Medicare - Now What?

[greasemonkey]

Greasemonkey,

I want to know what 'safety net' you think there is for people that don't have insurance because I can tell you from experience that there is not one. I could write a book on trying to get help from government agencies. I should post here the letter I got back from the Social Security Agency after I had my Representative contact them regarding Tim's disability application. I was told in no uncertain terms that it didn't matter who wrote to them, it wasn't going to make any difference and that if I kept on, it would only lengthen the process. Safety net, my A&&!

Good for you that you can plan ahead for all life's setbacks. Glad you have never had an unforseen catastophe.

Don't pass judgement on people that get kicked in the gut and don't have the resources that you do.

Anniemac, I said there are saftey nets to those that cannot afford health care insurance. I meant that if you are so destitute that you cannot afford to purchase health care insurance then there are welfare programs that will put you on an insurance (medicaid) and there are also public hospitals and charities too.

My intent was not to criticize you. I genuinely empathize your situation. I truly hope your friend comes out of this well.

I don't think there is a built in safety net for those that don't get coverage when they can. Maybe I am misunderstanding your post so please explain at what point you were without health coverage?

I mean, your friend worked for years and years you said then he was injured but had no insurance? I guess I didn't get how that happened and assumed (possibly wrongly?) that it was a choice to not get insurance the very day that any work would not be covering it? sorry if I got that all confused. I will await clarifications before I comment further as I may have misunderstood the entire situation?

 

[greasemonkey]

On another note. Anniemac's post further demonstrates why socialized medicine is bad. She is saying what public healthcare exists is broken. Why in the world would the solution be to make a big, giant public healthcare system then to fix the broken one?

LOL@ that notion. Everything the govt. does of a social nature is a failure. Social security - going bankrupt. medicare/medicaid... a bankrupt joke.... I could go on and on but everyone already knows all of this.

 

[Casinomeister]

Admin note - no flaming

Please watch the Hitler and baby molesting comments. I know this is a "rants" arena, but please do not flame one another. That is uncool and will result in spankings and closings of threads. Thank you.

 

[Cabrair32]

Please watch the Hitler and baby molesting comments. I know this is a "rants" arena, but please do not flame one another. That is uncool and will result in spankings and closings of threads. Thank you.

haha. I was not even going to read this whole mess until I saw that casinomeister had just responded to it so I went to the above comment and read it! LOL. How can anyone resist reading after that intro?

"baby molesting and Hitler".

Aside from the name calling it is very interesting. 2 very distinct view points of view on what government is and what it is supposed to do.

 

[BBKPoker]

As wrong as greasemonkey is, I agree that comparing someone to Hitler is the very basest of arguments one could resort to.... along with questioning someone's patriotism or religion because you disagree with them, lol.

 

[BBKPoker]

ummmmmmm.... it is what the govt is intended to do in the constitution. Thanks for pointing that out errantly. It validates my point. You do have the right to protection in the constitution. You do have the right to many things. Mostly the constitution tells you what the govt CANNOT do. This is because throughout history of mankind govts tend to tread on freedom and become to overbearing thus taking away freedoms. That is what the founding fathers were gaurding against. They werent busy telling you all the benefits you will get by being an American citizen. They were simply spelling out your freedom and telling you what the govt's restrictions are. Its a great read. Have a go at it. You may be surprised.

Ok, I see, so it seems you are saying the socialist government programs that do exist aren't socialist because, um.... because...?

You want to claim that national defense, clean water, public roads etc is "protection" but then somehow exclude public health as some crazy leftist ideal. In reality you're just being typical in dividing the programs you do like vs the programs you don't and trying to reclassify them. Sorry, you can't have it both ways.

 

[Nifty29]

I joined the Marines out of Highschool so that I could afford a secondary education. I was in Dessert Storm and I graduated from College also.

So the Marines put you through college? I.E. the Government subsidised your education? I didn't think you agreed with the Gov (i.e. the taxpayers) paying for anyone's education? Or is that only if it's you? Under your argument, if you can't afford it you don't get it - and you admitted yourself that you couldn't afford it.

I also see you said that you joined the Marines so you could get a college education. Did you think that by joining the Marines you might have to kill people? Or was killing (or potentially killing) a few nameless people from another part of the world worth it as long as you got your education? You can jump on me all you like, but you didn't say you joined the armed forces to protect and serve your country, and that education was just a 'side benefit' - you gave it as your reason for joining.

