Liberty Dave, that's a well-reasoned reply, but permit me to answer a few of the points.
1. I don't think than argument based on what the US government does is valid when you're trying to make an argument about the costs of socialized medicine. For WHATEVER reason (and you may well be right) health care cost per patient is twice as high here in the USA.
2. Frivolous lawsuits. Absolutely correct. We don't have them in the UK. How is this a strike against socialized medicine?
3. Canada. 33 million population. 60,000 doctors. given even distribution if your 1 in 3 figure is correct this is a range from 20,000 to 11,000,000 Canadians came to the US for treatment. Perhaps you could research this a little more specifically.
4. Great Britain. Maybe there are 750,000 people waiting for hospital Admission. I can guarantee you that tehse are not fur urgent operations. Some will be for joint replacements, some will be for wart removal, and all levels inbetween. The fact is that medically urgent operations are available. As far as the "health tourists" are concerned, sure there will always be people who want to spend their own money to get something done more quickly. There will be people who buy Corvettes and people who buy Corollas. There should always be a right for people to decide what to do with their own money over and above their responsibilities to society.
5. Lasik is a good example, but not in the way you mean. Quite simply, any new procedure is more expensive for two reasons. a. There are a limited number of practitioners and b. The manufacturers want their R&D costs back as fast as possible. Both quite reasonable ideas. And of course the quality of Lasik has gone up. Couldn't be because of all those "early-adopter" guinea-pigs could it?
6. Your little diatribe about "rights" is all in your imagination. I didn't say anything of the sort. In fact, it was the USA's Declaration which talked about the inalienable rights being "Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness". It's a little difficult to have "Life" without good health.
The real question is whether or not you believe that a society has any responsibilities towards the individuals that make up the society. Clearly the signers of your D of I thought so, and frankly so do I.
I cannot "pass by on the other side of the road" either physically or financially. And neither should you.
Thanks Chris H. That's exactly the point I was trying to make. Health care costs are double here per patient, that is per capita. And you're spot on about the prevention aspects.
AJ, costs don't just "appear to be double" they ARE double. If you prefer to look at it a different way, in 2008 they used up 17.9% of the Gross Domestic Product. The next highest was Germany with 10/9% of GDP.
Take away the "Capitalism is best" kneejerk reaction, and there is just no question that the US Health System is unbelievably inefficient in hard financial terms.
As an aside, I have always found individual Americans to be among the most generous people in the world. You give to charities, you would never pass by a starving child in the street, but for some strange reason a significant portion of you will not allow your government the same privilege of generosity. Maybe in Europe we have learnt to trust our governments more. Maybe in fact, our systems of government are better. Maybe the constitution is a bad thing.... (Oh wash your mouth out Alan!)
First of all, and most importantly, I very carefully did NOT use the word "free" anywhere in my posting. There is no such thing as a free lunch, or as my Yorkshire friends would say. "There's always a come-from".
Second, you both miss the point completely, which is that the cost-per-patient here in the USA is TWICE that of other leading countries. That is NOT twice the cost of insurance-carrying patients, that is the average cost to treat every patient. To put it simply, the cost of a hip replacement here is twice that of the UK. Now we're not talking about what the patient pays, that is pretty much irrelevant, it is the cost of providing that service to the patient.
Third, you do not have to go very far to find many, many examples of people with insurance who do not get reimbursed for their claims, sometimes on spurious grounds. My own best example of this was when I was a Virginia resident, driving to Austin TX. By the time I reached Texarkana I was running a 105F temperature so I went to the Emergency Room. Suspecting meningitis they promptly gave me an MRI. It turned out to be blood poisoning from an abcessed tooth, but my Insurance company tried to deny the claim because "You had not first visited your primary physician". According to them, I should have turned round and driven the 1,152 miles back to Arlington, VA to see my primary physician before going to the emergency room. Sure, they were just trying it on to avoid paying, and one very strong letter sorted it out. But that's not an untypical reaction by insurance companies to avoid payment (and thus increase profit).
