How Bad Is American Health Care...Really?

Quote:

Originally posted by Honda_X

...

See my post above. *is Canadian*

Sorry Honda, I missed your post somehow. Wow, another country with a public health system who takes home more of their checks than those of us in the U.S.A.. My percentage of 74% also includes state taxes, which some other states in our country do not have. So if I take away the state tax ... it is 79%. ZR800 makes a good point though, maybe you do pay for it in other ways, such as a higher sales tax or other imposed taxes. I guess it takes a bit more work than figuring out what we take home of our pay checks.

As far as paying for it, why does anyone think it will be any cheaper to go to a government system? The current law being debated in the US isn't for a government option really. If you read the law, it becomes very apparent that the goal is for everyone to be on the government plan in a few years. Taking into account increased usage of health care, there is no way it will wind up costing less and probably would wind up costing more since the government has higher administrative costs than private insurance (much of medicare/medicaid admin costs are not included in their budget but in the budgets of other government entities like the IRS or Treasury so their reported costs are not accurate).

I'm sick to God of debating things on this site. I'm too familiar with all of you, so I'll make this brief and go to work.....at my job with the government.

Healthcare needs fixed. How bad is it Honda? We pay the most in costs, but our life expectancy is 38th. Obviously something is wrong.

Something needs to be done. The system is broke. People talk about the Canadian system and I saw Freeworld say he's heard complaints about that. I know more than a dozen Canadians and I have never heard one complaint from them. Nor have I read a complaint from a Canadian on this site. I think the dogging of the Canadian system is fear of the unknown at this point. A reasonable fear. Just because it works there, doesn't mean it will here. Whatever we get will have so much politics and lobbying in it, Lord knows how it'll work. But I think the Canadian system does work and would be an improvement to ours. You'd just have to correct so many problems in our system to honestly get to their system. More problems than people realize.

I voted for Obama. I would vote for him again. Still, I don't agree with his current plan. Its loosely based on what Massachusetts did (a Republican plan) which has worked very well for that state. But the Federal government -- my employer -- will fuck it up. We don't need that either. We need everyone to slow down. Obama is being dumb with this July deadline shit and shoving it out the door as fast as possible. That is hat Bush did with the bank bailout and the legislation was flawed. This is an important thing he is doing. I hear Dems and Repubs both saying we need to do something. But he needs to slow it down and do it right.

A novel concept for the government. I don't support the current plan the way its written and I have let my representatives know. I have also suggested they look into what Utah had done. There seems to make more sense there. It was a bipartisan plan and seems well thought out.

That said though, I think something needs to be done with healthcare. It is a bad system. Every industrialized nation in the world has figured this out. Japan is a great example. Universal healthcare and they are in the top 3 in life expectancy. That is how its supposed to work.

Problem is, and I have to agree with 'freeworld and I'm sure rainbowdeamon and EL have or will chime in with this, any solution suffers under the weight of the big fat lazy Americans. Personal responsibility is at an all time low in the country from the bad mortgages to the big asses.

Bottom line, Utah has a good plan, Massachusetts seems to have something smart going. Shouldn't this be a state issue? If folks want better coverage can't they just move to Massachusetts or Utah? Or petition their state to do something similar?

To clarify something EL said on page one for my foreign friends. Yes, if you walked into any U.S. hospital with a bullet wound they would remove the bullet and fill you back up with blood. But that isn't health care, that is emergency care. They aren't going to check your cholesteral and put you on a diet. If you have compound fractures they aren't going to bring you through the rehabilitation process or anything. They will stabilize you.

Unless you pay through the nose. Even with the housing market going to shit, medical bills are still the top reason for bankruptcy in this country.

Quote:

Originally posted by mrdorkbutt

We pay the most in costs, but our life expectancy is 38th. Obviously something is wrong.

I am going to try to find the link for this, but I saw a study the other day that showed US life expectancy to be among the top 5 when murder and automobile accidents are removed. That makes sense to me due to the fact that the US has a much higher rate of murder and automobile accident death than other countries and those deaths fall heavily into the 16-30 age group.

Quote:

Originally posted by Honda_X

[ Image ]
Now that you've heard about how pretty awesome Canadian health care is...short, if any wait time, and choosing doctors on your own...being able to walk into any hospital, for any reason..and not pay a cent, do you prefer Americas health care system?

The part about not paying a cent shows you don't really understand the argument on this topic at all...

