Check out some similar questions!

excon · Mar 4, 2009, 07:25 AM

Hello:

Is it bad, or is it good?

excon

Curlyben · Mar 4, 2009, 07:41 AM

I could ask you exactly the same reversed question, almost..

In the case of the UK we have a two tier system.
"Free" care is available to ALL, but it is possible to purchase insurance to cover non-emergency issues or join the looooooong waiting lists.

Everyone can been seen for Emergency cases and treatment without the need of insurance.
Now payment doesn't guarantee "better" care, just quicker care.

excon · Mar 4, 2009, 07:53 AM

Hello ben:

Thanks... But, is it good or bad?

We dump sick people on the street if they can't pay. Do you?

excon

speechlesstx · Mar 4, 2009, 08:18 AM

Originally Posted by excon

Hello ben:

Thanks.... But, is it good or bad?

We dump sick people on the street if they can't pay. Do you?

excon

Who dumps sick people on the street besides Michelle Obama and David Aexelrod?

tomder55 · Mar 4, 2009, 08:19 AM

No one is denied health care in America. We spend a fortune on health care for the poor, the near poor,etc. No one showing up at an ER can be turned away.Not even illegal aliens .

Alty · Mar 4, 2009, 09:22 AM

I'd have to say that we Canadians have it pretty good.

Health care is paid for by the government, in other words, doctors visits are covered, so are surguries and stays at the hospital (unless you get a phone and TV in your room, then it's around $7/day).

Contrary to what some people believe it's not hard to get in to see your doctor and there are many walk in clinics as well. I usually get in the same day I call, the longest I've had to wait is 2 days. The hospital can be a chore, there are too many people, not enough doctors but you still get pretty prompt "service".

As far as special services (MRI's, CT scans etc) it's a first come first serve sort of thing unless your doctor suspects something life threatening, then you're bumped. You can also pay in order to be bumped.

I'm pretty happy with our health care system here, it could be better, but all in all we're pretty lucky.

Curlyben · Mar 4, 2009, 09:27 AM

Originally Posted by excon

Hello ben:

Thanks.... But, is it good or bad?

We dump sick people on the street if they can't pay. Do you?

excon

As everyone pays in their taxes, what's bad about it and NO sick people are never dumped on the streets as there's no requirement to pay.

Originally Posted by Altenweg

I'd have to say that we Canadians have it pretty good.

Health care is paid for by the government, in other words, doctors visits are covered, so are surguries and stays at the hospital (unless you get a phone and tv in your room, then it's around $7/day).

Contrary to what some people believe it's not hard to get in to see your doctor and there are many walk in clinics as well. I usually get in the same day I call, the longest I've had to wait is 2 days. The hospital can be a chore, there are too many people, not enough doctors but you still get pretty prompt "service".

As far as special services (MRI's, CT scans etc) it's a first come first serve sort of thing unless your doctor suspects something life threatening, then you're bumped. You can also pay in order to be bumped.

I'm pretty happy with our health care system here, it could be better, but all in all we're pretty lucky.

Very similar to UK, I think the only difference is we have to pay for prescription meds at about $10 an item, which considering the retail price of some meds is extremely good value.

Yes cosmetic and elective surgery you have to pay for, after all it's not contributive to a healthy life.

This includes medical care, dentistry and ophthalmics.
Of course paid for "upgrades" are available.

excon · Mar 4, 2009, 09:31 AM

Originally Posted by tomder55

No one showing up at an ER can be turned away.Not even illegal aliens .

Hello tom:

That IS the line, isn't it? But, if someone shows up at an ER who needs hospitalization or long term care, they give him a band-aid and put him on the street. That is JUST SO!

If we're going to have this discussion, you're going to have to tell the truth. Facts DO count. I promise you, there are NO uninsured patients IN the hospital getting cared for.

excon

speechlesstx · Mar 4, 2009, 09:45 AM

Originally Posted by excon

Hello tom:

That IS the line, isn't it? But, if someone shows up at an ER who needs hospitalization or long term care, they give him a band-aid and put him on the street. That is JUST SO!

If we're going to have this discussion, you're going to have to tell the truth. Facts DO count. I promise you, there are NO uninsured patients IN the hospital getting cared for.

excon

I'm not tom, but my daughter, uninsured and broke, received excellent care in both San Diego and Amarillo. She spent 6 weeks in intensive care here and another 2 in SD, plus several more weeks in a regular room. She had the care of a top Infectious Disease doctor, Nephrologist and Pulmonologist and continued to see them and an excellent Gynecological Oncologist afterward and never paid a penny. Nobody in this city goes without health care except of their own choosing.

speechlesstx · Mar 4, 2009, 10:16 AM

Will Obama offer paid "upgrades?" And if so, how will that help him reach his goal of tackling "disparities in health care?" How could he do that if some are still able to pay for better care than others?

tomder55 · Mar 4, 2009, 11:02 AM

THE TRUTH... I know someone in a gvt run alzheimers nursing home going on 2 years now while their application for medicaid is tied up in bureaucratic BS . That person is getting excellent 24/7 care . When this person's application is approved he will receive for the rest of his life medical care for alzheimers and any other illness he gets while there .

The TRUTH is that part of the high costs of health care for everyone else is this type of subsidizing . This business that medicine is free or inexpensive because the gvt runs it is a fallacy when you factor in the taxes needed to run these plans.

inthebox · Mar 4, 2009, 06:10 PM

Originally Posted by excon

Hello tom:

That IS the line, isn't it? But, if someone shows up at an ER who needs hospitalization or long term care, they give him a band-aid and put him on the street. That is JUST SO!

If we're going to have this discussion, you're going to have to tell the truth. Facts DO count. I promise you, there are NO uninsured patients IN the hospital getting cared for.

