My only firsthand experience with single payer was Ireland's, 2001 - 2005, and the way it worked was you pay 36% of your tiny salary in taxes and in exchange you get terrible healthcare or sometimes no healthcare at all.
So
I would like to check out a single payer system that doesn't come with intolerably high taxes and saves the nation money.
Is "single payer" the "socialist" health care system?
This is what really causes the pushback against health reform.
For people who can actually afford it, American healthcare is astonishingly good. For everyone else it's garbage. For the working poor who are caught between medicaid and even crap healthcare coverage it's pretty much third world.
My only firsthand experience with single payer was Ireland's, 2001 - 2005, and the way it worked was you pay 36% of your tiny salary in taxes and in exchange you get terrible healthcare or sometimes no healthcare at all.
So
I would like to check out a single payer system that doesn't come with intolerably high taxes and saves the nation money.
Is "single payer" the "socialist" health care system?
If so: see the entirety of northern europe.
Also: Medicare. We already have single payer, we just limit it to the sickest people, because we're dumb.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
+11
Options
ChanusHarbinger of the Spicy Rooster ApocalypseThe Flames of a Thousand Collapsed StarsRegistered Userregular
From a non-US perspective, I have to say that the healthcare debate there is truly baffling.
There is something fundamental to it that nobody within it has ever seems able to explain. I literally do not understand what possible objection there is to a single payer or highly regulated hybrid system, and neither does our news media.
So, I know spool has his issues with it but they aren't issues that make any sense to me, and I suspect that the majority of euro posters are in the same boat.
I don't really have a point particularly, other than to comment to spool that though it probably feels like dogpiling, but most likely isn't meant that way.
It's because your health care system is terrible. Don't you know that? gawl
There's a pervasive and insistent myth on the Right that healthcare in Europe is awful, it takes seven years to see a doctor for the sniffles, and you'll die before you ever get treatment.
So that's why America has the best health care system in the world.
This is what really causes the pushback against health reform.
For people who can actually afford it, American healthcare is astonishingly good. For everyone else it's garbage. For the working poor who are caught between medicaid and even crap healthcare coverage it's pretty much third world.
Yes, we are a medical travel destination for the super rich and for world leaders who will fly across the world to go to places like the Mayo clinic that are utterly off limits to 99.9999% of Americans.
This isn't any sort of argument in favor of our health care system since I doubt very much that if you took a poll you'd find any Americans who were enthusiastic about our healthcare being nice for wealthy aliens.
This is what really causes the pushback against health reform.
For people who can actually afford it, American healthcare is astonishingly good. For everyone else it's garbage. For the working poor who are caught between medicaid and even crap healthcare coverage it's pretty much third world.
Yes, we are a medical travel destination for the super rich and for world leaders who will fly across the world to go to places like the Mayo clinic that are utterly off limits to 99.9999% of Americans.
This isn't any sort of argument in favor of our health care system since I doubt very much that if you took a poll you'd find any Americans who were enthusiastic about our healthcare being nice for wealthy aliens.
To be fair Mayo sees a lot of people with lesser means. I know a few people who moved to Rochester in order to enter their transplant list.
This is what really causes the pushback against health reform.
For people who can actually afford it, American healthcare is astonishingly good. For everyone else it's garbage. For the working poor who are caught between medicaid and even crap healthcare coverage it's pretty much third world.
Yes, we are a medical travel destination for the super rich and for world leaders who will fly across the world to go to places like the Mayo clinic that are utterly off limits to 99.9999% of Americans.
This isn't any sort of argument in favor of our health care system since I doubt very much that if you took a poll you'd find any Americans who were enthusiastic about our healthcare being nice for wealthy aliens.
To be fair Mayo sees a lot of people with lesser means. I know a few people who moved to Rochester in order to enter their transplant list.
And Harvard gives some people scholarships!
We've totally achieved equality lets shut down the ACLU everything is fine.
This is what really causes the pushback against health reform.
For people who can actually afford it, American healthcare is astonishingly good. For everyone else it's garbage. For the working poor who are caught between medicaid and even crap healthcare coverage it's pretty much third world.
And a lot of Americans run over the border to Canada or Mexico for treatment because they can't afford it in the US. In fact far more people travel away from the US than travels to the US for treatment making this point a net negative.
This is what really causes the pushback against health reform.
For people who can actually afford it, American healthcare is astonishingly good. For everyone else it's garbage. For the working poor who are caught between medicaid and even crap healthcare coverage it's pretty much third world.
Yes, we are a medical travel destination for the super rich and for world leaders who will fly across the world to go to places like the Mayo clinic that are utterly off limits to 99.9999% of Americans.
This isn't any sort of argument in favor of our health care system since I doubt very much that if you took a poll you'd find any Americans who were enthusiastic about our healthcare being nice for wealthy aliens.
It's a plus when talking about American healthcare. A single-payer system is great if you break your leg or develop bronchitis. When you find a lump or need heart surgery, you want to good stuff and the good stuff is in America.
From what I understand about English healthcare (correct me if I'm wrong), if you seek treatment outside the country or you start buying drugs out of pocket to treat your cancer, you forfeit your future NHS care for that particular illness.
This is what really causes the pushback against health reform.
For people who can actually afford it, American healthcare is astonishingly good. For everyone else it's garbage. For the working poor who are caught between medicaid and even crap healthcare coverage it's pretty much third world.
