Obama calls for universal health care

[zimv20]

AP (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070125/ap_on_el_pr/democrats_health_care)


WASHINGTON - Every American should have health care coverage within six years, Democratic Sen. Barack Obama (news, bio, voting record) said Thursday as he set an ambitious goal soon after jumping into the 2008 presidential race.

"The time has come for universal health care in America," Obama said at a conference of Families USA, a health care advocacy group.

"I am absolutely determined that by the end of the first term of the next president, we should have universal health care in this country," the Illinois senator said.

Obama was previewing what is shaping up to be a theme of the 2008 Democratic primary. One of his rivals, 2004 vice presidential nominee John Edwards, also said as he announced his candidacy last month that he will offer a proposal for universal health care.

Obama said while plans are offered in every campaign season with "much fanfare and promise," they collapse under the weight of Washington politics, leaving citizens to struggle with the skyrocketing costs.

He said it's wrong that 46 million in this country are uninsured when the country spends more than any one else on health care. He said Americans pay $15 billion in taxes to help care for the uninsured.

"We can't afford another disappointing charade in 2008, 2009 and 2010," Obama said. "It's not only tiresome, it's wrong."

Obama's call was an echo of a speech he made last April when he said Democrats "need to cling to the core values that make us Democrats, the belief in universal health care, the belief in universal education, and then we should be agnostic in terms of how to achieve those values."

His argument Thursday not only will be considered through the prism of the presidential campaign, but weighed against rival Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's ill-fated plan to overhaul the health care insurance system when she was first lady.

Even after leading that calamitous attempt in 1993, Clinton remains a strong advocate of universal health care and has made it a central theme of her presidential bid.

"One of the goals that I will be presenting ... is health insurance for every child and universal health care for every American," she said at a community health clinic in New York Sunday, the day after entering the 2008 Democratic field. "That's a very major part of my campaign and I want to hear people's ideas about how we can achieve that goal."

Another candidate, Ohio Rep. Dennis Kucinich, also backs universal health care.

i'm liking that so many candidates are calling for it now. is it just a matter of time before we get it?

[Dont Hurt Me]

With half of congress Republican the U.S. will never have universal healthcare. They are very happy that many Companies make big profits off of illness. Even those companies that contribute absolutely nothing like the insurance giants.

[IJ Reilly]

i'm liking that so many candidates are calling for it now. is it just a matter of time before we get it?

One of my standing predictions has been that we'd get universal health care when the corporations demanded it. Recently, this has started to happen. The balance may be tipping in favor, finally.

I wonder if Obama is going to offer an actual plan, or stick to his "core values" and "agnosticism" about how it gets done.

[Swarmlord]

<snip>

I wonder if Obama is going to offer an actual plan, or stick to his "core values" and "agnosticism" about how it gets done.

I'm thinking the latter.

[zimv20]

I wonder if Obama is going to offer an actual plan, or stick to his "core values" and "agnosticism" about how it gets done.
CW is it's suicide to offer details on a plan while you're campaigning. disappointing, imo. so even if sen obama does have a plan, i don't think we'd see details until much, much later.

[leekohler]

Guys- here's at least some hints. The internet is a wonderful thing. ;)

http://obama.senate.gov/issues/health_care/index.html

[Dont Hurt Me]

Obama makes some good points because Healthcare and Education are skyrocketing when compared to anything else. I think every child should have access to healthcare and to a education system that takes them through say a jr college level of education. At the moment we like to build jails not minds, we like to build bombs and ignore healthcare and these two are hardcore republican christian values. Think about this those of you who are republican flag wavers.

[YS2003]

Isn't this what Hilary Clinton did when she was the first lady to Bill several years ago. If my memory serves me correctly, she got burned. In USA, I just don't believe there would be the universal coverage. This country will stay as it is, which is to say there would be a big divide between rich and poor.

If I am going to keep living in USA, I don't want the universal coverage which raises my taxes. I don't want to subsidize someone's bad health (note: USA is one of the most obese countries in the world) with my tax money.).

[it5five]

I only hope he sticks true to his word when he becomes our next president. :D

I also hope that all of the spoiled ****ers whining about taxes put themselves in other peoples positions before opening their mouths.

[solvs]

Isn't this what Hilary Clinton did when she was the first lady to Bill several years ago. If my memory serves me correctly, she got burned.
Her plan was a bureaucratic nightmare. And she had to face a Republican Congress that hated her. Still, it brought up some interesting points and got us talking about it for awhile.

In USA, I just don't believe there would be the universal coverage. This country will stay as it is, which is to say there would be a big divide between rich and poor.
You can always buy more and better coverage just like you always could, but those who have nothing would get at least something.

If I am going to keep living in USA, I don't want the universal coverage which raises my taxes. I don't want to subsidize someone's bad health (note: USA is one of the most obese countries in the world) with my tax money.).
That's a very selfish view that we've been discussing in the SOTU thread. You're paying for it anyway when those who have no insurance go to the ER and/or can't pay their bills. The number 1 reason for bankruptcy is medical bills that can't be payed (http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2005/bankruptcy_study.html).

We can't afford not to have healthcare for everyone, and every other developed country seems to be able to pull it off.

[Music_Producer]

When I first came to this country (from India) I couldn't quite understand as to what this whole healthcare business was all about. It shocked me that people paid $300 on an average, for 'health insurance' for their families. And, that $300 didn't cover everything. My sister-in-law had to undergo a CT scan and she had to fork out $5000.. and she pays insurance every month. What the hell is the use of paying insurance if you're going to get screwed anyway?