AJ, you've been drinking the Kool-aid. Get hold of the one fact that matters. It costs twice as much to treat a patient. Nothing to do with illegal immigrants, nothing to do with socialized medicine, the rest of the world (except for a few highly publicized cases) do NOT beat their way here for medical treatment.
You may want to check out www.nchc.org, the National Coalition on Health Care. The Coalition's Honorary Co-Chairmen are former Presidents George Bush and Jimmy Carter, and its Co-Chairmen are former Governor Robert D. Ray (R-IA) and former Congressman Robert W. Edgar (D-PA). Its President is Henry E. Simmons, M.D., M.P.H., F.A.C.P.
You say "get your hand out of my pocket". I've got news for you. A good socialized medicine system would leave money IN your pocket.
Unless of course you own an Insurance Company. Like AIG?
Like everybody, I have my own political views. My favorite three presidents of the last century were Reagan, Clinton, and Nixon. The difference is that I spend a lot of time thinking about politics, and I can tell you flat out that the rabid Rebuplicans and the equally rabid Democrats are both wrong. There are awesomely good aspects of capitalism, and equally great aspects of socialism. If this country could pragmatically combine the best of both then it really would be "the greatest nation on earth".
All I hear here in the USA is how inefficient a socialized medicine system is. But consider these points.
1. The people who make the decisions here (the House of Representatives, the Executive Branch, the Senate) have socialized medicine. As do the military.
2. Instead of a Government Bureaucracy you have Insurance companies - all of who have to make a profit in addition to the direct Health Care Costs.
3. Per patient cost here is TWICE the cost in other advanced countries.
4. The "Emergency Room" is the primary option for many many people. Because of this there is almost no preventative medicine for most citizens,
5. Yes, in England they pay an additional tax. It is still less than the average cost of Health Insurance here.
6. They still make house calls in England.
7. My mother, now 84, has had a hysterectomy, treatment for three minor strokes, a broken hip, two replacement hips, a 6 week hospital stay to fix a severe intestinal problem, and is now in an excellent nursing home where she will stay for the rest of her life. Can you imagine the surgeries, MRI's X-rays etc she has had? And yet she has no Medical debts to pay off. In the USA she would have to have declared bankruptcy years ago.
8. And I repeat, all at a cost per patient less than half of the USA.
Now tell me that a Government-run organization can't be more efficient?
And my last point is that from her and my own experiences the most important single aspect is that the doctors there make time to listen to the patient.
My HSA plan here in Pennsylvania for my wife and I costs me around $12,000 a year, with a $4,000 deductible. I wonder how much of that goes toward running the Insurance Company rather than towards Our Health care? It's not too surprising that there are so many uninsured here.
One more thing, 'Instead, everything is second-guessed and scrutinized for "how will this look."'. You think that companies here don't consider this when they are required to submit Annual Reports to Shareholders? Not to mention the requirements of Sarbanes-Oxley which has turned out to be an expensive waste of effort and money.
In the same way, you don't have "less" blackouts, you have "fewer" blackouts. You can have fewer of an item, and less of a quantity. This is pretty basic English, and although I mostly enjoy AC's comments their impact is diminished if the grammar and syntax is incorrect.
My God! I'm becoming an old fogey! Thank goodness it doesn't stop me being right!
I, along with my wife, own a small business in Carlisle PA. We have healthcare insurance which costs us around $950 per month, with a $5000 deductible.
Am I correct in thinking that if you pay $120 per month, your employer pays a heck of a lot more for you?
BestNetTech has not posted any stories submitted by Alan Duxbury.
Re: Easy fix for you students out there...
And hang a blanket over the screen to stop screen-shots....
Re: Re: the real issue here
Brian,
I think that, politically speaking, right should have been capitalized... oh wait, you said "homeless" not just "disgusting", my error.
Designer of the Mini
It was Alec Issigonis - later Sir Alec. Boosted sales of radios though! I seem to recall we had a tranny on the back seat....
Re: Weird Harold the social Clamberer
The thought of the public clambering (over what you don't say) brings to mind many vivid possibilities.
