Well I'm happy you Canajuns and Europeans are happy with your health care. I'm actually pretty happy with mine too and, for anything serious, would prefer to be treated here than anywhere else. It is a good thing when people are happy with what they have.
I will refer to my previous comments on this thread re difficulties of adapting systems suitable for your smaller populations to the behemoth that is the United States. A good comparison might be trying to develop a workable health care system that covered all of EU instead of just Germany or the Netherlands. I think we could be reasonably successful with single payer plans in some of our states provided most of the citizenry was behind the concept. I just don't think a one-size-fits-all plan would be practical throughout the U.S. however.
I don't know why i bother, but what the hell . . .
We have public utility commissions in this country, because we consider gas, electricity and water/sewage systems to be essentials, which ought not be left to the rapacious greed of corporate decision makers. Corporate capitalists are easily comparable to sociopathic personalities when it comes to decisions which affect the bottom line. A corporation is going to charge for magnetic resonance imaging what the market will bear; a doctor is going to order an MRI on the basis of a "rule out" diagnosis to cover his or her ass in the event of a lawsuit--even though he or she may believe in good faith that the MRI will not reveal any anomoly of which he or she is not already aware. The result is increased costs for all of us.
The government doesn't need to run hospitals to make the system work. Malpractice rates could be government regulated without the use of an enormous bureaucracy, just as could the rates which medical care delivery systems would be allowed to charge for specific procedures or tests. Public utility commission in effect regulate the rate of profit of the corporations which sell us gas or electricity. But the contemporary medical care delivery corporation is under no such constraints--they can charge whatever they can get away with charging; the insurance company can use those charges as an excuse to jack up premiums, once again in an unregulated environment.
Public utility commissions simply assure us that the privately owned or joint-stock corporations which supply gas, electricity and water/sewage are well-regulated, and do not deny us what we consider necessities based upon the unrestricted greed of the owners or stock holders. Setting up such a means of regulating the costs of tests, procedures, drugs and therapies does not mean that the government would run the system--simply that they would regulate it.
I find it the height of ironic stupidity that conservatives rant on about how badly the government would do the job, when they're being raped by pharmaceutical companies, who are regulated as to the charges they may levy for their products in every other country in the world. They still sell the same drugs in Canada, because they're making a good profit there, even though they cannot gouge the customer the way they do here.
The reason we have the system we do here, despite the need for reform which was identified more than a generation ago, is that the Congress is up for sale, and the medical, pharmaceutical and insurance companies have a lot of money to purchase the policies they like best.
Hehehe, I'm totally pro-European, but a German!
Heath care is a national thing, has nothing to do with EU (beides, of course, that each country recognises the systems of the other)(, although most systems are indeed very similar - not only within the EU but in Europe :wink: ).
I know Walter. I was using a hypothetical illustration of a mythical EU universal healthcare system to compare with what a single payer system covering the entire U.S. might look like. Do you think there might be some difficulty in disbanding the individual healthcare systems in all the EU member countries and adopting a single universal system that would cover all? Or do you guys have some magic pill that creates harmony that is more effective than our cooperative efforts?
Cooperative efforts . . . oh jesus . . . yeah, the Congress cooperates with the corporate bandits who pick our pockets every day . . . geeze, people like you are the con man's dream . . .
Well, Foxfyre:
Quote:The right to travel freely, or to live and work anywhere in the EU would make no sense if EU citizens could not be sure of obtaining health care wherever they go. Mutual recognition of social security rights ensures that health care is readily available for anyone falling ill while in another member state, and in some other European countries as well. In future*, a European health insurance card will make it easier to claim these rights. Phase-in of this card begins on 1 June 2004. In some circumstances, EU citizens are also entitled to obtain treatment in another member state. This is particularly important to people living in border regions or needing specialist treatment.
Source:
EU guide: Public Health
* Most Germans can or already have got this card by their insurance companies.
Recognition of each other's health insurance is not the same thing as one universal plan covering everybody Walter. My health insurance covers me too if I get hurt in New York or Alaska or Germany. Are you intentionally throwing up a smoke screen to avoid answering the question?