As wrong as greasemonkey is, I agree that comparing someone to Hitler is the very basest of arguments one could resort to.... along with questioning someone's patriotism or religion because you disagree with them, lol.

I didn't say he was 'like Hitler'. I was referring to the program Hitler had where he executed all the sick, disabled, and mentally handicapped citizens so the state didn't have to look after them (along with some other reasons).

My point was, and I could have made it better I agree, that how should a civilised society treat it's most vulnerable members? GM said that if you can't afford health care, then tough cookies you just have to suffer because people that can afford it shouldn't have to pay for those who can't. If they aren't allowed to be treated free (or heavily subsidised), then they probably will die young - and in the context of what I originally said there isn't a lot of difference. GM says "don't treat them" but doesn't give any other suggestions of what should be done with all those sick people - Hitler went a step further, and the only difference is that those people didn't live quite as long.

I was not for a minute suggesting GM was a Nazi or any such thing. If I think of a better analogy I will post it.

couldn't get pills that would have cured my ear aches when I was younger as we could not afford them. I suffered through that pain nightly. Finally, A few members of the church that I went to got together and bought the pills for me finally. I know struggle.

That is an awful situation - and I can guarantee it happens every minute of every day to families like yours. I'm very sorry that you had to go through all of that.

The part I cannot understand as regard to your views on universal health care, is that you received charity from others (the church) to help you along....surely that is a case of people who can afford things giving to those who cannot? You speak of this as somewhat of a 'blessing', which is was, but when it comes to applying it on a national scale via medicare etc you are dead against it.

You certainly know struggle. This is clear. So why would you want others to have to endure that kind of pain and sorrow when you could do something about it without it having a significant impact on your own situation. How can you think of you as that young lad in pain and not think "Geez I wish there was a proper health system where I could have had the medicine I needed regardless of how poor my family was"? Imagine how much better your young life could have been if every American who could afford it put a few dollars each year into the health system!

You had a tough start but you made it. Somehow you found an inner strength to take opportunities by the hand and become a fully-fledged taxpaying citizen. Unfortunately, not everyone knows how to find that inner strength and many never will - why punish them for not having the 'right' parents or the 'right' guidance?

 

[greasemonkey]

So the Marines put you through college? I.E. the Government subsidised your education? I didn't think you agreed with the Gov (i.e. the taxpayers) paying for anyone's education? Or is that only if it's you? Under your argument, if you can't afford it you don't get it - and you admitted yourself that you couldn't afford it.

I joined the Marines. As part of my contract with them there is a program in which I would contribute part of my paycheck and the employer (USMC) would also add to that total thus enabling me to have a savings for college. I didn't ask some tax payers to give me something for nothing. It was part of my pay for my service.
There is quite a large difference between taking a govt handout and taking your pay for working.

I also see you said that you joined the Marines so you could get a college education. Did you think that by joining the Marines you might have to kill people? Or was killing (or potentially killing) a few nameless people from another part of the world worth it as long as you got your education? You can jump on me all you like, but you didn't say you joined the armed forces to protect and serve your country, and that education was just a 'side benefit' - you gave it as your reason for joining.

That is...... wow, I don't know where to begin....

OK, well I joined the Marines for MANY reasons. Like the paycheck that I would receive for my service, for the death benefit my mother would receive if I was to have an unfortunate end, Like for the ability to send money home when I would get paid, like for the college tuition EARNINGS, protecting and serving my country, traveling the world, resume experience, testing myself etc, etc... in no particular order. yes, I thought that I may have to kill someone if it came to that in terms of protecting my country and my FREEDOM. If you have it then its worth fighting for. Definitely, should never give it up.

I didn't say he was 'like Hitler'. I was referring to the program Hitler had where he executed all the sick, disabled, and mentally handicapped citizens so the state didn't have to look after them (along with some other reasons).

Sounds like you think that these 'lesser' people are an unnecessary burden on the state. I remember someone else who had that idea back in the 30's and 40's - he just rounded them up and killed them. Maybe you could run for congress on that ticket?

I can only read that and take it that you were comparing me to hitler and having the same ideals. Sorry if that wasn't your intent but it sure came off that way.

My point was, and I could have made it better I agree, that how should a civilised society treat it's most vulnerable members? GM said that if you can't afford health care, then tough cookies you just have to suffer because people that can afford it shouldn't have to pay for those who can't. If they aren't allowed to be treated free (or heavily subsidised), then they probably will die young - and in the context of what I originally said there isn't a lot of difference. GM says "don't treat them" but doesn't give any other suggestions of what should be done with all those sick people - Hitler went a step further, and the only difference is that those people didn't live quite as long.

