posted 08-17- 08:03 PM               

So get this: Here in "live free or die" New Hampshire we have a state run "healthy kids" program. Pretty much your dream come try - healthcare is a God given "right" in NH, at least for kids. We're taling 100% free covereage and any choice of doctors!

So the kids roll into this plan, and the wife and I take out a cheap high deductable plan... we end up paying about $50 a week and get better care.

So I can pay more for less, or hit up the "welfare" program. Of course, the money must coem from somewhere... so really I might as well partcipate in the program that I pay taxes for.

So does $5/hr of my work seem fair for shitty healthcare? This is where we are going folks... you won't have a choice soon... you won't be able to purchase with your money. Basic economics says that this means your money becomes worth less... and less. Final result: lower standard of living for all.

posted 08-18- 03:23 AM               

Not in my books.

I personally don't mind paying higher taxes if it means that I don't have to worry about going bankrupt if someone in my family becomes gravly (or even mildly) ill.

I think of it as a nationwide health insurance scheme. Sure a private system would probly run on less money but then they are also in it for profit.

I know we are on 2 different sides of this argument SV, as we have proven many times, but you must agree that if the majority of Canadians see our system as I do and don't have a problem with being part of a nation wide insurance program then really there is no problem with our system. Except that we can't opt out. But since I don't want to I don't really care.

Its insane that you have to spend that kind of money just for some healthcare and its shitty to boot. Crappy freaking deal.

I thought you could just buy health insurance and have it not attacted to work in anyway, and theres no way I ever thought it would cost that much money.

BTW we DON'T get perscription coverege, so thats where your buy in plan would be better.

We do have cheaper drugs in this country though, as proven by your senior citizens coming up here to buy them.

You say that heath care would cost you 5 dollars an our of your work. And then you complain that your kids are covered by your taxes?

Could you please reword the last paragraph please, you lost me.

In the US a minimum wage worker (6.85 here) pays for health insurance how?

Oh yeah, even though we have free healthcare we still can get benifits from work. It would cover the perscriptions, dental work and glasses and such.

Childeren under 18 are covered for yearly eye exams. Those over 18 are covered for one ever 2 years, that recently changed from yearly for adults. I think it was wise to change to 2, every year seems like a waste to me anyways for adults. An eye exam is $45. If you want to compare costs.

Dental is not covered in anyway, unless you happen to be on welfare and need emergency service, usually its just pulled.

I wish dental was covered too, why do they worry about your eyes but not your teeth? Wacky.

Anyways, I had a tooth repaired latly. 50 to take a look at it and make a plan of action (exactly whats wrong, do we pull it, fill it or cap it, root canal? and such) Xrays included.

Then it was 121 to fill it. All of that stuff inludes taxes.

Again I just state the numbers incase you want to compare costs.

Costs do change from dentist to dentist, I'm not sure by how much, but I think I paid A little more then If I shopped around but I like this guy, he put most of the fillings in my teeth and they are all holding up great, except for this last one, wacky stuff, its the new non mercury style. I'm hoping he covers it when a filling doesn't take, or only charges a small fee.

posted 08-18- 11:18 PM               

But if the free market system is so great then why is it so ungodly expensive, I thought it was supposed to foster compitition and bring down the prices?

Seems it isn't working.

What I see is that the free market system wasn't working so well. Maybe people weren't getting adequate health care for their kids (in otherwords they weren't living up to their responsiblitys as parents to make sure they were taken to a doctor when sick) so they state decided they could do a better job and used tax revenues to make sure the kids were healthy. This seems to reflect a fact about the society more then the goverment.

You still didn't answer my question SV how does a low income worker pay for health care in the free market system like that? Cause it doesn't sound like they can afford health insurance.

It seems you love the free market system and then you complain when it doesn't work, and you forget that people just suck ass and can't take care of themselves. I don't think thats the goverments fault but rather the peoples.