Excon

I personally know uninsured patients in US hospital, but that would violate HIPPA laws ;)

Go to any ER in the US and ask the ER doctor if he sees uninsured patients or even knows the payor status of the patients he or she sees.

As to FACTS here is one for you:

YFile - One-day summit to discuss the future of health care in Canada

Supreme Court Challenges Canada's Health-Care Assumptions

wrote Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin and Justice John Major. "Inevitably where patients have life-threatening conditions, some will die because of undue delay in awaiting surgery."

The US healthcare system IS FLAWED - no doubt - a majority of physicians in some polls favor a single payor system>

The Doctors' Revolt | The American Prospect

The latest sign is a poll published recently in the Annals of Internal Medicine showing that 59 percent of U.S. doctors support a "single payer" plan that essentially eliminates the central role of private insurers.

Just remember that ERISA laws reduce the ability to sue .

Is the medico-legal environment the same, worse , or better in Canada or England or Sweeden?

G&P

twinkiedooter · Mar 4, 2009, 06:31 PM

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

I'm not tom, but my daughter, uninsured and broke, received excellent care in both San Diego and Amarillo. She spent 6 weeks in intensive care here and another 2 in SD, plus several more weeks in a regular room. She had the care of a top Infectious Disease doctor, Nephrologist and Pulmonologist and continued to see them and an excellent Gynecological Oncologist afterward and never paid a penny. Nobody in this city goes without health care except of their own choosing.

So how did she not pay a penny for all that hospital stay with no insurance? Who do you think paid for it? Most people would be paying that hospital and doctor bill for the rest of their lives.

twinkiedooter · Mar 4, 2009, 06:35 PM

In Russia their citizens get free health care. Tourists get free health care. If you are an illegal alien in Russia you don't. You must prove citizenship to get health care.

It's the same way in Canada. Americans just can't sneak over the border and get free health care. They must prove citizenship.

I'll betcha dollars to donuts that in all the other countries where they have universal health care that the citizens must prove citizenship to get free health care. Unless they can prove they are a tourist.

excon · Mar 4, 2009, 07:17 PM

Originally Posted by twinkiedooter

I'll betcha dollars to donuts that in all the other countries where they have universal health care that the citizens must prove citizenship to get free health care. Unless they can prove they are a tourist.

Hello twink:

If they're NOT citizens, then they'd be tourists. No?

excon

Skell · Mar 4, 2009, 07:20 PM

Don't forget us down under here Ex. We're much like Britain's system. We have our flaws but overall most people like it.
And many politicians have been lynched in the past for even mentioning going down the path of the US system.

excon · Mar 4, 2009, 09:42 PM

Hello again:

I don't know. So far, we've got 3 countries reporting in, and 100% of them like it.

Does that means these people don't know what they're talking about?

excon

speechlesstx · Mar 5, 2009, 05:30 AM

Originally Posted by twinkiedooter

So how did she not pay a penny for all that hospital stay with no insurance? Who do you think paid for it? Most people would be paying that hospital and doctor bill for the rest of their lives.

I know who paid for it, the point is Ex said "there are NO uninsured patients IN the hospital getting cared for" and that's simply not true.

tomder55 · Mar 5, 2009, 05:57 AM

Ex
That sure is a representative sampling !

The stimulus provides for the creation of a federal health care bureaucracy not unlike Hillarycare including $19 billion to adopt Health Information Technology (HIT) systems;and the creation of the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology along with a 15-member board of officials . Decisions that should be made by doctors and patients will belong to bureaucrats deciding cost-effectiveness.

I don't know if that is how the universal care works elsewhere. But that is what has been proposed here.

It creates the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research, which will decide which treatments you should get, whether you should get them, and whether they should even be available.

It is supposedly modeled after a British board which helps run the National Health Service. Curley can comment on this board if he chooses . I have heard it is horribly inefficient and overly bureaucratic. The Brit board approves or rejects treatments after calculating the cost of the treatment against the number of years the patient is expected to live to decide if it's worth giving the patient the treatment . The British National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) proposed that the National Health Service use age as a measurement of a patient's worthiness for treatment. To illustrate where that leads;In 2006 it was decided that elderly patients with macular degeneration had to wait until they went blind in one eye before they could get the drug to save the other. After all, how many years would they be needing two good eyes?

So treatment is denied or rationed based not on a doctor's and patient's decision but on the whim of a bureaucrat. If that's the system you want you are welcome to it.

speechlesstx · Mar 5, 2009, 06:00 AM

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again:

I don't know. So far, we've got 3 countries reporting in, and 100% of them like it.

Does that means these people don't know what they're talking about?

Excon

Nope. One person each from 3 countries is a rather small statistical sample, though.

What I don't get, ex, is for a guy with so many suspicions about government you seem intent now on letting government take care of us. When did you start trusting the government? I don't, never did, and never will. I don't see how it can possibly be sustainable, as "the father of the Quebec public health care system" now admits. I can see cost cutting measures like those in the UK where patients are told to "treat themselves."

I don't see how the feds can make better health care decisions than the patient and doctor can, yet Obama plans on a committee to do just that. As I said before, I don't see how Obama can end the "disparities" in care if some can still buy better care than others.

While a laudable goal to have quality care for everyone, I think the whole thing is a cruel sham that will be just one more way for government to have power over us. Knowing the kind of radical nitwits that think this is the best thing since sliced bread, I can see things like Baroness Warnock believes, that old people, particularly those with say Alzheimer's, have a duty to die.

'If you are demented, you are wasting people's lives, your family's lives, and you are wasting the resources of the National Health Service.

I'm not a conspiracy kind of guy, but these people are serious, and they're far from alone... and I don't want to say I told you so.