Thread: Health Insurance

Originally Posted by Dale Mabry

So you think they would get the average salary they are getting now, higher, or lower?

It's hard to say but if the option to negotiate salary is present in the chosen UHC system, then there's no reason to think that salaries across the medical spectrum won't be in line with what is currently earned now.

The problem is not that medical professionals earn too much. The problem is is that insurance companies/drug companies etc. eat up too much of each dollar spent--paper pushers, over priced services/drugs i.e., profit driven/motive.

The US population spends more on healthcare per individual than any other country--more than any UHC country. We have the highest paid doctors and one of the lower life expectancy rates in the world--lack of preventive HC will do that. The American Journal of Epidemiology states that "a vast body of evidence has shown consistently that those in the lower classes have higher mortality, morbidity and disability rates" and these "are in part due to inadequate medical care services as well as to the impact of a toxic and hazardous physical environment." Want lower health costs then have UHC and eliminate the private bureacracy.

Map & Graph: Health: Life expectancy at birth - Total population
Scroll down for more information Show map full screen

Definition: The average number of years to be lived by a group of people born in the same year, if mortality at each age remains constant in the future. Life expectancy at birth is also a measure of overall quality of life in a country and summarizes the mortality at all ages. It can also be thought of as indicating the potential return on investment in human capital and is necessary for the calculation of various actuarial measures.


Country Description Amount
1. Andorra 83.49 years
2. Macau 81.87 years
3. San Marino 81.43 years
4. Japan 80.93 years
5. Singapore 80.42 years
6. Australia 80.13 years
7. Guernsey 80.04 years
8. Switzerland 79.99 years
9. Sweden 79.97 years
10. Hong Kong 79.93 years
11. Canada 79.83 years
12. Iceland 79.8 years
13. Cayman Islands 79.67 years
14. Italy 79.4 years
15. Gibraltar 79.38 years
16. France 79.28 years
17. Monaco 79.27 years
18. Liechtenstein 79.25 years
19. Spain 79.23 years
20. Norway 79.09 years
21. Israel 79.02 years
22. Jersey 78.93 years
23. Faroe Islands 78.9 years
24. Greece 78.89 years
25. Aruba 78.83 years
26. Netherlands 78.74 years
27. Martinique 78.72 years
28. Virgin Islands 78.59 years
29. Malta 78.43 years
30. Germany 78.42 years
31. Montserrat 78.36 years
32. New Zealand 78.32 years
33. Belgium 78.29 years
34. Guam 78.27 years
35. Austria 78.17 years
36. United Kingdom 78.16 years
37. Saint Pierre and Miquelon 78.11 years
38. Man, Isle of 77.98 years
39. Finland 77.92 years
40. Jordan 77.88 years
41. Luxembourg 77.66 years
42. Guadeloupe 77.53 years
43. Bermuda 77.41 years
44. Saint Helena 77.38 years
45. Ireland 77.35 years
46. Cyprus 77.27 years
47. Puerto Rico 77.26 years
48. United States 77.14 years


Very impressive....greatest health care system in the world...

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/...at_bir_tot_pop

Originally Posted by ForemanRules

. . .Very impressive....greatest health care system in the world...

The US has the best emergency health care around but you are correct--The US's HC system gets the least bang for the buck.

Very impressive....greatest health care system in the world...

I think that list has less to do with the health care and more to do with the fact that the people of this country have become fat slobs.

Originally Posted by P-funk

I think that list has less to do with the health care and more to do with the fact that the people of this country have become fat slobs.

Very true and also a bunch of junkies that take pills for every occasion......The good news is that we are exporting our shitty food in record amounts around the world.............I was in Mexico last month and saw a Mc Donalds the funny thing was that I was scared to eat the food in there so I just bought some thing off a dirty street vender.....

Originally Posted by P-funk

I think that list has less to do with the health care and more to do with the fact that the people of this country have become fat slobs.

It's a free country. All those fat fucking pigs are free to live it up and be a drag on our HC system. Somewhere down the line they need medical attention and like it or not, they will get it. A little preventive medicine might go a long way in addressing that though.