In India, there is no health insurance. Medicines are cheap, doctor's fees are something like $1 for a prescription.. x-rays for $4.. root canal treatment for $50 and so on. Every person can afford health care.. and those who cannot.. go to the local government hospitals (really basic hospitals - with good staff and medicines, but no 'vending machines' :p or gift shops) where treatment is meted out for free.

It's tragic and a shame that the world's most developed country can't afford to give out basic healthcare to all its citizens. Why does everything here have to be so expensive? At least when it comes to the medical field? It puts me off when all I see is money involved when it comes to basic treatment of people. I remember when I we had to read out loud the ethics of medicine ('you will treat every patient as equal', ' you will not deny any patient medical treatment on any grounds' etc) as I graduated from medical school.. none of that applies here.

[Music_Producer]

This country will stay as it is, which is to say there would be a big divide between rich and poor.



India has a big divide between the rich and poor too, every country has that. But that doesn't mean that everyone should not have the basic right to medical care.

I don't think it is necessary to raise taxes for a universal healthcare system, there is a lot of money mismanagement.. that's all. If the money was used properly, we would have free healthcare, education, etc. Oh well..

[mactastic]

If I am going to keep living in USA, I don't want the universal coverage which raises my taxes. I don't want to subsidize someone's bad health (note: USA is one of the most obese countries in the world) with my tax money.).
Would you object if it didn't raise your out-of-pocket costs? (ie if the tax increase was less than what you pay now in premiums plus co-pays etc.)

Would you still object on principle?

[aquajet]

I'm thinking the latter.

It's funny you should mention that, considering you have vaguely proposed that "special consideration" should be given to some in difficult situations, while simutaneously suggesting that others in difficult situations need to "make changes".

(removed trademarked comment as per cease and desist notice)









:rolleyes:

[Ugg]

Isn't this what Hilary Clinton did when she was the first lady to Bill several years ago. If my memory serves me correctly, she got burned. In USA, I just don't believe there would be the universal coverage. This country will stay as it is, which is to say there would be a big divide between rich and poor.

If I am going to keep living in USA, I don't want the universal coverage which raises my taxes. I don't want to subsidize someone's bad health (note: USA is one of the most obese countries in the world) with my tax money.).

Things have changed a lot since Hilary was shot down. Corporate America's profits and competitiveness are being seriously impacted by massive health care cost increases. There's either $12,000 a year policies or $40,000 a year emergency room care. The system is broke and since insurance companies are doing their utmost to ensure that only the healthiest individuals are offered health insurance. The end result is total meltdown.

Right now you are paying through your taxes for everyone who visits the ER and doesn't have insurance. You are paying through higher insurance premiums because fewer and fewer people have insurance. You are paying because drug companies have unlimited access to federal research and Medical/Medicare/VA dollars and the feds don't demand anything in return.

[solvs]

It shocked me that people paid $300 on an average, for 'health insurance' for their families. And, that $300 didn't cover everything. My sister-in-law had to undergo a CT scan and she had to fork out $5000.. and she pays insurance every month. What the hell is the use of paying insurance if you're going to get screwed anyway?

I also pay for medical coverage, and still had to pay several thousand dollars the last time I went to the hospital. I was there a couple of hours, they doped me up, and sent me home with a prescription that was cheaper to buy generic out of pocket than use my insurance. I also had to pay for half of the ambulance. That's all the coverage that job offered. Pretty much the norm now. You're either paying way too much, paying yet still getting almost nothing, or just going without. And the people who have insurance don't want to pay more taxes for people who don't, not realizing they already do.

Even ignoring the obvious selfishness, doesn't make a lot of sense does it?

[IJ Reilly]

Even ignoring the obvious selfishness, doesn't make a lot of sense does it?

"I've got mine" is a logic all it's own.

[solvs]

"I've got mine" is a logic all it's own.

My friend's 6 year old is like that.

She has to keep giving her time-outs all the time.

[IJ Reilly]

My friend's 6 year old is like that.

She has to keep giving her time-outs all the time.

Don't get me started. ;)

[YS2003]

Would you object if it didn't raise your out-of-pocket costs? (ie if the tax increase was less than what you pay now in premiums plus co-pays etc.)

Would you still object on principle?
If that is possible, that would be an interesting plan which may be worth studying further. However, I am not sure how that can be achieved. By looking at the stats on obesity in USA (among other data), this country has many indulgent people who tend to follow the path of unhealthy life style (bad eating habit, lack of exercise, and etc). I just feel the cost will go up as many people start get treated under "universal coverage" and this may cause longer waiting to set up appointments with health care providers.
If this universal health care is going to be launched, I hope the legislators will make this program available only to the citizen and "legal" aliens/immigrants only.

[skunk]

My friend's 6 year old is like that.Must be the emotional age of your average Libertarian...

[skunk]

If this universal health care is going to be launched, I hope the legislators will make this program available only to the citizen and "legal" aliens/immigrants only.Not universal then, is it? Let go of your market-driven fantasy.

[iGav]

I hope it's better than our one.

[skunk]

I hope it's better than our one.I'm certain that those inventive Americans can come up with an improved version without all the baggage of the various European models.

[iGav]

without all the baggage of the various European models.

What... you mean that they might even treat fat people and smokers too?

[skunk]

What... you mean that they might even treat fat people and smokers too?It's OK, they're a dying breed. :rolleyes:

[YS2003]

That's a very selfish view that we've been discussing in the SOTU thread. You're paying for it anyway when those who have no insurance go to the ER and/or can't pay their bills. The number 1 reason for bankruptcy is medical bills that can't be payed (http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2005/bankruptcy_study.html).

