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.
And there goes your "Medicare For All". At their age they are Medicare eligible and yet substantial costs weren't absorbed under that plan. Yet people think that you can tripe the size of Medicare and make it work.
The only expenses that Medicare wouldn't have covered would have been custodial care (the home attendant). The high costs of this sent Medicare running.
Folks really need to put the blame where it lies. Delivering healthcare in the USA is many times more expensive than it is just across the border in Canada. Until we address this fact it doesn't matter what mechanisms we use to pay for this care.
Hospital CEOs in NYC where the hospitals are all nonprofit, can earn as much as $7Million. We all end up paying for this as we do for those doctors who subject their patients to unnecessary procedures, either to reduce the risk of being sued, or to increase how much they can bill Medicare/Medicaid/private insurance.
Medicare pays for a skilled nursing home for about a month. Medicaid, on the other hand, will pay for nursing care long term but one must spend all of one's money on nursing care first.
Of course there are elderly people who gave away their houses and other assets 5 years or more before they need a nursing home. In that case it doesn't matter, with no assets and no recent assets medicaid pays.
But the point is savings are very easily wiped out by healthcare crises.
Canada and other Western nations doctors don't have such extremely high levels of death from medical school, and for them medical school is shorter, more at the level of a bachelor's degree unless one wants to go into academia or research (those doctors have PhDs).
Canada and other Western nations do not give freebies to millions of people. They require everyone to pay into the national insurance system, so there are enough funds to cover the complete medical care for people who become ill.
It is like a lottery - the size of the available award depends upon the revenue from lottery tickets sold. If more tickets are sold, people who are drawn as lottery winners will get more money. But normally the only way to win the lottery is to buy a ticket - you can't claim winnings without a ticket. Healthcare insurance in Western countries (other than the USA) works on the principle of lottery, only of course an illness is the lottery that nobody wants to win, though many people will.
In the US, a huge proportion of the population does not pay anything into the healthcare insurance pools, yet gets many benefits from those pools for free. This drives health isnurance premiums sky high for those people who DO pay into the insurance pools, and still cannot cover all healthcare services. The presence of a huge population that is obtaining medical care without paying insurance premiums is the principal reason why the US healthcare is (a) expensive, and (b) cannot provide complete coverage for all medical problems.
I had given this example before, but will again. If there is a group of 100 prople, and it is known statistically that in an average year 20 of them will get ill at the total cost of $200,000, then the insurance needs to collect $200,000 in medical insurance premiums from that group in order to pay for their medical care. If each of the 100 people pays their annual premium, the premium will be $2,000 per year for each person. But if only 50 people pay the premium, and the other 50 get their healthcare for free, then the premium for those who pay goes up to $4,000. The tab for Medicaid (which pays medical providers almost nothing, it generally does not even cover the cost of operating room supplies let alone the labor) has to be picked up by other insurers, which is what constantly drives up the cost of insurance in the US.
Again the question for supporters of "free" universal healthcare in the US: who will pay for it? Santa Claus?
Canada and other Western nations do not give freebies to millions of people. They require everyone to pay into the national insurance system, so there are enough funds to cover the complete medical care for people who become ill.
It is like a lottery - the size of the available award depends upon the revenue from lottery tickets sold. If more tickets are sold, people who are drawn as lottery winners will get more money. But normally the only way to win the lottery is to buy a ticket - you can't claim winnings without a ticket. Healthcare insurance in Western countries (other than the USA) works on the principle of lottery, only of course an illness is the lottery that nobody wants to win, though many people will.
In the US, a huge proportion of the population does not pay anything into the healthcare insurance pools, yet gets many benefits from those pools for free. This drives health isnurance premiums sky high for those people who DO pay into the insurance pools, and still cannot cover all healthcare services. The presence of a huge population that is obtaining medical care without paying insurance premiums is the principal reason why the US healthcare is (a) expensive, and (b) cannot provide complete coverage for all medical problems.
I had given this example before, but will again. If there is a group of 100 prople, and it is known statistically that in an average year 20 of them will get ill at the total cost of $200,000, then the insurance needs to collect $200,000 in medical insurance premiums from that group in order to pay for their medical care. If each of the 100 people pays their annual premium, the premium will be $2,000 per year for each person. But if only 50 people pay the premium, and the other 50 get their healthcare for free, then the premium for those who pay goes up to $4,000. The tab for Medicaid (which pays medical providers almost nothing, it generally does not even cover the cost of operating room supplies let alone the labor) has to be picked up by other insurers, which is what constantly drives up the cost of insurance in the US.