Greekblondechic-I used to live in NJ and before my insurance kicked in I paid cash at the doctors. Most of the doctors I dealth with including specialists would give a discout if you paid cash. Don't be afraid to ask if they offer discounts if you pay cash.

Originally Posted by ForemanRules

Very true and also a bunch of junkies that take pills for every occasion......The good news is that we are exporting our shitty food in record amounts around the world.............I was in Mexico last month and saw a Mc Donalds the funny thing was that I was scared to eat the food in there so I just bought some thing off a dirty street vender.....

Prolly less likely to have been rubbed under someone's armpit that way. Better safe than sorry.

I've never understood why America's outstanding talents in so many other market forces is so dismally incapable of fixing our medical system as it exists now.


I believe it comes down to our expectation. For the last 30 years, health-care costs have been rising 6 percent to 8 percent a year—more than double the inflation rate in the rest of the economy—because demand keeps outstripping supply.

As people's real income rises, they expect more medical care; our society is aging, so people need more care; and with new technologies treating formerly intractable conditions, people want more care.

In practice, almost everyone, insured or not, has access to health care, especially in emergencies. Insurance affects how much people actually use health services:

The access of the uninsured involves inconveniences and costs that encourage them to underconsume medical services, sometimes with grim results.

By contrast, people with insurance often have such broad access that many overconsume those services. People are running to the doc after two days of dealing with a viral upper respiratory infection. (I see this alot) These consumption patterns drive the price increases that ultimately shrink insurance coverage.

No politician is going to put it straight to the public. Anyway, who gets elected president by telling people that their health-care costs will soar so long as everybody has access to the most expensive forms of care?


When prices rise unusually fast in other markets, people can usually find and substitute cheaper products: Beef prices rise and people eat more chicken, or a real-estate bubble drives up housing prices and people downsize their residential ambitions. That doesn't work nearly as well in health care, when patients are told that the alternative to a costly test or procedure is poor health or even premature death.


As a society we determine how much health care we want . Unfortunately, our desires have no relation to what we would spend. This is what makes us different from socialized medicine. The current system has no balances. Universal health care would not improve that problem, it would only shift the locus of control.


Our health care insurance system is broken. Perhaps we could look at ways to improve that system, and in some way link behaviors with costs (e.g., smokers and the obese would pay higher insurance) and expenditures with graduated co-pays. I can tell you right now, it is the medical treatment and expense of two of my employees, one a smoker and one obese, who has driven up our premiums for the whole office. Only when each individual starts to understand costs will market forces apply. Without the power of market forces, I suspect that we will be continuing this debate forever.

Regardless, other countries do get more bang for their buck when it comes to medicine , the first step is to admit our health care system is in shambles and needs fixing, but some people still have their heads stuck in the sand.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

People need to learn prevention by modifying lifestyles. I just saw a report on how teenagers can not live with out cell phones and come home hit the computer till 1 am. No wonder we have a bunch of fat depressed teenagers. Despite all the fitness centers growing LOL Sad isn't it.

"Universal Health coverage" and "more efficient" don't belong in the same sentence. That is just plain nuts.

Here, I will list the things government does well:
1. Military

OK, that's it.

You want some government body like FEMA setting doctors' salaries.

Where do the wealthy Canadians get their serious health care? you got it...USA.

Originally Posted by brogers

It's a communist state, which is socialism, "dummy" nice try.

communism is more similar to "socialist realism."

Communism and Socialism are cousins; but not the same at all.

Norway and Sweden are some of the most socialist countries in the world - they are democratic socialist.



(I am NOT a Socialist by the way.)

The US is the world's only socialist country that refuses to admit it.

Originally Posted by Pepper

Where do the wealthy Canadians get their serious health care? you got it...USA.

Thats mostly coz they want to 'jump the line'. You cant buy yourself to the front of the line here, as you can in the US.

Originally Posted by BulkMeUp

Thats mostly coz they want to 'jump the line'. You cant buy yourself to the front of the line here, as you can in the US.

No, it is mainly because the high-level health care is practiced here.

Don't get me wrong, I don't like our system either but Canada's system is NOT the answer.

Originally Posted by Pepper

No, it is mainly because the high-level health care is practiced here.

I agree that there is a certain level of health care that is higher than others. But it is not accessable to all. Depends on what you can afford, mostly.