Please show me one place where I said any such thing.

Where did I say that someone should suffer if they can't afford health care?

Where did I say "don't treat them"?

I didn't say that at all. Not at all.

I did say that in America, if you are too poor to afford health insurance then you will be able to get medicaid. That is a govt handout to the needy in terms of health coverage.
I then went further and said that if you CAN afford health coverage but opt not to purchase it then get hurt/sick it isn't your neighbors responsibility to cover for you. It was your own choice and you have a responsibility with your freedom of choice. There are consequences to all of your decisions in life. Good and bad.

That is an awful situation - and I can guarantee it happens every minute of every day to families like yours. I'm very sorry that you had to go through all of that.

The part I cannot understand as regard to your views on universal health care, is that you received charity from others (the church) to help you along....surely that is a case of people who can afford things giving to those who cannot? You speak of this as somewhat of a 'blessing', which is was, but when it comes to applying it on a national scale via medicare etc you are dead against it.

That is because it is not "charity" in any form. It is not willingly given. It is govt CONFISCATION of one person's personal property forcefully then handed to another. I am and will always be against such things. It is a direct violation of freedoms and infringement on rights.

Please NEVER confuse govt seizure with charity. They are not even from the same planet.

You certainly know struggle. This is clear. So why would you want others to have to endure that kind of pain and sorrow when you could do something about it without it having a significant impact on your own situation. How can you think of you as that young lad in pain and not think "Geez I wish there was a proper health system where I could have had the medicine I needed regardless of how poor my family was"? Imagine how much better your young life could have been if every American who could afford it put a few dollars each year into the health system!

You had a tough start but you made it. Somehow you found an inner strength to take opportunities by the hand and become a fully-fledged taxpaying citizen. Unfortunately, not everyone knows how to find that inner strength and many never will - why punish them for not having the 'right' parents or the 'right' guidance?

firstly, I don't want others to endure ANY pain or suffering.

secondly, this is where we are failing to meet on the grid, My life would NOT have been as good if I lived in a society that forced people to give up their personal properties to the govt in order to redistribute it DIRECTLY to me. That would have made me many different things and I would not have known the beauty of freedom. It would have made my life a bit easier for a short period but it would not have made me grow up any better. Probably worse because every dollar I earned would have had more of it taken away from me later in life. I want to work for what I get and keep what I earn. I want to give to the charity of my choice to help my fellow man. It is NOT benevolent in any way to have the govt subsidize the lives of others.


lastly, I don't want to "punish" anyone or any such thing. The govt is NOT a charity group and should not be looked upon as such. I love the idea of charity. The govt is not that and nobody should be stolen from to facilitate it.

Here is a great quote:

A cruel form of hatred is to convince people that they are "helpless" to survive by their own initiative and power, and that they need the "goodwill" of redistributors to take what others have earned and transfer it to the Helpless. Sad, but this entitlement mentality destroys the value of good work, and disempowers the individual from fully realizing his potential. In essence, the welfare state is economic and psychological feudalism at its worst.

 

[greasemonkey]

Ok, I see, so it seems you are saying the socialist government programs that do exist aren't socialist because, um.... because...?

You want to claim that national defense, clean water, public roads etc is "protection" but then somehow exclude public health as some crazy leftist ideal. In reality you're just being typical in dividing the programs you do like vs the programs you don't and trying to reclassify them. Sorry, you can't have it both ways.

READ the constitution for Goodness' sakes!!!

It spells out what the govt function is in the country in which you live. You live in America. We are supposed to abide by the constitution. If it says that the govt is to provide pink wigs then it should provide pink wigs. It doesn't though. It says exactly what I quoted earlier in this thread. And as such I don't mind the govt serving the basic functions it was built and INTENDED to do. That includes military, roadways, mint.....et al.

It does NOT include socialized programs like taking your neighbors money and paying for your health care. Or car care. Or home maintenance. Or hairdo.


so you keep acting as if the constitution equally would apply to the military and to social programs. it doesn't . Read it and you will stop asking such silly things. Like "because why"? The answer to your because why questions is because it is in the constitution.

 

[anniemac]

Greasemonkey,

I think you might finally be getting what I was trying to say. The system was and still is very broken. Actually from my perspective, the healthcare system is worse now since the 'new healthcare initiative' than it was 2 years ago.

