IT'S TIME FOR UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE

Thomas wrote:

georgeob1 wrote:
The big difference, of course, is for the unemployed or those without an income.

And for those whose medical bills are so high their employers' insurance companies won't take them. Have you ever talked with Bipolar Bear about his epileptic son and the treatment he gets from America's healthcare system?

I did not follow bipolar bear's story, so I don't know the details of either the coverage he has, alternatives that were available to him, or the case itself. However the law here absolutely precludes an employer (or his contracted insurer) from denying an employee coverage in a company-provided plan based on pre-existing medical conditions. There may well however be limits on insured coverage in some cases (as I suspect is also the case in German coverage).

Walter Hindler wrote:

Well, the highest sum an individual has to pay himself is about 620 Euros/month - but you get not only (basic) dental care but nursing in the home, preventive and rehab measures as well as travel expenses (taxis, emergency cars, fares to rehab institutions).
And it includes the premium for the nursing insurance. (That is mandatory, even if you're privately insured.)

Well I pay $70 dollars/month for family medical coverage that provides unlimited selection of doctors & hospitals, preventive and rehab coverage and home nursing (for up to 90 days) - however travel & taxis are not included. I pay an additional $40/month for similarly structured dental care, which, however, has an annual family $400 deductable cost.

Our company previously also offered less espensive HMO medical coverage as an elective alternative, however we dropped it because the savings were not proportional to the limitations of coverage. Overall we are only slightly more generous with these benefits than most employers.

0 Replies

georgeob1 wrote:

Well I pay $70 dollars/month for family medical coverage that provides unlimited selection of doctors & hospitals, preventive and rehab coverage and home nursing (for up to 90 days) - however travel & taxis are not included. I pay an additional $40/month for similarly structured dental care, which, however, has an annual family $400 deductable cost.

That's indeed even cheaper than anything here.

I wonder why a) so many don't have a health insurance in the USA and b) why our insurance companies can't do it for so little money.

0 Replies

georgeob1 wrote:

Well I pay $70 dollars/month for family medical coverage that provides unlimited selection of doctors & hospitals, preventive and rehab coverage and home nursing (for up to 90 days) - however travel & taxis are not included. I pay an additional $40/month for similarly structured dental care, which, however, has an annual family $400 deductable cost.

Wow.

That is a really big difference between the $1,320 you're paying and the average of $6,400 per capita per year that e.g. the latest OECD Health report states as health care costs in the United States.

0 Replies

Walter Hinteler wrote:

georgeob1 wrote:
Well I pay $70 dollars/month for family medical coverage that provides unlimited selection of doctors & hospitals, preventive and rehab coverage and home nursing (for up to 90 days) - however travel & taxis are not included. I pay an additional $40/month for similarly structured dental care, which, however, has an annual family $400 deductable cost.

That's indeed even cheaper than anything here.

It's cheaper than anything I've seen in Massachusetts too. The rates quoted above really don't mean much, if we can't read the insurance contract that accompanies the policy.

With such a contract, what would the deductible be should the patient have to be admitted to a hospital for medical care/surgery?

I've found that the lower the premium, the higher the real hopsital/medical cost to the sick or injured patient.

0 Replies

GEORGEOB1 QUOTE:

Quote:

The unemployed or those between jobs do indeed face difficulties here. They are entitled by law to keep their previous employer-provided medical insurance for several years after leaving employment, however, they must pay for the coverage (at the employer group rates)

You're probably referring to the COBRA plan we have in the USA. This plan is expensive and when a person leaves a company and enters the COBRA plan, he/she pays full amount of insurance premium to be covered. So while you may have been paying $70/month while employed by the company, once you leave that company and enter the COBRA plan, your payment/month for the same level of coverage could easily reach $1000+/month.

Another comment about "pre-existing conditions" and coverage. Usually you have to be employed 6+ months, before you're covered by the plan. And
many plans do not cover pre-existing conditions.
Prior to Romney's plan in Massachusetts this was common in the Commonwealth. Now, with universal coverage the law, pre-existing conditons are covered, at least in Massachusetts.

With Medigap plans as used by Medicare recipients, most if not all plans will not cover individuals having or in the state of renal failure.

0 Replies

Walter Hinteler wrote:

georgeob1 wrote:
Well I pay $70 dollars/month for family medical coverage that provides unlimited selection of doctors & hospitals, preventive and rehab coverage and home nursing (for up to 90 days) - however travel & taxis are not included. I pay an additional $40/month for similarly structured dental care, which, however, has an annual family $400 deductable cost.

That's indeed even cheaper than anything here.

I wonder why a) so many don't have a health insurance in the USA and b) why our insurance companies can't do it for so little money.

I doubt that your insurance companies are at fault or that their total premiums are much greater. While I pay only $70/month, my company pays a much larger share of the premium. It is the government tax incentives for both employer and employee that create this situation.

I believe the number of "uninsured" here is exaggerated and distorted by the rather hot political debate. Those who qualify for government MEDICAD (medical & dental care for the poor) are invariably INCLUDED in the "uninsured". The remainder include many (mostly healthy young people) who simply reject employer coverage merely to avoid their (small) share of the cost. Finally there is a large number who are truly unemployed and uninsured.

In short we have a very generous structure of government subsidies for medial care. However, it does have a hole in it with respect to unemployed or only marginally employed people.

In general we have more built in incentives for people to seek employment and fewer social programs to sustain people through long periods of unemployment compared to what prevails in Europe. There are adverse side effects on both sides of this question, and European governments have recently been marginally reducing or restricting their support systems in some areas, while perhaps we are headed for some extensions of ours. I do believe our system better enables us to deal with the assimilation of immigrants than does the European one, however that is but one of many factors on which such choices must be made.

