Universal Health Insurance (2)

[jman507]

The fact of the matter is I cannot get insurance in the majority of the US states, period. This is not a question or a matter of debate, I have a stack of rejection letters on my desk. I am uninsurable. Some states have a ‘last resort’ plan that I can apply for, but there is usually a waiting list, and then they turn around and deny everything, saying it is all related to my transsexuality. Complications from it, etc.

I cannot believe that I am the only uninsurable person in the US.

I know you have, I’ve read some of those post in this thread. As I’ve said, that is due to policy issue with regard to insurance.

I replied to your quote

“Since we’re on the subject of Canada? I wonder how many people there have to file bankruptcy for medical bills? Since ‘UHC won’t cover everything you think it will’ is often a tactic to somehow make me think my situation is better here in the US than it would be elsewhere.”

My response is that I doubt that claim is made in an absolute way - that case by case it is always better. It probably is made more in a macro sense, regarding the overall health system. For myself I would say a UHC may probably be better for you. On the other hand, that also assumes what you need will be covered – a problem with insurance overall.

No matter how you shake it up, there will be advantages, disadvantages, and abuses in any type of system. Uninsurable situations are one disadvantage of the system.

 

[Oscarthecat]

It’s in ‘nonesense’. This is one of those myths that becomes ‘truth’ in the conservative mind because it is repeated a lot (like you would teach phrases to a parot) and fits what they want to believe.

Overall, self described liberals give about 3-5% more (in terms of percentage of annunal income) to Charity than self described conservatives. But that doesn’t really tell whole story. In virtually all studies, the two biggest factors are poverty and religion.

Secular liberals give significantly more (8-18%, depending on precisely how it is calculated) than secular conservatives. Pretty much what you would expect. But the gap shrinks to just 1 or 2% when comparing members of both groups who consider themselves religious. Liberals still seem to give slightly more, but religion seems to be far more important than ideology.

Most interestingly, the poor give, by far, the most. Presumably that is why we were instructed by Christ to be poor in spirit, and why Catholic religious priests all take a vow of poverty.

I provided a source to support that conservatives give more to charity than liberals…could you please do the same to support your claims?

 

[pathia]

My response is that I doubt that claim is made in an absolute way - that case by case it is always better. It probably is made more in a macro sense, regarding the overall health system. For myself I would say a UHC may probably be better for you. On the other hand, that also assumes what you need will be covered – a problem with insurance overall.

It would be covered I have friends in similar but not quite as extreme situations there, but emigrating to Canada is not very viable, not unless I get healthy enough to actually work enough to become a citizen. Those same friends are trying to get me to move in with them actually, but you need to be productive to gain citizenship.

 

[SoCalRC]

So what y’all are telling me a guy making 60k a year lives the same in Canada as in Alabama? LOL. Is that what you want us to believe? Eiither one of y’all ever lived and or spent time in BOTH places besides me?

No, I am saying your comparisons are seemingly nonsensical and definately off topic. In many ways Alabama is like a third world country, that is why people like me are investing in putting plants there. We have to augment your public education system to prepare people for the rigors of a modern factory job, but the overall combination, low cost of living, desperate workforce, and large incentives from the state and localities, make it an appealing investment.

But comparing 60K in Alabama to Canada is like comparing to California. Cost of living is difficult to meaningfully discuss without considering quality of life. After all, it is undoubtedly cheaper to live where you are than were I am, but although I’ve invest hundreds of millions of dollars in Alabama, I consider the difference in what I spend to live here a bargain.

But more importantly, it has zero to do with comparing health care delivery systems unless one starts the conversation by accepting something measurably false as inarguable fact. Canada is just one of about 30 examples, all of which provide better health care while spending less - not just on a personal level, but period.

If you bother to follow your own state government you will see that health care costs are the primary concern in terms of continuing to get people like me to invest in your state instead of investing overseas. It’s simply math, 10-18% inflation on something that is already the worst bargain in the industrialized world is unsustainable. But then, again, basic math skills is one of the things we have to provide classes for our workers in Alabama…

 

[Oscarthecat]

Where it fails is that those who would say it is better in the US than in Canada, is speaking in a aggregate term; case by case terms may be different. Since your dealing with insurance policies case by case it’s going to come down to how exactly the terms of the policy. The insurance payout for a certain claim may be denied, short the actual cost, is on par with the actual cost, or surpasses the actual cost. If a hospital or doctor finds that one is losing money on certain cases and with certain equipment, it’ll either be rationed or rejected. The system must stay solvent. If your lucky to fall into a case that surpassed the actual cost of care, you’re lucky and probably will get great care. If not your out of luck.

What you say is true about insurance companies- but it is equally true of socialized medicine programs, where it is dealt with by “rationing” services, eliminating more costly new treatments in favor of less expensive older ones, raising taxes, or, as is happening in England right now, forcing healthcare workers to work longer hours to meet the gap.

 

[onetimeposter]

but you need to be productive to gain citizenship.

…or possess a lot of money that you will invest in the economy.