A random google result : Americans Pay More for Health Care But Receive Less in Return

Originally Posted by Pepper

Don't get me wrong, I don't like our system either but Canada's system is NOT the answer.

Canada's system is not perfect. But at least everyone is assured of medical care. It does cost a lot in terms of paying for it with taxes. But at least it is not a 'health care only for the rich' kinda philosophy.

Canada spends almost the same as Switzerland, but somehow our system isnt as efficient as theirs.

...
# Health care spending is 4.3 times the amount spent on national defense. (4)
# In 2003, the United States spent 15.3 percent of its Gross Domestic Product (GDP) on health care. It is projected that the percentage will reach 18.7 percent in 10 years. (3)
# Although nearly 45 million Americans are uninsured, the United States spends more on health care than other industrialized nations, and those countries provide health insurance to all their citizens. (4)
# Health care spending accounted for 10.9 percent of the GDP in Switzerland, 10.7 percent in Germany, 9.7 percent in Canada and 9.5 percent in France, according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. (5)
...

http://www.nchc.org/facts/cost.shtml

Originally Posted by BulkMeUp

Canada's system is not perfect. But at least everyone is assured of medical care. It does cost a lot in terms of paying for it with taxes. But at least it is not a 'health care only for the rich' kinda philosophy.

not true.When I was in Dartmouth University Hospital system in New Hampshire, almost a third of the patients there were Canadians whose government didn't give them the medical care they needed. Remember, socialized medicine works for Canada better than most because they have a back door...us. There is alot of money for "free" medical care when you get hurt or sick in the beginning of the year. Canada excels at preventative care and maintenance of chronic diseases, far superior to us....but, When funds run low, you have to wait in line for when the funds become available .. Case in point...

One of our patients was an 8 yr old girl who was diagnosed with leukemic crisis towards november in the Province of Quebec. Now, this particular leukemia has a 80% cure rate when treated aggressively early. She was not going to be able to get the aggressive chemo until 12 weeks later when the hospital was going to be able to afford it so to speak (this brings the survivability down to less than 40%) Her mom bought her over to Dartmouth and she was started on induction therapy right away. The mother had no means to pay but being an academic center we did it.

Another case, a construction worker from Canada has a very large inguinal hernia. He is on a 6 month waiting list for surgery. He cannot afford to be off work (evern disability pays nothing) so he dips into his savings and pays for the $2000.00 dollar surgery at Dartmouth and returns to work in 5 weeks back in Canada.


These people were not the "wealthy" getting to the front of the line.


The list goes on. However, our system isn't perfect either.Even\patients with health care don't necessarily get the treatment they want in this country as well. A 54 year old teacher had metastatic melanoma diagnosed by myself. She has Aetna HMO. There is a new novel agent that costs $50,000 that might help her live another 8 months, so she can see her son graduate highschool. Aetna denies covering for the cost of the drug (remember, this is a drug that has to be ordered, no hospitals carry it) and she dies in 10 days.



Also, by the way, you can't sue a doctor in socialized medicine. So if a doc cuts off the wrong hand, you sue the government and see how far it gets you.


Now, I am not a socialized medicine basher because I see lessons that we can borrow from them and we have a lot to learn from them. Our system is collapsing. Personally , I favor a universal health insurance, tort reform and doctors and hospitals can go back to practicing medicine, not legal medicine.

Originally Posted by bandaidwoman

....but, When funds run low, you have to wait in line for when the funds become available .. Case in point...

I agree. Which is why i said "Canada spends almost the same as Switzerland, but somehow our system isnt as efficient as theirs." In Canada there are some unreal waiting times, where as a study concluded that in some other countries like Switzerland, there are virtually none! I like our system, but there is something wrong with the set up. The cases you mentioned would not have occoured if the system was corrected to eliminate these waiting lines.

Originally Posted by bandaidwoman

These people were not the "wealthy" getting to the front of the line.

True. Not all are wealthy. But the point is that it is possible. Money talks, in your system
However for someone do such a thing would need to have some finances to do it. Generally speaking, with no med-insurance, can one seek treatment there? Say, these same cases?

My point is that you guy pay waaay more, per capita, than other developed countries. But offer your citizens nothing in terms of Universal health care!

