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 truth is the middle class needs to shoulder the burden of taxes for healthcare. It's the simple hard truth. Yet the Dems want to tax the rich. We all know you cannot fund a social system like universal healthcare by relying on tax revenues from just 3-5% of the population. The republicans obviously need to get off their holier than now "no new taxes stance".
In the US we have unequal participation. And that's not a way to run a social program.
I think the point where we talk past each other is this:
America already has government healthcare. Medicare, Medicaid, Veterans, IHA etc. Several different programs with a lot of duplication of effort. The taxpayer shoulders the cost. A cost which is right now, greater than what taxpayers in other countries pay for full UHC. Bar two countries.
I'll repeat that: Americans, at the moment, pay more for government healthcare than the cost of full UHC.
I think the point where we talk past each other is this:
America already has government healthcare. Medicare, Medicaid, Veterans, IHA etc. Several different programs with a lot of duplication of effort. The taxpayer shoulders the cost. A cost which is right now, greater than what taxpayers in other countries pay for full UHC. Bar two countries.
I'll repeat that: Americans, at the moment, pay more for government healthcare than the cost of full UHC.
and again you FAIL to address WHY
average RN salary in France $1700 a month
avarage RN salary in England $2800 a month
averaage RN salary in Germany $2200 a month
average RN salary in USA $5416 a month or 65k a year
I'll post this again. It's how much it costs the government, per citizen.
UK total healthcare spending per person - $3480
Public - $2919
Private - $561
Doctors per 10000 - 27.43
Life expectancy - 81.05
Australia total healthcare spending per person - $3441
Public - $2340
Private - $1101
Doctors per 10000 - 29.91
Life expectancy - 81.81
USA total healthcare spending per person - $8362
Public - $4437
Private - $3925
Doctors per 10000 - 24.22
Life expectancy - 78.37
Ugh, switching to single payer doesn't change the fact that hospitals set the prices and they are largely monopolistic. A 15 mile difference could mean an $80K difference in price. Over the past 20-30 years there has been significant consolidation within the healthcare sector and that led to decreased competition. And you are really cherry picking your data don't you think? Affluence and technology are the 2 main drivers of healthcare costs, but the UK and Australia have lower median incomes, less cosmetic surgery, and much longer wait times.
If you are going to look at life expectancy you might want to look at lifestyle choices. We have more violent gangs, more violent cops, more car accidents, more teen pregnancy, more premature births, consume more calories per capita, consume more drugs, have higher HIV rates, work more and have more stress, et cetera. All of the preceding factors lower life expectancy. However, none of the things I have mentioned have anything to do with the quality of healthcare.
White men, black men, and black women are below 80 years in life expectancy, but everyone else is above 80.
Life expectancy: All - 78.61
Black male: 70
Black women: 77.57
Hispanic male: 80.63
Hispanic female: 86.25
Asian male: 84.56
Asian female: 89.67 - highest in the world.
White male: 76.19
White female: 81.21
Most British actually dislike their Health care and Welfare systems.
I have a few clients and friends in the UK. If they get sick they have a massive wait to see a doctor, and up to a year to see a specialist. Canada is better than the UK. US level of care is better than both, but at 2-3-4x the cost, which is usury at the very least.
Conservatives bash any program that is run by the government. Let's face it, everything the government does is inefficient and expensive. The fact that a panel of bureaucrats would be in charge of approving medical procedures is lunacy.
Liberals want everyone to have equal care, regardless of affordability. While equal care is a noble idea, it isn't practical. By law, anyone that goes into an emergency room has to be treated. Liberals say this practice is costing everyone money and is too expensive. At the same time, ACH is going to hammer young adults by forcing them to cover healthcare most won't need for decades.
The bottom line is that either way, you have to pay for what you get. I fear that in forcing everyone into an exchange, we'll be spending far more than we do currently under EMTALA/COBRA.
Again, since 1986, medical costs have skyrocketed. Much the same as low interest student loans with no bankruptcy protection has skyrocketed tuitions. When the government mandates a thing, someone devises a way take advantage of the law and squeeze recipients (blood from turnips).
When none of them have had any experience with such a system? There's dozens of Canadian and British posters on here who can easily refute just about any ridiculous claim made by reactionaries against both systems. So:
1. How many people die as a result of a waiting list in Canada and the UK, compared to how many people die in the US because they can't pay for a procedure for whatever reason (which amounts to a defacto waiting list of sorts)?
