health care one way or the other).

There is more than one way to judge the "quality" of a health care system. Is it by accessibility? cost? number of pretty pictures hanging in the hospitals? It could be a thousand different things.

If we are going to look at how quickly you get medical attention...
You mentioned the wait for surgeries here. Well, generally a few days or so, maybe a week, depending on the surgeon's schedule. If it's an emergency surgery - a matter of hours.

Emergency services - many people consider it absolutely insane to wait more than a couple of hours, but of course, those times are based on priority. The car accident patient will get seen before the person with a nose bleed - so if a bus full of old people turns over, you're gonna wait a long time. If you're having a heart attack, you will be seen pretty much right away.

Doctor visits - that depends on the doctor and his patient load. Most gp's can get you in within a couple of days, some even that day or the next.

One thing I've seen a lot of is Canadian nurses coming here. They all say that the pay is better in the American system, the conditions are better, and overall the medicine practiced is superior. That is unofficial, of course, based on the 10 years in two states my sister has worked with many of them. They say, to them, coming to America to be a nurse, is sort of like the MiddleEasterners coming here to be engineers (or doctors) - it's just a common thing.

In the end, maybe you disagree that our system is privately funded instead of tax payer funded, and yes, there are a lot of people that do fall through the cracks. I will note, that is largely due to their lack of filling out the paperwork to get it. However, the quality of the medicine itself (the advancements, procedures, treatments, and even wait times) are top notch - even if you don't like the set up of the system.

 

[Wrangell]

Which is why he mentioned the maximum out of pocket expense on his policy, he could have millions worth of healthcare - but only pay a certain maximum, in his case $5000.

Let's see if I understand.

The most he can pay out of pocket is $5,000 ( per year ? ) - so all he needs to set aside is $5,000 in his savings account each year.

So there is never a situation where he might have to pay ( for example ) 15,000+/- out of pocket in a given year ? Or, am I seeing this incorrectly ?

Health insurance works similarly to any other type of insurance. When you agree to a policy (more expensive is not always better) - you agree to those terms. What is and isn't covered is given to you in writing in your policy (just like home or auto insurance). So, the ins company cannot on a "whim" just deny your claim b/c they felt like it. They are legally bound to the terms of the policy. If they don't pay for something they are supposed to - that is why there are people like Tan - lawyers. So, no, people aren't really going into bankruptcy on the whim of an insurance company.

Good explanation. Thanks.

So, you're basically saying your insurance will likely cover 99% of what you think might need covered, though it still possible it may or may not cover the exact same things our health care does - which is pretty much everything. And that is why you guys need a saving account for medical costs I assume - to cover off what isn't covered, deductibles - or both ? In essence, I guess in your system you get the coverage you can afford ?

At the heart of all this are two very different forms of thought.

1-That healthcare is a right, and therefore paid for by all those who work to cover everyone, working or not. and

Perhaps something like feeling a public primary school education is ' a right ' for all citizens that all citizens should pay into - i.e with taxes.

btw - how do ' state universities ' get funded - in part thru taxes from all citizens of the state ?

2-That medical services are a service like any other, reserved for those who earn the money to pay for it (sort of).

I say "sort of" because even though that is the idea behind our healthcare system, it isn't that cut and dry - considering the numerous programs and such for those who cannot afford insurance (again, in the end, people can end up with health care one way or the other).

There is more than one way to judge the "quality" of a health care system. Is it by accessibility? cost? number of pretty pictures hanging in the hospitals? It could be a thousand different things.

It's a very tough thing to nail down - I suspect there are a lot of factors that go into determining ' quality " ....the things you mentioned, plus, mortality rates, longevity rates, doctors / nurses / hospital beds per capita and on and on and on.

If we are going to look at how quickly you get medical attention...You mentioned the wait for surgeries here. Well, generally a few days or so, maybe a week, depending on the surgeon's schedule. If it's an emergency surgery - a matter of hours.

Pretty much the same up here.

Emergency services - many people consider it absolutely insane to wait more than a couple of hours, but of course, those times are based on priority. The car accident patient will get seen before the person with a nose bleed - so if a bus full of old people turns over, you're gonna wait a long time. If you're having a heart attack, you will be seen pretty much right away.

Exactly - triage.

Doctor visits - that depends on the doctor and his patient load. Most gp's can get you in within a couple of days, some even that day or the next.

Can you pick any GP you want ?

And I can assume you can see a GP as often as you need to ( without incurring extra costs ) i.e weekly all year long if need be ?

One thing I've seen a lot of is Canadian nurses coming here. They all say that the pay is better in the American system, the conditions are better, and overall the medicine practiced is superior. That is unofficial, of course, based on the 10 years in two states my sister has worked with many of them.