[ignores blanket statements from both sides]
I'm satisfied with the quality and price I pay for healthcare.

Quote:

Originally posted by Honda_X

...

Well, it's cool to disagree with a Canadian, about the Canadian health care system, if you want to sound like a retard.

You see what I did there? I turned it all around on you.

The only thing about Canada that has ever pissed me off is the new street racing legislation that allows them to take my car if I'm in excess of 50kmph over the speed limit. I mean, it makes sense to enforce the rules, but being able to impound my car without any sort of trial rubs me the wrong way. Although it had never come up in my life, as I rarely race, it just seems like bullshit.

I'm going to make this very clear...I've had to deal with the health care system quite a lot, and I don't know who is feeding you what bullshit, but I'll break it down, just for you. (Take off your helmet, this is important.)

Where many Americans cannot afford health insurance, to the point where some can die because of it...EVERYONE in Canada is covered for pretty much everything.

You can see whatever doctor you like, you can see specialists, spend time in the hospital, ambulances...the works, you pay nothing. Like I said, I bring home roughly 78% of my wage after taxes and my pension, and I know if right now, (I'm unemployed) if I had a heart attack, or needed any major surgery..I would be covered, and it would cost me nothing.

I can't imagine how terrifying it must be for some Americans to know if they get badly injured, they're either in debt for years, or going to flat out fucking die....excellent system, perhaps you should pull your head out of your ass. There is no percentage we pay for services, (like someone said earlier he had to pay 10% of his MRI) wait times for doctors appointments are fair, like I said, usually ranging from 1-2 weeks..and the wait time in the emergency room here is usually less than a half hour, if it's serious you just go in.

Like, even with some health insurance in America, like a lot have said, can still not cover you in some circumstances, you know how fucking pissed off I would be if my kid needed a heart transplant, and it turned out to be more affordable for the insurance company to fight you about it until my kid just dies. Shit like that happens there, shit like that does not happen here.

Like pretty much everyone has said, no health care system is perfect, so I can understand that the odd Canadian chap might be mildly disgruntled, I can't see why, but it makes sense occasionally some people are unhappy with their system, so yeah, no system is perfect, but Canadas is a hell of a lot closer to it than Americas..

Also, I have no problem with part of my wages going into universal health care, if we all pay into it, and we're all covered...it's a lot better than some of us being covered, and some of us getting raped financially or dying.


Although my dad is British, and he says their system is superior to ours.

Let me ask you this simple question: if your government turned against you in the morning, would Canadians have the power to fight back?

You talk a great game about your tax rate, healthcare, etc., but I still think you're blowing smoke. I've heard too many Canadians say the opposite. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that your actual take home is no different than the average American after taxes, insurance payments, etc. and that puts you closer to 50%. 50% is absolutely intolerable in a free system of any kind. The American Revolution ignited at a time when people brought home closer to 99% of their wages!

See how what you perceive as "all fine and dandy" is pretty much anything but?

I don't know enough about Canadian systems to get into details that you claim. I do know enough about the general state of worldwide brainwashing to recognize that the Globalist agenda moves full steam ahead if socialized medicine comes to the USA.

I could go on far more but then I'd drag this thread off-topic.

Quote:

Originally posted by mrdorkbutt

I'm sick to God of debating things on this site. I'm too familiar with all of you, so I'll make this brief and go to work.....at my job with the government.

Healthcare needs fixed. How bad is it Honda? We pay the most in costs, but our life expectancy is 38th. Obviously something is wrong.

Something needs to be done. The system is broke. People talk about the Canadian system and I saw Freeworld say he's heard complaints about that. I know more than a dozen Canadians and I have never heard one complaint from them. Nor have I read a complaint from a Canadian on this site. I think the dogging of the Canadian system is fear of the unknown at this point. A reasonable fear. Just because it works there, doesn't mean it will here. Whatever we get will have so much politics and lobbying in it, Lord knows how it'll work. But I think the Canadian system does work and would be an improvement to ours. You'd just have to correct so many problems in our system to honestly get to their system. More problems than people realize.

I voted for Obama. I would vote for him again. Still, I don't agree with his current plan. Its loosely based on what Massachusetts did (a Republican plan) which has worked very well for that state. But the Federal government -- my employer -- will fuck it up. We don't need that either. We need everyone to slow down. Obama is being dumb with this July deadline shit and shoving it out the door as fast as possible. That is hat Bush did with the bank bailout and the legislation was flawed. This is an important thing he is doing. I hear Dems and Repubs both saying we need to do something. But he needs to slow it down and do it right.