I was not posting this for anyone's pity. I was stating facts as they affect me and mine. I am not seeing anything good coming from the healthcare reform now.

My son was also in the Marines, serving in Iraq. As such his medical is paid for as is yours. For his sake, I am very grateful for that. But even that is sub-par. What is wrong with the picture when our returning heroes are treated like second class citizens by the very country that they swore to defend with their life?

My postings are personal rants because I am just generally pissed about the way things are going. Please don't use my postings to call each other names etc. Not cool.

 

[voodookitty]

By the time Im old enough for Medicare and Social Security there wont be anything left. I may as well throw myself in a ditch when I turn 65

EXACTLY..... I was thinking to do the same! :nod:

Only, I am thinking to do it a few days before my 65th B-Day - that way, I won't be late!

 

[unhappy]

Yea i have to agree the US health care system sucks better off to move to Canada

 

[Jasminebed]

Most first world nations have some form of socialized, or universal medicine. The US doesn't, yet spends MORE money on healthcare per capita than any other nation in the world other than Japan (which does offer coverage to every citizen).

Humanitarian arguments aside, the current US health care system benefits private health providers and insurance companies much more than its citizens.

 

[greasemonkey]

Most first world nations have some form of socialized, or universal medicine. The US doesn't, yet spends MORE money on healthcare per capita than any other nation in the world other than Japan (which does offer coverage to every citizen).

Humanitarian arguments aside, the current US health care system benefits private health providers and insurance companies much more than its citizens.

I agree that some laws should be changed. Like why can someone from Arkansas NOT go outside of Arkansas to get insurance coverage? Interestingly a bill was introduced by conservatives to allow more competition (state vs. state competition) but was shot down. (Obama voted against it actually).

I do NOT think that the govt should get involved. As anniemac is pointing out, that is a road in which we don't want to go down or it will truly ruin our health care.

Yea i have to agree the US health care system sucks better off to move to Canada

While it may be expensive in America, it is also the most available and is among the most innovative.

You do realize that without the carrot dangling of profit that many of the medicines and procedures that we have today would not be invented/found right? it is the profit that drives our best and brightest innovators in the field. Humanitarianism is also part of it I am sure. But those minds would be lead to different paths if not for the prize of profits. That is how innovation comes about in anything really.

Medical care in the United States is derided as miserable compared to health care systems in the rest of the developed world. Economists, government officials, insurers and academics alike are beating the drum for a far larger government rôle in health care. Much of the public assumes their arguments are sound because the calls for change are so ubiquitous and the topic so complex. However, before turning to government as the solution, some unheralded facts about America's health care system should be considered.

Fact No. 1: Americans have better survival rates than Europeans for common cancers.[1] Breast cancer mortality is 52 percent higher in Germany than in the United States, and 88 percent higher in the United Kingdom. Prostate cancer mortality is 604 percent higher in the U.K. and 457 percent higher in Norway. The mortality rate for colorectal cancer among British men and women is about 40 percent higher.

Fact No. 2: Americans have lower cancer mortality rates than Canadians.[2] Breast cancer mortality is 9 percent higher, prostate cancer is 184 percent higher and colon cancer mortality among men is about 10 percent higher than in the United States.

Fact No. 3: Americans have better access to treatment for chronic diseases than patients in other developed countries.[3] Some 56 percent of Americans who could benefit are taking statins, which reduce cholesterol and protect against heart disease. By comparison, of those patients who could benefit from these drugs, only 36 percent of the Dutch, 29 percent of the Swiss, 26 percent of Germans, 23 percent of Britons and 17 percent of Italians receive them.

Fact No. 4: Americans have better access to preventive cancer screening than Canadians.[4] Take the proportion of the appropriate-age population groups who have received recommended tests for breast, cervical, prostate and colon cancer:

* Nine of 10 middle-aged American women (89 percent) have had a mammogram, compared to less than three-fourths of Canadians (72 percent).
* Nearly all American women (96 percent) have had a pap smear, compared to less than 90 percent of Canadians.
* More than half of American men (54 percent) have had a PSA test, compared to less than 1 in 6 Canadians (16 percent).
* Nearly one-third of Americans (30 percent) have had a colonoscopy, compared with less than 1 in 20 Canadians (5 percent).