Again the question for supporters of "free" universal healthcare in the US: who will pay for it? Santa Claus?
A lot of people in Spain, Portugal, Italy, and other European nations work in cash.
They still get free healthcare.
Now if they want pensions THEN they have to pay into that system.
Though of course there is sales tax, so everyone pays their taxes in the end.
Lots of British retirees are in Spain or in Southern Europe and they use the healthcare systems of these countries without ever having worked here. Though of course they spend money here and a big part of the economy is based on tourism, retirees, and foreigners in general.
No one is denied healthcare because they haven't paid X amount of money in social security taxes.
Have you lived in a Western country outside of the United States?
If you just came from Serbia to the US, then you have not.
There are too many posts on City Data of people ranting and raving anytime anyone gets ANY government assistance, whether it's elders getting SCRIE, or anyone getting any sort of help. There have been too many posts of people suggesting all poor people move to some small town outside of NYC.
A lot of people in Spain, Portugal, Italy, and other European nations work in cash.
They still get free healthcare.
Now if they want pensions THEN they have to pay into that system.
Though of course there is sales tax, so everyone pays their taxes in the end.
Lots of British retirees are in Spain or in Southern Europe and they use the healthcare systems of these countries without ever having worked here. Though of course they spend money here and a big part of the economy is based on tourism, retirees, and foreigners in general.
No one is denied healthcare because they haven't paid X amount of money in social security taxes.
Have you lived in a Western country outside of the United States?
If you just came from Serbia to the US, then you have not.
I have never lived in Serbia and have not come from Serbia to the US. My parents worked in several Western European countries when I was 18 to 23, so I spent a fair amount of time in Western Europe in the few years before going to the US for training (but I was still going to school in Croatia, so was living full time in Croatia as well. But distances are very small in Europe for weekend travel). My parents have lived in a Western European country since around 1990 - they paid into a healthcare system there, which is why their healthcare was always covered at a full level. My entire extended family lives in Western Europe (only my brother and I live in the US).
If you think your healthcare is free in any country you are visiting, try having a skiing accident in any Western European country without carrying travel insurance... you will.have a REAL example of bankruptcy through medical bills :-). You seem to truly have no idea.
People who work illegally in Europe are already in trouble with law without seeking medical care... if they seek medical care, they will get free medical care followed by a heavy fine to the illegal employer and deportation of the worker. Have you seen the Dardenne brothers' film La Promesse? Well, you should (or anybody should who is interested in going to Europe for "free healthcare").
Again, Western Europe applies welfare to a very small proportion of the society, and it is persistently very embarassing and undesirable for Western Eurooean people to receive welfare. A very large working and tax-paying population can easily support a small number of unfortunate cases who truly need welfare.
In the US, welfare is an accepted lifestyle for a massive population that rivals the working population in size. Working population has not been able to comfortably support that for a long time, and considering the lack of real growth in wages (measured against real inflation) and the ever increasing "rights" of the welfare population, the working population cannot support the welfare lifestyle on any reasonable level at all any more.
A solution for that is either to make everyone poor (per AOC & Co.), or to cut welfare and wean the welfare population off of other people's money - if there is no free everything any more, a number of people would very quickly learn how to manage their job search, their contraception, their self-paid housing, and their self-paid everything else.
And sure, in a market economy people should move where they can afford to live. That is what people do who work for living - why should welfare-dependent people be given any diffetent privileges? If one earns nothing and can afford nothing, he/she should be housed in places with the lowest land and housing costs. Welfare people should be supported at a sustenance level, not at a luxury level - and living ANYWHERE in NYC is an optional luxury, not a survival necessity.
I have never lived in Serbia and have not come from Serbia to the US. My parents worked in several Western European countries when I was 18 to 23, so I spent a fair amount of time in Western Europe in the few years before going to the US for training (but I was still going to school in Croatia, so was living full time in Croatia as well. But distances are very small in Europe for weekend travel). My parents have lived in a Western European country since around 1990 - they paid into a healthcare system there, which is why their healthcare was always covered at a full level. My entire extended family lives in Western Europe (only my brother and I live in the US).
If you think your healthcare is free in any country you are visiting, try having a skiing accident in any Western European country without carrying travel insurance... you will.have a REAL example of bankruptcy through medical bills :-). You seem to truly have no idea.