Yes, we are a medical travel destination for the super rich and for world leaders who will fly across the world to go to places like the Mayo clinic that are utterly off limits to 99.9999% of Americans.
This isn't any sort of argument in favor of our health care system since I doubt very much that if you took a poll you'd find any Americans who were enthusiastic about our healthcare being nice for wealthy aliens.
It's a plus when talking about American healthcare.
Only if you're wealthy.
Most of us aren't, so it's just a negative.
And as I already mentioned, no one cares that our healthcare system is nice for rich aliens. Yeah, if you're the mullah of some awful little arab country you can show up at the Mayo clinic with a failing kidney and kick someone off the transplant list and have your kidney tomorrow and be on a private jet back to your home the day after that.
That's an indictment of the U.S. healthcare system.
My only firsthand experience with single payer was Ireland's, 2001 - 2005, and the way it worked was you pay 36% of your tiny salary in taxes and in exchange you get terrible healthcare or sometimes no healthcare at all.
So
I would like to check out a single payer system that doesn't come with intolerably high taxes and saves the nation money.
Is "single payer" the "socialist" health care system?
If so: see the entirety of northern europe.
Also: Medicare. We already have single payer, we just limit it to the sickest people, because we're dumb.
To be fair, Medicare is overly expensive to the taxpayer because we, once again, insist on running it through the private sector.
2 years after my stepdad had died my mom was still getting bills cc'ed from University of Alabama hospital that they were sending to Medicare for the same procedure. In one instance she found that they had billed medicare 3 times for one round of chemo.
And Medicare just pays out on it.
If the U.S. is ever to go single payer, we need people with shotguns in hospital billing departments keeping our glorious capitalist private sector healthcare in check or they would run off with the entire treasury.
This is what really causes the pushback against health reform.
For people who can actually afford it, American healthcare is astonishingly good. For everyone else it's garbage. For the working poor who are caught between medicaid and even crap healthcare coverage it's pretty much third world.
Yes, we are a medical travel destination for the super rich and for world leaders who will fly across the world to go to places like the Mayo clinic that are utterly off limits to 99.9999% of Americans.
This isn't any sort of argument in favor of our health care system since I doubt very much that if you took a poll you'd find any Americans who were enthusiastic about our healthcare being nice for wealthy aliens.
To be fair Mayo sees a lot of people with lesser means. I know a few people who moved to Rochester in order to enter their transplant list.
And Harvard gives some people scholarships!
We've totally achieved equality lets shut down the ACLU everything is fine.
I just wanted to say it since they have gone out of their way to help friends of mine with not dying and all... To not paint Mayo as refusing anyone without amex black. But ok, if you say so. Sorry.
This is what really causes the pushback against health reform.
For people who can actually afford it, American healthcare is astonishingly good. For everyone else it's garbage. For the working poor who are caught between medicaid and even crap healthcare coverage it's pretty much third world.
Yes, we are a medical travel destination for the super rich and for world leaders who will fly across the world to go to places like the Mayo clinic that are utterly off limits to 99.9999% of Americans.
This isn't any sort of argument in favor of our health care system since I doubt very much that if you took a poll you'd find any Americans who were enthusiastic about our healthcare being nice for wealthy aliens.
It's a plus when talking about American healthcare. A single-payer system is great if you break your leg or develop bronchitis. When you find a lump or need heart surgery, you want to good stuff and the good stuff is in America.
From what I understand about English healthcare (correct me if I'm wrong), if you seek treatment outside the country or you start buying drugs out of pocket to treat your cancer, you forfeit your future NHS care for that particular illness.
I'll be sure to move to America when I get old and rich...or not
This is what really causes the pushback against health reform.
For people who can actually afford it, American healthcare is astonishingly good. For everyone else it's garbage. For the working poor who are caught between medicaid and even crap healthcare coverage it's pretty much third world.
Yes, we are a medical travel destination for the super rich and for world leaders who will fly across the world to go to places like the Mayo clinic that are utterly off limits to 99.9999% of Americans.
This isn't any sort of argument in favor of our health care system since I doubt very much that if you took a poll you'd find any Americans who were enthusiastic about our healthcare being nice for wealthy aliens.
To be fair Mayo sees a lot of people with lesser means. I know a few people who moved to Rochester in order to enter their transplant list.
And Harvard gives some people scholarships!
We've totally achieved equality lets shut down the ACLU everything is fine.
I just wanted to say it since they have gone out of their way to help friends of mine with not dying and all... To not paint Mayo as refusing anyone without amex black. But ok, if you say so. Sorry.
It's great that they take some hard luck cases. It's also still true that that level of healthcare is off limits to the vast majority of the non-wealthy.
They're not turning away any wealthy people at all. So it's not some sort of egalitarian system.
This is what really causes the pushback against health reform.
For people who can actually afford it, American healthcare is astonishingly good. For everyone else it's garbage. For the working poor who are caught between medicaid and even crap healthcare coverage it's pretty much third world.
Yes, we are a medical travel destination for the super rich and for world leaders who will fly across the world to go to places like the Mayo clinic that are utterly off limits to 99.9999% of Americans.
This isn't any sort of argument in favor of our health care system since I doubt very much that if you took a poll you'd find any Americans who were enthusiastic about our healthcare being nice for wealthy aliens.