Fact No. 5: Lower income Americans are in better health than comparable Canadians. Twice as many American seniors with below-median incomes self-report "excellent" health compared to Canadian seniors (11.7 percent versus 5.8 percent). Conversely, white Canadian young adults with below-median incomes are 20 percent more likely than lower income Americans to describe their health as "fair or poor."[5]

Fact No. 6: Americans spend less time waiting for care than patients in Canada and the U.K. Canadian and British patients wait about twice as long - sometimes more than a year - to see a specialist, to have elective surgery like hip replacements or to get radiation treatment for cancer.[6] All told, 827,429 people are waiting for some type of procedure in Canada.[7] In England, nearly 1.8 million people are waiting for a hospital admission or outpatient treatment.[8]

Fact No. 7: People in countries with more government control of health care are highly dissatisfied and believe reform is needed. More than 70 percent of German, Canadian, Australian, New Zealand and British adults say their health system needs either "fundamental change" or "complete rebuilding."[9]

Fact No. 8: Americans are more satisfied with the care they receive than Canadians. When asked about their own health care instead of the "health care system," more than half of Americans (51.3 percent) are very satisfied with their health care services, compared to only 41.5 percent of Canadians; a lower proportion of Americans are dissatisfied (6.8 percent) than Canadians (8.5 percent).[10]

Fact No. 9: Americans have much better access to important new technologies like medical imaging than patients in Canada or the U.K. Maligned as a waste by economists and policymakers naïve to actual medical practice, an overwhelming majority of leading American physicians identified computerized tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as the most important medical innovations for improving patient care during the previous decade.[11] [See the table.] The United States has 34 CT scanners per million Americans, compared to 12 in Canada and eight in Britain. The United States has nearly 27 MRI machines per million compared to about 6 per million in Canada and Britain.[12]

Fact No. 10: Americans are responsible for the vast majority of all health care innovations.[13] The top five U.S. hospitals conduct more clinical trials than all the hospitals in any other single developed country.[14] Since the mid-1970s, the Nobel Prize in medicine or physiology has gone to American residents more often than recipients from all other countries combined.[15] In only five of the past 34 years did a scientist living in America not win or share in the prize. Most important recent medical innovations were developed in the United States.[16] [See the table.]

Conclusion. Despite serious challenges, such as escalating costs and the uninsured, the U.S. health care system compares favorably to those in other developed countries.

Scott W. Atlas, M.D., is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution and a professor at the Stanford University Medical Center. A version of this article appeared previously in the February 18, 2009, Washington Times.

 

[BBKPoker]

Well its inarguable that technologically speaking the USA is a frontleader in medicine, afterall, its an industry driven by big pharmaceutical companies that profit by overcharging for medicine. The rest of the claims you just posted are fairly specious, especially the cancer mortality rates, since pretty much all of the countries listed have far lower rates of preventable illness, and you can cherry pick cancer statistics by countries that have higher than average instances pretty easily.

Here's the countries that were cited in your quote concluding the US has better healthcare than most other nations:

UK
Norway
Canada
Italy
Germany
The Netherlands
Australia
New Zealand

So how about we talk in specific overall metrics that actually accurately measure public health than by cherry picking specific statistics: all metrics are ranked best to worst:

Infant mortality rate

source:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

UK: 22nd, Norway: 5th, Canada 22nd, Italy 25th, Germany 14th, The Netherlands: 19th, Australia 17th, New Zealand 27th, USA 33rd (last of the compared countries)

Life expectancy:

source:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Australia: 5th, Canada: 11th, Italy: 12th, New Zealand/Norway: 13th (tied), Netherlands: 16th (tied with Austria), United Kingdom/Germany: 20th(tied with Belgium, Malta, Virgin Islands), USA: 36th (last of the compared countries)

Highest Obesity rates:

source:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

USA (highest of compared countries)

Rate of preventable deaths:

Source:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

USA has the highest preventable rate of death among the 19 countries surveyed, of our comparison countries, only Australia was not included in th study.

Total Health Expenditure as % of GDP:

source:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

The only country worse than the US was Marshall Islands.

Physicians per 1000 population:

source:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

The USA is the 3rd worst of our comparison countries very slightly outranking New Zealand and Canada (US: 2.43, NZ 2.31, Canada 2.18).



The healthcare spending as a percent of GDP is actually particularly egregious (and yes, its tabulated prior to our universal healthcare) we actually spend 150% of where everyone else spends and come last in pretty much every measurable relevant healthcare metric.