Holly Molly. That thread is brutal. One guy against all who are participating on that thread. I did not read through the entire thread. I think if he was running for a public office and voters are all located on this forum, I am pretty sure if won't get elected. I hope my comment does not attract that type of passionate tirade, as I have no interest in partaking into that.

[skunk]

The guy's views are brutal, if you ask me. If he's going to run with ideas that close to eugenics and fascism, he'd better be prepared to defend them.

[sushi]

Just some random comments...

Not sure what the answer is. I believe that market forces will make things better. Obscene malpractice cases, uninsured individuals and abuses take their toll on the current system.

What I do know, is very few Americans go to places outside of America for medical assistance. On the other hand, many who live outside of America go to America to receive some of the best health care in the world.

On a side note, I have yet to hear of one American who has gone to Cuba for treatment. And they are touted as having a wonderful and extensive healthcare system. However, their wonderful leader went outside of Cuba for his treatment! Makes me wonder! :eek: ;)

Socialized medicine does not work. Just ask anyone who has to rely on that system what happens when they need help...quickly. It doesn't work. There is always a waiting list to get treatment.

Competition makes things better. Just look at what Wal-Mart is doing with medicine. Good stuff.

Limiting malpractice settlements would be a great start in the right direction! :)

[Eraserhead]

On a side note, I have yet to hear of one American who has gone to Cuba for treatment. And they are touted as having a wonderful and extensive healthcare system. However, their wonderful leader went outside of Cuba for his treatment! Makes me wonder! :eek: ;)

That's because it's illegal to go direct to cuba from the US, I believe that Micheal Moore did a prime time TV show comparing the healthcare in the US, Canada, and Cuba, Cuba won, but they didn't let it actually win on prime time US TV.

Also remember that thanks to US sanctions Cuba is a LOT poorer than the US so *should* have worse healthcare. Castro probably left the country to be treated simply because Cuba doesn't have the level of specialist doctors required, it doesn't mean they can handle a broken leg decently.

[skunk]

Obscene malpractice cases, uninsured individuals and abuses take their toll on the current system.Obscene malpractice cases we can all do without, as with obscene malpractice. As for uninsured individuals, what essentially is the difference between compulsory insurance and a tax-based system?

On the other hand, many who live outside of America go to America to receive some of the best health care in the world.The same applies to most west European countries, despite their variously dysfunctional healthcare systems. As for Cuba, see above.

Socialized medicine does not work. Just ask anyone who has to rely on that system what happens when they need help...quickly. It doesn't work. There is always a waiting list to get treatment.Perhaps there are no waiting lists in the States because many of those who need treatment simply can't get it. No point waiting for that, is there?

[QuarterSwede]

Socialized medicine does not work. Just ask anyone who has to rely on that system what happens when they need help...quickly. It doesn't work. There is always a waiting list to get treatment.
Not to mention you get worse care in general. There is a reason a lot of the best doctors and healthcare pros are in the United States.

[skunk]

Not to mention you get worse care in general. There is a reason a lot of the best doctors and healthcare pros are in the United States.Unsubstantiated speculation.

[Eraserhead]

There is a reason a lot of the best doctors and healthcare pros are in the United States.

yeah, they get paid more :rolleyes:.

[takao]

Socialized medicine does not work. Just ask anyone who has to rely on that system what happens when they need help...quickly. It doesn't work. There is always a waiting list to get treatment.

what do you mean with waiting list ? i don't remember waiting lists when you need help quickly

Competition makes things better. Just look at what Wal-Mart is doing with medicine. Good stuff.

unless there is a cartel which brings prices through the roof even more

[it5five]

Socialized medicine does not work. Just ask anyone who has to rely on that system what happens when they need help...quickly. It doesn't work. There is always a waiting list to get treatment.



I guess the rest of the industrialized world must be wrong. :rolleyes:

[zimv20]

However, their wonderful leader went outside of Cuba for his treatment!
he did? i know that cuba sent doctors to venezuela, i think in exchange for oil. but i hadn't heard of castro leaving cuba for treatment.

[pseudobrit]

Obscene malpractice cases we can all do without, as with obscene malpractice. As for uninsured individuals, what essentially is the difference between compulsory insurance and a tax-based system?

Maybe you go to jail if you can't comply. Free healthcare in there.

Perhaps there are no waiting lists in the States because many of those who need treatment simply can't get it. No point waiting for that, is there?

I've had the distinct displeasure of being covered by an HMO at one point in my life. They only had one family doctor (GP) in my area to choose from. There was a waiting list, and a huge waiting room, and a huge wait all around.

Then he tried to push me onto expensive brand-name medication that I repeatedly told him I'd used in the past with nasty side effects and no real palliative effects ("I still think it would be a good idea to try it again").

My next batch of drugs is coming from Canada, BTW.

[IJ Reilly]

Socialized medicine does not work. Just ask anyone who has to rely on that system what happens when they need help...quickly. It doesn't work. There is always a waiting list to get treatment.

A straw-man argument. Between "socialized medicine" and what we've got today are a world of choices. In my experience, dropping the loaded terms "socialized medicine" is the classic way of avoiding seriously discussing the massive flaws in the current system.

[Peterkro]

I agree with that a definition of what is meant by socialised medicine might be helpful as well, it has all the accuracy of "axis of evil" or "communistic".

[YS2003]

A straw-man argument. Between "socialized medicine" and what we've got today are a world of choices. In my experience, dropping the loaded terms "socialized medicine" is the classic way of avoiding seriously discussing the massive flaws in the current system.