It's a plus when talking about American healthcare. A single-payer system is great if you break your leg or develop bronchitis. When you find a lump or need heart surgery, you want to good stuff and the good stuff is in America.
From what I understand about English healthcare (correct me if I'm wrong), if you seek treatment outside the country or you start buying drugs out of pocket to treat your cancer, you forfeit your future NHS care for that particular illness.
I'll be sure to move to America when I get old and rich...
Emnmnme is not completely correct.
Sure you can find the best statistics somewhere in America. But single-payer is in no way directly indicating that specialist health care is bad.
My local hospital in Stockholm had, up till 2005 if I recall correctly, better survival statistics of liver transplants than Mayo.
Not every single skilled professional wants to uproot and move to America.
This is what really causes the pushback against health reform.
For people who can actually afford it, American healthcare is astonishingly good. For everyone else it's garbage. For the working poor who are caught between medicaid and even crap healthcare coverage it's pretty much third world.
Yes, we are a medical travel destination for the super rich and for world leaders who will fly across the world to go to places like the Mayo clinic that are utterly off limits to 99.9999% of Americans.
This isn't any sort of argument in favor of our health care system since I doubt very much that if you took a poll you'd find any Americans who were enthusiastic about our healthcare being nice for wealthy aliens.
It's a plus when talking about American healthcare. A single-payer system is great if you break your leg or develop bronchitis. When you find a lump or need heart surgery, you want to good stuff and the good stuff is in America.
From what I understand about English healthcare (correct me if I'm wrong), if you seek treatment outside the country or you start buying drugs out of pocket to treat your cancer, you forfeit your future NHS care for that particular illness.
I'll be sure to move to America when I get old and rich...
Emnmnme is not completely correct.
Sure you can find the best statistics somewhere in America. But single-payer is in no way directly indicating that specialist health care is bad.
My local hospital in Stockholm had, up till 2005 if I recall correctly, better survival statistics of liver transplants than Mayo.
Not every single skilled professional wants to uproot and move to America.
I can only assume that the fact that Swedes are less likely to be fat and diabetic plays into this. Americans are kind of... unhealthy. As a generalization.
This is what really causes the pushback against health reform.
For people who can actually afford it, American healthcare is astonishingly good. For everyone else it's garbage. For the working poor who are caught between medicaid and even crap healthcare coverage it's pretty much third world.
Yes, we are a medical travel destination for the super rich and for world leaders who will fly across the world to go to places like the Mayo clinic that are utterly off limits to 99.9999% of Americans.
This isn't any sort of argument in favor of our health care system since I doubt very much that if you took a poll you'd find any Americans who were enthusiastic about our healthcare being nice for wealthy aliens.
It's a plus when talking about American healthcare. A single-payer system is great if you break your leg or develop bronchitis. When you find a lump or need heart surgery, you want to good stuff and the good stuff is in America.
From what I understand about English healthcare (correct me if I'm wrong), if you seek treatment outside the country or you start buying drugs out of pocket to treat your cancer, you forfeit your future NHS care for that particular illness.
I'll be sure to move to America when I get old and rich...
Emnmnme is not completely correct.
Sure you can find the best statistics somewhere in America. But single-payer is in no way directly indicating that specialist health care is bad.
My local hospital in Stockholm had, up till 2005 if I recall correctly, better survival statistics of liver transplants than Mayo.
Not every single skilled professional wants to uproot and move to America.
I can only assume that the fact that Swedes are less likely to be fat and diabetic plays into this. Americans are kind of... unhealthy. As a generalization.
Most likely that and other things, possibly different metrics are used although those should be pretty similar.
Anyway the point being that while there is a place in the US that is the world best at any particular treatment, a lot of places single-payer or otherwise are not lagging that far behind.
So sure, if I am super rich then I care about the final 0,3% raise in survival rate enough to go to the US. But a lot of places are "basically" equal.
Edit: Less night and day, more noon and 12.05.
Honk on
PSN: Honkalot
0
Options
JuliusCaptain of Serenityon my shipRegistered Userregular
This is what really causes the pushback against health reform.
For people who can actually afford it, American healthcare is astonishingly good. For everyone else it's garbage. For the working poor who are caught between medicaid and even crap healthcare coverage it's pretty much third world.
Yes, we are a medical travel destination for the super rich and for world leaders who will fly across the world to go to places like the Mayo clinic that are utterly off limits to 99.9999% of Americans.
This isn't any sort of argument in favor of our health care system since I doubt very much that if you took a poll you'd find any Americans who were enthusiastic about our healthcare being nice for wealthy aliens.
It's a plus when talking about American healthcare.
Only if you're wealthy.
It's not even that. Due to it's sheer size you would expect the best heavily specialized healthcare in the USA. You don't see heart-surgery clinics in rural alaskan towns either. Canada has a population of about a tenth of the USA. This is not due to the wise decision to say fuck you to the vast majority of the population. If you give the rest of the population affordable care you won't lose the best care because the people who need that care are not going to stop existing.
(also probably the most profitable place to put your specialized care is going to be the US for many more reasons, like taxes)
I have a question... I'm watching that video above on ACA 101 and looking at this infographic, and both mention the 30 million people who still won't get covered with the ACA. What combination of circumstances would need to exist so that a person has no access to healthcare at all, either through the exchanges or through Medicaid? Is it when someone just barely makes more than the upper limit of Medicaid? Wouldn't the subsidized exchange prices still apply to make it affordable, or is this person somehow not eligible for the exchanges at all?