But yeah, clearly nothing is wrong with our healthcare system when literally every other westernized country is paying less to be more healthy, in fact it is precisely the countries with socialized medicine that perform the best in global healthcare surveys, regardless of whatever lol anecdotal stories right wingers enjoy copy/pasting about someone they knew this one time (probably the 71 yo african american they invited out to lunch, lol!) who had to wait for some procedure, lolololol........

 

[BBKPoker]

My son was also in the Marines, serving in Iraq. As such his medical is paid for as is yours.

But then you also have to look at the actual quality of care veterans receive (another area republicans have tried to cut or block expanding for years).

My sister has done two tours in Iraq and tore the exact same muscle in both her knees in very similar injuries, one in the USA playing rugby in college where she received private care which included pain medication, physical therapy, and what she said was most important was a stretching device that exercised and strengthened her injured knee. In the army she ripped the same muscle in her other knee during a drill in a US base. She was given pain medication only and no rehabilitative measures were taken. As a result the knee that was cared for outside of the army is pretty close to 100% and her army cared for knee is painful and difficult to walk on or bend for her.

I actually think Veterans Rights is one of the most appallingly underfunded programs we have in the USA. People who defend our country and take care of others and protect their freedom should receive excellent care, but republicans will just continue to slash these programs as long as its politically expedient. Another perfect example was the right wing oppositon to the medical bill for 9/11 first responders to pay for some of their access to care that was all but dead until Jon Stewart began to talk about it daily on his show and brought on actual responders to talk about their medical difficulties post 9/11.

 

[greasemonkey]

Well its inarguable that technologically speaking the USA is a frontleader in medicine, afterall, its an industry driven by big pharmaceutical companies that profit by overcharging for medicine. The rest of the claims you just posted are fairly specious, especially the cancer mortality rates, since pretty much all of the countries listed have far lower rates of preventable illness, and you can cherry pick cancer statistics by countries that have higher than average instances pretty easily.

Here's the countries that were cited in your quote concluding the US has better healthcare than most other nations:

UK
Norway
Canada
Italy
Germany
The Netherlands
Australia
New Zealand

So how about we talk in specific overall metrics that actually accurately measure public health than by cherry picking specific statistics: all metrics are ranked best to worst:

Infant mortality rate

source:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

UK: 22nd, Norway: 5th, Canada 22nd, Italy 25th, Germany 14th, The Netherlands: 19th, Australia 17th, New Zealand 27th, USA 33rd (last of the compared countries)

Life expectancy:

source:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Australia: 5th, Canada: 11th, Italy: 12th, New Zealand/Norway: 13th (tied), Netherlands: 16th (tied with Austria), United Kingdom/Germany: 20th(tied with Belgium, Malta, Virgin Islands), USA: 36th (last of the compared countries)

Highest Obesity rates:

source:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

USA (highest of compared countries)

Rate of preventable deaths:

Source:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

USA has the highest preventable rate of death among the 19 countries surveyed, of our comparison countries, only Australia was not included in th study.

Total Health Expenditure as % of GDP:

source:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

The only country worse than the US was Marshall Islands.

Physicians per 1000 population:

source:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

The USA is the 3rd worst of our comparison countries very slightly outranking New Zealand and Canada (US: 2.43, NZ 2.31, Canada 2.18).



The healthcare spending as a percent of GDP is actually particularly egregious (and yes, its tabulated prior to our universal healthcare) we actually spend 150% of where everyone else spends and come last in pretty much every measurable relevant healthcare metric.

But yeah, clearly nothing is wrong with our healthcare system when literally every other westernized country is paying less to be more healthy, in fact it is precisely the countries with socialized medicine that perform the best in global healthcare surveys, regardless of whatever lol anecdotal stories right wingers enjoy copy/pasting about someone they knew this one time (probably the 71 yo african american they invited out to lunch, lol!) who had to wait for some procedure, lolololol........

You actually prove my point a few times.

lets take a few shots here:

1) Are you really going to say that obesity in America compared with other nations is because of the healthcare system? Are you sure its not because we are the most wealthy country ? Look DEEEEEEEPER into the obesity rate. Find out how much of our "impoverished" that get social benefits are actually OBESE. LOL@that. Our poor are overwhelmingly obese. How do the other countries "poor" rank on the obesity meter?
That looks silly. Obesity has NOTHING to do with healthcare and everything to do with finances and availability.

2) You readily admit that we have more avalability to early prevention and screenings. BEAUTIFUL! That means it is BETTER, not that it cannot be used because other countries don't have it.

