The problem is that most people like the idea of socialized medicine but hate it when it is put in place. Health care for everyone is a nice easy issue to stand for but the ramifications of socialized healthcare are rarely considered.
By the way...stupid ass supermarket workers here are striking over a $5 per week or $15 per week decrease in pay to cover some of the rising medical costs (5 if you have no kids, 15 if you do). Stupid unions.
I don't believe this, but I agree completely.
National Healthcare in this country might just ruin the best medical system in the world. I am totally opposed to it.
As for the thread topic, here's my take on the problem. For one thing, we have increased demand for covered prescription drugs. Part of the reason for this is that profit-driven drug companies are now allowed to advertise on TV (since 1997). We now have a pill for everything...a covered pill.
Secondly, medical insurance has really screwed things up. In fact, I'd argue that the "uninsured persons" problem would not be as bad if we didn't have day-to-day non-catastrophic coverage. Doctors rates are so outrageous (in part), because insurance companies only pay about 30% of what they bill. If people could pay for services like anything else, you'd see that $75 docter visit cost about $20. Insurance should be available for catostrophic/major illness that would normally bankrupt the average person.
Now, I know: What about the poor? I suppose that I would favor assistance for those unable to afford care or insurance. When I say assistance, I mean it literally. They would not receive free care, but reduced cost care. Only care essential for basic health would be covered.
US has very high quality health care. Unfortunately, it isn't accessible to the 48+ million of us without health insurance. 10,000 people die every year of common medial maladies that regular insurance would cover. The issue at hand is very high quality health care for those with the money or insurance versus acceptably high quality health care for the masses. I'll take the latter, but I could see how those with good insurance would go for the former.
So, the US is #1ish in medical innovation but 28th or so in healthcare accessability. 28th. that sucks for such a great country. When someone dies from pneumonia due to lack of insurance, that is just sad. When 10,000 people die similarly, it is tragic.
The problem is that most people like the idea of socialized medicine but hate it when it is put in place. Health care for everyone is a nice easy issue to stand for but the ramifications of socialized healthcare are rarely considered.
Actually, most opinion polls in Canada show that Canadians are, overall, pretty happy with our socialized health-care system. It's not a perfect system, and governments here are trying to improve it - but not a single federal or provincial political party here - no matter how conservative (and we have some parties that, on other issues are at least as right-wing as the Republicans in the U.S.A.) are suggesting changing the basic principle of universal coverage.
Socialized heatlh care systems have also proven to be more efficient, in terms of reducing the amount of dollars spent on bureacracy vs. actual patient care compared with others. A study published by the New England Journal of Medicine in August found that Canada?s government-run public health care system was twice as efficient ? in terms of minimizing costs spent on administration vs. costs actually spent on care ? than the privately-run U.S. system. An astounding 31 per cent of health-care expenditures in the United States are spent on administration - largely the administration expenses of private insurance companies. Perhaps part of the answer to Trumptman's question can be found there.
Now, I am not against the private sector in most areas, but I do think that health-care should be a a social responsibility funded through taxes - and I think that most Canadians, right and left, would agree.
Comments
The problem is that most people like the idea of socialized medicine but hate it when it is put in place. Health care for everyone is a nice easy issue to stand for but the ramifications of socialized healthcare are rarely considered.
By the way...stupid ass supermarket workers here are striking over a $5 per week or $15 per week decrease in pay to cover some of the rising medical costs (5 if you have no kids, 15 if you do). Stupid unions.
I don't believe this, but I agree completely.
National Healthcare in this country might just ruin the best medical system in the world. I am totally opposed to it.
As for the thread topic, here's my take on the problem. For one thing, we have increased demand for covered prescription drugs. Part of the reason for this is that profit-driven drug companies are now allowed to advertise on TV (since 1997). We now have a pill for everything...a covered pill.
Secondly, medical insurance has really screwed things up. In fact, I'd argue that the "uninsured persons" problem would not be as bad if we didn't have day-to-day non-catastrophic coverage. Doctors rates are so outrageous (in part), because insurance companies only pay about 30% of what they bill. If people could pay for services like anything else, you'd see that $75 docter visit cost about $20. Insurance should be available for catostrophic/major illness that would normally bankrupt the average person.
Now, I know: What about the poor? I suppose that I would favor assistance for those unable to afford care or insurance. When I say assistance, I mean it literally. They would not receive free care, but reduced cost care. Only care essential for basic health would be covered.
So, the US is #1ish in medical innovation but 28th or so in healthcare accessability. 28th. that sucks for such a great country. When someone dies from pneumonia due to lack of insurance, that is just sad. When 10,000 people die similarly, it is tragic.
Originally posted by BR
The problem is that most people like the idea of socialized medicine but hate it when it is put in place. Health care for everyone is a nice easy issue to stand for but the ramifications of socialized healthcare are rarely considered.
Actually, most opinion polls in Canada show that Canadians are, overall, pretty happy with our socialized health-care system. It's not a perfect system, and governments here are trying to improve it - but not a single federal or provincial political party here - no matter how conservative (and we have some parties that, on other issues are at least as right-wing as the Republicans in the U.S.A.) are suggesting changing the basic principle of universal coverage.
Socialized heatlh care systems have also proven to be more efficient, in terms of reducing the amount of dollars spent on bureacracy vs. actual patient care compared with others. A study published by the New England Journal of Medicine in August found that Canada?s government-run public health care system was twice as efficient ? in terms of minimizing costs spent on administration vs. costs actually spent on care ? than the privately-run U.S. system. An astounding 31 per cent of health-care expenditures in the United States are spent on administration - largely the administration expenses of private insurance companies. Perhaps part of the answer to Trumptman's question can be found there.
Now, I am not against the private sector in most areas, but I do think that health-care should be a a social responsibility funded through taxes - and I think that most Canadians, right and left, would agree.