2. I also constantly read just how superior US healthcare is. Sure, healthcare is superior in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh or Cleveland, but what about those people, of which a plurality, if not most, Americans live in such settings; namely being those that live in a no-name city like Altoona, PA or Somerset, PA or some other small, rusted out town in eastern Kentucky, etc.? Not every geographical area in the US has a Cleveland Clinic, a Philadelphia Children's Hospital, or some other respectable Level I trauma center. The Level II and III trauma centers are not centers of innovation and world class healthcare, everybody seems to forget those in their rants.
OTTAWA–Danny Williams' decision to head south for heart surgery has sparked a furious debate on both sides of the border.
The premier of Newfoundland and Labrador, a former lawyer and millionaire businessman, left Monday for an unspecified cardiac surgical procedure at an undisclosed U.S. hospital. The move raised questions about whether he could have the operation in Canada.
Baby Jayden was denied medical treatment and handed back to his mother to die – just because he was born two days before a 22-week limit when he could have been given a chance to live.
When you lived/worked in Europe, did you actually use their health care system, or did you use U.S. facilities like those found on military bases? Quite different animals. In the UK, my family and I had to use the British NHS. That was our primary means of health care. The pediatric care was horrible. I will leave it at that, it in no way compared to the level of care found in the US. A family member had to have an inpatient surgical procedure while we were there. It was like going back in time 50 years. The post surgical ward was literally 10 people crammed into a room that probably should have held about 6. It was so crowded that the beds were touching. The windows were open to the main thoroughfare outside with no screens. Nice to have flies all over the inside of a post surgical ward. There was a massive MRSA outbreak in NHS hospitals at the time. It was a systemic problem, not an isolated one.
It isn't at all about political ideology, it is about retaining personal choice and standard of care. Mentioning ideology once does not indicate that it is the primary focus of the discussion.
The pro-centralized health care crowd is quick to point out cost savings in comparison to the European models. What they fail to realize is large disparity in tax burdens between the US and places like Germany, Great Britain, France, Greece, Spain, Portugal, etc. Britons pay much higher tax rates than we do. They, along with Germans, also pay Value Added Tax (VAT) on goods and services. Think of this as a sales tax on steroids. Most Europeans pay nearly four times what we pay for fuel. Bottom line, health care is expensive, and it must be paid for. In the US, we pay for it more directly, in most cases through an HMO or other health insurance program. In Europe, they pay for it through higher taxes. Pick your poison, but you will still be paying for health care.
I was born and grew up in the UK. I used the NHS like every other British citizen. My mother still lives in the UK and she gets excellent health care and social services. I lived and worked in Switzerland for several years. I had Swiss health insurance like every other Swiss person. Again the health care was outstanding. I also get great health care here in the USA. The difference is that I pay a lot more for it than I ever did in the UK or in Switzerland.
Because dental care was expensive in Switzerland, I used to drive into France to go to the dentist. Great care at a reasonable cost.
Incidentally, the tax burden in Switzerland is pretty low. In fact, it has the lowest marginal tax rate on average income workers at 20% (US average is 27%). VAT is 8%, lower than many sales taxes in the USA, there are far fewer of the hidden taxes we have in the USA (ever read your utility bill?) and there is no capital gains tax.
The Swiss have a private health care model which is regulated by the government. It works, it is efficient and it is great value for money.
And I repeat .... this isn't an issue of quality of care. This is an issue that Americans are paying far too much for health care by any standard you care to choose. Our system is grossly inefficient, has too many middlemen taking a cut and has prices kept artificially due to powerful lobbying.
OTTAWA–Danny Williams' decision to head south for heart surgery has sparked a furious debate on both sides of the border.
The premier of Newfoundland and Labrador, a former lawyer and millionaire businessman, left Monday for an unspecified cardiac surgical procedure at an undisclosed U.S. hospital. The move raised questions about whether he could have the operation in Canada.
Oh, for the love of God!! Again??
Yes, he could have had the same surgery in Canada. He didn't want to, as he preferred to recuperate in sunny Florida, where he owns a home, rather than face a bitter Canadian winter.
How many bloody times do you have to repeat the same fallacious meme ad nauseum?
I have a few clients and friends in the UK. If they get sick they have a massive wait to see a doctor, and up to a year to see a specialist. Canada is better than the UK. US level of care is better than both, but at 2-3-4x the cost, which is usury at the very least.
My mother's doctor comes to see her .... usually next day. In the UK of course.
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.
switching to single payer doesn't change the fact that hospitals set the prices and they are largely monopolistic. A 15 mile difference could mean an $80K difference in price. Over the past 20-30 years there has been significant consolidation within the healthcare sector and that led to decreased competition. And you are really cherry picking your data don't you think? Affluence and technology are the 2 main drivers of healthcare costs, but the UK and Australia have lower median incomes, less cosmetic surgery, and much longer wait times.