A huge factor is states that refused the Medicaid expansion, leaving a lot of people in the gap between Medicaid coverage and the 8% maximum cost of insurance premiums compared to income.
For example, a family of three that makes about $4,500$4,900 per year is too rich to qualify for Medicaid in Texas.
E: Fixed:
Could you cite where you found that please? Or where the info was? Not because I necessarily don't believe you, but I don't want to believe you.
My state, Indiana, apparently only gives you medicaid if you can't even afford an apartment that is subsidized. At that point, you are fucked in so many ways that health care is only one large worry.
This is what really causes the pushback against health reform.
For people who can actually afford it, American healthcare is astonishingly good. For everyone else it's garbage. For the working poor who are caught between medicaid and even crap healthcare coverage it's pretty much third world.
Yes, we are a medical travel destination for the super rich and for world leaders who will fly across the world to go to places like the Mayo clinic that are utterly off limits to 99.9999% of Americans.
This isn't any sort of argument in favor of our health care system since I doubt very much that if you took a poll you'd find any Americans who were enthusiastic about our healthcare being nice for wealthy aliens.
It's a plus when talking about American healthcare. A single-payer system is great if you break your leg or develop bronchitis. When you find a lump or need heart surgery, you want to good stuff and the good stuff is in America.
From what I understand about English healthcare (correct me if I'm wrong), if you seek treatment outside the country or you start buying drugs out of pocket to treat your cancer, you forfeit your future NHS care for that particular illness.
Single payer countries do not send all their seriously sick people to the US because the "godd stuff" is in America (or let them die from non-treatment at home). Single payer countries treat their patients in their home country. A few very wealthy individuals go to the US for highly specialized (and frankly often unnecessarily complicated)surgery because a) they can, and b) in the US having cash to pay upfront means you get bumped on the transplant list. They can get sufficient treatment at home too.
This is what really causes the pushback against health reform.
For people who can actually afford it, American healthcare is astonishingly good. For everyone else it's garbage. For the working poor who are caught between medicaid and even crap healthcare coverage it's pretty much third world.
Yes, we are a medical travel destination for the super rich and for world leaders who will fly across the world to go to places like the Mayo clinic that are utterly off limits to 99.9999% of Americans.
This isn't any sort of argument in favor of our health care system since I doubt very much that if you took a poll you'd find any Americans who were enthusiastic about our healthcare being nice for wealthy aliens.
It's a plus when talking about American healthcare. A single-payer system is great if you break your leg or develop bronchitis. When you find a lump or need heart surgery, you want to good stuff and the good stuff is in America.
From what I understand about English healthcare (correct me if I'm wrong), if you seek treatment outside the country or you start buying drugs out of pocket to treat your cancer, you forfeit your future NHS care for that particular illness.
I'll be sure to move to America when I get old and rich...
Emnmnme is not completely correct.
Sure you can find the best statistics somewhere in America. But single-payer is in no way directly indicating that specialist health care is bad.
My local hospital in Stockholm had, up till 2005 if I recall correctly, better survival statistics of liver transplants than Mayo.
Not every single skilled professional wants to uproot and move to America.
Eh, the thing is that places like Mayo are more likely to take the most difficult / complex case, as opposed to a local hospital that's only going to do a complex procedure when it's straightforward and little anticipated risk of complications.
There's a reason difficult stuff gets escalated to the best places.
zagdrob on
0
Options
AManFromEarthLet's get to twerk!The King in the SwampRegistered Userregular
This is what really causes the pushback against health reform.
For people who can actually afford it, American healthcare is astonishingly good. For everyone else it's garbage. For the working poor who are caught between medicaid and even crap healthcare coverage it's pretty much third world.
Yes, we are a medical travel destination for the super rich and for world leaders who will fly across the world to go to places like the Mayo clinic that are utterly off limits to 99.9999% of Americans.
This isn't any sort of argument in favor of our health care system since I doubt very much that if you took a poll you'd find any Americans who were enthusiastic about our healthcare being nice for wealthy aliens.
It's a plus when talking about American healthcare. A single-payer system is great if you break your leg or develop bronchitis. When you find a lump or need heart surgery, you want to good stuff and the good stuff is in America.
From what I understand about English healthcare (correct me if I'm wrong), if you seek treatment outside the country or you start buying drugs out of pocket to treat your cancer, you forfeit your future NHS care for that particular illness.
I'll be sure to move to America when I get old and rich...
Emnmnme is not completely correct.
Sure you can find the best statistics somewhere in America. But single-payer is in no way directly indicating that specialist health care is bad.
My local hospital in Stockholm had, up till 2005 if I recall correctly, better survival statistics of liver transplants than Mayo.
Not every single skilled professional wants to uproot and move to America.
Eh, the thing is that places like Mayo are more likely to take the most difficult / complex case, as opposed to a local hospital that's only going to do a complex procedure when it's straightforward and little anticipated risk of complications.
There's a reason difficult stuff gets escalated to the best places if you can afford it.
This is what really causes the pushback against health reform.
For people who can actually afford it, American healthcare is astonishingly good. For everyone else it's garbage. For the working poor who are caught between medicaid and even crap healthcare coverage it's pretty much third world.
