A Thought About Healthcare

[carpedm9587]

Heavily fining folks was pretty much always part of the plan and not the result of any compromise worked out among the Democrats who passed it.

I have no problem with fining people for not securing healthcare under the policy.

Personally, I think the entire thing should reduce to a single-payer system covered by our taxes and get rid of the entire "premium" model.

Many of those countries rely on the U.S. to protect them so they have minuscule defense budgets.

To which I can only respond...wow...

[carpedm9587]

A lot of the hospitals shut down because of Obamacare.

Data, please...

[carpedm9587]

mossy lives in a country with socialized medical care. Her and her husband depend on it. So she is not just giving examples, she is speaking from decades of experience. Expert testimony.

Well - I too have family that lives in such a country, Sparko - and they love it. They also love that they can get a college education for their children without having to go into debt in six figures.

And, BTW, "expert testimony" is still only one person's experience. And example is not an argument.

[carpedm9587]

This is not simply having or not having a perfect record.

This is the norm in this country.

What country?

[carpedm9587]

Here's a specific example for carpe.

5 years ago this month my husband saw our family doc because he was having shortness of breath.

Doc was concerned and set him up for a stress test and we had to wait 2 weeks for that.

The cardiologist said that he wanted my husband to have an angiogram, and he sent the request in. I didn't hear for 2 weeks from anybody, so I phoned the hospital where the test was to take place. I was told they were booking in September and someone would get back to me. It was the second week of July. I asked that he be placed on a cancellation list. I could tell he was not doing well. I never did hear from anybody about an appointment.

We got a call on August 15 that there was an opening on the 19th. He went in, had the test, and they found that he had 3 blockages, one at a three-way artery junction that they call "the widow-maker". He needed surgery.

He was told they wanted to keep him in hospital until they had a surgery date, he felt like he wanted to come home. The cardiologist told him that if he went home, it would be 3 MONTHS before he would get into surgery, and he would die at home.

He opted to stay, spent 10 days at that hospital before they transferred him to the other one with the best cardio unit in the country. He was exactly 2 weeks in the hospitals altogether. They actually had to do a quadruple bypass.

Now, you tell me how long you would have to wait for a stress test, an angiogram, and heart surgery.

It's only because of God's grace and the fact the cardiologist recommended that my husband stay in the hospital instead of going home that I believe he's alive today. That doctor knew that if he wasn't "in the system" the chances were very slim that he would get the surgery.

People die here because of wait times.

Again...where is here?

And though I can sympathize with what is obviously a bad experience, a single person's story/experience is not an argument. Do you have data that outlines average wait times by medical procedure, that can be used to compare with other countries with varying types of program?

[carpedm9587]

That is what most people who are for socialized medicine don't see. That you are still paying for your healthcare, and probably just as much, but it is called "taxes" instead of "premiums and deductibles"

And what the other side doesn't see is that the increase in taxes is counter-balanced by the elimination of out-of-pocket, and costs can be contained by aggregating all into a single pool.

A national single-payer system is the largest "insure yourself" possible. In the U.S., it has been shown that a company of 120 people is adequate to save money using a self-insurance model. If it works at a mere 120 people - how on earth can anyone think that by aggregating 350M people we wouldn't save an enormous amount of money?

[JimL]

Again...where is here?

And though I can sympathize with what is obviously a bad experience, a single person's story/experience is not an argument. Do you have data that outlines average wait times by medical procedure, that can be used to compare with other countries with varying types of program?

Mossy asked for the data, then when it's given to her, says she doesn't believe in data, it's all fake news, so there's really no arguing with that?

[carpedm9587]

Link to those statistics, please.

Because every person that I've ever talked to about it hates the system as it is. The media is constantly reporting on the horrendous wait times.

So, until you show me stats, I don't believe you.

I wondered if you were in Canada. My cousins live in Montreal, and they LOVE the system. One of their sons was diagnosed with a drain-malfunction in his brain and they spent 18 months trying to get it under control. He raves about the care his son received, and the responsiveness every time he had an episode.

Canadians apparently have a 86% approval rating for their healthcare. That seems high, but even these more conservative numbers show both the UK and Canada far exceed the U.S. for satisfaction with healthcare and health care availability.

Countries that offer universal healthcare have a higher percentage of people who are satisfied with the availability of healthcare and have trust in their healthcare system

And this article does a lot to compare the various systems. The USA stands out in pretty much all measurements, and not in a good way.

Our arrangement is stupid - and largely because Congress is in the pockets of the healthcare lobbyists, the Democrats have little/no spine, and the Republicans are like Wormtonque whispering into everyone's ears about the "evils of government."

It's enough to make one want to scream...

[carpedm9587]

And get poor service it looks like. with an example such as Mossy's you guys wonder why we don't want single payer system.

You can dig around in ANY healthcare system and find a bad story.
You can dig around in ANY healthcare system and find a good story.
An example is not an argument against an entire system. It's just an example...
An example is not an argument for an entire system. It's just an example...

The question is, what does the data tell us about overall acceptance/satisfaction, comparative health/happiness, etc.

[mossrose]

Again...where is here?