In my opinion, socialized medicine means equal distribution of health care to all the eligible recipients of such a service. I understand health is one of the main issues for many voters (as that is life or death of his/her existence on earth), who are directly affected by this topic. I heard someone said there are "about" 30% of uninsured in USA (don't quote me on the percentage). Let me be a devil's advocate (I know many American forum members are leaning toward the Democrats.) That means the majority (70%) is just doing fine with health care issues as they are.

[zimv20]

That means the majority (70%) is just doing fine with health care issues as they are.
well that's a Bad Conclusion. i have health care, but it's overly expensive and there's a whole bunch of routine stuff it doesn't cover, like some kinds of immunization. (when my doctor says "you need this shot," and the insurance company says "no you don't", is that effective healthcare?)

i had some pre-cancerous moles removed last year. some were covered (to 80%), others were not. why not? they weren't bad enough yet. my doctor said "i need to remove these", the insurance company disagreed. so i had to pay for those out of pocket. is that effective healthcare? am i doing "just fine" with my health care issues?

and i pay $500 / month for this "privilege" with a $2000 deductible, meaning every year i'm out-of-pocket at least $8000, not even counting prescriptions or uncovered procedures (the uncovered procedures do *not* count towards my deductible).

[sushi]

Before I make some replies, please note that I am not happy with the way things are and believe that it can be better.

Up front, I am not a believer in the socialized concept.

Got first hand experience with my step-mom who was Canadian. Saw that system up front. It leaves a lot to be desired. Needless to say I heard many horror stories. And in her case, she went to the states for treatment. Enough said.

As for health care, broken bone are minor. Heck, I can fix those -- we learn such things for combat! :)

There are much more serious concerns such as heart disease, cancer, kidney disease, etc. and of course chronic type diseases that require continuous medication -- some of it very expensive.

And no, I don't feel like paying more in my premiums to cover excessively overweight people and their healthcare issues due to being overweight. Just like I don't care to pay extra for smokers. Many life insurance companies have already adjusted rates based upon smoking history -- which I believe is good.

Where do most people around the world go for healthcare when money is no option? In many cases it is to America. That should tell us something.

I was back in the states one time when I got sick with a bad cold. So I dropped by the local clinic for help. There was some confusion on my health policy. While we were getting it sorted out, the lady who was trying to help me get assistance suggested that I just go up to the nearest hospital emergency room for help. I couldn't believe it. The emergency room for a cold. But it was free and they had to service me. To me that is simply ridiculous and drives up health care costs. In my case we sorted out the insurance issue and I got service via the clinic as it should have been.

There are many abuses of the healthcare system. Maybe charging a simple fee of $20-100 per visit will limit those who really do not need a doctors assistance freeing them up for those who really need their help.

Competition is good. Sure glad companies like Wal-Mart are around to improve things.

[IJ Reilly]

In my opinion, socialized medicine means equal distribution of health care to all the eligible recipients of such a service. I understand health is one of the main issues for many voters (as that is life or death of his/her existence on earth), who are directly affected by this topic. I heard someone said there are "about" 30% of uninsured in USA (don't quote me on the percentage). Let me be a devil's advocate (I know many American forum members are leaning toward the Democrats.) That means the majority (70%) is just doing fine with health care issues as they are.

Very, very far from it, I assure you. I am not one of the uninsured, not yet anyway. I am one of the many millions of Americans who are being treated extremely rudely by the health insurance system. You should also understand that it's not just individuals who are feeling the squeeze. Industry is as well. In fact they will be one of the prime movers forcing change.

[pseudobrit]

I heard someone said there are "about" 30% of uninsured in USA (don't quote me on the percentage). Let me be a devil's advocate (I know many American forum members are leaning toward the Democrats.) That means the majority (70%) is just doing fine with health care issues as they are.

I wonder what would happen if the Postal Service had 70% delivery coverage. Or if the electric company only sent power to 70% of a city.

The majority would be fine with that, right?

[pseudobrit]

Where do most people around the world go for healthcare when money is no option? In many cases it is to America. That should tell us something.

I think you meant "no object." But in any case...

What does it tell us that many Americans are going to SE Asia for medical procedures they cannot afford here?

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1196429,00.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_tourism

There are specialised procedures for which you may find the best doctors in America. Or France. Or Germany. Though you would be covered if you lived there.

In the United States, we pay more per capita for health care than any other nation in the world. But we don't have the world's best care and we don't have universal coverage. That reeks of inefficiency. I don't know how any capitalist could argue that the current market isn't a failure.

[vniow]

What does it tell us that many Americans are going to SE Asia for medical procedures they cannot afford here?


Thailand has some of the best hospitals and surgeons in the world. I know a pretty good amount of Westerners who have gone there for various procedures than ended up being of better quality and a good amount cheaper than in their home country. The vast majority of those who've gone are always raving about the standards of care they received while over there as compared to the US. There have been few complaints about the way you're treated there even if you happen to choose a mediocre surgeon.

[Grakkle]

In the United States, we pay more per capita for health care than any other nation in the world. But we don't have the world's best care and we don't have universal coverage. That reeks of inefficiency. I don't know how any capitalist could argue that the current market isn't a failure.

I don't think there's a better arguement in favour of regulated and universal healthcare. The idea that the U.S. style of unregulated, competitive, and capitalistic healthcare is somehow "more efficient" or "better" is utterly unsubstantiated by the facts.