Yes, we are a medical travel destination for the super rich and for world leaders who will fly across the world to go to places like the Mayo clinic that are utterly off limits to 99.9999% of Americans.
This isn't any sort of argument in favor of our health care system since I doubt very much that if you took a poll you'd find any Americans who were enthusiastic about our healthcare being nice for wealthy aliens.
It's a plus when talking about American healthcare. A single-payer system is great if you break your leg or develop bronchitis. When you find a lump or need heart surgery, you want to good stuff and the good stuff is in America.
From what I understand about English healthcare (correct me if I'm wrong), if you seek treatment outside the country or you start buying drugs out of pocket to treat your cancer, you forfeit your future NHS care for that particular illness.
Single payer countries do not send all their seriously sick people to the US because the "godd stuff" is in America (or let them die from non-treatment at home). Single payer countries treat their patients in their home country. A few very wealthy individuals go to the US for highly specialized (and frankly often unnecessarily complicated)surgery because a) they can, and b) in the US having cash to pay upfront means you get bumped on the transplant list. They can get sufficient treatment at home too.
Pretty much this.
Going to US is for rich fucks who don't feel like waiting until people in actual danger are cared for first, or feel quite happy with someone else dying for lack of transplant as long as they survive (exaggeration, i know, and hyperbole, but there is a seed of truth to it).
Not saying i would not do the later myself if i had the money, people do quite a lot to survive, but i do hope i would have the balls and integrity to just sit in line and not feed the monster that is US healthcare system for the former.
I have a question... I'm watching that video above on ACA 101 and looking at this infographic, and both mention the 30 million people who still won't get covered with the ACA. What combination of circumstances would need to exist so that a person has no access to healthcare at all, either through the exchanges or through Medicaid? Is it when someone just barely makes more than the upper limit of Medicaid? Wouldn't the subsidized exchange prices still apply to make it affordable, or is this person somehow not eligible for the exchanges at all?
A huge factor is states that refused the Medicaid expansion, leaving a lot of people in the gap between Medicaid coverage and the 8% maximum cost of insurance premiums compared to income.
For example, a family of three that makes about $4,500$4,900 per year is too rich to qualify for Medicaid in Texas.
E: Fixed:
Holy fuck I thought you missed a zero.
Really old but this needs to be repeated ad nauseum. It is utterly shameful that this is the real number. How in the mother of all that is fuck can Texas choose not to expand Medicaid when this is what's currently on offer, and we lead the nation in uninsured population percentage (and last I checked, we were also the third most populous state)?
Ok, quick horror story about the terrible, terrible socialized healthcare we have to survive under in the frozen wastes of northern Europe.
Last Wednesday i cut my finer, removing circular a piece about quarter inch in diameter, and maybe quarter of that in thickness, clean of.
I patched myself up, as i could, and being a lazy bastard that i am, did not feel like visiting a doctor, but this morning, i got fed up with the constant pain (and bleeding), and decided to visit the hospital.
Less than half an hour after entering, i had my bandaid removed (whooboy was it dirty after 2+ days), wound cleaned, had new bandage put in told to come back if it gets infected and sent home.
Nobody ever talked about payment (they were somewhat upset about not coming in earlier though), and they gave me some bandages to take home with me.
Ok, quick horror story about the terrible, terrible socialized healthcare we have to survive under in the frozen wastes of northern Europe.
Last Wednesday i cut my finer, removing circular a piece about quarter inch in diameter, and maybe quarter of that in thickness, clean of.
I patched myself up, as i could, and being a lazy bastard that i am, did not feel like visiting a doctor, but this morning, i got fed up with the constant pain (and bleeding), and decided to visit the hospital.
Less than half an hour after entering, i had my bandaid removed (whooboy was it dirty after 2+ days), wound cleaned, had new bandage put in told to come back if it gets infected and sent home.
Nobody ever talked about payment (they were somewhat upset about not coming in earlier though), and they gave me some bandages to take home with me.
Horrible, right?
Under Obamacare they would have convened a death panel.
YOU know. The wait that happens. It's... very important.
And somehow different from making appointments.
Yeah, the wait was horrible, i was there like, minutes man, MINUTES.
I could have brewed a cup of tea in that time, not drink it, no, but i could have brewed a cup.
Ok, quick horror story about the terrible, terrible socialized healthcare we have to survive under in the frozen wastes of northern Europe.
Last Wednesday i cut my finer, removing circular a piece about quarter inch in diameter, and maybe quarter of that in thickness, clean of.
I patched myself up, as i could, and being a lazy bastard that i am, did not feel like visiting a doctor, but this morning, i got fed up with the constant pain (and bleeding), and decided to visit the hospital.
Less than half an hour after entering, i had my bandaid removed (whooboy was it dirty after 2+ days), wound cleaned, had new bandage put in told to come back if it gets infected and sent home.
Nobody ever talked about payment (they were somewhat upset about not coming in earlier though), and they gave me some bandages to take home with me.
Horrible, right?
Counterpoint: I live a block from the biggest hospital in my US town of about 80k people. When I cut into my finger with a saw it took about 4 hours in the waiting room to get seen, and another hour Ina semi-private room waiting to get checked out, and then about a half hour to get fixed up.
The total bill for this was around $2,000. Fortunately I was insured but....$2000.