Depends on who you talk to. See, I hear one of the reasons the Canadian nurses are so heavily recruited is because there is a shortage of nurses in the US and because of the above average quality of our Canadian nursing and medical education up here. I know of someone who is teaching in a nursing faculty here at U of T - and you're right - she has seen some nurses leave. They'll pop down to the U.S. for the pay - but it's one of those situations that when she does follow up asks them which system is better they overwhelming prefer ours. And, the medicine practiced here is of the same overall quality as it is in the U.S. France, Australia etc. However, I would concede your trauma centers are likely more adept at handling gunshot victims than ours are though - only because of your rampant gun violence, your big urban centers ( i.e compared to Toronto ) see a lot more gun violence and murders than we do .

They say, to them, coming to America to be a nurse, is sort of like the MiddleEasterners coming here to be engineers (or doctors) - it's just a common thing.

Not as common as you might think.

In the end, maybe you disagree that our system is privately funded instead of tax payer funded, and yes, there are a lot of people that do fall through the cracks.

A case of a chain is only as strong as it's weakest link I suppose

I will note, that is largely due to their lack of filling out the paperwork to get it. However, the quality of the medicine itself (the advancements, procedures, treatments, and even wait times) are top notch - even if you don't like the set up of the system.

The actual medicine being delivered is " top notch " in most of the major industrialized countries.

In my view, it's just figuring out a way that 100% of the citizens can have to the exact same quality of that care.

That is the challenge IMO.

 

[goergen1]

I've got 4 kids - and I think I may have spent about $ 300 of out of pocket medical expenses for them in the past 18 years.

So there is never a situation where he might have to pay ( for example ) 15,000+/- out of pocket in a given year ? Or, am I seeing this incorrectly ?

There is never a situation that will be more than $5000. That is true.

What percentage of your income comes out to pay for health care. Do not pretend that is not out of pocket. I am pretty sure that it is more than the 400 hundred a month that my wife and I pay. Add it up and let us know how much you pay per year.

We pay $4,800 per year. If we use the $5,000 it is $9'800 on one year. Do the math and let me know how it turns out.

Money that comes out of your check before you get to use it is like being robbed and knowing about it. I am not comfortable with the amount that currently comes out of my income. I vote no on everything and if I lived in a higher tax country I would move. I honestly do not understand how people put up with the higher taxes in their countries. I am about ready for a revolution here because of it.

we're all considered to be equal in terms of the medical services we can receive.

Your government can and has opted not to treat people. You know as well as I do that it happens, being that no system is perfect.

Could this lead to what you referred to earlier as " people getting screwed " ?

The reality is that people are not getting screwed all of the time. Actually, I have never heard of it happening to anybody. Outside of the stories that the news comes up with, which is the only time I have ever heard of this happening.

And WORD UP to deschain's last post. This is my last post here. I think we have covered what needs to be covered.

 

[Wrangell]

There is never a situation that will be more than $5000. That is true.

What percentage of your income comes out to pay for health care. Do not pretend that is not out of pocket. I am pretty sure that it is more than the 400 hundred a month that my wife and I pay. Add it up and let us know how much you pay per year.

There isn't a " line item " for health care on our tax returns so I can't add up what the cost is on a ' per person ' basis. Overall, tax revenues from individual provincial taxpayers and other sources ( lottery revenues etc. etc. ) and federal transfer payments fund our health care. In our province, about 40% of tax revenue was allocated to health care - a big chunk.

We pay $4,800 per year. If we use the $5,000 it is $9'800 on one year. Do the math and let me know how it turns out.

Again, our system is different so a cost on a person to person contribution basis is not possible based on the info I have. But, I'd have to look at the Sicko stats as they suggest it costs the US something like 6,500$ per person vs something like $3,500 +-/ here in Canada to provide the service itself. In any event, I'm not saying it is cheaper or more expensive for the individual taxpayer. I'm simply saying that we have no need to set aside any of our funds in any account " just in case " or for some " worst case scenario " to cover medical bills as you do. The fact you guys even have the need for such an account in the first place is the relevant issue and speaks for itself.

Money that comes out of your check before you get to use it is like being robbed and knowing about it. I am not comfortable with the amount that currently comes out of my income. I vote no on everything and if I lived in a higher tax country I would move. I honestly do not understand how people put up with the higher taxes in their countries. I am about ready for a revolution here because of it.

No one in the world likes to pay taxes - we're on the same page there.

Your government can and has opted not to treat people. You know as well as I do that it happens, being that no system is perfect.

I suspect it has happened ....but it is rare.

I golf with some guys who are MDs - and they tell me that usually the type of things that aren't covered are procedures that are deemed ' experimental ' where the efficacy hasn't been determined by peer review. I suspect it does happen - but even the MDs I know at the club concede it is very very rare. As they tell me, 99.9% of medical costs are covered.

The reality is that people are not getting screwed all of the time.

I never meant to suggest it happens all the time...far from it. I simply meant that if you are covered or not covered and can't pay for even some of the more mainstream care for some reason - whatever it might be - you're screwed.

Actually, I have never heard of it happening to anybody. Outside of the stories that the news comes up with, which is the only time I have ever heard of this happening.

Ditto for all this stuff about Canadians flocking to the US for surgery. It is a bit overblown - at least according to the MDs I know.