Aa
Aa
A
A
A
Close
Avatar universal

Dont Knock our Health System

Canada's system is called Medicare, and is much like Medicare in the U.S. for over-65-year-olds, except that this one treats virtually the entire Canadian population of 33 million.Canadians are setting aside their criticisms of Medicare and rallying to its defense. The reason: Their system has been dragged into the debate over President Barack Obama's health care reform proposals by opponents who say Canada proves Obama is wrong — that Canadians endure long waits for critical procedures, medical rationing, scant resources and heavy-handed government interference.




http://www.the33tv.com/news/nationworld/sns-ap-cn-canada-medicare-for-all,0,5821607.story
52 Responses
Sort by: Helpful Oldest Newest
146021 tn?1237204887
Hey Deb, I salute you for the kindness and compassion you showed in your post. Really, your attitude sums it all up for me. I'd rather give a little more of my overstretched paycheck to help end the suffering of all those who can't get healthcare. You rock!

Here's a great video link: "We can't afford to wait"
http://pol.moveon.org/healthcare_cantwait/?id=17196-14921241-6ncjKtx&t=3

Trish: Thanks, as always for your contributions. I'll raise my glass of water to you cause I really can't stand rootbeer!
Helpful - 0
Avatar universal
Well, here's the Canadian chick again....obviously non-partisan because I can't vote in your country.  I just really really want you to have the best parts of what I have for healthcare in my country.

I just finished watching the Obama speech on healthcare. He has the right ideas to some extent. His goals are appropriate and worthy. Now it's how to get there. I can't say that everything he wants makes sense as to how he sees it playing out. I think he's going to have to adjust things and tweak it quite a bit. I think he's hamstringing himself to say his plan will not add to the deficit. His plan is worthy of adding to the deficit and he should cut other things that are not so much. I think he'll go back on that promise but he'll find ways of saying that he hasn't. That's politics and it's actually expected. And I'd forgive him for this particular backtrack.

I can see a number of holes in his plan - how he prevents doctors from taking only those patients from the very best insurance companies he has not addressed. I can only hope he'll get around to that as well.  As I've said before, nobody cares what insurance company you have, we only have one - the government.  And everybody in my country has equal access not only to care but to the very best doctors (and the worst!) that you can get an appointment with.  

He also didn't address the immigrant question very well.  He just said that health coverage would not be available to immigrants but that's as far as he went.  He needed to say a bit more on that, as to how he sees abuses being prevented.  More to be done on that yet.

The co-operative insurance option for those that don't have any insurance is a bit puzzling to say the least on how it's going to work.  That definitely needs to be explained alot more.  Actually, I see that turning into the public option that he's saying will be only 5% of the overall Plan but if you get a GOOD public option, there is nothing wrong with that.  Public is not bad if it's done right.  Public in my country is mostly a damn good thing and I am immensely grateful for our public option here.  

I liked the idea of not allowing businesses and individuals off the hook.  Good comparison with auto insurance.  Now that needs more information but it's the right idea.  Either everyone chips in by paying taxes or by carrying insurance or whatever.  Every employer in Canada contributes to the healthcare system and it's the right idea.  It proportionately distributes the burden.

I have to say that I'm quite emotionally invested in this particular issue. I found myself clapping in my own livingroom for an extended period of time when he said it will be against the law for insurance companies to deny coverage based on previous illnesses and that insurance companies will not be allowed to put a cap on how much they'll cover in any given year. How lovely is that. If that is the *only* thing he institutes, he'll have made a great stride. And yet there are a number of other initiatives.

He's very consultative and it was refreshing to see him include ideas from John McCain and call them good ideas. It was heartwarming to see him single out Mr. Dingle and his son for continuously beating the drum of healthcare reform year after year after year. Mr. Dingle may end up being the father of healthcare reform. I'd never heard of him before and today President Obama honoured him for a most noteworthy lifelong effort. How lovely yet again.

It's not gonna be easy. But I'm very very pleased for my American friends. When I know what I and my fellow Canadians have in my country compared to what you have...I'm very pleased to see this kind of effort at healthcare reform happening in your country. It's a start and a good start. I'm looking forward to seeing him sign the law that prohibits insurance companies from denying coverage to those with previous illnesses and on that alone, on goes the red shoes of celebration and in the tradition of my fellow Hep C compadres, I raise a glass of root beer and toast the prospect of better healthcare in your country.