Ok, quick horror story about the terrible, terrible socialized healthcare we have to survive under in the frozen wastes of northern Europe.
Last Wednesday i cut my finer, removing circular a piece about quarter inch in diameter, and maybe quarter of that in thickness, clean of.
I patched myself up, as i could, and being a lazy bastard that i am, did not feel like visiting a doctor, but this morning, i got fed up with the constant pain (and bleeding), and decided to visit the hospital.
Less than half an hour after entering, i had my bandaid removed (whooboy was it dirty after 2+ days), wound cleaned, had new bandage put in told to come back if it gets infected and sent home.
Nobody ever talked about payment (they were somewhat upset about not coming in earlier though), and they gave me some bandages to take home with me.
Horrible, right?
Counterpoint: I live a block from the biggest hospital in my US town of about 80k people. When I cut into my finger with a saw it took about 4 hours in the waiting room to get seen, and another hour Ina semi-private room waiting to get checked out, and then about a half hour to get fixed up.
The total bill for this was around $2,000. Fortunately I was insured but....$2000.
Don't you just feel lucky you're not forced to suffer from socialized medicine like i am?
/sarcasm
This is what really causes the pushback against health reform.
For people who can actually afford it, American healthcare is astonishingly good. For everyone else it's garbage. For the working poor who are caught between medicaid and even crap healthcare coverage it's pretty much third world.
And a lot of Americans run over the border to Canada or Mexico for treatment because they can't afford it in the US. In fact far more people travel away from the US than travels to the US for treatment making this point a net negative.
More people leave the US to get treatment than visit the US. The CDC (corroborated by McKinsey) thinks that 750k people leave the US per year to other countries to get medical treatment. The number of people entering the US from other countries? About one-tenth that. (Patients Beyond Borders seems to think that latter number is actually 600k, but they don't cite or justify that number.)
Yeah, some people come to the US from other countries to skip waiting lists. Far, far more are going to India and Singapore.
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
Australia's is much lower these days at the low end since we're tax free up to ~18k per year (Link to ATO)
Which I am mentioning because arbitrarily picking out some tax rates and declaring "that's what healthcare costs you!" is bullshit in this discussion, especially since the US taxpayer pays more per capita out of the public purse for their (still mostly non-existent) healthcare system then any other first world nation.
Take Ireland for example. During the last few years, their tax revenue to GDP ratio has been 2-3 percent higher than the United States, but their healthcare-to-GDP spending ratio has been 8-9 points lower. Some countries with single payer (like France) have drastically higher total tax rates than the US; others (like South Korea) do not.
If we could increase our total tax rate by 2% or 3% of GDP but decrease our healthcare expenditures by 8% or 9% of GDP and get better outcomes, it makes financial sense to do so. It's really just that simple.
And a side note about taxes:
In a progressive tax system, there's no reason why a middle or lower class person should be paying an actual tax rate the same or higher than the total tax-to-GDP ratio of the country at large. Progressive taxation means that richer people should carry more of the tax burden. That spool32 paid over 30% taxes in a country where the total tax rate was around 33% doesn't tell us anything about their healthcare system. It just suggests that Ireland's tax burden was distributed poorly.
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
0
Options
Irond WillWARNING: NO HURTFUL COMMENTS, PLEASE!!!!!Cambridge. MAModeratormod
This is what really causes the pushback against health reform.
For people who can actually afford it, American healthcare is astonishingly good. For everyone else it's garbage. For the working poor who are caught between medicaid and even crap healthcare coverage it's pretty much third world.
And a lot of Americans run over the border to Canada or Mexico for treatment because they can't afford it in the US. In fact far more people travel away from the US than travels to the US for treatment making this point a net negative.
More people leave the US to get treatment than visit the US. The CDC (corroborated by McKinsey) thinks that 750k people leave the US per year to other countries to get medical treatment. The number of people entering the US from other countries? About one-tenth that. (Patients Beyond Borders seems to think that latter number is actually 600k, but they don't cite or justify that number.)
Yeah, some people come to the US from other countries to skip waiting lists. Far, far more are going to India and Singapore.
many of the cases of americans going abroad are cases where an american doesn't have enough money or juice to jump a transplant queue in the US, but has plenty to jump a transplant queue in mexico, india or thailand.
those cases aren't so much an indictment of our system as an indictment of the systems of those countries
This is what really causes the pushback against health reform.
For people who can actually afford it, American healthcare is astonishingly good. For everyone else it's garbage. For the working poor who are caught between medicaid and even crap healthcare coverage it's pretty much third world.
And a lot of Americans run over the border to Canada or Mexico for treatment because they can't afford it in the US. In fact far more people travel away from the US than travels to the US for treatment making this point a net negative.
More people leave the US to get treatment than visit the US. The CDC (corroborated by McKinsey) thinks that 750k people leave the US per year to other countries to get medical treatment. The number of people entering the US from other countries? About one-tenth that. (Patients Beyond Borders seems to think that latter number is actually 600k, but they don't cite or justify that number.)
Yeah, some people come to the US from other countries to skip waiting lists. Far, far more are going to India and Singapore.
many of the cases of americans going abroad are cases where an american doesn't have enough money or juice to jump a transplant queue in the US, but has plenty to jump a transplant queue in mexico, india or thailand.
those cases aren't so much an indictment of our system as an indictment of the systems of those countries
Both systems are flawed. Why should money make anyone more entitled to a transplant. The fact that jumping a line in less developed countries is less expensive doesnt make it different.