What I feel we need is national healthcare that is quality and run efficiantly. Then would you complain?

I mean if the healthcare was just the same quality AND the same cost (because there wouldn't be as much profit mongering going on) but you paid through your taxes instead of the checkbook.

Then the only differnce would be that lower income people would be paying less and somewhat living off the rich people in that respect WHEN THEY WERE SICK.

I know you hate that but maybe thats just a price you have to pay for living in a country that offers you so many oppertunities to become an above average income earner. I mean is life so bad if you have to complain cause your paying higher healthcare costs then the guy making half the amount of money you are?

I'm not sure how much you know about our system SV, but we do have to pay for some healthcare. Like any sort of special thing.

What a fiberglass cast so you can still get it wet and its lighter? You have to pay.

Want a private room while you are in the hospital, you have to pay.

Want a boob job for the wife? Pay.

We pay for the perks. Or I should say we pay EXTRA for the perks.

Its like we are all in one HUGE nationwide insurance healthcare plan, but the payments are based on what you make. If you feel its unfair then thats your choice, but alot of us also belive in equal healthcare for all, we belive that every citizen of this country deserves the best care avalible, no matter if your a millionare or a welfare recipent (they even get perscriptions for free if the drug qualifies, you try paying for any when you don't have $5 bucks left after paying rent and food, and yes I agree you shouldn't have left over money after paying the basics)
As a bonus it also means no one has to worry about the debt incurred along with sickness. Up here you get sick and you might miss work and be out of a job, that sucks, but at least you can somewhat consentrate on getting better instead of losing everything ever worked for and selling the house to pay back all your medical costs.

Once again its a reflection of Canadas society and our beliefs. This is yet another example of just how differnt we are from Americans.

Please note I'm not trying to argue at all, just trying to clearly state my position on the healthcare issue and why I feel that way.

I'm not trying to sway you as I know that rarly happens in life, I'm just trying to maybe make you say "ah I guess I can see how some people might feel that way"

Think about it this way.

In your county a decent perportion of you feel it is your given right to own and bare arms. Theres no 2 ways about it.

That is how I feel about national healthcare its a right. No 2 ways. And alot of other people here do too.

If I'm properly informed even if a Canadian has to travel to the USA for some special medical procedure, usually breakthrough cutting edge stuff that we havn't adopted yet or specilized care. Our goverment will still pay for it.

They realize we don't have doctors or facilaties to provide that so they send us where it is done. Thats not saying that our system sucks cause we can't afford the equipment or the doctors, or the scientest to develop the techniques. Just our small population wouldn't support some specialized stuff like that enough to justify the costs, as they could end up being higher then just sending special cases down there and paying for them.

Also we have every right in the world to pay for our own healthcare and travel to the states to get it.

posted 08-18- 11:39 PM               

The problem with the US system isn't however "profit". Most HMO's are non-profit (Kaiser, Blue Cross, etc) but they are under attack in this country by liberals for trying to control costs. Also, ask yourself why it is that the US has the latest state-of-the-art medical care that Canada is willing to send it citizens here to get? It's not just Canada either. People from all over the world come here for medical treatment.

The dilema as I see it is: do we opt for a single payer (government) system where everyone gets the same level of rationed, mediocre medical care, or do we leave it to the market place where there are incentives for excellence but where some people need government assistance and not everyone gets the same level of care?

IMO you can not have "free" medical care without rationing it. If food were free everyone would want steaks, who would eat hamburger. If cars were free would you rather have a Mercedes or a Ford Escort? The same holds true for medical care. You can ration it by price or through government edict. In either case it's a form of rationing. At least with the price method there are incentives for the providers to offer more and better care if they can make more money by doing so.

posted 08-19- 08:08 AM               

Here's another stunt being pulled. The
corporation that is responisble for my medical
insurance is self insured. They instuted a
"health network" a few years ago. What it
amounts to is if you don't go to a network
hospital or doctor the insurance only pays
70% of your bill.