Trish
Helpful - 0
Avatar universal
thanks for the attitude adjustment Deb :) with a good attitude one can get though anything. And here I was getting worked up over the 3.36 billion profits by the Medicare Advantage insurers - heck I should be grateful our Medicare system (scheduled to go broke in 2017) still has so much money to throw away...
Helpful - 0
179856 tn?1333547362
I love you too.  You don't have to always agree with me to love you......remembmer all the old alcohol threads? I still loved Jim like our crazy old Uncle anyways!  ;)

Willing-
Wow 120% - and some of us thought Vertex was a great stock with a future in it.  

Well, no wonder we're eating mac n cheese instead of McDonalds these days but I will try to believe that my "raises" are in my insurance premium that the company pays and that really...I make a helluva lot of money every month - I just don't realize it.
Helpful - 0
Avatar universal
we'll see what Obama has to say tonight though by now it seems  most of Congress is committed one way or the other. Agreed that making sense of the impact of reform is not easy... but here's some hindsight that is pretty easy.

The link below are graphs from an article in lat Sunday's  NYT showing  what's happened to %unsinsured, health care spending as % of GDP, insurance premiums relative to inflation and monthly insurance premium costs since the last time this topic came up for national discussion in '94

http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2009/09/06/health/policy/20090906_LESSONS_GRAPHIC.html

Note that over the past 15 years worker earnings have just kept up with inflation whereas insurance premiums have ballooned 120%

I never got to see the infamous 'Harry and Louise'  commercials,  but as an  insurance company investment it looks like they were worth every penny.
Helpful - 0
96938 tn?1189799858
First of all, I love you like a third cousin. Second, I've already had one post deleted from this thread and I don't want to risk incurring the rath of MHM and dooming the entire thread to the same fate as my post.  So, I'll just leave it as I don't agree with much of what you said. You are still my cyber BFF.
Helpful - 0
179856 tn?1333547362
"So, my friends, we WILL be paying for illegals."

So, seriously we aren't already?  And even if we are I would rather have the compassion to want to find a solution and risk a couple falling through the cracks than throw out the baby with the bathwater and just chuck it all completely.

OHAWK - I LOVE YOU.  You made my heart happy.  

LL - I have at times waited tables just to keep food on the table and a roof over our heads with no insurance.  The fact that one "doesn't qualify" for the pittance that most times doesn't even cover the monthly bills DISGUSTS me.  I would RATHER pay an extra 1% taxes out of MY paycheck and make sure that woman had her colonoscopy than let her go through what she is going through.

If everyone just took a small small part of the burden to themselves and accepted the responsibility for doing for those who do not have - what a better country we would be.   How much stronger and proud.

But unfortunately many people have not walked in those shoes and they just don't care.  Let me keep my extra couple bucks a year in the bank where I can look at the number grow.

It's not about "knowing the plan" because quite honestly most of us aren't financial or medical experts and won't understand it all  anyway - the elected officials and such are supposed to do what is the right thing by us, it's not "our" job\.  It's about putting the needs or others up there with your own......that is where it gets sketchy because quite honestly there are just an awful lotta people who could care less.
Helpful - 0
250084 tn?1303307435
Thank you med help! I for one, learn a lot on these threads and health care is one of my #1 issues in our country. I don't know all sides tho, and appreciate hearing them here, even if I don't agree with all. Whomever is hitting the abuse button, please allow us to discuss and learn in an extrememly important issue.


NYgirl...(Hi! :)......
"Maybe if Americans would quit trying to help everyone else out and concentrate on ourselves, we would have the money to provide a FREE State of the Art Health Care System second to none. "...........

That was RGlass. And I have to 'ditto' him thru most of this. Not having read all replies through yet, I have to say..........

I am 51, not 'low income' and still can not afford all I need done, even just pre-screening tests...colonoscopy, labs, mammogram's, pap test, etc. I have to pick one and do it. My last bout with a severe kidney infection cost over $2000. , not including the $160. I paid for TEN pills to clear it! (Levaquin) . Had I not gotten into a trial, I would not be SVR today!!