If your poor and need a transplant you can go die in a corner. Equal rights for everyone, some are just more equal then others.
This is what really causes the pushback against health reform.
For people who can actually afford it, American healthcare is astonishingly good. For everyone else it's garbage. For the working poor who are caught between medicaid and even crap healthcare coverage it's pretty much third world.
And a lot of Americans run over the border to Canada or Mexico for treatment because they can't afford it in the US. In fact far more people travel away from the US than travels to the US for treatment making this point a net negative.
More people leave the US to get treatment than visit the US. The CDC (corroborated by McKinsey) thinks that 750k people leave the US per year to other countries to get medical treatment. The number of people entering the US from other countries? About one-tenth that. (Patients Beyond Borders seems to think that latter number is actually 600k, but they don't cite or justify that number.)
Yeah, some people come to the US from other countries to skip waiting lists. Far, far more are going to India and Singapore.
many of the cases of americans going abroad are cases where an american doesn't have enough money or juice to jump a transplant queue in the US, but has plenty to jump a transplant queue in mexico, india or thailand.
those cases aren't so much an indictment of our system as an indictment of the systems of those countries
Both systems are flawed. Why should money make anyone more entitled to a transplant. The fact that jumping a line in less developed countries is less expensive doesnt make it different.
If your poor and need a transplant you can go die in a corner. Equal rights for everyone, some are just more equal then others.
“The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich and the poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal
bread.”
Posts
Is "single payer" the "socialist" health care system?
If so: see the entirety of northern europe.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/2010/02/04/canadian-premier-heart-surgery-plans-raise-questions-about-health-care/
Also: Medicare. We already have single payer, we just limit it to the sickest people, because we're dumb.
It's because your health care system is terrible. Don't you know that? gawl
There's a pervasive and insistent myth on the Right that healthcare in Europe is awful, it takes seven years to see a doctor for the sniffles, and you'll die before you ever get treatment.
So that's why America has the best health care system in the world.
I'm not sure what your point is.
Yes, we are a medical travel destination for the super rich and for world leaders who will fly across the world to go to places like the Mayo clinic that are utterly off limits to 99.9999% of Americans.
This isn't any sort of argument in favor of our health care system since I doubt very much that if you took a poll you'd find any Americans who were enthusiastic about our healthcare being nice for wealthy aliens.
To be fair Mayo sees a lot of people with lesser means. I know a few people who moved to Rochester in order to enter their transplant list.
And Harvard gives some people scholarships!
We've totally achieved equality lets shut down the ACLU everything is fine.
And a lot of Americans run over the border to Canada or Mexico for treatment because they can't afford it in the US. In fact far more people travel away from the US than travels to the US for treatment making this point a net negative.
It's a plus when talking about American healthcare. A single-payer system is great if you break your leg or develop bronchitis. When you find a lump or need heart surgery, you want to good stuff and the good stuff is in America.
From what I understand about English healthcare (correct me if I'm wrong), if you seek treatment outside the country or you start buying drugs out of pocket to treat your cancer, you forfeit your future NHS care for that particular illness.
Only if you're wealthy.
Most of us aren't, so it's just a negative.
And as I already mentioned, no one cares that our healthcare system is nice for rich aliens. Yeah, if you're the mullah of some awful little arab country you can show up at the Mayo clinic with a failing kidney and kick someone off the transplant list and have your kidney tomorrow and be on a private jet back to your home the day after that.
That's an indictment of the U.S. healthcare system.
To be fair, Medicare is overly expensive to the taxpayer because we, once again, insist on running it through the private sector.
2 years after my stepdad had died my mom was still getting bills cc'ed from University of Alabama hospital that they were sending to Medicare for the same procedure. In one instance she found that they had billed medicare 3 times for one round of chemo.
And Medicare just pays out on it.
If the U.S. is ever to go single payer, we need people with shotguns in hospital billing departments keeping our glorious capitalist private sector healthcare in check or they would run off with the entire treasury.
I just wanted to say it since they have gone out of their way to help friends of mine with not dying and all... To not paint Mayo as refusing anyone without amex black. But ok, if you say so. Sorry.
I'll be sure to move to America when I get old and rich...or not
scienceblogs.com/denialism/2009/05/26/what-is-healthcare-like-neth/
It's great that they take some hard luck cases. It's also still true that that level of healthcare is off limits to the vast majority of the non-wealthy.
They're not turning away any wealthy people at all. So it's not some sort of egalitarian system.
Emnmnme is not completely correct.
Sure you can find the best statistics somewhere in America. But single-payer is in no way directly indicating that specialist health care is bad.
My local hospital in Stockholm had, up till 2005 if I recall correctly, better survival statistics of liver transplants than Mayo.
Not every single skilled professional wants to uproot and move to America.
I can only assume that the fact that Swedes are less likely to be fat and diabetic plays into this. Americans are kind of... unhealthy. As a generalization.
Most likely that and other things, possibly different metrics are used although those should be pretty similar.
Anyway the point being that while there is a place in the US that is the world best at any particular treatment, a lot of places single-payer or otherwise are not lagging that far behind.
So sure, if I am super rich then I care about the final 0,3% raise in survival rate enough to go to the US. But a lot of places are "basically" equal.