Healthcare is a basic human right. That's all there is to it. That's recognised in the U.S. too: hospitals aren't allowed to refuse treatment to any patient, regardless of ability to pay. What happens is that the hospitals are absorbing the cost of care given to those unable to pay, rather than the government.

Which, of course, makes health insurance premiums rise and so on. It's an entirely disfunctional system. It's a system that benefits no one but the insurance companies - who not surprisingly have one of the largest lobbying presences in Washington and pretty much a stranglehold on both the Democratic and Republican parties.

[sushi]

I think you meant "no object." But in any case...
Yep, that's what I meant! Thanks! :)

[LethalWolfe]

While studying in London in 2000 I broke two bones in my right hand. This required surgery (pins put into my hand) and a two night (maybe three, not sure) stay in the hospital. I had to wait an obscene amount of time to see a doc in the ER (over 8hrs), an obscene amount of time for a bed to open up in the hospital (nearly 12hrs) and anytime I had an appointment to see a doc it was an obscene wait (usually 3-4hrs). It sucked. But all said an done my treatment in London only cost about $2.5-3k US (since I was in the country for less than 6 months I only qualified for free ER treatment). 10yrs prior I broke my left arm and that required sedation for it be set, but I was in and out of the hospital in a couple of hours. That cost about $7k.

Since 2000 I've seen my health insurance premiums go up while my coverage goes down even though I'm fit and only in my late 20's. In fact, my premiums went up 33% as of the first of the year. That makes 2 hikes and I've only had the insurance a bit over a year.

I don't know enough to know what the specific problems are, or what it will take to fix them, but I know this ***** in the US is broke.


Lethal

Oh, and FWIW the method used to fix my hand isn't approved for use in the US even though it's superior than the current US method.

[IJ Reilly]

While studying in London in 2000 I broke two bones in my right hand. This required surgery (pins put into my hand) and a two night (maybe three, not sure) stay in the hospital. I had to wait an obscene amount of time to see a doc in the ER (over 8hrs), an obscene amount of time for a bed to open up in the hospital (nearly 12hrs) and anytime I had an appointment to see a doc it was an obscene wait (usually 3-4hrs). It sucked. But all said an done my treatment in London only cost about $2.5-3k US (since I was in the country for less than 6 months I only qualified for free ER treatment). 10yrs prior I broke my left arm and that required sedation for it be set, but I was in and out of the hospital in a couple of hours. That cost about $7k.

Since 2000 I've seen my health insurance premiums go up while my coverage goes down even though I'm fit and only in my late 20's. In fact, my premiums went up 33% as of the first of the year. That makes 2 hikes and I've only had the insurance a bit over a year.

I don't know enough to know what the specific problems are, or what it will take to fix them, but I know this ***** in the US is broke.


Lethal

Oh, and FWIW the method used to fix my hand isn't approved for use in the US even though it's superior than the current US method.

I've been to the ER twice here in the U.S. -- both times I spent about nine hours waiting. My Dad was bitten by a dog just last week. He got to the ER around 3:30 and was home at 8:30. No stitches, just an exam, bandage and a tetanus shot.

[LethalWolfe]

I've been to the ER twice here in the U.S. -- both times I spent about nine hours waiting. My Dad was bitten by a dog just last week. He got to the ER around 3:30 and was home at 8:30. No stitches, just an exam, bandage and a tetanus shot.

The nurse on duty in the UK ER told me that people are split in the three groups. Dying, about to be dying, and other. I guess that's fair.


Lethal

[pseudobrit]

The nurse on duty in the UK ER told me that people are split in the three groups. Dying, about to be dying, and other. I guess that's fair.


Lethal

I sat in an ER for three hours bleeding, waiting for stitches.

[skunk]

Good article here. Food for thought for those decrying "socialised healthcare":
Caring for America's health
By Justin Webb
BBC, Washington

Senator Barack Obama, an early frontrunner in the 2008 presidential race, advocates something the US has never had - universal health care, but just how bad a state is America's health care service really in?


It was the summer of 1981.

Mrs Thatcher was only two years into her first term and Ronald Reagan only months into his.

I was starting out as well. Writing stories for the Beaver newspaper at the London School of Economics (LSE) about students throwing eggs at government ministers and the iniquities of low-cost coach travel to Greece.

I had arrived in London from a boarding school in the West Country and a black and white world had suddenly burst into colour.

My room mate in our hall of residence was a cheerful American with lively eyes and a vague resemblance to Bruce Springstein (a resemblance of which he was enormously proud).

Bo Nora was exotic. My friends at school had been called Patrick or Adrian, and mostly hailed from Somerset.

Bo came from Chicago and studied at the University of California. He was at the LSE for only a few months.

Parting company

Bo and I never felt the slightest bit mortal.

I remember us listening to a programme on the local London radio station where people with emotional problems would call in for counselling.

We laughed.

We had no problems.

I said goodbye to Bo on Great Portland Street tube station and we stayed in touch for a few years.

And then life took over and Bo Nora became a memory.

I moved to Northern Ireland, back to London, to Brussels and here to the US.

Insured but unwanted

A few months ago, 25 years after that central London goodbye, I tracked Bo down.

I found his e-mail address and sent him a message.

His reply talked of marriage and career and children and then came these words: "After several years of increasing physical difficulties, I saw a doctor in 1991 and was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis. I retired due to further disability and incapacity. Presently, I am spastic quadriplegic."

I went to see Bo the other day in his home on the outskirts of Chicago.

We had supper.

Bo's eyes flashing with recognition as we talked about London and university and people we had known.

His wife fed him.

