National Health Care

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by Mormon Red Death

I have the source ... it would take some digging (I knew I kept my college notes for some reason

As for medicaid and medicare they don't completely set the rate they just mess with the market.

As for the parallel system doesnt that mean that the rich can get good care while the rest of us have to settle?

research shows that private school doesn't do a better job of educating than public school.

why does the USA fail in so many areas as compared to other industrialized nations when it comes to health? if public care were inferior, wouldn't the USA dominate, instead of bringing up the rear?

[Mormon Red Death]

Originally Posted by Archaea

Medicare impacts rates as most insurers do theirs as a percent of Medicare rates.

Medicare is socialized medicine.

it impacts the rates but does not set them. many insurers rates are moved as much by market forces then by Medicare.

[Mormon Red Death]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

research shows that private school doesn't do a better job of educating than public school.

why does the USA fail in so many areas as compared to other industrialized nations when it comes to health? if public care were inferior, wouldn't the USA dominate, instead of bringing up the rear?

the only thing we "fail" in is access. If you want the best doctors, best hospitals best technology where do you go?

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by Mormon Red Death

the only thing we "fail" in is access. If you want the best doctors, best hospitals best technology where do you go?

we are the best at screening and preventative medicine?

[tooblue]

"Without the private medical insurance the law had denied him, Bill Murray paid out of pocket for this medically necessary treatment. But after successful surgery on his left hip, Murray encountered pain in his right hip. Again, the medical specialist recommended Birmingham hip resurfacing.

But this time, Alberta denied him the surgery outright - the province wouldn't even let Murray pay for it himself. (He eventually paid for the treatment in Montreal.) Murray's experience with the government's health care monopoly is not unique.

Canada's health system forces people to wait for months, even years, for necessary medical treatment. Many suffer irreparable harm to their health in the process. Physical pain is compounded by psychological suffering: the inability to work and to enjoy life."

Gee, let's talk specifics here ... Sorry, but the linked story is hyperbole and propoganda.

"Schumann said he's glad he made the decision he did."

Even more detail here!

"We are renowned for our health care system, and when I am in the deepest need as a cancer patient, and they don't have what I need to save my life, that's very sad," she said in a recent interview.

But Ms. Aucoin is not alone. Whether it is to get life-saving medication for cancer or a hip replacement, an increasing number of Canadians are travelling abroad for medical purposes. Long hospital wait times–it can take more than a year to get a hip replacement–have been identified as the reason most Canadians seek treatment overseas."

A little more info but again more hyperbole! I'm not trying to diminish the frustration of some of these people, however the reality is, despite potential long waits they have access to the care whereas 1 in 7 Americans don't have insurance. And, you failed to recognize that health tourism is equally on the rise in the States. You would rather deal in half truths and fear mongoring.

[MikeWaters]

True of false: nationalized healthcare would lead to a burst of entrepreneurial activity as more people are willing to let go of jobs that had previously guaranteed health insurance?

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by Mormon Red Death

it impacts the rates but does not set them. many insurers rates are moved as much by market forces then by Medicare.

My post validated what you said. You are one of the few posters who appears to understand at least in broad outlines how our system functions. Most just deal in meaningless anecdotes.

Sometimes anecdotes can be insightful, sometimes they are useless.

[tooblue]

Originally Posted by Archaea

Are you aware what rationing kills people in Canada? I could do the research, because most of my data is old. But for example, it takes time to MRIs, sometimes the denial of an MRI can miss a cancer which if it had been diagnosed earlier would have been cured.

This is simply an untrue statement -NO person is denied a proceedure such as an MRI. They sometimes have to wait, but eventually receive the care.

If an American is uninsured cancer will not be detected in that person because there is ZERO chance of an MRI! That is the comparison argument to your incredibly poor logic!

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by tooblue

This is simply an untrue statement -NO person is denied a proceedure such as an MRI. They sometimes have to wait, but eventually receive the care.

If an American is uninsured cancer will not be detected in that person because there is ZERO chance of an MRI! That is the comparison argument to your incredibly poor logic!

The delay can kill.

And your definition of emergent and elective is different than ours.

My point is that all systems make cost judgments and no system delivers all things to all patients. That simply is untrue; all systems ration and deny some patients some things.

We simply need to discuss the value systems for these denials and their related costs, not engage in debates about scare tactic anecdotes.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by Archaea

My post validated what you said. You are one of the few posters who appears to understand at least in broad outlines how our system functions. Most just deal in meaningless anecdotes.

Sometimes anecdotes can be insightful, sometimes they are useless.

That's an awfully self-serving summary of the discussion on this thread.