A novel concept for the government. I don't support the current plan the way its written and I have let my representatives know. I have also suggested they look into what Utah had done. There seems to make more sense there. It was a bipartisan plan and seems well thought out.

That said though, I think something needs to be done with healthcare. It is a bad system. Every industrialized nation in the world has figured this out. Japan is a great example. Universal healthcare and they are in the top 3 in life expectancy. That is how its supposed to work.

Problem is, and I have to agree with 'freeworld and I'm sure rainbowdeamon and EL have or will chime in with this, any solution suffers under the weight of the big fat lazy Americans. Personal responsibility is at an all time low in the country from the bad mortgages to the big asses.

Bottom line, Utah has a good plan, Massachusetts seems to have something smart going. Shouldn't this be a state issue? If folks want better coverage can't they just move to Massachusetts or Utah? Or petition their state to do something similar?

When Aspartame (a common artificial sweetener), which is literally bacteria shit, is endorsed by the FDA and your water in almost every major city is Fluoridated (a substance used also as an ingredient in rat poison), your kids are sicker than ever before on average in American history with thyroid problems and learning disorders, you'd think that maybe more people would wake up to the fact that the state of the Americans being "fat and lazy" isn't inherent, but induced. But then, how could more Americans (and other nations) wake up to these facts when they are literally being brainwashed by controlled mass media and the toxins in their food and water?

I'm lucky. I'm informed and I've investigated these things. I eat organic, drink predominantly natural spring water. Yeah, I'm one of those guys that recently got called a "nut" by a full cadre of top journalists on Chris Matthews, because I question our government.

We are living 1984 right damn now. It's insane how many will probably never realize the danger until it's too late.

Google Alex Jones and watch End Game. Then you will either snap out of your comas, folks, or run like bunnies from reality.

Actually, let me correct myself: we are living 'Brave New World' right now with elements of '1984' tossed in. Science is controlling us more than the media.

Aldous Huxley spoke on March 20, 1962.

Here is what he said:


"And here I would like briefly to compare the parable of BRAVE NEW WORLD (Huxley's book) with another parable which was put forth more recently in George Orwell's book 1984. I'm inclined to think that the scientific dictatorships of the future (and I think there are going to be scientific dictatorships) in many parts of the world will be probably be a good deal nearer to the BRAVE NEW WORLD pattern than to the 1984 pattern, not because of any humanitarian qualms in the scientific dictators, but simply because the BRAVE NEW WORLD pattern is probably a good deal more efficient than the other. If you can get people to consent to the state of affairs in which they are living, the state of servitude, it seems to me that the nature of the ultimate revolution which we are now facing is precisely this, that we are in process of developing a whole series of the techniques which will enable the controlling oligarchy who have always existed, and presumably always will exist, to get people actually to love their servitude. People can be made to enjoy a state of affairs which, by any decent standard, they ought not to enjoy.
And these methods I think are a real refinement on the older methods of terror, because they combine methods of terror with methods of acceptance. Then there are the various other methods which one can think of, for example the pharmalogical method. This one of the things I talked about in BRAVE NEW WORLD. And the result would be that, I mean you can imagine a euphoric state which would make people thoroughly happy even in the most abominable circumstances. I mean these things are possible."

---------

And this Globalist cretin-major, D. Rockefeller, is still alive and well as far as I know. Here is just one of his infamous quotes:

"We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order."

David Rockefeller

----

Gee, the "right major crisis." Now, what could that have been or what will it be?

Healthcare is small potatoes.

Quote:

Originally posted by rocknthefreeworld

As far as paying for it, why does anyone think it will be any cheaper to go to a government system? The current law being debated in the US isn't for a government option really. If you read the law, it becomes very apparent that the goal is for everyone to be on the government plan in a few years. Taking into account increased usage of health care, there is no way it will wind up costing less and probably would wind up costing more since the government has higher administrative costs than private insurance (much of medicare/medicaid admin costs are not included in their budget but in the budgets of other government entities like the IRS or Treasury so their reported costs are not accurate).