I have a waitress friend that is in IMMEDIATE need of a colonoscopy and has no money for it, doesn't qualify for health department and if we're going to go into long waits here, or mths. to get a procedure done ......anyone ever been to OUR emergency rooms and/or health depts???? A person waits 6-8 hrs for a 1st appointment at a health dept, MANY with standing room only, then gets scheduled for another, 1-3 mths away, then gets an appointment for that specialist/procedures (and that is a big IF) and thats 1-3 mths off, your looking at 3-6mths for a person that has been bleeding rectally for mths already and if it's colon cancer, your now stage 4 in that  wait! I can not count how many people I know that have died from lack of health care, lack of insurance, SERIOUSLY! Many that gave up at the health dept., one that is in cirrhosis from Hep C due to being 'dismissed' from the health dept, many that couldn't get a simple colonoscopy. Our health care, insurance rates, pharmaceutical cost.....in NOT working! ANYONE dying from lack of health care.......is a crime and well should be!

My mother and sister passed from colon cancer. I am about to pay the $1500. out of pocket as I fall in the cracks of our health care (and yes, have tried to get insurance, denied due to Hep C and cervical cancer, even if I would pay their $500. mth!) , then I have to pay for my other testing, then try and get an answer to my post tx issues so more testing.....we're looking at $10,000 easily.  Not 'low income' but do I have that in my pocket without letting important things go, and not luxuries....no!

I fully agree that we need to know the 'plan', the exacts of any reformed or future health care plans, but the government needs to hurry up on it! There will be problems, issues in any plans, but what could possibly be worse then what we have now? This poor waitress makes $300. a week, yet doesn't qualify for help!! In 'my America'.....this is the one area I am 100% not happy with.

There's a lot of good discussion up there, again, thanks Med Help.
Copy and pasting just in case ;)

LL
Helpful - 0
146021 tn?1237204887
I live in Texas, and my PCP accepts medicare,and so does my neurologist. I don't understand your comment regarding the difficulty in finding a dr who accepts Medicare.

I have BCBS, and am not eligibile for medicare (yet). I know there are some dr's who don't accept medicare, but I have encountered a lot of drs who didn't accept my BCBS when I was looking for a surgeon. A physical therapist I trusted gave me the name of the top 3 surgeons (in his opinion) and only one was in network for me.

Also, regarding medicare supplemental insurance, members are allowed to :"Choose any Medicare-eligible doctor that accepts the plan's terms, conditions and payment rate"
Turns out they're still getting a dr who accepts Medicare.

Since I live in a more rural area, (30 mile from the metroplex) some medicare supplements consider any skilled nursing facility out of network since it's not located within the city limits.
Several years ago, the leading medicare supplement refused to cover people in our county and I know of a few people who lied about their residence, then had to drive farther to be insured. The leading reason seniors pick the medicare supplement was cost. They go for a higher deductible on the gamble that they won't need it, or under the assumption that they have the same coverage as medicare.

I'm sorry to have to disagree with you, but I know what I'm talking about on this subject. I'm an admission coordinator now, and I'm the one who has to discuss a persons coverage with them. I hate to be the one who says "Your supplement has this co-pay or your supplement considers us out of network so you're not eligible unless you want to pay a 3,000 dollar deductible"

Have a great Labor day everyone. We deserve this holiday, right?

Janice
Helpful - 0
Avatar universal
MH : thanks for allowing this discussion to continue. The current national discussion about health care futures is more than politics-as-usual and a seems very appropriate topic for a health-focused site.

Desrt: yes!agreed. "Money" is just a proxy; the larger point is that the total demand for health-care resources (staff, training, percent of GDP, etc.) exceeds what can reasonably be made available. We can't all get what we want and need to start thinking about what we need.

Trish : OK maybe you're right, but as the last couple of threads have shown, mistrust of government-run health care runs very deep on this side of the border.

