Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The US system has an overabundance of middlemen - as evidenced by the fact that more of our healthcare money is spent on administration than in any comparable system anywhere. Copying a working system like, say, the Swiss one would leave a lot of people with an economic interest in maintaining the existing system without a job. Which leads to the captain's insight:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mal
"About 50% of the human race is middle-men and they don't take kindly to being eliminated"
Do you realize the amount of a difference the healthcare system would have to make for it to have "enormous ramifications" when mixed in with the multiple other factors as an average across hundreds of millions of people?
Absolutely no healthcare system might be enough of a difference, but then again, those countries also suffer from other economic and living conditions that bring down the numbers. Is it lack of Aetna or undrinkable water?
There are simply too many variables that play into that to make it a valid measure.
It's called stress. And stress during an illness will kill and does. Like getting a $50,000 medical bill while on dialysis, because of some bs about out of network nonsense. That is the difference.
Far too simplified but you did add another variable that makes this a poor measure.
Because it is that simple. So many on this site lack common sense and above all--life experience, especially pertaining to this subject. So, if you've got something to say, then spell it out.
So we're not smart enough to make something at least similar work for us and our special problems? Is that what you're saying?
Healthcare has been on the table since it was first proposed in the early 70's within the Nixon Admin. Heck, even the conservative Heritage Foundation once pitched a national healthcare system.
Medicare works reasonably well, sans the Part D thingy.
Younger people could be phased in over time. People would continue to be encouraged to obtain their own supplemental policies to cover what Medicare does not. Several nations operate this way.
Of course it would be necessary to increase taxes to fund it. That increase would in theory be offset with significant reductions in primary healthcare insurance. I know too many families who are paying $20-25K out of pocket for individual policies because they are self-employed and do not have employer sponsored group policies or subsidies.
Happens to me all the time, doesnt even phase me anymore except I have to get on the phone call billing and then usually BCBS. They always take care of the problem and are vedry apologetic about any miz ups.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmking
It's called stress. And stress during an illness will kill and does. Like getting a $50,000 medical bill while on dialysis, because of some bs about out of network nonsense. That is the difference.
now count the number of countries with socialized healthcare. Countries like Canada and UK get drugs cheap because people in the US fund that research by paying the full price.
We get drugs cheap because we decided it's a buyer's market and laid down the law. Drug companies can sell at low prices or not at all, it's their choice. You don't really think that if our prices were to increase yours would go down, do you? Why? Would the drug companies say "Oh no, we've got enough profit now, no need to charge you so much."? No they would not.
Besides, pharmaceutical outfits spend more on marketing than R&D. Three times as much, last I read. If your high prices are paying for anything, they're paying for advertising.
Because it is that simple. So many on this site lack common sense and above all--life experience, especially pertaining to this subject. So, if you've got something to say, then spell it out.
If you look back over my previous posts, you will see many reasons why this is not a good measure for the medical system, but broadly speaking, too many variables contribute to the life expectancy to draw reliable conclusions about one of them (medical care).
As for your point about about stress making the difference, who is more stressed? Is it the guy that pays for his own insurance in the US but can get treated quickly? Is it the guy in another country that doesn't have to pay and will get service but has to worry for 8 weeks to get tested?
Is there a difference in anxiety disorder between the countries? Colder climates with less sun have an effect on emotions too, so where does that fit in since many of the countries mentioned are in northern Europe?
Let's take a wounded soldier, is his relieved stress that his treatment is covered enough to make up for the drop in life expectancy that his best friend created because he was killed at 18?
Who is more stressed the US? The guy working 80 hours per week to pay for healthcare and gets it or is it the 18 year-old guy that doesn't work, lives in the inner-city and has no health coverage? Guy number 1 may be more stressed because when he's ill, the company and many employees suffer. Guy number 2 may also be because he doesn't have money. To throw a wrench into it, guy number 2 is much more likely to be shot and die at a young age (adjusting the average lifespan) before he even encounters the healthcare system.
How about two middle class neighbors with similar jobs and insurance? Do they have the same stress levels? What if one has kids and the other does not? How about their counterpart in another country? What other elements may play into their stress level and life expectancy? Kids? Conflict with neighbors? Being sued? Or does it all come down to medical insurance?
What did your life experience tell you about all of these things? Since it's that simple, I'm sure you figured it all out. It is common sense isn't it?
Those ones, not to mention how the heavily regulate legal/illegal immigration because they cannot afford to support the worlds poor. But if you mention that in America you are a racist.
Not Canada. It allows in tons of immigrants, which is a good thing, because the birth rate is too low to replace their population.
I
Why can't we emulate the superior systems and processes that other rich, successful nations have been continuously doing for a long time now?
Because many Americans can't stand the idea that poor people might actually have the same access to and the same medical care as people who are better off. Poor people don't deserve health care!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