In order to get into the network a doctor or
a hospital must discount their servicies a
certain percentage to the company. Guess what
happens? Since office visits aren't covered
by insurance the cost of office visits has
skyrocketed. This is paid out of the pocket
of the individual. What the company has done
is shifted the cost of health care from them
to the individual.

BTW Sv, since you know first hand the problems
associated with obtaining health care do you
pay your employees enough to enable them to
have health care or do you furnish it for them? Just curious.

posted 08-19- 05:23 PM               

I blame US, you and me. Not the government, not the insurance companies.

The US government can't do anything correctly. Only commynists believe otherwise.

And it is in the best interest for the "insurance" companies to be as greedy as possible. Insurance companies take in as much money as possible, and pay out as little as possible to the providers (doctors, nurses, techs, staff). That is their business, take money and give nothing (if possible).

How is the situation corrected? Maybe it can't, maybe it can if the users strike the insurance companies. Only the uninsured can offer to strike.

Maybe we need new unions, Unions defined by economic class and need, not by workplace or job. I appoint myself as leader of this union, and I'll need dues from everyone ($50 per month).

As users of the system, we allow it to be as it is. If the government took it over, we'd never have any say about our care because we can't sue the government.

What would help?

Destroying States' right to regulate insurance. If a national company must deal with the regulation on a state-by-state basis, the company is able to segment its users by state, cutting down the users' ability to unite and fight for a better system.

Not that I'm a strick federalist, I see the point of States' rights.

PS Jerry, while Blue Cross is non-profit, have you ever wondered where their "excess" income goes at the close of their fiscal year? Obviously BC's income are negociated on a recurring basis (annual or whatever), and they have to resolve this income with their costs. The board members are provided with healthly bonuses from this excess income. (I can't understand people who think companies make money, they do not. My company doesn't make money, its profits are paid out into intra company development (more jobs), executive bonuses (manger level and up), and new-business iniciatives (taking new customers out to dinner, R&D, B&P)).

If everyone understood the issues, no one would disagree about anything. How BORING!

;(

posted 08-20- 07:25 AM               

Our employees had their healthcare paid by the company, it was a benefit. However, the money came directly out of our budget for employees, so we could have paid them the money in their paycheck just as easily.

If you add up all the taxes that we pay for the employess and all the health plans, etc - some employees could almost double their salary. Because all this money is taken out before you see it, you tend to forget that YOU are paying it. All this "secret" money hides the sad fact that we are hardly free anymore.

Isn't being able to buy the things you want with your own money as much as a God given right as healthcare?

So what is the perfect healthcare solution that is best for everyone... that perpetuates the highest quality care and most progress... and is most available to the widest range of people?

My solution is a free marjet system where all bills are paid at the time of service - and nothing is "covered" by any type of insurance. Now, you get health insuarce from companies not directly tied to the healthcare industry. They offer protection in case you need a kidney transplant, etc. You can also opt for an HMO type of insurance that tries to manage costs, etc. - like today's HMO's attempt to do. But these HMO's must PAY for their services like anyone else. Now they can try to own their own healthcare companies if they want... but good luck I say to them.

Now for those that can not afford any insurace, the government offers welfare money that can be used to purchase private insuarce - of their choice. However, it won't be enough money to pick any insurace plan... they will have to chose from plans that offer less quality care in the end... most likely - becuase, well, quality costs money. But the point is that they will have doctors, medicine, and be able to have children, etc. And I dare say that these folks will have even better care then we have now... as the technology improves and better doctors enter the system again, all will benefit.

posted 08-20- 03:07 PM            

Uh, maybe because you have to bust your fucking ass to get a Computer Engineering degree, while any liberal arts, English major pussy with a high enough GPA and determination can get into law school.

It's nobodies 'fault'. It's just pretty damn hard to get an advanced degree at a reputable school. Most lazy shit American kids won't do it. That's why my CS classes are 3/4 full of foreign students.