Hey, how about us Americans quit guessing and arguing. Let's take a look at what a member of the EU parliament might advise us on about health care, like in the UK:

 

[BBKPoker]

ok, so you are complaining about my list of obesity, but ignoring the fact that we have the highest infant mortality rate, lowest life expectancy, highest rate of preventable death despite spending more on health care than essentially any other country and somehow don't think the current system is broke, or that our health care especially in light of how much we spend on it isn't worse than practically any other westernized country with socialized medicine that beats us in every metric, and instead of actually paying attention to the inarguable unbiased statistics I've posted, you're just going to youtube link more right wing anecdotal rhetoric on the worst political entertainment (NOT news) channel while completely ignoring hard data.

okkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk. Reality calling......

 

[BBKPoker]

Interesting to note, btw, that Daniel Hannan is as close as you can get to the UK version of a neo conservative that exists, has pretty much only had a career that existed on Fox (has been on pretty much every Fox "commentator" show including Beck, Hannity, Cavuto etc) and that again is your one anecdotal opinion source from fox news with no actual statistical data backing up your arguments.

By the way, Hannity isn't a news show, its an entertainment show along with Beck, O'Reilly, and pretty much everyone who is a known personality on Fox News according to Fox News themselves.

So, so standard.

 

[BBKPoker]

2) You readily admit that we have more avalability to early prevention and screenings. BEAUTIFUL! That means it is BETTER, not that it cannot be used because other countries don't have it.

I did not say that anywhere in any of my posts, actually. I said the USA was technologically more advanced than most other countries in the medical industry. I did NOT say that we have more availability to early prevention and screenings. There is a huge difference between having the technology available, and actually using it to service the public and improve the countries health which is something we are NOT doing due to the overwhelming cost of the healthcare industry and the financial obstacles created by big pharmaceutical and insurance companies.

We could have all the equipment in the world, but if you can't afford to get a checkup or proper medical care (as many americans can't) then it might as well be worthless if it isn't being used. If we actually made healthcare affordable and (gasp) carry through with the passed health care legislation which limits to an extent the amount an insurance company can prey on people's health to inflate their profits by overcharging and denying sick people, then yes, we have the POTENTIAL to be far better than we currently are. Of course the idea that health in the United States could ever improve at the expense of corporate stockholders having their margins cut is so objectionable to republicans that they are making every effort to defund it, but at the moment it looks like they will not be successful.

 

[silcnlayc]

I will say one thing. You keep repeating infant mortality rate . You do know that the reason for this is not because of lack of healthcare right? But because so many teens and young mothers do not go for prenatal care by CHOICE?? How do I know this? I was one of those "teens" that chose no prenatal care with my first child.

When one is young, they feel invincible. Nothing can make someone do something they do not want to do. Forcing people to purchase healthcare, go to the doctors and such is a CHOICE , not a right. When will we require that people become self reliant again?

My husband and I both work 40-60 hours a week and he is of retirement age, but has not retired. We pay for our healthcare and always have, for our family. It is extremely costly at this time since I was diagnosed a diabetic and have had 4 major back surgeries, (I have a scar running down my back from my neck to my hip) but I still choose to work to keep my healthcare. We do not go to movies, dine out or travel. We choose to pay for our insurance.

I have been asked why I do not go on to disability. My answer, as long as there is breath in my body I will work until I no longer can walk. I was supoosed t be in a wheelchair when I hit 45 (first surgery was at 28) but I have long surpassed that.

I , too was on drugs for excruciating pain more times than I can count, laid up a year in the hospital and such. But because my healthcare was availalbe, I can now continue in the lifestyle I choose and that is to work and be a contributing Naturalized citizen. The cost of my healthcare? $800 a month. Do I get angry for this, no. It is what it is and I choose to make sure my quality of life is as good as I can make it till I can no longer do it.

We all have choices. Healthcare IS a choice. Not a right. JMO.

.

 

[greasemonkey]

ok, so you are complaining about my list of obesity, but ignoring the fact that we have the highest infant mortality rate, lowest life expectancy, highest rate of preventable death despite spending more on health care than essentially any other country and somehow don't think the current system is broke, or that our health care especially in light of how much we spend on it isn't worse than practically any other westernized country with socialized medicine that beats us in every metric, and instead of actually paying attention to the inarguable unbiased statistics I've posted, you're just going to youtube link more right wing anecdotal rhetoric on the worst political entertainment (NOT news) channel while completely ignoring hard data.

okkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk. Reality calling......

