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 British would never give up the NHS. Even Thatcher had to promise that she would protect it at all costs. So when Americans tell you it is no good why listen to them.
Same when you hear how bad the VA is but veterans overwhelmingly want to keep it.
But all of those people will acknowledge that those systems are in need of some changes and reforms.
The NHS may do it's job of addressing people with life threatening medical issues but changes need to come for those suffering with non life threatening issues. Just because a medical problem isn't life threatening doesn't mean people aren't still suffering and waiting too long for treatments.
Although taxes will always be discussed, we and GB are monetarily sovereign in our respective currencies. So the money itself should not be the issue. The decision should be based on how much profit we or GB wish private hospitals to make.
Wonderful post with factual information. Also great to read of a good outcome of personal experience. Would that every cancer story ended that way.
Why it being so difficult to understand that any entity existing on a business model of providing profits and shareholder dividends would of mandate not have the best interests of those consumers/members with the potential to reduce either of those, is beyond my ability to comprehend.
I'm hoping some "come to Jesus" moment occurs in the U.S. and a movement starts that culminates in a complete overhaul and will admit to an non-altruistic bent. I fantasize as to a system that would serve to cover both our countries, providing a universally designed system with a cost to benefit ratio lusted after by the rest of the world. Think of the unparalleled bargaining power to keep the costs of pharmaceuticals and procedures within reason.
I dream of the continued ability for the U.S. to lead us all with medical research and innovations by the shear might of it's huge economy. I would also add icing to the cake by making it desirable for doctors to obtain their training in either country through a certification process that stipulates accommodation to either countries requirements at the outset.
But all of those people will acknowledge that those systems are in need of some changes and reforms.
The NHS may do it's job of addressing people with life threatening medical issues but changes need to come for those suffering with non life threatening issues. Just because a medical problem isn't life threatening doesn't mean people aren't still suffering and waiting too long for treatments.
In the NHS people who don't want to wait have the option of going private, just like in many other countries. In Finland I can use the public healthcare, pay a bit more and go private for a bit quicker service, or if I have a job my company will pay for me to go private for preventative care and minor illnesses. I can make an appointment next week with any specialist I like and pay about 100 or so euros, or wait for a referral from a GP and pay 30 euros.
Eliminate the FDA and licensing requirements for healthcare providers and healthcare costs will drop dramatically. That is free market healthcare.
This statement is a good example of why there should be an IQ test for voting.
Quote:
Originally Posted by whogo
Yet the same liberals who want UHC condemn immigration restrictions as racist. Can you have it both ways? Do you really believe liberal immigration policies does not strain the welfare state?
I have a heart condition, the wife is a diabetic. We are both in our late 50's. My insurance must be outrageous without ACA, right?
No, I get insurance through my work. I pay the same rate a twenty year old at work pays. The fact is Americans have choices. I suspect UHC would end up costing me more and the corporation I work for less.
Wow! This post gets my vote for most outrageous post on this discussion. The reality is many people don't have choices and it is getting worse. I really think we are not going to have any real reform until health insurance is separated from employment. We currently have too many people who don't reailize a problem exists. Eliminating employer based health insurance is the first step to having free market competition in health insurance. The US is not ready for this discussion. We need at least four more years of education to take place.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoonose
Depending on your own situation, it may well be that you and your wife are raising the costs to cover all the other employees at your job. Your employer might be absorbing the added costs.
I agree. He is a good example of why health insurance is so expensive.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ohhwanderlust
If you and your wife ever lost your jobs (or if your employer nixed benefits), what would you do then? A free-market system would pretty much see to it that you'd never be covered again, unfortunately.
I do agree though that open borders would make universal healthcare impossible.
Exactly!
Quote:
Originally Posted by le roi
yeah, where do you start
there is no "free market" healthcare.
"universal healthcare" is not the same as "affordable healthcare" or "good healthcare for everyone." most of these phrases do not really mean anything, and they definitely don't apply to what's happening in the U.S.
And as for this video, they're just talking about shuffling the deck chairs on the titanic, which is pretty much what happened with Obamacare. Nobody in a position of power is talking seriously about the severe, painful measures that would cut revenues to pharmaceutical companies, insurance companies, IP/patent holders, lawyers, medical device manufacturers, and hospitals.
Our problem is not with the structure of the payment system. You can tweak insurance stuff all day long and it's not going to make the medical services you're buying any cheaper.
You need to separate health care from health insurance. We can encourage competition in health insurance and incentivize people to use low cost providers. The topic requires many changes in both how health care is paid for and how it is delivered. Much of the waste and overhead is due to an overly complex regulatory and administrative system that insurance companies and consultants take advantage of.
True there is no pure free market system out there. But a pure government run system has its problems.
I think you need some mix of both public and private services. It's just a matter of figuring out the right mix for different countries.
almost all developed nations have some sort of mix, but it is the floor that makes it work
unemployed , over 60 something... you get the standard plan for free..
working but low income, most opt for standard plan.
Working with more income people start to add private plans that sit on top of the public ones.
after that is is as fancy as you like but always underpinned by the public plan. That means the gov pays for you heart op, but your insurance makes up the gap for fancier room, time, service and indeed extra care, that your fancy plan covers.
everyone is covered, everone gets the best treatments available
almost all developed nations have some sort of mix, but it is the floor that makes it work
unemployed , over 60 something... you get the standard plan for free..
working but low income, most opt for standard plan.
Working with more income people start to add private plans that sit on top of the public ones.
after that is is as fancy as you like but always underpinned by the public plan. That means the gov pays for you heart op, but your insurance makes up the gap for fancier room, time, service and indeed extra care, that your fancy plan covers.
everyone is covered, everone gets the best treatments available
Not too bad. Only thing is that frills are not big overall HC cost drivers. Let the rich buy whatever extras they may desire. The bulk of most large HC bills are based on patient needs and the medical standards of care.
There are individuals on here from at least three other countries who enjoy universal or single payer along with many Americans themselves trying to convince the diehards.
I'm convinced eventually logic and reason will prevail.
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.