Re Medicare advantage it's as if the Canadian government told you could take your pro-rated share of what they expected to pay out on your behalf and buy private insurance with it instead.  Does it work ? Mr. L paints quite a rosy picture with free gym memberships etc. and Karl Rove recently roasted Obama on this very topic in the WSJ for wanting to eliminate the program:

"Medicare Advantage also has built-in incentives to encourage insurers to offer lower costs and better benefits. It's a program that puts patients in charge, not the government, which is why seniors like it and probably why the administration hates it."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203706604574374584177632694.html

Needles to say, there's another side to the story. The  reason the administration sees this as a prime example of misdirected spending has nothing to do with putting patients in charge and everything to do with eliminating excessive insurance company profits (obtained by denial of coverage).

"Another GAO report released last year and based on 2006 data shows Advantage insurers' profits were $3.36 billion, far exceeding a projected $2.03 billion. And though enrollment grew quickly, medical expenses were $360 million lower than projected.

A year earlier, the insurers' profits were nearly triple projections.

The Obama administration already has announced new restrictions on Advantage plans, including closer scrutiny of high-deductible coverage, but more are expected and might be included as part of the overall health reform bill."

from a recent LA times article
http://www.latimes.com/business/nationworld/wire/sns-ap-us-medicare-advantage,0,3056520,full.story

BTW, notwithstanding my gloomy comments, I'm a big fan of the public option (not the pubic option as I wrote above..) I just think there will be (painful) limits to what can be covered.

MrL: yes -  going after tort/malpractice  makes all kinds of sense. If it doesn't happen in this round of reform it certainly should stay on the agenda. But how many malpractice lawyers do you think can match H. Hanways 78.3 million in compensation over the past 5 years? (and I just picked Cigna at random) If a key goal of  health care reform is  to reduce extraneous expenses, insurance company profits and executive compensation seems a more productive place to start.

Re your later post, describing a 'heavily subsidized' public option sounds more like single-payer plan, which is not realistically under discussion. As proposed, subsidies would apply to the purchase of insurance, not to the  administration of the public option.

If private insurance companies don't find enough room for profit to remain in that part of that market  where exactly is the problem?
Helpful - 0
Avatar universal
"Mike points out one of the weirder inconsistencies in the arguments opposing the public option - if the publicly-administered, unsubsidized, insurance plan will be another hopeless, bureaucratic nightmare how will it possibly  outcompete our thriving, efficient, well-managed, private sector  ins. cos?"

Because the gov't has a non-profit, heavily subsidized plan. If they run in the red (which they will) all they have to do is print up some more money. The private insurers are publicy owned and need to make a profit to remain in business.

A man with 400 employees (small businesses are those with fewer than 500 employees) is going to stop providing private ins because it is cheaper to put his 400 employees on a gov't plan and pay the 8% penalty resulting in large savings for his company.  As soon as one company does this to save money they all will follow. The gov't plan can compete easily with private insurance simply because employers who provide health insurance to the majority of the citizens in this country are going to quit providing private ins to save money. You cannot infer from this that the gov't plan can compete head to head based on health services covered. It can't and it won't.
Helpful - 0
Avatar universal
" Socialism? Isn't that what our libraries are?"

Not by a long shot. Socialism is when you take something away from someone and give it to someone else.  Socialism is both a form of gov't and/or an economic policy.

"Am I the only one who wants a compassionate society?"

The majority of my post above is all about showing compassion for our aged, disabled and seniors. Did I choose the wrong groups to show compassion to ?

"And please Mr. Liver, leave the illegal immigrants out of this."

How do you leave 16,000,000 illegals out of a conversation about nat'l healthcare ? You mean just look the other way and pretend they aren't there?  Pretend that I won't be paying part of it ?  

And you really should aim your criticism to those before me who brought the topic of illegal immigrants up . The topic was broached several times before me and I threw in what I know about it. I didn't see you saying anything when others posted about illegals. Why is that ?

This is a very important topic for our country. One-sixth of our economy is being discussed when we talk healthcare. What we do will could affect America in profound ways. This thread has allowed discussion that has raised many points worth debating over. If Obama had gotten his way this would have been passed already and none of the important discussions like this one would have been held. Passing a bill no one has read is becoming a bad habit with this administration. Like cap and trade, the stimulus bill, and now healthcare if he had gotten his way.
Helpful - 0
146021 tn?1237204887
First and foremost, thank you Medhelp for letting the discussion continue....it's what brought me back to the forum today.