People who work illegally in Europe are already in trouble with law without seeking medical care... if they seek medical care, they will get free medical care followed by a heavy fine to the illegal employer and deportation of the worker. Have you seen the Dardenne brothers' film La Promesse? Well, you should (or anybody should who is interested in going to Europe for "free healthcare").
Again, Western Europe applies welfare to a very small proportion of the society, and it is persistently very embarassing and undesirable for Western Eurooean people to receive welfare. A very large working and tax-paying population can easily support a small number of unfortunate cases who truly need welfare.
In the US, welfare is an accepted lifestyle for a massive population that rivals the working population in size. Working population has not been able to comfortably support that for a long time, and considering the lack of real growth in wages (measured against real inflation) and the ever increasing "rights" of the welfare population, the working population cannot support the welfare lifestyle on any reasonable level at all any more.
A solution for that is either to make everyone poor (per AOC & Co.), or to cut welfare and wean the welfare population off of other people's money - if there is no free everything any more, a number of people would very quickly learn how to manage their job search, their contraception, their self-paid housing, and their self-paid everything else.
And sure, in a market economy people should move where they can afford to live. That is what people do who work for living - why should welfare-dependent people be given any diffetent privileges? If one earns nothing and can afford nothing, he/she should be housed in places with the lowest land and housing costs. Welfare people should be supported at a sustenance level, not at a luxury level - and living ANYWHERE in NYC is an optional luxury, not a survival necessity.
Why waste your time? Don't you understand that the United States is exactly like Denmark or the Netherlands in every conceivable way? And if those countries can do something that means that the U.S. can do it too? Because there's, like, no difference between the various nations?
Why waste your time? Don't you understand that the United States is exactly like Denmark or the Netherlands in every conceivable way? And if those countries can do something that means that the U.S. can do it too? Because there's, like, no difference between the various nations?
Denmark and Netherlands are very different from the US. I happen to be relatively closely familiar with Denmark. Over 90% of welfare resources in Denmark are being used by relatively recent immigrants of non-Danish origin. Denmark has started recouping the cost the immigransts have caused to the national safety system by appropriating all their property (ie, a temporary welfare is now treated as a debt), and deporting immigrants that commit crimes or at least detaining them at an isolated island (that I think used to serve as a quarantine for disease in the past). There are also new laws about deportation of immigrants "who failed to assimilate with Danish culture". The fact that anti-immigration measures in Denmark are at the same time anti-welfare measures in Denmark points to the glaring difference between Denmark and the US: the number of people who use welfare in Denmark is small relative to the general population and these people are not Danish to start with, while in the US the number of people who use welfare is a very large proportion of general population and (even though welfare-dependent immigrants are not negligible in the US) the welfare-dependent people in the US are mostly Americans, ie, have been Americans for generations, and have used welfare for generations. In Western Europe, generational welfare is extremely rare - in the US it is normal for a huge part of the society. I have worked on contracts in southern WV and MS where very few people in the entire county were employed, and a welfare check was the only form of "paycheck" normally known to anyone. This situation would sound like a weird science-fiction to anyone from Denmark or Netherlands.
Denmark and Netherlands are very different from the US. I happen to be relatively closely familiar with Denmark. Over 90% of welfare resources in Denmark are being used by relatively recent immigrants of non-Danish origin. Denmark has started recouping the cost the immigransts have caused to the national safety system by appropriating all their property (ie, a temporary welfare is now treated as a debt), and deporting immigrants that commit crimes or at least detaining them at an isolated island (that I think used to serve as a quarantine for disease in the past). There are also new laws about deportation of immigrants "who failed to assimilate with Danish culture". The fact that anti-immigration measures in Denmark are at the same time anti-welfare measures in Denmark points to the glaring difference between Denmark and the US: the number of people who use welfare in Denmark is small relative to the general population and these people are not Danish to start with, while in the US the number of people who use welfare is a very large proportion of general population and (even though welfare-dependent immigrants are not negligible in the US) the welfare-dependent people in the US are mostly Americans, ie, have been Americans for generations, and have used welfare for generations. In Western Europe, generational welfare is extremely rare - in the US it is normal for a huge part of the society. I have worked on contracts in southern WV and MS where very few people in the entire county were employed, and a welfare check was the only form of "paycheck" normally known to anyone. This situation would sound like a weird science-fiction to anyone from Denmark or Netherlands.
I was being sarcastic.
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.