That is a bald faced lie. Government overhead is 3%. Currently, the for profit insurance companies are keeping nearly 30% Last year alone, they made $13,000,000,000.00 in profits. That means they kept $13 billion that they made in premiums that they didn't pay out for health care...IN ONE YEAR. The CEO's of those companies made $120,000,000.00 in bonuses. Of course, you would rather have a huge bonus (taxed at a maximum rate of 25%), than making a high salary (currently taxed at the highest tax rate, if you make over $200,000 a year...the rate is 36%)

And to respond to a government run health insurance option, folks would still pay premiums. It would not be free by any means and would be an option especially for those who currently can't afford health care insurance and for those that lose it, once they lose their job (4 million 700,000 people have lost their job since this recession started in December 2007) and for those that have their insurance cut off because they get an illness that is expensive.

Point is, there are millions and millions of people that can't get or can't afford insurance. A public option run by the government would be a counter weight to the ever rising costs of for profit health insurance. They currently jack up the rates at an ever increasing rate. Since 1999 (10 years ago) the average increase in health insurance premiums has gone up 119%. Last week I got a letter from my insurance Anthem Blue Cross...telling me my rates are going up 22% the next quarter alone.

Tuesday (yesterday) on news that there will be no vote in the House or Senate until after their 3-week August vacation this is how Wall Street rewarded the for-profit health insurance companies:

Shares of U.S. health insurers rose broadly on Tuesday on hopes a health reform bill would not include a government-run option, which has drawn strong opposition from insurers who fear it would destroy the private marketplace. The S&P Managed Health Care index of large U.S. health insurers closed 6.5 percent higher.

Aetna rose 12.6 percent, Coventry was up 12.7 percent and Cigna was 7.7 percent higher, all on the New York Stock Exchange. Centene rose 7.9 percent.

Me? I pay over $650 per month for health insurance. I've paid over $100,000 during my life. I've never used it, because my policy had a $5000 deductible each year. So, I pay for everything out of pocket. My policy then pays 70% and I pay 30% from $5000 to $50,000. Then that's it. After $50,000 everything is on me again. BUT WAIT, for profit health insurance companies ALSO do what amounts to line-item vetoing when they get a bill.

My wife had to have a hysterectomy...the fibroids in and on her uterus were too large, starting to adhere to her colon and causing massive bleeding each month. So she had the surgery, staying one night in the hospital, left the hospital the next day. The bill for that say? $44,000. That doesn't count the surgeon, anesthesiologist, or any thing used in the hospital. WELL, Anthem Blue Cross decided they would pay $4,400 for the stay...YUP, 1/10 of the cost. NOW, since we have a $5000 deductible...where the fuck do you think that left us?

I pay all that money to them...they pay shit...or make so you end up paying for all of it anyway. In the industry they call it "consumer responsibility." That is what they are doing shifting the costs more and more onto the people who buy their policies. And the industry calls is "medical loss" on their books when they actually DO pay out anything.

Essentially, we've paid all these years and never used our health insurance...and the one time it is used...a simple hysterectomy, guess what? We ended up paying for it ourselves, due to their fancy "death by spreadsheet" accounting. I've paid over $100 grand to them...I should have simply NOT had health insurance and just kept all that money over the years.

And BTW, I pay 28% income tax to the Feds, 8% income tax to the state of California, then another 15.3% to the Feds for social security (I'm self-employed thus have to pay double the rate as an employed person)...a total of 50.3% of every dollar I make in profit goes to taxes. Of course that doesn't include sales tax on stuff I buy.

BUT, I'd gladly pay a little more AND have the option of buying a health insurance policy that is government run with an overhead of 3%. 97% of all the money going in would be actually paying for health insurance. With my health insurance going up 22% next quarter, the fact they kept $13 billion in profits last year...and the rate keeps increasing...and the fact that the rates will continue to climb until...literally...by 2025 the average American will be paying practically everything they have for health insurance premiums CLEARLY a counter weight balance has to be in place SO that they will not be able to jack their rates up and keep larger percentages.

Paradise_50 paints a much more realistic picture of how I see the true situation of taxation in the USA. Thanks for that post. Very helpful.

Quote:

Originally posted by paradise_50

...

That is a bald faced lie. Government overhead is 3%. Currently, the for profit insurance companies are keeping nearly 30. Last year alone, they made $13,000,000,000.00 in profits.

Not quite. Look at the financial statements for health insurance companies. They all report 4-6% profit margins. Overall, life/health insurance reports only 10.9%, mostly from companies that sell mainly insurance other than health insurance. $13 Billion on profits for an industry that reports spending in the Trillions is nowhere near your 30%. It barely reaches my 4%.


Also, Medicare published administrative costs are around 6% with the true costs probable double that since they do not report any compliance costs under Medicare but under IRS or law enforcement.