Mr. Liver: I have worked in long term care/skilled rehab since the late 80's.
Most people don't understand the difference betwen Medicare and Medicaid when they are checking on their parents benefits.

The part most people are unfamilar with is MedicareA which is a health insurance policy. It will cover the first 20 days of skilled nursing care if someone breaks, their hip, needs a knee replacement, or is dehydrated and has a urinary tract infection and needs care and strengthening before going home. On day 21 Medicare drops to an 80/20 copay.

Medicare B pays for outpatient services  such as therapy or home health and some medical equipment.

Medicare D pays for prescriptions.

When a person trades in their medicare coverage for a Medicare supplement, they are often surprised to find out that they have a $50 $75 or $100  co-pay per day when they leave the hospital and need skilled rehab from day one. Not one of the supplemental insurances pays as well as Medicare A.

Hospitals don't keep patients the amount of time that they used to in order for a person to leave the hospital and go home. Many people need extra time in a skilled nursing facility receiving rehab before they can go home safely.

I've encountered many shocked families when they find out that the medicare ppo doesn't offer as much coverage for skilled nursing care as traditional Medicare PartA.

Just my observations in the field...
Bug
Helpful - 0
Avatar universal
Hello All,

As some of you may already be aware we have decided to discontinue any political discussions on the site. However, we have allowed this particular discussion to continue because there has been no fighting and basically it is a quiet discussion.

That being said, someone seems to disagree and has been continually hitting the abuse button. Sadly, one member is going to ruin this thread for you all.

The next abuse report that comes in, the thread will be removed and a report will be run to find out which member is the culprit and he/she will be dealt with accordingly.

I sincerely hope this will not be necessary and you will be able to continue this discussion.

I hope you all enjoy your holiday weekend and I thank you for your cooperation.

The MedHelp Team
Helpful - 0
163305 tn?1333668571
Am I the only one who wants a compassionate society?

I think we all should contribute to a society that includes education, clean water and air, health care and compassion for all its citizens.

  Socialism? Isn't that what our libraries are? I think they're wonderful!

I think greed, the me first attitude, has caused the big mess our country is in right now.

And I think the mess the health care situation  is in can be directly contributed to greed.

The Insurance companies function for profit. Not for care or health first. If they did,we wouldn't need any changes.

Mr. Obama's mother died of cancer.
He saw her struggle with her insurance company while in the hospital. I think his desire to change the current situation comes from this experience.

And please Mr. Liver, leave the illegal immigrants out of this.


Helpful - 0
Avatar universal
In a nutshell, they are private companies who have elected to provide Medicare Supplemental Insurance to those qualified beneficiaries who normally use Orginal Medicare Plan with the promise to conform to certain gov't rules and regulations as required in the Original Medical Plan. Of course, the Supp Ins Plans does all of the requirements and then some from the same money. The private plans receive the medical premiums that the medicare recipients normally  would have had to pay to the Medicare Original Plan.Then they more efficiently disburse the payments
They use this money to run their insurance companies and do it much more efficiently and provide more services and better care, than the Original Plan does. These supplemental plans focus more than medicare on after-care .Preventative care is critical also and amenities such as health classes . If a plan enrollee would like to pay a little extra they can further reduce their co-pays and deductibles and. get benefits that offer PPO, and HMO  low deductibles, private hospital rooms, reduced cost of some services, and more choices as to doctors and contracted hospitals. Choice is important to people when it comes to their health and the safety of their loved ones.as it should be. I kinda rambled but I think you got the bottom line. Don;t let gov't run the 6th largest industry in North America. Rember the government must first take before it can give.
Hope this helps a little. Complicated subject to be sure. I have read enough US Code to last me 2 lifetimes.
Helpful - 0
Avatar universal
Can you explain how Medicare Supplemental insurance plans work?  Who is eligible for this and what does it cover?  Now asking for my benefit as the ongoing debate here in Canada is whether to allow private healthcare and in what form.  Your reference to it has piqued my interest.