Edit: Less night and day, more noon and 12.05.
It's not even that. Due to it's sheer size you would expect the best heavily specialized healthcare in the USA. You don't see heart-surgery clinics in rural alaskan towns either. Canada has a population of about a tenth of the USA. This is not due to the wise decision to say fuck you to the vast majority of the population. If you give the rest of the population affordable care you won't lose the best care because the people who need that care are not going to stop existing.
(also probably the most profitable place to put your specialized care is going to be the US for many more reasons, like taxes)
Could you cite where you found that please? Or where the info was? Not because I necessarily don't believe you, but I don't want to believe you.
My state, Indiana, apparently only gives you medicaid if you can't even afford an apartment that is subsidized. At that point, you are fucked in so many ways that health care is only one large worry.
Single payer countries do not send all their seriously sick people to the US because the "godd stuff" is in America (or let them die from non-treatment at home). Single payer countries treat their patients in their home country. A few very wealthy individuals go to the US for highly specialized (and frankly often unnecessarily complicated)surgery because a) they can, and b) in the US having cash to pay upfront means you get bumped on the transplant list. They can get sufficient treatment at home too.
If the US went single-payer tomorrow, the Mayo Clinic would still be a spectacular clinic where people all over the world would want to be treated.
And I'm still waiting on who sold ACA as an entitlement. Other than the GOP that is.
Eh, the thing is that places like Mayo are more likely to take the most difficult / complex case, as opposed to a local hospital that's only going to do a complex procedure when it's straightforward and little anticipated risk of complications.
There's a reason difficult stuff gets escalated to the best places.
Fixed that for you
Pretty much this.
Going to US is for rich fucks who don't feel like waiting until people in actual danger are cared for first, or feel quite happy with someone else dying for lack of transplant as long as they survive (exaggeration, i know, and hyperbole, but there is a seed of truth to it).
Not saying i would not do the later myself if i had the money, people do quite a lot to survive, but i do hope i would have the balls and integrity to just sit in line and not feed the monster that is US healthcare system for the former.
Really old but this needs to be repeated ad nauseum. It is utterly shameful that this is the real number. How in the mother of all that is fuck can Texas choose not to expand Medicaid when this is what's currently on offer, and we lead the nation in uninsured population percentage (and last I checked, we were also the third most populous state)?
Last Wednesday i cut my finer, removing circular a piece about quarter inch in diameter, and maybe quarter of that in thickness, clean of.
I patched myself up, as i could, and being a lazy bastard that i am, did not feel like visiting a doctor, but this morning, i got fed up with the constant pain (and bleeding), and decided to visit the hospital.
Less than half an hour after entering, i had my bandaid removed (whooboy was it dirty after 2+ days), wound cleaned, had new bandage put in told to come back if it gets infected and sent home.
Nobody ever talked about payment (they were somewhat upset about not coming in earlier though), and they gave me some bandages to take home with me.
Horrible, right?
Under Obamacare they would have convened a death panel.
YOU know. The wait that happens. It's... very important.
And somehow different from making appointments.
Yeah, the wait was horrible, i was there like, minutes man, MINUTES.
I could have brewed a cup of tea in that time, not drink it, no, but i could have brewed a cup.
Guess we know somebody never tried to play Simcity Diablo GTA:O FF14 Every MMO Ever at launch
Counterpoint: I live a block from the biggest hospital in my US town of about 80k people. When I cut into my finger with a saw it took about 4 hours in the waiting room to get seen, and another hour Ina semi-private room waiting to get checked out, and then about a half hour to get fixed up.
The total bill for this was around $2,000. Fortunately I was insured but....$2000.
Thanks to insurance, I only had to pay around $3k!
Which was about $1k short of being able to deduct on my taxes.
Yay.
Don't you just feel lucky you're not forced to suffer from socialized medicine like i am?
/sarcasm
More people leave the US to get treatment than visit the US. The CDC (corroborated by McKinsey) thinks that 750k people leave the US per year to other countries to get medical treatment. The number of people entering the US from other countries? About one-tenth that. (Patients Beyond Borders seems to think that latter number is actually 600k, but they don't cite or justify that number.)
Yeah, some people come to the US from other countries to skip waiting lists. Far, far more are going to India and Singapore.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Which is why we really should be looking at two numbers: total tax revenue to GDP ratio, and healthcare spending to GDP ratio.
Take Ireland for example. During the last few years, their tax revenue to GDP ratio has been 2-3 percent higher than the United States, but their healthcare-to-GDP spending ratio has been 8-9 points lower. Some countries with single payer (like France) have drastically higher total tax rates than the US; others (like South Korea) do not.
If we could increase our total tax rate by 2% or 3% of GDP but decrease our healthcare expenditures by 8% or 9% of GDP and get better outcomes, it makes financial sense to do so. It's really just that simple.
And a side note about taxes:
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
many of the cases of americans going abroad are cases where an american doesn't have enough money or juice to jump a transplant queue in the US, but has plenty to jump a transplant queue in mexico, india or thailand.
those cases aren't so much an indictment of our system as an indictment of the systems of those countries
Both systems are flawed. Why should money make anyone more entitled to a transplant. The fact that jumping a line in less developed countries is less expensive doesnt make it different.
If your poor and need a transplant you can go die in a corner. Equal rights for everyone, some are just more equal then others.
“The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich and the poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal
bread.”