Bo is not a bitter person - funny how happiness is wired into some people whatever life brings - but one subject genuinely pained him.

Bo has health insurance, I presume provided by the law firm he worked for when he was diagnosed.

This is good news for Bo - bad news for the insurance company.

Bo is expensive and the insurers do not want him... and they make it obvious.

'Cut no slack'

The story of American healthcare is one of huge expenditure for little obvious benefit
Someone has to fill in a form for him: "Yes, I am quadriplegic; no, no miracle appears to have happened."

He told me recently he had to have a minor procedure associated with the condition.

The bill was $78,000 (&#163;40,000).

In the end he paid only a small part of it himself but of the various entities that chipped in - the state, the insurer, the hospital - you can bet that no-one wanted to, and everyone would have got out of it if they could.

Americans who fall ill are cut no slack. A society which expects everyone to pay their way, expects it of them as well.

As a jolly man selling life insurance pointed out to me the other day, most personal bankruptcies in the US are the result of illness.

Endless letters

The story of American healthcare is one of huge expenditure for little obvious benefit.

By head of population America spends twice the amount Britain does on health.

But life expectancy here is lower and infant mortality is higher, way higher in some ethnic groups.

Most of the money seems to go on overheads and on profits for the many private companies providing care, the hospital groups, the drug manufacturers, and above all the insurance companies which write letters to Bo inquiring about his MS and write incessantly to all their other customers as well, endlessly negotiating, fussing, harassing.

As the costs spiral upwards and private employers ditch their health care schemes to stave off bankruptcy, increasing numbers of Americans have reduced their health insurance to the barest minimum, and when something goes wrong they are dependent on the back-up provided by the state.

So in a nation where socialised medicine is a phrase to be spat out contemptuously, Americans are on course by the year 2050 to spend every cent the government takes in tax, on health-related claims. Nothing left even for the tiniest war.

For the time being, Bo Nora will go on getting his annual letter but all of America is cottoning on to what Bo has known for years: there must be a better way of looking after sick Americans.

If Iraq is eventually resolved, the issue waiting next in line for the president, or more likely for his successors, is restoring health to American health care.http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/6302043.stm

[Grakkle]

Americans who fall ill are cut no slack. A society which expects everyone to pay their way, expects it of them as well.

As a jolly man selling life insurance pointed out to me the other day, most personal bankruptcies in the US are the result of illness.


That's absolutely true. I know quite a few people in the States who managed to pay for a serious illness only by selling various assets, charity, etc.

IF you can pay for health insurance to begin with, and IF you stay at least reasonably healthy, the system may work for you.

But if you can't pay the insurance, or you get anything more than a minor illness, you are in serious trouble. The insurance companies are willing to pay for minor illnesses, since they're still making obscene profits, but get anything that's actually going to cost them and you'll find the limits of the capitalist healthcare system soon enough.

Capitalist healthcare is never going to be primarily concerned with caring for people. That may be a side result, and certainly there are good doctors around, but when the goal is profits, profits are going to be the focus.

Anyway, I am an American citizen and grew up in the States (though I live in Canada now), and as far as I can tell from my own experience and what I've heard from others, universal or "socialised" healthcare is generally best. Yes, waiting times are longer here than in the U.S., but on the other hand, at least everyone gets the care they need - or at least the vast majority do, unlike the U.S. system in which only those who can pay receive decent care.

[IJ Reilly]

On the scary insurance stuff scale, this is actually pretty low order. The man has health insurance from his employer, and probably disability payment income as well. His health is bad, but at least he's not ruined finacially. The situation can be worse.

Blue Cross (who happens to be my insurer) has cancelled policies of many individually insured customers when they become ill and begin making large claims on their policies. Technically, this is against the law, but Blue Cross exploits loopholes. They closely examine the customer's original application for insurance. If they find that the customer has failed to fully disclose any part of their health history (no matter how trivial or old, and no matter whether it was deliberate or an oversight), then they feel they've got the authority to declare the application fraudulent, and to cancel the policy. This has led to the ruination of many families caught in the middle of a health crisis who find themselves suddenly fully exposed to hospital, drug and doctor costs, leading to the loss of homes and bankruptcy.

Their only avenue of relief was to sue Blue Cross. The company is in the process of settling some of these claims (and admitting no guilt). Meanwhile, hospitals are also suing Blue Cross for refusing to pay the bills of patients who's policies they cancelled even after they'd approved procedures.

It's a nasty business. A very nasty business.

[LethalWolfe]

Speaking of trivial things IJ, I was denied coverage once for being on prescription seasonal allergy meds (no kidding).

I know a couple people in the medical/healthcare area (one is a lawyer the other is a sales rep) and they both have basically said if you don't have a good benefits package via your employer your are pretty much screwed. The jokes they make about "PathetiCare" (aka PacifiCare) and "skin and contents" riders (the insurance will cover everything except your skin and what's inside it) are only funny at first.


Lethal

[leekohler]

I think a particular libertarian is conspicuously absent at the moment. ;)

[MacNut]

I think this is a reason why they will never find the "cure" for all of these diseases. Once they find a cure for cancer and people get the proper medication how will the insurance companies be able to charge to treat patients. The more research they do the more funding they get. So what good does it do them to find a cure if the money will then run out.

[MacNut]

Would it ever work to have all insurance publicly funded and combine all the private insurance companies and have the government pay for it. Then every american can pay into the system and get equal coverage.

