Canadians in general are horrified at the aspect of the United States going to a one-payer system. Where will they go to get necessary medical treatment?

However, if one of the major problems is that insured never deal with the insurer, and therefore have little say in the matter in terms of how they would like to set up their healthcare and quality & feedback, why would government negotiating rather than employer negotiating have any difference?

 

My point concerning competing for price and not coverage is this: an insurance company X may provide cheaper rates than insurance company Y, so it is chosen by company A for their employee benefits program. However, in order to provide the best rates, company X covers very, very little of the cost of the treatment of stroke, for instance, while insurance company Y does cover that. Let's say the majority of people would like to have insurance cover something like that, how is the mechanism of competition going to provide that service? Therefore, in a government plan it would be covered, but the government would negotiate with the hospitals for best pricing.

 

If the problem has to do with the first bolded passage (which is a bit questionable because I though that the root of US healthcare problems was the high cost), and you also say the second bolded passage, do we not have the same problems?

 

I think this takes the issue a bit deeper and warrants some more thought on my part, especially since I don't know the inner workings of the insurance and medical industries. But, I think the high cost stems in part from how much medical companies are charging for their products and services, which is insulated from price competition. On the other hand, since there are few insurance companies competing for policies it's in their best interest to keep prices moderately high rather than compete for the lowest of rates. I'll have to do some more research on that one.

Canadians in general are horrified at the aspect of the United States going to a one-payer system. Where will they go to get necessary medical treatment?

 

Well, I can't say that I blame them. Since they're relatively close to us, they can get the best of both worlds.

 

Just a thought...

 

But, for the record, I don't want to see the US adopt a health care plan like Canada's. It just occurred to me that Canadians could have a selfish motivation there.

Canadians in general are horrified at the aspect of the United States going to a one-payer system. Where will they go to get necessary medical treatment?

 

:thumb:

 

As someone who works with a guy from Canada, I can tell you that, that is definitely true.

However, if one of the major problems is that insured never deal with the insurer, and therefore have little say in the matter in terms of how they would like to set up their healthcare and quality & feedback, why would government negotiating rather than employer negotiating have any difference? If the problem has to do with the first bolded passage (which is a bit questionable because I though that the root of US healthcare problems was the high cost), and you also say the second bolded passage, do we not have the same problems?

 

I'm still in the process of learning what I can about healthcare, but I found this article both relevant and interesting.

 

New Yorker

I'm still in the process of learning what I can about healthcare, but I found this article both relevant and interesting.

 

New Yorker

 

Great read. Next time warn me if it will be that long.

 

My dad pretty much said the same thing this weekend, that high healthcare costs have to do with a tremendous amount of overtesting. It's true- when you go to the doctor, does the thought "how much does this test cost?" ever come up? No, because we aren't paying, the insurance company is. However, no parents, i.e., wants to be the one who lost a child because they were to cheap to get a test recommended by the doctor (even though the doctor may be doing it out of some purely financial motivation).

 

I'm inclined to believe that FSA's and high-deductible insurance policies may be a good start, even though the article is skeptical of it. But the article is right that change will have to be brought about from more than just whether the government or the private insurance companies are writing the checks. (While I'm inclined to keep the government out of it, it is similar to RM's perspective on abortion that even if Roe v Wade is overturned, more needs to be done.) Simply removing government regulation on healthcare won't solve all of the problems.

 

Now, the question is, how do we motivate local medical communities to follow the Mayo Clinic or Grand Junction model?

I was going to start a new thread but thought this story would fit in here.

 

I just got back from a week in Gulf Shores where we go every year with a number of my extended family. One family that goes every year is my cousin and her husband. Last year a couple of weeks before our annual beach trip her husband took a new job and was relocated to Edmonton. I had not talked to the them (expect here and there on facebook) since our beach trip last year. I was anxious to see how they liked living in Canada. One of the things I really wanted to about was the health care system. Their first response was you get what you pay for. A few negatives they told me about...