Helpful - 0
Avatar universal
Politicians on the left can imagine a conspiracy, or racism ( I just love that one) , or an organized effort by citizens in the community or the RNC is bussing (taking a page from the DNC play book) disgruntled seniors in from assisted living homes. They can imagine all of this and more while trying to explain away the dissent they are hearing at their townhalls but its not going to work. Many Americans are angry and they have an absolute right to be.

I saw a lady at my townhall meeting with a shirt that said "I love my government-run medicare!" Maybe some of you have seen them. I talked with her a bit about her shirt. It turns out that she didn't have medicare at all. She has a Medicare Supplemental Insurance Plan. I explained to her that the shirt seemed to imply that she had the Original Medicare Plan administered by the federal government.  

If the proponents of the health reform bill were to actually read it, and/or listen to what Obama really says about it they certainly would come to a clear understanding of what fuels much of the dissent at their meetings.

Original Medicare Plan vs Medicare Supplemental Insurance

Original Medicare is an 80/20 plan for doctors visits and limits on hospital stays,  20% co-pay for .diagnostic tests (MRI can be pretty pricey) , and you can't find a doctor who accepts medicare payments to treat you in the first place. Trying to find a specialist who accepts the low payments offered by the Original Plan is a joke.  Why anyone would take this plan over a Medicare Supplemental Insurance Plan (offered by private insurers) is beyond me. For the same money per month as a medicare part B payment, private insurers offer plans with lower co-pays and deductibles, and include many more medical services. Many offer free gym memberships, and put an emphasis on preventative care. They offer dental programs for very low addt'l payments, something the Original Plan has never offered. Many of the supplemental plans offer a wide array of programs for diabetes, heart disease, cancer, and most chronic diseases. Supplemental insurance programs are a godsend to those who are among the most vulnerable in our society- the aged, and disabled, many of whom have very little income.

How can these private insurers provide so much more than the gov't run Original Medicare Plan  ? Several ways-- lower overhead due to more efficiency in administration, more emphasis on follow-up care and preventative programs, and they do receive $115 billion dollars in governmental subsidy for administering the plans in place of
Here's what Obama thinks is right.This is according to his own words. He wants to take away the $ 115 billion in subsidies paid to the private insurers who administer Medicare Supplemental Insurance across the country . This will result in drastic and severe cuts to these health plans that most of our retired seniors and disabled have come to rely on.  There is no mathematical way around it. We will be diminishing the level of healthcare that the aged and disabled now receive. Obama may be OK with that, but I'm not, and neither is most of America. Our seniors and disabled are VERY worried and have every right to be in light of this agenda.

Think about this:

Obama is going to take money ( $115 B ) which he repeatedly refers to as "savings" from the Medicare Supplemental  Insurance plans that cover the majority of our retired and disabled Americans. Where are the "savings" ( $115 B ) going to? Why to subsidize the health insurance of younger, healthier, and more affluent people, of course.  A large number of seniors and disabled people have been showing up at these townhall meetings who are not happy about this. They are angry at what is being attempted by this administration. And so are their children. And their friends. And their fellow church and community members. You know, the very people you would expect at a townhall meeting---the constituents.

And how can there be anyone so naive as to not think that illegals won't be covered ? I don't think many Americans, and apparently no one in the administration, knows how the vast majority of illegals get work in this country.  It's because they have the necessary documents to fulfill the requirements of an I-9 form of which a copy is then sent to the federal government. And the documents presented in most every instance are very authentic looking. Dems love to call the illegals "undocumented workers" LOL. If this were true we wouldn't have much of an illegal alien problem. I've hired hundreds of people over the years. I have hired some that I suspected were illegal. And in some cases I found out later that my suspicions were correct  BUT, at the time of interviewing they had authentic looking documents and their SS# checked out. .Employers, HR, managers,etc are not trained to be counterfeit experts.  To not accept them based on a suspicion only, would be blatant discrimination. There is no doubt that illegal aliens will sign up for and be accepted into health care coverage with the same documents they use to get work. So, my friends, we WILL be paying for illegals. Lots of them. And some of that money used to do this will come from the $115 B that they are going to take away from our seniors and disabled. Good reasoning and logic there Barak. You might want to try laying off of the island bud for awhile.