None of them however have much relation to the public clamoring to see the movie....
Re: Grateful
Liberty Dave, that's a well-reasoned reply, but permit me to answer a few of the points.
1. I don't think than argument based on what the US government does is valid when you're trying to make an argument about the costs of socialized medicine. For WHATEVER reason (and you may well be right) health care cost per patient is twice as high here in the USA.
2. Frivolous lawsuits. Absolutely correct. We don't have them in the UK. How is this a strike against socialized medicine?
3. Canada. 33 million population. 60,000 doctors. given even distribution if your 1 in 3 figure is correct this is a range from 20,000 to 11,000,000 Canadians came to the US for treatment. Perhaps you could research this a little more specifically.
4. Great Britain. Maybe there are 750,000 people waiting for hospital Admission. I can guarantee you that tehse are not fur urgent operations. Some will be for joint replacements, some will be for wart removal, and all levels inbetween. The fact is that medically urgent operations are available. As far as the "health tourists" are concerned, sure there will always be people who want to spend their own money to get something done more quickly. There will be people who buy Corvettes and people who buy Corollas. There should always be a right for people to decide what to do with their own money over and above their responsibilities to society.
5. Lasik is a good example, but not in the way you mean. Quite simply, any new procedure is more expensive for two reasons. a. There are a limited number of practitioners and b. The manufacturers want their R&D costs back as fast as possible. Both quite reasonable ideas. And of course the quality of Lasik has gone up. Couldn't be because of all those "early-adopter" guinea-pigs could it?
6. Your little diatribe about "rights" is all in your imagination. I didn't say anything of the sort. In fact, it was the USA's Declaration which talked about the inalienable rights being "Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness". It's a little difficult to have "Life" without good health.
The real question is whether or not you believe that a society has any responsibilities towards the individuals that make up the society. Clearly the signers of your D of I thought so, and frankly so do I.
I cannot "pass by on the other side of the road" either physically or financially. And neither should you.
AJ & Tom Termini
Thanks Chris H. That's exactly the point I was trying to make. Health care costs are double here per patient, that is per capita. And you're spot on about the prevention aspects.
AJ, costs don't just "appear to be double" they ARE double. If you prefer to look at it a different way, in 2008 they used up 17.9% of the Gross Domestic Product. The next highest was Germany with 10/9% of GDP.
Take away the "Capitalism is best" kneejerk reaction, and there is just no question that the US Health System is unbelievably inefficient in hard financial terms.
As an aside, I have always found individual Americans to be among the most generous people in the world. You give to charities, you would never pass by a starving child in the street, but for some strange reason a significant portion of you will not allow your government the same privilege of generosity. Maybe in Europe we have learnt to trust our governments more. Maybe in fact, our systems of government are better. Maybe the constitution is a bad thing.... (Oh wash your mouth out Alan!)
AJ and Tom Termini
First of all, and most importantly, I very carefully did NOT use the word "free" anywhere in my posting. There is no such thing as a free lunch, or as my Yorkshire friends would say. "There's always a come-from".
Second, you both miss the point completely, which is that the cost-per-patient here in the USA is TWICE that of other leading countries. That is NOT twice the cost of insurance-carrying patients, that is the average cost to treat every patient. To put it simply, the cost of a hip replacement here is twice that of the UK. Now we're not talking about what the patient pays, that is pretty much irrelevant, it is the cost of providing that service to the patient.
Third, you do not have to go very far to find many, many examples of people with insurance who do not get reimbursed for their claims, sometimes on spurious grounds. My own best example of this was when I was a Virginia resident, driving to Austin TX. By the time I reached Texarkana I was running a 105F temperature so I went to the Emergency Room. Suspecting meningitis they promptly gave me an MRI. It turned out to be blood poisoning from an abcessed tooth, but my Insurance company tried to deny the claim because "You had not first visited your primary physician". According to them, I should have turned round and driven the 1,152 miles back to Arlington, VA to see my primary physician before going to the emergency room. Sure, they were just trying it on to avoid paying, and one very strong letter sorted it out. But that's not an untypical reaction by insurance companies to avoid payment (and thus increase profit).