NO. NO. you are not getting it again. I was making one small point to show you that your "statistics" have very, very little to do with health care. They have everything to do with other things.


LIKE:
Obesity is not health care, it is economical.
Infant mortality rate was summed up by silknlayc.

Life expectancy????

How about Violence in society? Well we have lots of young people killed and that die in accidents because american society is more aggressive. What does that have to do with health care? What do inner city shootings have to do with health care? ok then.

Did you know that Hispanics outlive blacks IN AMERICA by almost 8 years per person??? Why is that? Is it that they get better health care? ummmmm NOOOOO, it is genetics. We have a larger variety of cultures. Did you know that in american hispanics outlive asians who outlive whites who outlive blacks? WHY is that again? it has nothing to do with different levels of health care. Health care means nothing in these situations.

We have bad habits (eating, exercising, drugs, smoking....etc) more so than other countries. Again, nothing to do with health care.

 

[anniemac]

Silc,

I am glad you can work with your back problems. And I am glad you can pay for your insurance. Good for you. My guy would gladly be working now if he could. He took much pride in the fact that he was a Master Machinist and could walk into any business and be hired on the spot. His whole self worth, in his eyes, was based on this ability. He was told by the Texas Rehabilitation Agency as well as Social Security that he could not be rehabilitated in order to do some other kind of work because of his age, would be a waste of money. And now, no one would hire him anyway because of his back and he cannot pass a drug test. Do not presume to think that he wants to be on disability.

FYI, Medicare is not free. He has a premium taken out of his check each month to pay for it and he also has to pay a co-pay each and every doctor visit. He also pays $82 a month for prescription insurance as this is not covered by Medicare. This is above what was taken out of his paycheck as mandated by the government when he was able to work. As I have said before, there is a difference in Medicare and Medicaid. He does not qualify for Medicaid because he makes too much money.

My reason for posting at all was to point out a broken system that is getting worse from my perspective. I sincerely hope that those of you here who have taken the 'moral highground' never have depend on any government agency for help. I hope you will continue to live your life as you are now.

But if you ever have to have assistance, well, good luck with that too.

 

[silcnlayc]

anniemac: Do not presume to think that he wants to be on disability.

I do not presume anything anniemac. I may have said it badly, but I was pointing out that but for the fact that I have very good insurance that I could choose, that paid for all my surgeries during the many times I needed it to help me keep the quality of life I wanted to keep, I could be in the very unfortunate position as your husband without it.

At the time he was hurt, he had no insurance

I do not believe in universal health insurance. I still have family over in europe and they are miserable. The wait that they must endure is unbelievable to have any quality care at all. Some have waited over a year for heart medication because you must see the doctors for refills since it is such a specialized drug. ( I do not know what it is but they write about this all the time, the waiting)

I undertand about your husband wanting to work. I really do. That is why I went through the struggles of multiple surgeries so I could work. It gives me self worth and pride also. If that were taken away, I too, would be crushed as is your husband I believe. I was told I had a very high thresheld for pain and I believe that is my other saving grace. I do wish your husband better health. I would never wish that kind of pain on anyone since I know how it feels.

Universal healthcare is NOT the answer IMO. AFFORDABLE healthcare that one can choose from IMO is the answer for everyone.

.

 

[Nifty29]

Geez Silc - $800 a month???

That is crazy. I really feel for you being taken for a ride by the medical profession (which is what it amounts to since most of the HMOs are owned by doctors).

I can get the absolute top hospital cover with premium extras here for around $200 per month. Or, of course, I can just go to the public hospital for free....yes there are waiting lists for elective and non-urgent procedures, but if you need surgery today urgently you will get it. I can also get free dental.

When you consider the GDP of the US vs Australia, it's incredible to think that the US Government can't provide some kind of medical cover for every citizen (whether it be free public care or subsidised private care like Silc suggested - either is a good option IMO)

As an outsider following this thread, I'm would be amazed if anyone seriously thought the US healthcare system is good one.

A system where there isn't equal opportunity for every citizen just isn't right IMO. ( as I said not necessarily free)

If I were someone in the US with health issues that were going to cost me a fortune, or that I possibly could never afford to fix, I would consider moving out here and becoming a citizen.


P.S. I thought 'blacks' was a derogatory/racist term these days? Aren't we supposed to say "African Americans"?