 

[pathia]

What you say is true about insurance companies- but it is equally true of socialized medicine programs, where it is dealt with by “rationing” services, eliminating more costly new treatments in favor of less expensive older ones, raising taxes, or, as is happening in England right now, forcing healthcare workers to work longer hours to meet the gap.

It took me a six month waiting period to get an appointment with the specialist that could see me. I feel pretty ‘rationed’ there. This is related to the incident that led to the 1month period of waiting for an MRI. It took me six months to see this doctor about my problems, who then wanted an MRI of my brain to make sure there were no pituitary tumors. SEVEN MONTHS and it was about a potential brain tumor.

The MRI thing I can buy, I’ve read the articles about people coming to the US for MRI’s, but you can’t just magic up doctors with the invisible hand, it takes a good 8years to train up a doctor, even longer for specialists.

 

[jman507]

It would be covered I have friends in similar but not quite as extreme situations there, but emigrating to Canada is not very viable, not unless I get healthy enough to actually work enough to become a citizen. Those same friends are trying to get me to move in with them actually, but you need to be productive to gain citizenship.

Well I guess what does that say for Canada’s citizenship requirements. After all they are far more happier, healthier and wealthier than us in the States.

 

[SoCalRC]

I provided a source to support that conservatives give more to charity than liberals…could you please do the same to support your claims?

But you didn’t read yours. Look at the actual studies and data that ultimately it traces to. It argues that conservatives give 30% “more”, but that is in total dollars. When you break it down in terms of percentage of annual income and other respondant factors, it falls in line with all the other studies available.

However, it is still dubious, since it considers a few massive endowment sources “conservative” without actually asking. So, even in total dollars, it might be false.

 

[onetimeposter]

it is equally true of socialized medicine programs, where it is dealt with by “rationing” services, eliminating more costly new treatments in favor of less expensive older ones…

Not in Canada. There is no rationing, everyone gets equal access to health care and new technologies and medical procedures are not ignored in favour of older less effective procedures.

 

[Oscarthecat]

It took me a six month waiting period to get an appointment with the specialist that could see me. I feel pretty ‘rationed’ there. This is related to the incident that led to the 1month period of waiting for an MRI. It took me six months to see this doctor about my problems, who then wanted an MRI of my brain to make sure there were no pituitary tumors. SEVEN MONTHS and it was about a potential brain tumor.

The MRI thing I can buy, I’ve read the articles about people coming to the US for MRI’s, but you can’t just magic up doctors with the invisible hand, it takes a good 8years to train up a doctor, even longer for specialists.

We’ve talked about this before- while in Socialized Medicine, “rationing” is the deliberate withholding of services to reduce costs, in the free market, when need outstrips demand, then someone steps in to fill that market-

again, limited services is considered a solution in UHC, while it is considered a problem to be solved in the free market.

 

[pathia]

We’ve talked about this before- while in Socialized Medicine, “rationing” is the deliberate withholding of services to reduce costs, in the free market, when need outstrips demand, then someone steps in to fill that market-

again, limited services is considered a solution in UHC, while it is considered a problem to be solved in the free market.

And in the mean time, I come closer to death every time I run into one of these ‘problems’

 

[onetimeposter]

There is no rationing in Canada.

 

[Walt_Oliver]

Thread split. Too long.

 

[Oscarthecat]

There is no rationing in Canada.

well, normally I’d disagree with you, but since you underlined it, I’ll go ahead and ignore all the evidence that has been posted…

 

[Oscarthecat]

Not in Canada. There is no rationing, everyone gets equal access to health care and new technologies and medical procedures are not ignored in favour of older less effective procedures.

hey, here’s a doctor from Canada who disagrees with you…

"“Our population is aging, medical technologies have become more expensive, demand is increasing. So what happens is that provinces, caught between a rock and a hard place, are rationing health care,” Martin said.

As demand outstrips funding, provinces have begun to limit what services and procedures are covered and are refusing to pay for new services and medications."
source: thestar.com/News/article/447066
June 21, 2008

read the whole article, it is worth the time

 

[Oscarthecat]

here’s another good, recent article about the state of UHC around the world:

Universal health care: a fairy tale

By BARBARA FISCHER
jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=770912
Posted: July 9, 2008

Recently, I was diagnosed with a serious medical condition and began to wonder what my medical care would be like under universal health care. So I decided to take a tour of the best-known examples around the world.

(The majority of data cited is from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development and the World Health Organization.)

Germany: Capitated care was introduced as a means to contain costs and to avoid overutilization. Most Germans now pay a portion for seeing a general practitioner and contribute toward drugs and preventative treatment. The health ministry concluded that the system suffered from, among other things, insufficient or inappropriate care, shrinking revenue, an aging population and waits for care of beyond three months. Health insurance premiums cost more than 14% of an individual’s monthly salary. My premium is under 9% of my salary and under 5% of my income, and care is not rationed.