Originally Posted by bandaidwoman

Aetna denies covering for the cost of the drug (remember, this is a drug that has to be ordered, no hospitals carry it) and she dies in 10 days.

This has happened here as well. Drugs approved in the US (or even other provinces) are not paid for here as they are not yet 'approved'. Damn bureucracy!.

Originally Posted by BulkMeUp

I
True. Not all are wealthy. But the point is that it is possible. Money talks, in your system
However for someone do such a thing would need to have some finances to do it. Generally speaking, with no med-insurance, can one seek treatment there? Say, these same cases?

In practice, almost everyone, insured or not, has access to health care, especially in emergencies. Legally, no emergency room can turn away anyone in need. Insurance affects how much people actually use health services in this country. Thus, our uninsured forgoe preventative services and we feel the consequences as a society.

Also, most hospitals are quite humane. One patient from Russian had open heart surgery (completly uninsured.) Luckily, the cardiothoracic surgeon did it for free and the anesthesiologist also wrote it off, but the hospital bill was over $20,000. They allowed her to make only $50.00 a month as a payment schedule. I think hospitals just want to know you will try, they know most can't pay. The sad thing is, from a liability standpoint, a majority of lawsuits against docs or hospitals are from the uninsured, (as a means of recovering money for the procedure) and so hospitals and docs are getiing more gunshy treating them. (They can't refuse them in emergencies but relative elective procedures are indefinatley delayed.) Sad

Originally Posted by BulkMeUp

My point is that you guy pay waaay more, per capita, than other developed countries. But offer your citizens nothing in terms of Universal health care!

could not agree with you more!

When comparing life expectancy in the United States to other countries, it becomes clear that the vast sums we spend on health care buy very little health. The roughly $4,500 per person the United States spends annually on health care far outpaces any other country. Yet three-fourths of developed countries outrank America in life expectancy and infant mortality. For instance, Jamaican seniors outlive American seniors. According to the World Health Organization, life expectancy at age 65 is roughly equal, and at 85 it's longer in Jamaica. An argument for medical marijuana? No, I think it's an argument for walking. 60 percent of Jamaica's elderly live in rural areas, where walking is the only reliable means of transport and 78 percent of Jamaican elders walk daily. By contrast, just 60 percent of the entire U.S. adult population exercises at all!

Americans do expect the latest and greatest technological and pharmaceutical advances and we throw our money into these areas but we forgo building adequate bike lanes and public transportation so our urban sprawl inhabitants don't get the daily "passive" excercise that most other countries get ( by biking to work or walking to public transportation) . Our priorities are screwed up. I personally don't believe Medicare should be paying for implantable defibrillators that costs thousands of dollars to extend a life in someone with congestive cardiomyopathy but it won't pay for a simple yearly preventative exam! (except the first one when you turn 65) .However, if a politician told voting constituents that the money should be shuttled from paying for defibrillators to bike lanes, how many americans are going to vote for that guy! It will need a major social restructuring of American thinking!

Greekblondchick,

Whatever you do, get something. I had a tumor on my Kidney in 2002. After 2 surgerys and many, MRI's, CT Scans, Hospital visits, etc. my final bill was $256,000. I was 31 at the time. Luckily I had good insurance through my employer. Had I needed additional Chemotherapy and Radiation.............Well, you get the point. Whole thing cost me $2,000 out of pocket. You don't know when something like this can happen, but if it does, you need coverage.

Originally Posted by bandaidwoman

. . . . Also, by the way, you can't sue a doctor in socialized medicine. So if a doc cuts off the wrong hand, you sue the government and see how far it gets you..

If you consider Canada's health system to be socialized medicine, then you are incorrect in that legal recourse is available...maybe not against the gov., but the doctor will be taken to task. Or else we'd better tell these guys: The Canadian Medical Protective Association....Or the multitude of attorney's that practice professional negligence law in Canada.

There are factions in the US are pushing 'tort reform' to cap damages at $250,000 for victims of medical malpractice. Large settlements from doctors that cut off the wrong hand, in principle, serve as a deterrent so that they will not continue to cut off the wrong hands of other patients. Capping damages is not the answer, competent medical care is the answer.