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.
That's great for you, but some of us already pay a shockingly large percentage of our incomes in Federal Taxes. Not to mention all the other taxes we pay. I would be willing to pay more for everyone to have UHC, but with the caveat that EVERYONE pays the same percent. No one gets a completely free ride and we all participate at the same rate.
Those who are overweight-obese ( determined by waist size) pay a higher rate.
No income? No problem. Whatever benefit you receive will be reduced by the same percent.
Everyone needs to have skin in the game.
The point is, if UHC is SO good, why is private insurance needed?
Are employers FORCED to give the private insurance you are speaking of?
According to many on here, it is the greatest thing since sliced bread.
In other counties private insurance is NEEDED because of the long wait times for routine things and the poor service received by the UHC proiveded by that country.
You really don't understand our system. Employers are not forced to offer private insurance. It's a benefit.
Private insurance in Canada doesn't offer faster wait times. Private insurance in Canada does not cover things that are covered by UHC.
Private insurance is offered for optical ( everyday optical since medical optical issues are covered like cataract surgery ), dental ( dental work in the medical sense is covered by UHC ) and prescriptions.
I sincerely HOPE none of the get cancer at 70 years of age.
I had a good friend living in the U.S, she married a Canadian, and when he died she stayed here.
When she got cancer here, she was getting Chemo treatments and was improving.
Her family wanted to "come home" so they could help her.
Upon getting back to Canada she went to the doctor. They told her she could NOT get Chemo because SHE WAS TOO OLD AND COULDN'T JUSTIFY THE COST.
3 months later she died.
Sorry, I don't believe the story. I know of several cancer patients here in Canada. Those needing chemo etc get it IMMEDIATELY.
I find it highly unlikely that a doctor in Canada whose training is just as good an any American doctor, would stop chemo treatments on a patient already receiving them.
Too old? My grandmother had cancer treatments at the age of 97. She lived to be 99.
Welcome to the Canadian socialized universal health no care.
It's a great solution to the society. When you get sick, you have three options:
1. The illness cures itself while you are waiting to see a doctor
2. You live long enough to get treatment
3. You die while you are on the waiting list
Every option is great for the common good but not so much for you but you need to suffer and die for the common good!
Had a friend waiting for a year for treatment and died months into that waiting. Had another friend learned the lesson and she paid her own treatment in US and lived. My mom basically gave up waiting.
Really? Then why are medical outcomes in Canada excellent?
Do you HONESTLY think that anyone with experience with the Canadian healthcare system believes your 3 points?
Do you HONESTLY think Canadians are a stupid people and would put up with ANY of those scenario's?
Originally Posted by jetgraphics Ever since government CRIMINALIZED the unlicensed trade in healthcare, it has been getting more and more expensive.
Deregulate healthcare and get government out of the way.
Many parts are too risky to unlicense this side of Zimbabwe. Would you want to see a doc who got his degree for cheap and easy online?
You are under the mistaken impression that government permission (license) equates to competence.
If that were true, why would there be malpractice lawsuits?
A certificate for medical education does not equate to competence. All it establishes is that someone complied with the requirements for the credential.
Allopathic medicine may have gained ascendancy (and mocked all competitors as "quacks"), but it has a history of being wrong, too.
What you're really trying to say is that you TRUST government rules and regulations to insure that IDIOTS do not practice medicine. Which boils down to wishful thinking, based on the experience of many who had to get multiple "opinions" before they were properly diagnosed and treated... or worse, never properly diagnosed, suffered and died.
LICENSING is only for the privilege to COMMIT MANSLAUGHTER without criminal consequences. AS long as the physician 'follows the rules' (even when they're dead wrong), he's not criminally liable for harming his patient. It is a form of limited liability.
Hospitals, which cannot get limited liability (license), simply ask you to SIGN A WAIVER FORM absolving them of criminal liability.
Feel safer?
IATROGENIC - Induced unintentionally in a patient by a physician. Used especially of an infection or other complication of treatment.
Iatrogenic Disease: The 3rd Most Fatal Disease in the USA
You are under the mistaken impression that government permission (license) equates to competence.
If that were true, why would there be malpractice lawsuits?
A certificate for medical education does not equate to competence. All it establishes is that someone complied with the requirements for the credential.
Allopathic medicine may have gained ascendancy (and mocked all competitors as "quacks"), but it has a history of being wrong, too.
What you're really trying to say is that you TRUST government rules and regulations to insure that IDIOTS do not practice medicine. Which boils down to wishful thinking, based on the experience of many who had to get multiple "opinions" before they were properly diagnosed and treated... or worse, never properly diagnosed, suffered and died.
LICENSING is only for the privilege to COMMIT MANSLAUGHTER without criminal consequences. AS long as the physician 'follows the rules' (even when they're dead wrong), he's not criminally liable for harming his patient. It is a form of limited liability.
Hospitals, which cannot get limited liability (license), simply ask you to SIGN A WAIVER FORM absolving them of criminal liability.
Feel safer?
IATROGENIC - Induced unintentionally in a patient by a physician. Used especially of an infection or other complication of treatment.
Iatrogenic Disease: The 3rd Most Fatal Disease in the USA
225,000 deaths per year constitutes the third leading cause of death in the United States, after deaths from heart disease and cancer.
It is very tough to get through 4 years of college with high grades, 4 years of med school, 2+ years of training, passing board exams all along the way, then getting licensed if you are a simpleton. Sure nothing in this world is absolutely guaranteed, but our systems weed out almost all the stupid ones.
I have known more than 100 docs in my days and can hardly remember an idiot among them. Most docs get sued from time to time for one reason or another. Blatant malpractice from sheer stupidity is quite rare, and I am not sure that I have seen it in 40 years. Operating on the wrong knee might qualify. The OR staff labeled the wrong knee. So although the doc is primarily responsible, the screw up wasn't his simple stupidity.
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.
...results in obesity. 