No, but even if you came without any health insurance, you would get the same in the UK, in Germany, in Franc e... as any of the citizens living there
of course, if you are either well off (let's say : very well off) and/or have a good "non-cancellable" health-insurance policy you can no doubt get outstanding medical treatment in the u.s. if however, you are an underdog, your treatment might not be quite as outstanding. i recall an entry by a able2know member earlier this year. i believe the entry stated that she could not afford to let her husband stay in the hospital over the weekend (after having had a heart-attack ?), because the hospital was going to charge an extra $500 a day. well, i think that is not the way i would like my "government" insurance treat me if i were hospitalized. hbg
hbg, I agree with you 100 percent. That is not any way to treat another human in the richest country on this planet.
c.i. : you are a good soul ! how's your eyesight after the operation ? i hope you are back to NORMAL (what us old guys call NORMAL ! ). hbg
Thanks, hbg. My eyesight isn't going to be normal until I can quit using the eye salve for the next three weeks. It's really a strain to participate on A2K, but I keep plugging at it. The doctor took the stitches out on Wednesday, and that wasn't a very pleasant experience. I think all my upper body muscles were strained, and my jaws were "tight." Glad that's over with. Now must be patient for the surgery to mend. *** About being a "good soul." We come from very modest backgrounds, so I know how it's like to be a poor kid. The cost of medical care is so expensive now, even middle class families without health insurance provided by their jobs are financially strained. At the age group before Medical kicks in, the monthly premium can be upwards of $500 every month for a single. That's close to $7,000 a year just for health insurance. Since our country already spends the most for medical care, I don't understand why we can't cover all of our citizens with universal health care - especially all the children. I feel it's a crime that we are spending 200 billion on Iraq, while our own people go without. It just doesn't compute.
The American Medical Society, as well as many, many non-member MDs are against Universal Health care in the USA.
I agree. The idea looks good on paper, but in reality, the system couldn't handle the patient load.
Maybe if the trial lawyers stopped their lawsuits against MDs, the plan might work. Until then, the best plan is individual/family health insurance.
from watching u.s. media reports, i understand that a good portion of the health-insurance premiums are being swallowed up through fraudulent billing practices . i understand that a number of health-care providers and insurance companies have either been convicted or are under investigation for crooked business practices. looking through the "business weekly" magazine will usually reveal some shady business practices, but the problems seem to be ongoing. in the meantime : the policyholder pays and has little recourse. hbg
I don't know what you're reading Hamburger. While I suppose there are crooks to be found anywhere, the insurance industry is so closely regulated in at least most if not all 50 states, the incidents of clear fraud among private insurors is low when compared to many other industries.
What you most read in the paper are doctors and patients defrauding the government provided healthcare programs such as Medicare and Medicade.
Think how long, it'll take to get a mammography or a colonoscopy, when there's universal care?
Not a pleasant thought, for sure.
Three days to a fortnight normally, the very same day when it is urgent here. :wink:
About the same here Walter!
Then all the horror stories we hear about long waits for diagnostic tests and non-emergency surgery in Canada are all fabrication? Are the friends and relatives of friends from Canada who show up here for medical treatment because the wait was too long in Canada a lie? (I don't know anybody who came here from Germany however, so can't speak to that.
)
mammographies are scheduled to be done at least once a year - and more often if there is a suspicion of abnormal growth. my wife received her notice from the clinic recently and a follow-up phonecall when she did not show up at the clinic promptly. an elderly friend of ours in toronto (nearly 80) had a mammography recently; she was called for a follow-up within 48 hours and had her operation before the week was over. couple of years ago my physician suggested a coloscopy "just to make sure" . since this was on a non-urgent basis (no bleeding etc. - i had my previous colonoscopy 25 years ago) it took about six weeks to have a pre-screening ( i think it was an MIR ?), colonoscopy and follow-up interview with the head of the G.I. unit completed - there was no need for further action. from what i know there are excessively long wait times for some hip and knee-replacements; but a friend of mine had a knee-replacement done within six weeks. another friend of ours had a hip-replacement (thesecond one) done within three months. i know that some patients want their operations done immediately and there fore elect to pay to have it done in the U.S. ... i'm sure the canadian system is not perfect, but from what little i know about it EVERYONE can count on receiving medical care. from the way i see it, not alltogether an unsatisfactory system; but as i also said, it can always stand improvement. hbg