0 Replies

Georgeob1 QUote:

Quote:

Those who qualify for government MEDICAD (medical & dental care for the poor) are invariably INCLUDED in the "uninsured"

Not in Massachusetts. If you are overed by Medicare or Medicaid, you're covered by health insurance. You are not "uninsured"...

0 Replies

We've covered that before. Massachusetts is not in the USA (particularly the part in a triangle roughly from Foxboro to Fall River, to Boston). :wink:

Moreover, my reference was not so much to official State statistics but rather to the factoids that dominate the political debate and the various screeds published by advocacy groups.

0 Replies

If MA is not in the USA, Ahnold is trying his best to take CA out of the USA too! LOL

0 Replies

old europe wrote:

georgeob1 wrote:
Well I pay $70 dollars/month for family medical coverage that provides unlimited selection of doctors & hospitals, preventive and rehab coverage and home nursing (for up to 90 days) - however travel & taxis are not included. I pay an additional $40/month for similarly structured dental care, which, however, has an annual family $400 deductable cost.

Wow.

That is a really big difference between the $1,320 you're paying and the average of $6,400 per capita per year that e.g. the latest OECD Health report states as health care costs in the United States.

Again, I cited the cost to me. My employer paid the rest and for the company as a whole the cost amounts to about 10% of total salary cost less the total of the $70/month employee charges which are deducted from paychecks. All of the company's net cost is treated by the government as a business expense and thus escapes the Federal 35% corporate tax and the state tax (typically about 6% ) as well. These are powerful incentives and in effect they enable companies to "buy" a dollars worth of "happiness" for their employees at a cost of about 60 cents.

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

If MA is not in the USA, Ahnold is trying his best to take CA out of the USA too! LOL

You know Cicerone, it figures that you would not like the governator. I believe he is a clever and effective politician & governor - certainly a lot better than his hapless predecessor.

0 Replies

georgeob1 wrote:

Again, I cited the cost to me. My employer paid the rest and for the company as a whole the cost amounts to about 10% of total salary cost less the total of the $70/month employee charges which are deducted from paychecks. All of the company's net cost is treated by the government as a business expense and thus escapes the Federal 35% corporate tax and the state tax (typically about 6% ) as well. These are powerful incentives and in effect they enable companies to "buy" a dollars worth of "happiness" for their employees at a cost of about 60 cents.

I see. Seems to be pretty much the same as in Germany, then.

0 Replies

Ahnold has his ups and downs, but his latest action to reduce all departments by 10 percent is a very bad idea. Some programes and departments are more important than others, and he needs to prioritize those - like education and medical care.

0 Replies

old europe wrote:

georgeob1 wrote:
Again, I cited the cost to me. My employer paid the rest and for the company as a whole the cost amounts to about 10% of total salary cost less the total of the $70/month employee charges which are deducted from paychecks. All of the company's net cost is treated by the government as a business expense and thus escapes the Federal 35% corporate tax and the state tax (typically about 6% ) as well. These are powerful incentives and in effect they enable companies to "buy" a dollars worth of "happiness" for their employees at a cost of about 60 cents.

I see. Seems to be pretty much the same as in Germany, then.

I agree. Based in particular on the information Walter provided, it seems our respective systems are similar. The main differences are the unemployed "hole" in our system and the division of roles between government and employer in the respective countries.

I'm still unclear on who collects the premium costs in Germany. is it the government or the insurer?

0 Replies

oe wrote :

Quote:

That is a really big difference between the $1,320 you're paying and the average of $6,400 per capita per year that e.g. the latest OECD Health report states as health care costs in the United States.

as george stated , the difference is being taken up by many american companies to keep their employees happy .
the problem is that some companies (the big auto three - general motors , ford ,chrysler) found that they could no longer carry that burden .
their first step many years ago was to have more and more automobiles built "off-shore" . canada , being close by and having a universal health insurance (which requires litle money to be paid by the corporations) , was a beneficiary of that outsourcing for quite a few years .

the cost difference between producing a car in the U.S. and canada is about $2,000 in favour of the canadian production - certainly a sizeable difference . this difference is essentially the higher cost of health care - in its broadest sense - in the U.S.
even though productivity was higher in the U.S. factories , it couldn't make up for the difference in health costs .

with the further downturn of the automobile manufacturing business even canadian factories have started to run fewer shifts and to close factories .
at this time both toyota and honda are still increasing their manufacturing facilities in ontario and have even started to export some of their products to japan - we are sure hoping that will continue !
hbg

0 Replies

georgeob1 wrote:

I'm still unclear on who collects the premium costs in Germany. is it the government or the insurer?

The insurer. Government pretty much stays out of this.

0 Replies

cicerone imposter wrote:

If MA is not in the USA, Ahnold is trying his best to take CA out of the USA too! LOL

Good one, CI!

0 Replies

The republicans will be fighting the democratic congress against any universal health care plan, but will approve billions of dollars for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan while our country spirals into a recession. What's wrong with this picture?

0 Replies

c.i. wrote :

Quote:

The republicans will be fighting the democratic congress against any universal health care plan, but will approve billions of dollars for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan while our country spirals into a recession. What's wrong with this picture?

and the answer is :

Only two things are infinite, the universe and
human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.

"watch my tongue ! "

http://www.maniacworld.com/albert-einstein-1.jpg

-- Albert Einstein (1879-1955)

0 Replies

hamburger wrote:

c.i. wrote :

Quote:
The republicans will be fighting the democratic congress against any universal health care plan, but will approve billions of dollars for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan while our country spirals into a recession. What's wrong with this picture?

and the answer is :

Only two things are infinite, the universe and
human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.

"watch my tongue ! "

-- Albert Einstein (1879-1955)

Looks like a little bump on that old tongue...

0 Replies

IT'S TIME FOR UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know