And though I can sympathize with what is obviously a bad experience, a single person's story/experience is not an argument. Do you have data that outlines average wait times by medical procedure, that can be used to compare with other countries with varying types of program?

https://www.macleans.ca/society/heal...rd-high-again/

https://www.fraserinstitute.org/stud...in-canada-2017

http://www.waittimealliance.ca/for-patients/

http://www.cbc.ca/news/health/wait-t...alth-1.3984920

https://www.aimseducation.edu/blog/u...e-differences/

Is that enough? Or do you need more.

[Starlight]

You can dig around in ANY healthcare system and find a bad story.
You can dig around in ANY healthcare system and find a good story.

This reminds me of some studies I was reading about healthcare in England (the NHS). Polling of patients consistently found really high levels of satisfaction with their care and with the system, but the polling among the public at large kept showing that lots of people thought there were serious issues with the system and significantly overestimated things like wait-times etc. The authors concluded that the public was being hugely influenced by media stories where the media would find the one worst case in the country and run with it. So the public had gotten a story of a failing system in crisis from the media, when in fact people who were actually dealing with the system were overwhelmingly positive about it.

To give some polling numbers, in the UK, ~90% of people think that comprehensive healthcare should be funded through taxes and be free at the point of delivery, 77% agreed with "the NHS is crucial to British society and we must do everything we can to maintain it", and 66% were willing to pay more taxes themselves if it meant funding the NHS more.

[carpedm9587]

https://www.macleans.ca/society/heal...rd-high-again/

https://www.fraserinstitute.org/stud...in-canada-2017

http://www.waittimealliance.ca/for-patients/

http://www.cbc.ca/news/health/wait-t...alth-1.3984920

https://www.aimseducation.edu/blog/u...e-differences/

Is that enough? Or do you need more.

OK - I have read through two and skimmed through the rest. So it appears there are wait time issues. A couple quick observations. First, I found the reports you linked did nothing to differentiate these times by need. They appear to dump all of the numbers in one basket, rather than examine them based on severity of condition or complaint. (I had to chuckle at the "1 in 5 Canadians have had to wait more than seven days for an appointment." Heck, I have to wait more than a week most of the time - unless my need is urgent). Second, these articles are highly overlapped - several of them appear to deal with the same basic study. Third, these articles, which all pretty much hammer at wait times, don't seem to align with the reports that have a very high approval rating of the Canadian healthcare system, nor the consistent reports that Canadians (and other universal-system countries) are reliably happier with their healthcare system than U.S. patients. That puts my radar up a bit. The disconnect needs some explanation.

Finally, for me, your stories and these reports are very much at odds with what my cousins report to me from Montreal. That being said, as I noted, those are stories and not studies, so they don't prove anything. But they do have me scratching my head.

[mossrose]

OK - I have read through two and skimmed through the rest. So it appears there are wait time issues. A couple quick observations. First, I found the reports you linked did nothing to differentiate these times by need. They appear to dump all of the numbers in one basket, rather than examine them based on severity of condition or complaint. (I had to chuckle at the "1 in 5 Canadians have had to wait more than seven days for an appointment." Heck, I have to wait more than a week most of the time - unless my need is urgent). Second, these articles are highly overlapped - several of them appear to deal with the same basic study. Third, these articles, which all pretty much hammer at wait times, don't seem to align with the reports that have a very high approval rating of the Canadian healthcare system, nor the consistent reports that Canadians (and other universal-system countries) are reliably happier with their healthcare system than U.S. patients. That puts my radar up a bit. The disconnect needs some explanation.

Finally, for me, your stories and these reports are very much at odds with what my cousins report to me from Montreal. That being said, as I noted, those are stories and not studies, so they don't prove anything. But they do have me scratching my head.

It's nice that your cousins in Montreal have had good experiences with the healthcare system. However, as you said about my experiences, so what, who cares.

When you live in this country, or heaven forbid, if the US goes through with universal health care, then you can talk to me about it. When you have to wait 10 hours in the emerg to see a doctor, or 10 months to have hip surgery, or die waiting 3 months for urgent heart surgery, well, I guess it will be too late for us to talk then.

So go ahead and pooh-pooh the millions of Canadians who believe the system here stinks. Makes no difference to me. We're stuck with a mess. And I hope your cousins never, ever need speedy care.

[Starlight]

When you live in this country, or heaven forbid, if the US goes through with universal health care, then you can talk to me about it. When you have to... die waiting 3 months for urgent heart surgery

Have you often died while waiting for surgery?

[rogue06]

I have no problem with fining people for not securing healthcare under the policy.

They couldn't afford health care previously and they still couldn't afford Obamacare (which for most cost even more^[1] despite assurances that it was going to drop the price), so how does punishing them with heavy fines going to help. All it accomplishes is punishes the poor for being poor -- but I guess that'll teach 'em.

To which I can only respond...wow...

Other governments can spend money on all sorts of social programs as long as they can count on Uncle Sugar defending them. Make them pay for for their own defense and they'll quickly find themselves low on funds to support such things or else sharply raising taxes on their people.








1. pretty much expected since it forces people to get coverage for things they will never, ever need -- like forcing old people, especially men, to get coverage for pregnancy for instance.