[leekohler]

I think this is a reason why they will never find the "cure" for all of these diseases. Once they find a cure for cancer and people get the proper medication how will the insurance companies be able to charge to treat patients. The more research they do the more funding they get. So what good does it do them to find a cure if the money will then run out.

Oh shush! The free market knows best. ;):rolleyes:

[skunk]

Would it ever work to have all insurance publicly funded and combine all the private insurance companies and have the government pay for it. Then every american can pay into the system and get equal coverage.I think you'll find that is basically the model for every other country's national healthcare system. It's really not so scary.

[Dont Hurt Me]

Still not a good idea because you have a big fat middleman between the patient and the provider who provides nothing but additional cost,waste and abuse. I think it would be better to eliminate these guys 100% and have the provider paid by govt directly given certain criteria.

[sushi]

On item that I don't see discussed, is tax rates for those countries with the national healthcare system.

It would be interesting to compare and see if there is any difference in what people pay in taxes.

[IJ Reilly]

Speaking of trivial things IJ, I was denied coverage once for being on prescription seasonal allergy meds (no kidding).

I know a couple people in the medical/healthcare area (one is a lawyer the other is a sales rep) and they both have basically said if you don't have a good benefits package via your employer your are pretty much screwed. The jokes they make about "PathetiCare" (aka PacifiCare) and "skin and contents" riders (the insurance will cover everything except your skin and what's inside it) are only funny at first.


Lethal

I know you aren't kidding. The cherry picking process has gone completely mad. Did you catch the recent articles in the Los Angeles Times on insurance company black lists? It's incredible... the insurance companies won't issue you a policy unless your health record is spotless. Individual policy holders are truly screwed. They could only be more screwed if they were uninsured and not completely healthy.

[obeygiant]

On item that I don't see discussed, is tax rates for those countries with the national healthcare system.

It would be interesting to compare and see if there is any difference in what people pay in taxes.

I would like to see a comparison as well. Doesn't Japan have a version of universal healthcare?

[skunk]

On item that I don't see discussed, is tax rates for those countries with the national healthcare system.

It would be interesting to compare and see if there is any difference in what people pay in taxes.I have just paid around 32&#37; (today!) on my net profits. That does not include VAT @ 17.5% (Sales Tax) and petrol tax @ something crazy like 80%.
Ouch.

However, I'd much rather do that than pay umpteen grand if I fall over.

How does that compare with you lot?

[IJ Reilly]

On item that I don't see discussed, is tax rates for those countries with the national healthcare system.

It would be interesting to compare and see if there is any difference in what people pay in taxes.

My health insurance tax is currently over $6,000 a year, not including deductibles and copayments and is increasing 25% a year, irrespective of what I earn. Of course since I live in the U.S. I'm not allowed to call it a tax, because I have a "choice."

[IJ Reilly]

I would like to see a comparison as well. Doesn't Japan have a version of universal healthcare?

Nearly everybody does, except for us.

[Grakkle]

I have just paid around 32% (today!) on my net profits.
Ouch.

However, I'd much rather do that than pay umpteen grand if I fall over.


That's just it. People tend to look at the tax rates of countries with universal health care versus American rates, without taking into consideration what those taxes are bringing in benefits.

Yes, American tax rates are lower, but then the taxpayer receives far fewer benefits from those taxes than, say, Mr. Skunk does in the UK.

When the added costs of providing for healthcare on one's own are factored in, I suspect the universal healthcare model is likely more economically advantageous, despite the higher taxes required to provide it. It's certainly more equitable.

[Eraserhead]

I have just paid around 32&#37; (today!)

Nice and close until the 31st when you have to ;).

I'm a student so don't have to pay any tax yet, (and I live in the UK).

This (http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/8Comparison.htm) seems to be an interesting list of taxation statistics


General rate Top rate
(percent of GDP) (percent of income)
Sweden 53.2% 45.0
Denmark 48.3 40.0
Norway 47.1 23.0
Netherlands 47.0 72.0
Germany 39.2 56.0
Finland 37.7 51.0
Canada 37.3 29.0
Japan 30.9 60.0
United States 29.8 34.0



Health Care Expenditures (percent of GDP)4

United States 13.4%
Canada 10.0
Finland 9.1
Sweden 8.6
Germany 8.4
Netherlands 8.4
Norway 7.6
Japan 6.8
United Kingdom 6.6
Denmark 6.5

[skunk]

Nice and close until the 31st when you have to ;).Damn right!

Actual overall percentages paid would be more useful than nominal rates, though.

[Eraserhead]

Actual overall percentages paid would be more useful than nominal rates, though.

OK a second google came up with: this page (http://www.oecd.org/document/60/0,2340,en_2649_34533_1942460_1_1_1_1,00.html), which contains all the taxation data you could ever want.

The average taxation in the US is at 29% and the UK at 34% for the average wage according to table I.2 (http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/44/0/1942482.xls). Other countries are also listed. Other taxation tables are available on social security/vat/corporation tax.

EDIT:

from this page (http://www.oecd.org/document/15/0,2340,en_2649_201185_35472591_1_1_1_1,00.html) I got overall figures, much more useful!

67052

I'm off to bed, got to get up at 7 tomorrow for my lectures :(.

[LethalWolfe]

On item that I don't see discussed, is tax rates for those countries with the national healthcare system.

It would be interesting to compare and see if there is any difference in what people pay in taxes.

That's a good point. If someone could do the math (where's Dr. Q when you need him?) and take the average taxes in the US + the average cost of health insurance and compare that to the average taxes of other countries w/socialized medicine that would be helpful. I don't mind paying more in taxes if it means my overall out-of-pocket expenses are lower.