AJ, you've been drinking the Kool-aid. Get hold of the one fact that matters. It costs twice as much to treat a patient. Nothing to do with illegal immigrants, nothing to do with socialized medicine, the rest of the world (except for a few highly publicized cases) do NOT beat their way here for medical treatment.
You may want to check out www.nchc.org, the National Coalition on Health Care. The Coalition's Honorary Co-Chairmen are former Presidents George Bush and Jimmy Carter, and its Co-Chairmen are former Governor Robert D. Ray (R-IA) and former Congressman Robert W. Edgar (D-PA). Its President is Henry E. Simmons, M.D., M.P.H., F.A.C.P.
You say "get your hand out of my pocket". I've got news for you. A good socialized medicine system would leave money IN your pocket.
Unless of course you own an Insurance Company. Like AIG?
Like everybody, I have my own political views. My favorite three presidents of the last century were Reagan, Clinton, and Nixon. The difference is that I spend a lot of time thinking about politics, and I can tell you flat out that the rabid Rebuplicans and the equally rabid Democrats are both wrong. There are awesomely good aspects of capitalism, and equally great aspects of socialism. If this country could pragmatically combine the best of both then it really would be "the greatest nation on earth".
The biggest government business in the UK
is of course the National Health Service.
All I hear here in the USA is how inefficient a socialized medicine system is. But consider these points.
1. The people who make the decisions here (the House of Representatives, the Executive Branch, the Senate) have socialized medicine. As do the military.
2. Instead of a Government Bureaucracy you have Insurance companies - all of who have to make a profit in addition to the direct Health Care Costs.
3. Per patient cost here is TWICE the cost in other advanced countries.
4. The "Emergency Room" is the primary option for many many people. Because of this there is almost no preventative medicine for most citizens,
5. Yes, in England they pay an additional tax. It is still less than the average cost of Health Insurance here.
6. They still make house calls in England.
7. My mother, now 84, has had a hysterectomy, treatment for three minor strokes, a broken hip, two replacement hips, a 6 week hospital stay to fix a severe intestinal problem, and is now in an excellent nursing home where she will stay for the rest of her life. Can you imagine the surgeries, MRI's X-rays etc she has had? And yet she has no Medical debts to pay off. In the USA she would have to have declared bankruptcy years ago.
8. And I repeat, all at a cost per patient less than half of the USA.
Now tell me that a Government-run organization can't be more efficient?
And my last point is that from her and my own experiences the most important single aspect is that the doctors there make time to listen to the patient.
My HSA plan here in Pennsylvania for my wife and I costs me around $12,000 a year, with a $4,000 deductible. I wonder how much of that goes toward running the Insurance Company rather than towards Our Health care? It's not too surprising that there are so many uninsured here.
One more thing, 'Instead, everything is second-guessed and scrutinized for "how will this look."'. You think that companies here don't consider this when they are required to submit Annual Reports to Shareholders? Not to mention the requirements of Sarbanes-Oxley which has turned out to be an expensive waste of effort and money.
So that's why...
Circuit City (see page 7) went Chapter 11 - they were worried about the $450m....
Bits are the same as bytes... no?
In the same way, you don't have "less" blackouts, you have "fewer" blackouts. You can have fewer of an item, and less of a quantity. This is pretty basic English, and although I mostly enjoy AC's comments their impact is diminished if the grammar and syntax is incorrect.
My God! I'm becoming an old fogey! Thank goodness it doesn't stop me being right!
The Bush Administration - Wrong???
No, seriously..... what's your REAL opinion?
BTW, I never knew what a Klein bottle was until now!
Re: Re: British National Health Service
I, along with my wife, own a small business in Carlisle PA. We have healthcare insurance which costs us around $950 per month, with a $5000 deductible.
Am I correct in thinking that if you pay $120 per month, your employer pays a heck of a lot more for you?