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.
When is anyone going to get it. The USA is totally incapable of fixing anything at all in their country. Things are just going from bad to worse and will continue to decline until there is some meaningful reform. The good old days are gone for good in the USA and they are not coming back. The country is still operating like it did from the 50s onwards and the world is a very different place. What made the USA great in the past just is not going to work any more and the sooner the politicians realize it the sooner they will be able to make the changes needed in this new millennium. Healthcare is just a single example of the inability of the country to effect positive change. The entire rest of the western democracies figured this out decades ago and actually did things to address it.
The bottom line is that the USA is a "right wing" state. By definition the right is reactionary which means going backward and not forward. It's regressive which means any of the hard earned benefits the middle class has fought for and won will be taken away. The state exists for the benefit of the wealthy few and as we have seen the healthcare system is just fine for them, "thank you very much". It's truly pathetic seeing a once great "Beacon of freedom" descend into a quasi Fascist state where the corporations are more important and have more rights than the citizens. I really can't see this changing any time soon and who knows how far down the country will have to go before "the people" have had enough of getting screwed over and over.
He lost the argument when it became apparent through his own admission some time ago, he works for insurance companies. That takes him right into the 'parasitic shill' category and completely out of the realm of an un-prejudicial observer.
I never made such an admission.
That was in fact you and weltschmerz who made that claim after you ran out of space deflecting and dodging....like here....where dodged...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea
You contradict yourself....A more accurate statement by you is that wealth and influence is perfectly fine, so long as it supports your agenda.
American Hospital Assn
HEAVY HITTER The American Hospital Association represents 37,000 individual members at more than 5,000 hospitals and health care systems.
View totals for other cycles:
CONTRIBUTIONS
$2,383,767 ranks 137 of 20,981
LOBBYING
$19,251,200 (2012)
$20,823,341 (2011) ranks 5 of 4,368 in 2012
OUTSIDE SPENDING
$1,912,675 ranks 47 of 296
The American Hospital Association gave....
$779 Million to Obama for America 2008
$260 Million to DNC 2008
$428 Million to RNC 2008
The American Hospital Association wrote the PPACA, not Obama, and not anyone in Congress. This wouldn't be the first time they've written legislation, found shills to sponsor it, and then dump it people....the American Hospital Association also wrote the Medicare law, and they also single-handedly screwed up the whole US healthcare system.
You keep dodging the question of how the US healthcare system evolved....just as every ACA supporter does, which yet again proves the whole point of this thread, that there is a massive disconnect.
Sourcing...
Mircea
...and you dodged this...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea
Let's time-warp back to 1953 and the BruSan Health Insurance Company. The big economics-business wizard BruSan has set up an health insurance company. His first client is a medium-size business with 100 employees. BruSan has issued....
50 family polices with a cash surrender value of $500,000 each; and
30 married-no-children policies with a cash surrender value of $300,000 each; and
20 single-person policies with a cash surrender value of $250,000 each.
The 50 family polices cost $2,000 per year.
The 30 married-no-children policies cost $3,000 annually.
The 20 single-person policies cost $4,000 annually.
The employer pays 50% of the employee cost.
Everything is cool and peachy, right?
Wrong.
BruSan is now in jail being held without bail on 100 counts of criminal fraud charges.
Congratulations BruSan....what a great job.
...as a reminder that was your chance to show everyone that you understand how insurance works....you failed...
....here's weltschmerz on failed deflection....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea
What about these....are they jokes?
Canadian Medical Association The Chronicle Herald Ottawa Citizen The Los Angeles Times
Are you saying the Canadian government is not truthful?
And just for the record, you made that claim here....
Quote:
Originally Posted by BruSan
Mircea; here's a simple question for you: in your self appointed or paid position, as an advocate for an/any insurance company, why is it the only ammunition you choose to use, that of comparing 'apples to coconuts'.
...as did this Canadian....
Quote:
Originally Posted by revrandy
I said it before the only reason she was on here posting such misinformation was that she worked for an insurance company. So glad the truth is finally out there.
Do I get a gold star for being right?
...and of course, this one....
Quote:
Originally Posted by weltschmerz
And there it is. Now we know why you're on every insurance thread like a pit bull on a poodle, slamming every single-payer system, even if it means lying and posting crap from the Fraser Institute.
Your livelihood depends on it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BruSan
He also had the unmitigated gall to refer to "poetic justice" as a descriptor for the posters untimely death.
If you do not "wish" for that to happen, then perhaps you should increase the taxes you pay to ensure that your ER rooms are adequately staffed to prevent such deaths.
But, then, of course if you did that, you would be admitting that Canada is not currently paying the true cost of healthcare, and that healthcare in Canada is not cheaper.
And if the increased taxes cause economic problems in Canada?
I'll guess you just turn more socialist, right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by weltschmerz
What a snarky and evil thing to say.
Would you like a reminder?
After Three Wolves In Snow cornered you on an issue, this was your response....
Quote:
Originally Posted by weltschmerz
What line jumping? The rich can go to a private MRI clinic if they don't feel like waiting.