Worth mentioning is the fact that for the first time in 37 years our seniors and disabled will not see a cost of living increase on their SS checks. As Obama loves to point out in trying to sell his agenda, healthcare costs are rocketing and as he has stated repeatedly, 60% of all healthcare costs are spent on our aging senior population. Could someone please connect the dots for Obama?

As for lobbyists---Why do you suppose there is not ONE mention on tort reform in 1100 pages of the house bill ? You don't suppose one of the largest contributors to Dem coffers, i.e.,  the Trial Lawyers Assoc. lobbied to keep it out of the reform bill ? I have never in my life seen such a blatant case of being in someone's pocket. How can you have an earnest, honest, and meaningful debate on healthcare reform without so much of a mention of tort reform when it contributes immensely toward the rising costs of healthcare? You can't. Its disenguous on their part to keep one of the major causes of rising health care in this nation off the table simply for their own personal political gain in the next election.

Write your representaives and senators in Congress and tell them to leave medicare and medicare supplemental insurances plans alone.  

Helpful - 0
148588 tn?1465778809
My point had more to do with the actual limit of resources rather than lack of 'money'. We can always print more money - just look at our 'solution' to the current fiscal crisis. But you can roll the printing presses all you want and it won't create more doctors or more medicine. One example of this is our current frantic effort to create flu vaccine. There are countries in SE Asia that will probably do without entirely because their normal supplier, Australia, will be holding on to most of what it produces for itself. Another example is the Midland-Odessa phone book. Last time I looked up 'Physicians' in the yellow pages, an estimated 75% of the doctors were South Asian surnamed. The fact that I only have to make a 450 mile round trip to see a gastro or a neurologist means that somewhere in Pakistan or India there are no specialists available at any price. True, these are global examples, but we will find the same to be true on a national level if "Universal Healthcare" is ever attempted in this country.
I don't have an answer to this. I think it would be great if everyone could have their needs met, but I don't see it happening in my lifetime.
Helpful - 0
Avatar universal
Oh sigh...I can't help it. I have to comment here.  

"As desrt point there will never be enough money "for everyone to get what they need" so its employees can be expected to spend a good amount of their time on the phone explaining the meaning of "not covered". And if people hate hearing that from their HMO they'll really hate hearing it from a bureaucrat."

I don't believe that's true.  When you hear that from an insurance company, isn't the thought going through your head that they're only interested in their profit margins and not interested in people at all?  When the government tells you it's not covered, it's because they can only cover so much and everybody knows what they're covering is coming from the tax base, not from the backs of people paying co-pays and lining the pockets of insurance company executives so to speak.  Yes or no?
Helpful - 0
Avatar universal
Mike points out one of the weirder inconsistencies in the arguments opposing the public option - if the publicly-administered, unsubsidized, insurance plan will be another hopeless, bureaucratic nightmare how will it possibly  outcompete our thriving, efficient, well-managed, private sector  ins. cos?

In the end it comes down to who do you trust. Blind faith in free market efficiency may be hazardous to one's survival. Included in Flguy's list of fubars are  several (Fannie Mae, privatized 68 re-nationalized-09, GM, Chrysler) examples of the toxic effects of private sector incompetence. And it'll be a quite a while yet before we climb out of the smoking ruins left by the collapse of unregulated  derivatized mortgage-backed security markets. To paraphrase Bo Diddley - "who do you trust?".

No sense having rosy illusions about  government-administered insurance  - it will a large, moderately efficient, somewhat dismal bureaucracy. As desrt point there will never be enough money "for everyone to get what they need" so its employees can be expected to spend a good amount of their time on the phone explaining the meaning of "not covered". And if people hate hearing that from their HMO they'll really hate hearing it from a bureaucrat.

So why enact a public option and universal coverage? It will eliminate the obscene inconsistency of having the world's "best" health system co-exist with 45-million uninsured some desperate enough to camp overnight for the privilege of receiving one-time medical care provided by Drs on a charity basis. Even if you think that's not your problem, there will be benefits.