IJ,
I didn't see that article, but I'll try and find it on their site. This whole health insurance thing was a lot more pleasant when I was a dependent under my parents plan. It was a little less pleasant when I entered the work force and saw my benefits shrinking over the past few years. And now, as a freelancer, it's pretty unpleasant as my options are screwed (go w/o insurance), slightly less screwed (get crappy insurance for 'bout $150/mo... which is what I'm doing now), or chose to live in a box (I'll have okay coverage, but I won't be able to make rent).


Lethal

[pseudobrit]

That's a good point. If someone could do the math (where's Dr. Q when you need him?) and take the average taxes in the US + the average cost of health insurance and compare that to the average taxes of other countries w/socialized medicine that would be helpful. I don't mind paying more in taxes if it means my overall out-of-pocket expenses are lower.

You might see a drop in overall payments into healthcare depending on your plan and employer. You might see an increase, but how much is the peace of mind worth to you? To me, being able to go back to school is going to be difficult, because I'll have to maintain a full-time job in order to keep insurance. If we had universal coverage, this woulnd't be hanging over my head.

And how much is a working health care system worth to our society?

[IJ Reilly]

I didn't see that article, but I'll try and find it on their site. This whole health insurance thing was a lot more pleasant when I was a dependent under my parents plan. It was a little less pleasant when I entered the work force and saw my benefits shrinking over the past few years. And now, as a freelancer, it's pretty unpleasant as my options are screwed (go w/o insurance), slightly less screwed (get crappy insurance for 'bout $150/mo... which is what I'm doing now), or chose to live in a box (I'll have okay coverage, but I won't be able to make rent).

I've been trying to find the article again myself, so far without success. It was in the paper, perhaps three weeks ago. In some absurd situations, they've turned people down for conditions they haven't got and drugs they haven't taken. People working in many professions are automatically blacklisted. The industry tries to keep these criteria secret (they generally don't disclose the reasons for refusal to the applicant), but the Times got their hands some of the lists.

I was uninsured for a time when I was younger. I finally bought a policy when it dawned on me that I was avoiding going to the doctor for routine exams or even if something seemed like it deserved attention -- lest the doctor discover a preexisting condition that would later render me uninsurable. The system could hardly be more surreal if it had been designed by Franz Kafaka.

[sushi]

Doesn't Japan have a version of universal healthcare?
Yes they do. That is why many go to the states for care if they can afford it! ;)

On a serious note, the healthcare system in Japan is in a melt down. These days it seems many hospitals and clinics are closing shop since they cannot afford to stay in business.

My wife uses the Japanese system. I have US healthcare insurance since I cannot use the Japanese system.

My premiums are almost 10 grand per year! :eek:

And of course she must pay for her premiums as well. And she pays high income tax rates as well! :eek: :eek:

[obeygiant]

Yes they do. That is why many go to the states for care if they can afford it! ;)

On a serious note, the healthcare system in Japan is in a melt down. These days it seems many hospitals and clinics are closing shop since they cannot afford to stay in business.

My wife uses the Japanese system. I have US healthcare insurance since I cannot use the Japanese system.

My premiums are almost 10 grand per year! :eek:

And of course she must pay for her premiums as well. And she pays high income tax rates as well! :eek: :eek:

My wife is from japan also, but we live in the states. She tells me her impression is that the heathcare we get here seems more efficient. However the Japanese Government is practically broke, so no wonder the clinics cant afford to stay afloat.

[obeygiant]

Nearly everybody does, except for us.

Y'know thats true, but what else is true is that The United States has some of the finest doctors and hospitals in the world.

[leekohler]

Y'know thats true, but what else is true is that The United States has some of the finest doctors and hospitals in the world.

Unfortunately, most of us can't afford them. And yes, I have health insurance.

[Peterkro]

Y'know thats true, but what else is true is that The United States has some of the finest doctors and hospitals in the world.
So do France,Germany,Italy,Russia,Japan,China,Cuba,UK,Scandinavia,Australasia,Eire,India,Iran,Israel,South Africa and so on and so on.Your parochial view does you no credit at all.

[skunk]

So do France,Germany,Italy,Russia,Japan,China,Cuba,UK,Scandinavia,Australasia,Eire,India,Iran,Israel,South Africa and so on and so on.Your parochial view does you no credit at all.You forgot Thailand... :)

[obeygiant]

So do France,Germany,Italy,Russia,Japan,China,Cuba,UK,Scandinavia,Australasia,Eire,India,Iran,Israel,South Africa and so on and so on.Your parochial view does you no credit at all.

Actually I wasnt excluding those countries. I did say "some".

[skunk]

Actually I wasnt excluding those countries. I did say "some".Your clear aim was to draw a contrast.

[leekohler]

Your clear aim was to draw a contrast.

That was quite obvious.

[obeygiant]

Your clear aim was to draw a contrast.

That was quite obvious.

Sure I was, because I think the treatment in the states happens to be one of the best. And I'm all for providing healthcare for anyone who needs it. Bring on universal healthcare.

here are some numbers as of 2001

http://www.pnrec.org/2001papers/DaigneaultLajoie.pdf

[Ugg]

Sure I was, because I think the treatment in the state happens to be one of the best. And I'm all for providing healthcare for anyone who needs it. Bring on universal healthcare.

here are some numbers as of 2001

http://www.pnrec.org/2001papers/DaigneaultLajoie.pdf

What state are you referring to?

And no, most of the numbers date to the late 1990s.

I'm not sure why you posted this, it puts the US in an unfavorable light to say the least.