Quote:

Originally posted by randomfan

...

The part about not paying a cent shows you don't really understand the argument on this topic at all...

No, if you read through my posts you'll see I know I do pay (we all pay) through our taxes. I just don't pay for specific procedures out of my pocket, like say a six figure heart surgery, like some Americans.

But I guess that would require you to have read my posts before making your comment...yeah.

Quote:

Originally posted by paradise_50

...

and the rate keeps increasing...and the fact that the rates will continue to climb until...literally...by 2025 the average American will be paying practically everything they have for health insurance premiums CLEARLY a counter weight balance has to be in place SO that they will not be able to jack their rates up and keep larger percentages.

As I stated earlier, that will never happen (Americans paying all they have for health care). Even Doctor Evil (if he was the head of a health insurance company) wouldn't make that bad business decision. They would lose every customer they had. Like Brownell said earlier, as of now, I am happy with the price and quality of my health insurance. If the cost gets to be too much, I will drop it. When enough people do that, the insurance companies will be forced to correct their prices. By the way, what does your crystal ball say a share of Garmin will be worth in 2025? Let me know.

I see others have tried injecting facts into this thread to no avail, but I can't sit idly by and allow an international audience to see common sense in the USA receiving only token representation. I started reading thinking I'd quote this one and that one, but there are just too many so I'll just dive in.

For background, I'm a middle aged, middle class male, and I have a few health issues. Hot so many as to be disabled in any sense, but certainly more than would benefit from going years without seeing a doctor. I have good medical coverage, and receive top-notch medical care, but that coverage (for my family of four) costs around $20K per year, of which probably 80% or so is picked up by my employer. There are many millions of people in this country in a similar position.

I have felt for my entire adult life that our health care system is an abomination - not because I've been denied excellent care (I haven't, ever), but because some people can't get needed care while others receive wasteful care. I have to agree with the president when he argues that a hundred-year-old person should not be getting a pacemaker with public money - do you folks have any idea how many pregnant mothers can get proper prenatal care for that money? How many people in their 90s and above have you ever met who wouldn't gladly forgo care for themselves to help a child? I've been fortunate enough to know many people approaching the century mark, and I can't think of a single one of them who would consider for a second trading the health of even a single child for their own, much less the number the price of a pacemaker could help.

Like it or not, the government can, and does, provide care with much lower administrative costs than any private insurer. Money really does matter here - if we don't get these costs under control, they will bury us. And somewhere along the line, difficult choices have to be made. One of those is to recognize that we simply cannot afford to prolong every life as far as is medically possible.

To those who feel a single-payer system will bring about the end of the republic, I say nonsense. If you were to actually do some real studying of the history of our nation and government, you might be fascinated to find that there were plenty of founding fathers and subsequent presidents and policymakers who would probably have lined up behind such a system. You may think anything that Teddy Kennedy supports must be bad for democracy (I don't happen to agree with that), but how about Teddy Roosevelt, or Richard Nixon? Yes TR and Tricky Dick, not known as wimpy socialist sympathizers, both saw the need for government-provided health care, as have an impressive array of the best of this country's leaders for most of the past century.

The fact that we're a capitalist society does not mean that only private industry can do anything right. Should we privatize defense? Intelligence? The treasury? Nuclear regulation? Ok, I know there are plenty of wing-nuts out there who probably think we should (because, of course, Reagan said "government is the problem" ), but fortunately, the majority doesn't.

We're paying for health care for the uninsured already through our premiums and taxes, and frankly I don't see how it could possibly cost more per-capita than it does overall now. There are some things government should stay out of, but health care, the proverbial 800-pound gorilla in the room that threatens our very existence, is most assuredly not one of them.

Reagan suggested that we should privatize defense, intelligence, the treasure, and nuclear regulation? I did not know that

Like it matters, they're going to have us all under one government soon anyway (North American Union) and then we can just hike the tax brackets up to 70% and let the government dictate every single aspect of our lives to us. Woo.

http://www.wariscrime.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/amerocoins.jpg

I think the health system works pretty good here in the U.S. Without it, we would be paying something like over "3 thousand" dollars per month for my wife's medication. She has M.S. & is on like 18 different medications. I am only middle class, gross 70K per year, have a family of three with a 15 yr old who is Biplolar 1 disorder with manic feature & I carry health insurance & I am the only one who works & we have a house & a leased Honda for 460 per month.