The pubic option will need to cut costs, and since it is public the source of those costs will FINALLY become transparent. Some costs are obvious : tort/malpractice litigation gets picked on a lot.  Equally obvious are ins co executive salaries/bonuses/profits (eg the 78.3 million pocketed by the cigna ceo over the past 5 years along with the 5 year 11% return to cigna stockholders).
http://www.forbes.com/lists/2006/12/0BHA.html

Less obvious and ultimately much more important are the costs of the actual procedures/supplies. To pick a simple example we're all familiar with, last time I checked a sensitive PCR was running around $375 - anyone have any clue what the profit margins in that fee are and whether they constitute a reasonable return?  I agree with desrt that there never will enough money to go around. However if health care spending is already at 18% of GDP we need to really understand where that money is going . Trusting H. Hanway (cigna ceo) to "do the right thing" will mean watching it climb to 20, 25, etc.
Helpful - 0
412873 tn?1329174455
Thanks, Trish for the info.  

I've always been curious about how it works.  As an employee and also as an employer.  

All very interesting to me as I was working in healthcare the last time changes came....the first HMOs, PPOs, ect.  

I sure hope they don't push anything through too quickly here.  Ever the optimist, I am looking for the best of both....universal and private.  Betcha I get my little bubble burst on that one,lol!!

Iz
Helpful - 0
Avatar universal
Well, I guess that's what I'm trying to say.  You can only do this so perfectly, you know.  The underpinning of all of it is that it's simply important to provide healthcare to those that need it and those that need it are sick people.  Don't break it down into rich sick people and poor sick people, obese sick people and thin sick people, smoking sick people and non-smoking sick people....just sick people.

Promote healthy lifestyles and all that - but definitely treat the sick.  There will always ALWAYS be those who abuse the system.  And we ALL abuse the system in various ways if you want to get as granular as the situations I'm poking with a stick.  

Put the collective funds in a pot.  Let the doctors treat their patients instead of the insurance companies treating the patients.  Take care of sick people.  

We ALL agree to pay for each other's risk factors.  We don't live in bubbles.  Just because we live *period* means anyone at any given time is susceptible to illness or injury on a major or minor scale with potentially devastating financial repercussions regardless of income or circumstance.

It will definitely cost you. It will be a headache for many years to come, it will be on every election discussion, it will be debated ongoing for years and there will be issues to be dealt with ongoing.  But I can definitely tell you that it will be one thing that you do as a country that will be well worth it.  It will change lives.  Aside from the extremist rhetoric on both sides of this issue in your country, what matters is that people's concerns are listened to and addressed and at some point...you simply have to go with it.  You can't get it perfect from the get-go but you can at least start with something better than what you have.  If you could do this on a staged implementation, that would be great.  Address the most pressing issues first and then implement in phases.  



Helpful - 0
148588 tn?1465778809
Ouch, stop it, Trish. You're making people think. It hurts.
This is the real 'devil-is-in-the details' reason why healthcare reform should not be rushed through. When you start talking about who should pay for someone else's risk factors it becomes extremely complicated.
It seems simple enough - why should the skinny, vegetarian, jogger pay for the healthcare of the guy sitting in his car with a cigarettte in his hand waiting for his bacon-cheese burger at the drive thru? But obesity is not just a 'life syle choice', there's also a genetic component. Same is also probably true of addiction. Scickle-cell? Certainly. And each day the list grows longer of what diseases we are genetically predisposed to. If you want to be completely fair about it, everyone is going to need to get gene-sequenced and your health risks assigned from that. This is something that is being fought out on the sidelines away from the spotlight of the 'big money' issues of actually paying for this stuff.
Then there is this basic fallacy in thinking that if we can just juggle the numbers right, there would actually be enough doctors, medications, hospitals available for everyone to get everything they need. Ask anyone on a waiting list for a liver transplant what they think about that one.
Oh my aching head.
Helpful - 0
Have an Answer?

You are reading content posted in the Hepatitis Social Community

Top Hepatitis Answerers
317787 tn?1473358451
DC
683231 tn?1467323017
Auburn, WA
Learn About Top Answerers
Didn't find the answer you were looking for?
Ask a question
Popular Resources
A list of national and international resources and hotlines to help connect you to needed health and medical services.
Herpes sores blister, then burst, scab and heal.
Herpes spreads by oral, vaginal and anal sex.
STIs are the most common cause of genital sores.
Condoms are the most effective way to prevent HIV and STDs.
PrEP is used by people with high risk to prevent HIV infection.