It would appear you like snarky and evil.
But....you admit there are waiting lines.....at least we're making progress.....it won't be too much longer before you step into the World of Reality.
Quote:
Originally Posted by weltschmerz
I wouldn't wish that on you.
I never wished it on anyone...I simply mentioned it as a possible future fate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by weltschmerz
Anyway......are you trying to say the ERs in the US are not without it's problems?
Dodging and defecting......if your healthcare system is properly funded and you are paying the true cost of healthcare, then why are people dying in your waiting rooms?
Either you have the intelligence to answer the question, or not.
And, if your claims that Americans are dying in ER rooms, then expanding the healthcare system to include more people and tax the already limited resources will do what?
Cause more people to die. Why would you "wish" that on people?
In the future, see if you can come up with something more creative than working for insurance companies.
Better yet, stop dodging and deflecting...
Australia's big health care controversy at the moment is whether we should charge a $5 fee for emergency room and GP visits.
There was a lot of public disapproval here when a couple of years ago, a 1€ participation (1$37) was made obligatory to pay for a doctor consultation (exception for children and poor people).
We definitely don't have the same problems regarding health care
No, your costs more than doubled between 1940 and 1950, even though only two "health insurance" companies existed at the time: the American Hospital Association's Blue Cross, and the AMA's Blue Shield.
In 1940, it was only 0.40% of disposable income, but more than doubled to 0.92% by 1950....due to technology.
That isn't true at all, and you cannot cite anything to support your claim. I won't even get into the fact that your claim is contradictory to the Laws of Economics.
Here, I think it is best that your own government explain to you what drives up the cost of healthcare....
1] Technology up to 65%
2]Consumer Demand up to 36%
3] Expanding Health Benefits or Insuring more people up to 13%
4] Healthcare Price Inflation up to 19% (caused by Consumer Demand and insuring more people)
5] Administrative Costs up to 13% (caused by Technology, Consumer Demand and Regulations)
6] Aging/Elderly up to 7%
Source: United States Government General Accounting Office GAO-13-281 PPACA and the Long-Term Fiscal Outlook, January 2013 pp 31-36
True, real, genuine, bona fide, actuarial-based health insurance has no bearing on the cost of healthcare, and in fact, may actually reduce the cost of healthcare.
Unfortunately, health insurance was outlawed by Congress and the IRS in 1954 and replaced with a fee-for-service plan.
Fee-for-service plans inherently have a tendency to drive up costs.
No such law exists.
Sorry, it doesn't work that way. The Laws of Economics are always in play, and they most certainly do apply to healthcare.
Healthcare Capital consists of cash, credit, facilities, space, equipment, technology, maintenance, staff and personnel and much more, not to belabor the point.
Each facet of Capital in Healthcare is limited. Even if that were not true, Opportunity Costs still are present.
If I spend $300,000 to treat you, then that means another person who needs $300,000 in treatment will be denied treatment, or that 10 people who require $30,000 of treatment are denied or that 100 people who require $3,000 in treatment are denied treatment.
And, yes, that happens in Canada, Britain, Sweden, Germany, France, etc etc etc and people die as a result.
The amount of money you have to spend on healthcare is finite, not infinite.
The flaw in your argument is that healthcare costs whatever it costs.
And what does healthcare cost?
We do not truly know, because you do not have Free Market healthcare.
A CAT Scan costs whatever it costs, and if it truly does cost $6,000 then that's just the way it is.
Hospitals rent CAT Scanners. That costs. The maintenance contract on the CAT Scanner? That's not free; it costs. The floor space that the CAT Scanner takes up? That's not free either...it costs. The technicians who operate it are not free. The janitors and cleaning crew who clean the room in which the CAT Scan sits are not free. The security guard who roams the hospital is not free. The payroll clerk, the HR person, et al are not free.
Shall I continue?
You people just don't think.
You have 1,539 separate economies in the united States. The Cost-of-Living varies dramatically. How dramatically?
Your government says a single person with an annual income of $53,490 qualifies for tax-payer subsidized HUD Section 8 Housing in some of those 1,539 separate economies.
But, then, your government also says that a single person with an annual income of $9,101 earns too much money to qualify for tax-payer subsidized housing.
Who among you is even remotely intelligent?
I ask, because a person with a modicum of intelligence would understand that in some of the 1,539 separate economies in the united States, a CAT Scan might actually truly really cost $590, while in other parts of the united States, a CAT Scan might truly really actually cost $17,000....
....and there is nothing immoral, unethical, unlawful, illegal or wrong with that.
For every single piece of medical diagnostic equipment ---MRI, CAT, PET, X-ray etc -- in each of those 1,539 separate economies in the united States, there is a billable rate per minute or per quarter hour which represents the "break-even" rate.
But, since those machines have to be replaced, a profit is necessary to ensure a replacement machine can be obtained in the future, so it would be Break-even Rate + Profit margin.
And, pray tell what might the Break-Even Rate and a fair Profit be?
Well, when you all decide that you want to have Free-Market healthcare, then you will know the answer.