 

-Everything you have heard about the waits are real. The main reason for this they were told was because of the shortage of specialist. This is due to the lack of pay that doctors receive so no one specializes in anything. For example, a pediatrician in Canada is a specialist. My cousin said they can't have a pediatrician for their 5 year old son unless he has something wrong. In other words they can't just have yearly checkups. Then they have to be referred and it can take up to a year to get in to see them. example - My cousin was having some problems last Sept. She went to see a doctor they decided she needed a colonoscopy. They referred her to a specialist and she just a few weeks ago received a call from the specialist to schedule the colonoscopy for the following week. She told them she may need more notice to make sure her husband could be off to drive her and take care of their son. They said if she couldn't do it then it would be October before they could get her in next.

 

-They have known two people that have died waiting to see a specialist.

 

-Doctors don't have to take patients they don't want to take, even family doctors. You have to go through an interview process and the Dr decides if they want to take you as a patient.

 

-Also nothing is free. They do pay for the system in taxes. Their tax rate is insane.

 

They basically said the same thing most have, it's great if you don't get sick.

 

Just some food for thought.

For reference's sake-

 

87% of all Candians report being "Very Satisfied" or "Somewhat Satisfied" with their health care services.

90% of all American report being "Very Satisfied" or "Somewhat Satisfied" with their health care services

 

91.5% of all Canadians report being "Very Satisfied" or "Somewhat Satisfied" with their physician services.

93.6% of all Americans report being "Very Satisfied" or "Somewhat Satisfied" with their physician services.

 

Numbers for the American uninsured are attached as well.

 

Perhaps the question becomes- do we make dramatic changes to the health care system for the betterment of the whole population, or just a certain sector (the American uninsured)?

 

If a person dies before services could be rendered in Canada, I guess they wouldn't be surveyed since they are dead.

If a person dies before services could be rendered in Canada, I guess they wouldn't be surveyed since they are dead.

 

How many people die in Canada while waiting for procedures? How many people die in the US while waiting for procedures?

 

I also find it humorous that so many people - from both sides of the aisle - know someone from Canada who happens to agree with their views on healthcare.

How many people die in Canada while waiting for procedures? How many people die in the US while waiting for procedures?

 

I also find it humorous that so many people - from both sides of the aisle - know someone from Canada who happens to agree with their views on healthcare.

 

:clap: Thank you.

 

This is personal right now for us. My mother-in-law has been "waiting" for quite a while. She has medical insurance. She has had a deginerative lung disease for five years.

 

In May she was diagnosed with a mass on her lungs. After a failed biopsy and a successful one completed in the first week of June, she was diagnosed with a malignancy that is "hot and active."

 

Because of her condition she was not a candidate for surgery (what the Doctor said he would like to do if possible but can't) but believed that radiation would work.

 

Well guess what folks, she still hasn't had the first treatment!! She is having to wait for this specialist to get their ducks in a row and then that one to get his. Today, she will finally have seeds implanted so they can be more precise in the robotic radiation treatment that will be started at some FUTURE date.

 

Now, tell me we don't have to WAIT around here too! :madman:

 

 

BTW, she is doing this through St. Joseph in Lexington. I'm not a proponent of Nationalized Health Care nor am I a detractor. But please leave the tired argument about "waits" somewhere else. :taz:

 

Thank you for listening to my rant.

If a person dies before services could be rendered in Canada, I guess they wouldn't be surveyed since they are dead.

I would also add that for simple stuff (urgent care, sniffles, running nose type stuff) they love the system. No copay, just in and out. So I would assume that most don't have a problem with it. It's the ones that need major care that probably don't much like it.

 

How many people die in Canada while waiting for procedures? How many people die in the US while waiting for procedures?

 

I also find it humorous that so many people - from both sides of the aisle - know someone from Canada who happens to agree with their views on healthcare.