England: The National Health Service is the fourth-largest employer in the world. Yet hospitals are deemed cold, austere, smelly and poorly maintained. Treatments deemed to be “ineffective,” e.g. drugs that have only minor effect at great cost, are not covered, leading to the rationing of care. One in eight patients wait more than a year for treatment, and 5,000 elderly die each year due to lack of hospital beds. Hundreds wait to register for dental care as dentists quit the system; the shortage is projected to double by 2011. In my case, no drugs were withheld, and I found the hospital to be warm, meticulously maintained and employing fewer than the federal government!

Canada: Wait time across all specialties averaged 18 weeks in 2005. Physician Brian Day was quoted in a New York Times 2006 article as saying: “This is a country in which dogs can get a hip replacement in under a week and in which humans can wait two to three years.” Canada suffers from a shortage of medical practitioners; therefore, Canadians come to the United States for treatment, creating medical tourism. I cannot imagine leaving the U.S. to find better medical care anywhere. It took one week to see my primary care physician, one week to have tests, one week to see the surgeon and one week to schedule the surgery — a total of 28 days.

Sweden: The wait time for bypass surgery reached 19 months, and 50% of the people wait more than three months across all types of care. While 5,800 patients were on waiting lists for heart surgery, 77 died, according to a study last year. On April 21, 2,500 nurses, midwives and radiographers of the Swedish Association of Health Professionals went on strike after pay negotiations failed, creating a danger to society. This is unimaginable in the U.S.

France: The system is funded by an 18.8% tax shared by employer and employee. Yet more than 92% have supplemental private insurance in order to obtain higher-quality access. And the greatest irony of all is that recent reforms have tended toward an American-style system: cost containment; decentralization to the regions; reduced reimbursements from insurance, leading to higher co-pays; changes in hospital planning; and a requirement that all have a general practitioner who will serve as the gatekeeper to more expensive and specialized care.

All of the above universal health care systems are broken or breaking. Yet every day, more and more Americans are falling prey to the fairy tale of universal health care.

Ah, universal health care. I can hardly wait. And if anyone believes that, the check is in the mail.

Barbara Fischer of Port Washington chairs the business and economics department at a local private university.

 

[pathia]

here’s another good, recent article about the state of UHC around the world:

18weeks still sounds alot better than 6months (24weeks). Nevermind that I’ve technically been ‘waiting’ for insurance for over a decade. That I’ve delayed treatment for YEARS for problems I know I had, because I could not afford them when they were ‘problematic’. I had to wait until they were life threatening and go to the ER.

Once, to get specialty surgery to clear out some of my medical problems that are a little too icky to mention, I had to wait OVER A YEAR for the surgery and it was not ‘elective’

 

[LCMS_No_More]

But you didn’t read yours. Look at the actual studies and data that ultimately it traces to. It argues that conservatives give 30% “more”, but that is in total dollars. When you break it down in terms of percentage of annual income and other respondant factors, it falls in line with all the other studies available.

However, it is still dubious, since it considers a few massive endowment sources “conservative” without actually asking. So, even in total dollars, it might be false.

This is what I thought. Since the set of conservatives includes a lot more wealthy people who give to charity (a lot in terms of whole dollars, but in relation to their wealth, not so much), it would stand to reason that this claim could be made as an aggregate.

I was also curious as to the methodology of determining who is “conservative” or not. Most likely, corporate = conservative.

 

[ribozyme]

This is what I thought. Since the set of conservatives includes a lot more wealthy people who give to charity (a lot in terms of whole dollars, but in relation to their wealth, not so much), it would stand to reason that this claim could be made as an aggregate.

I was also curious as to the methodology of determining who is “conservative” or not. Most likely, corporate = conservative.

And sometimes people do not give charity to the poor. They sometimes put it in art galleries, orchestras, operas, and universities that the poor are unlikely to interact with. (although supporting these things are important.) How much do the wealthy give (as in percentage of their income) to the poor. I doubt the amount would be superior to the amount they have to pay in taxes. As I have iteratively stressed, Homo sapiens is not a charitable but an avaristic species.

The numbers are what they are. The high tax burden is why not many in Canada break out of the middle class into the higher ends, you can’t keep enough of your income to do do it. But the trade off is you don’t have as many dip below the middle class, too many govt safety nets and income redistribution.

So you are saying you prefer a system where YOU benefit while others suffer because of a lack of safety nets that protect them from the menace of poverty. AND ROBERT RECTOR IS INCORRECT ABOUT POVERTY BECAUSE IT ALSO EXISTS IN THE USA TOO!!!

He describes in unsparing detail the conditions he found to be all too common – homes “without heat or electricity, rooms lacking furniture filled with filth and dirty clothes, roaches and mice running rampant, jars and buckets of urine stacked in corners, and multiple children sleeping on bare and dirty mattresses.” Entering a “normal” home, one that was “well furnished and clean,” he writes, was “so rare that it would be mentioned to fellow officers.”

online.wsj.com/article/SB121599570013649659.html

That is in Baltimore and in Baltimore, a person died not having proper dental treatment.

gazette.net/stories/030807/prinnew190705_32325.shtml