Until such time....enjoy being powerless, clueless and in the dark, only able to guess at what those rates might be.
Economically...
Mircea
Interesting. Will have to look for this report.
I am curious what "consumer demand" actually means here and how it is being measured.
Technology is not surprising. Patents are very important money makers for investors.
However, investments and debt pools certainly is connected to this issue. So are health care districts.
So glad that never happens in the U.S. ......oh wait.........
You dodged and deflected again.
What was that you said? Oh, yeah.....
Quote:
Originally Posted by BruSan
Well let's deal with the decorum of answering a question with a question firstly:
When a question is posed based upon an inaccurately assumed premise in the first place, an answer is really not an obligation.
Your premise is inaccurate.
Your claim is that Canadians have universal healthcare. What is the point of having universal healthcare, if access to treatment is limited and people die waiting for open-heart surgery, waiting for angioplasty --- that Americans get in a matter of minutes or hours --- or waiting in an over-crowded ER?
Diane Gorsuch and all the others died not because of medical mistakes, but because of a lack of access. Those Canadians who died waiting for angioplasty (cardiac catheterization) died because of a lack of access, not medical mistakes. Those people who died in your ERs died due to a lack of access, not because of medical mistakes. Those Canadians who are denied kidney dialysis are denied not because of medical mistakes, but because of a lack of access.
You claim that healthcare in Canada costs less than the US. That claim is refuted by the evidence. Healthcare in Canada has never cost less than in the US, and in fact it might even cost more. Spending less does not equal costing less.
Diane Gorsuch and the others who died under similar circumstances did not die because of medical error....they died because you spend less than what healthcare truly costs. It was not a medical error for Diane to be on a waiting list for open-heart surgery for a year.....she was denied because you didn't have the money. Her surgery was cancelled not by medical error, but because you didn't have the money. She was placed again on a waiting list not because of medical mistake, but because you didn't have the money. Her surgery was cancelled a second time not because of medical mistake, but because you didn't have the money. She was yet again placed on a waiting list....and died....because you didn't have the money.
The same is true for the others who died.
Americans get cardiac catheterization in a matter of minutes or hours, but in Canada, it can take months, because you don't have the money...and people die.
Delay, Denial and Dilution: The Impact of NHS Rationing on Heart Disease and Cancer
IEA Health and Welfare Unit
12% of kidney specialists in the UK said they had refused to treat patients due to limited resources .
One study showed that patients accepted for dialysis stacked up this way.....
65 patients per million population UK
98 patients per million population in Canada
212 patients per million population in the US
You have half the ability for kidney dialysis, because you don't have the money.
People wait 34 hours and die in your ERs, because you don't have the money.
Which part of "you don't have the money" do you not understand?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jambo101
While your wonderful system in the USA denies 30-40 million Americans healthcare insurance
Fortunately, the claim that there are 50 Million "uninsured" Americans is a lie, but assuming it would be true, adopting a system like Canada would only worsen existing problems in the US, so you both can quit acting with pious indignation.
The Trustees believe that this outcome, while plausible, will depend on the achievement of unprecedented improvements in health care provider productivity. If the health sector could not transition to more efficient models of care delivery and achieve productivity increases commensurate with economy-wide productivity, and if the provider reimbursement rates paid by commercial insurers continued to follow the same negotiated process used to date, then the availability and quality of health care received by Medicare beneficiaries relative to that received by those with private health insurance would fall over time, generating pressure to modify Medicare’s payment rates.
Source: 2012 ANNUAL REPORT OF THE BOARDS OF TRUSTEES OF THE FEDERAL HOSPITAL INSURANCE AND FEDERAL SUPPLEMENTARY MEDICAL INSURANCE TRUST FUNDS, Page 3
I suppose now you're going to claim that Medicare is a front-organization for the Koch Brothers funded by the Frasier Institute and that the Medicare Trustees are shills for the "health insurance" companies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jambo101
You are going to judge an entire nations national healthcare plan on a couple of cherry picked anomalies that have happened over the years.?
I can pull up 100s of news articles, reports from the Canadian Medical Association and reports from the Canadian government covering the last 15 years.
I am well aware of the problems in the US -- much more so than you ever could be.
Medical Errors?
Dodging and Deflecting. There must be some kind of Canadian Dodging and Deflecting Gene.
We're not talking about Medical Errors, we're talking about the fact that Canada does not have enough money to fund its healthcare system.
See if you can stay focused....
Now you get it, we don't trust our government to handle anything. This is exactly why we don't want universal health care run by the government.
Govt is regulating it and profiting from it through it's many investments in these publicly traded corporations. Even so-called "private" corps are not necessarily excluded. So not really sure what you think they don't already have their hands in.
And. . . . you constantly get away with this kind of stuff!
I remember that post as well, too bad I didn't take a screen print of it so repost here. There is no way I am going to search his posts to try and find it. Not enough soap in the world to clean me from the filthy feeling I would have after doing so.
Mircea you'll have to remind me what your point is in criticizing our Canadian healthcare program..
Last edited by jambo101; 01-01-2014 at 03:37 PM..
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.