If you would like I can find out if my cousin will allow me to give you her email address or phone number and you can discuss it with her since you obviously think I am lying. I never said they agreed with my views because I never said what my or their views were.

:clap: Thank you.

 

This is personal right now for us. My mother-in-law has been "waiting" for quite a while. She has medical insurance. She has had a deginerative lung disease for five years.

 

In May she was diagnosed with a mass on her lungs. After a failed biopsy and a successful one completed in the first week of June, she was diagnosed with a malignancy that is "hot and active."

 

Because of her condition she was not a candidate for surgery (what the Doctor said he would like to do if possible but can't) but believed that radiation would work.

 

Well guess what folks, she still hasn't had the first treatment!! She is having to wait for this specialist to get their ducks in a row and then that one to get his. Today, she will finally have seeds implanted so they can be more precise in the robotic radiation treatment that will be started at some FUTURE date.

 

Now, tell me we don't have to WAIT around here too! :madman:

 

 

BTW, she is doing this through St. Joseph in Lexington. I'm not a proponent of Nationalized Health Care nor am I a detractor. But please leave the tired argument about "waits" somewhere else. :taz:

 

Thank you for listening to my rant.

What type of insurance coverage does she have? How many people do you know in this country that have had to wait almost a year for a colonoscopy? My wife had to have one and it took all of about 3 weeks from the time our doctor ordered it to the time it was done.

What type of insurance coverage does she have? How many people do you know in this country that have had to wait almost a year for a colonoscopy? My wife had to have one and it took all of about 3 weeks from the time our doctor ordered it to the time it was done.

 

State Medical (her husband is retired from KY Corrections). I'm not arguing the need for Nationalized or Privatized. I just get tired of those who act as if we don't have similar issues now under privatized health care.

 

BTW, for what it's worth - did you check out this article:

 

http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Insurance/InsureYourHealth/whats-most-likely-to-bankrupt-you.aspx

 

 

Medical problems caused 62% of all personal bankruptcies filed in the U.S. in 2007, according to a study by Harvard researchers. And in a finding that surprised even the researchers, 78% of those filers had medical insurance at the start of their illnesses, including 60.3% who had private coverage, not Medicare or Medicaid.

 

 

I just wish we would fix what we have but not meaning to sound rude but I'll take a wait on a colonoscopy that MIGHT be something over a few months on treatment of a "hot and active" malignancy any day.

State Medical (her husband is retired from KY Corrections). I'm not arguing the need for Nationalized or Privatized. I just get tired of those who act as if we don't have similar issues now under privatized health care.

 

BTW, for what it's worth - did you check out this article:

 

http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Insurance/InsureYourHealth/whats-most-likely-to-bankrupt-you.aspx

 

 

Medical problems caused 62% of all personal bankruptcies filed in the U.S. in 2007, according to a study by Harvard researchers. And in a finding that surprised even the researchers, 78% of those filers had medical insurance at the start of their illnesses, including 60.3% who had private coverage, not Medicare or Medicaid.

 

 

I just wish we would fix what we have but not meaning to sound rude but I'll take a wait on a colonoscopy that MIGHT be something over a few months on treatment of a "hot and active" malignancy any day.

That is a good read....couple of questions it stirred for me...

 

What was the average debt prior to the medical problems? I have to assume it is pretty high since the average medical debt for the insured was less then $18,000 and for the uninsured less then $27,000. These amounts are nothing to sneeze at but to cause someone to have to file bankruptcy seems odd unless they were already in extreme debt. I would also say a percentage of these people filed just to get out of paying the debt back. I have seen way too many use bankruptcy for the wrong reasons. And I would guess there is a percentage of these that are legit.

I also find it humorous that so many people - from both sides of the aisle - know someone from Canada who happens to agree with their views on healthcare.

 

I can provide you his name, company of employment and email if you'd like.

 

What's truly humorous is someone accusing people on a message board of lying...