RE: National healthcare wont pay for everything

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: National healthcare wont pay for everything

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: National healthcare wont pay for everything

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: National healthcare wont pay for everything - 5/14/2008 11:43:57 AM

wandersalone

Posts: 4666
Joined: 11/21/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: cyberdude611

And yes this kind of thing will be common place with universal healthcare in the US. We got a much larger population than Britain. Every problem they have will be 10 fold on us. Hell....we dont even know how many people we have in this country since no one wants to close the border. If we have an open border with universal healthcare, we are going to have every sick person in central America jumping across the border to checkin to one of our hospitals. And who will pay for that healthcare? Taxpayers.

In Australia you need to have a medicare number/card to be eligible for services as a public patient and I imagine if the USA introduced universal healthcare they would include some similar system which would (theoretically) make it difficult for people who are not US citizens to be eligible for subsidised healthcare. People who are not covered by medicare (some new arrivals have a preclusion period before they are eligible) would then need to go into hospital as a fee paying patient.

We all pay a medicare levy which is a percentage of our taxable income and I have always had private health insurance as well due to the waiting lists for non-urgent procedures being horrendous. I get a rebate on my healthfund back from the government each year through my tax (an incentive to people to have health insurance).

_____________________________

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. Martin Luther King
Godmother of the subbie mafia
My all time favourite threads
http://www.collarchat.com/fb.asp?m=2002501
http://www.collarchat.com/fb.asp?m=790885

(in reply to cyberdude611)

Profile

Post #: 41

RE: National healthcare wont pay for everything - 5/14/2008 11:56:43 AM

ownedgirlie

Posts: 9184
Joined: 2/5/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kittinSol

quote:

ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie

Nothing costs less. Taxes are higher, goods are higher, waiting lists are longer, and care is rationed.

Which country are you referring you here? And what do you mean by 'rationing'?

I was referring to Spain and Canada, going by the experiences of my family members and those family members of close friends.

By rationing I meant saving dollars by denying treatment to the very ill with lower odds, to save them for others with higher odds.

_____________________________

Good is the enemy of great.

(in reply to kittinSol)

Profile

Post #: 42

RE: National healthcare wont pay for everything - 5/14/2008 12:03:25 PM

wandersalone

Posts: 4666
Joined: 11/21/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomMeinCT

No one plan is perfect.

As many as 12.5% of the UK population has private medical insurance. Tons of articles about how UK doctors and dentists are leaving the NHS. http://www.healthinsurance.co.uk/healthinsurance-information/Health-Insurance-and-National-Health-Service-FAQs.html (private health insurance industry website)

Some 65% of Canadians have some form of supplementary private health insurance (which pays for things the national plan won't) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_insurance

Similar to what you see in the U.S., even in countries with extensive national medical programs, people who can afford insurance seem to be buying it. Why? Because the national plans aren't as comprehensive (or don't provide the best medical care) that people want.

I don't think it is because the medical care isn't the best. The teaching hospitals here are the ones with the whiz bang scanners hmmm...what was it called ...some sort of nuclear medical scanner and the top Professors supervise the doctors. I choose to have private health insurance so that I can have the choice of both public or private hospitals. I needed to have a large part of my liver removed due to a tumour so I was told that going to the teaching hospital would be the safest place for me in case I had any complications. I went as a private patient simply because I was feeling so ill I didn't want to share with anyone. The care of the staff was excellent.Mine was emergency surgery so I was right at the top of the list.

_____________________________

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. Martin Luther King
Godmother of the subbie mafia
My all time favourite threads
http://www.collarchat.com/fb.asp?m=2002501
http://www.collarchat.com/fb.asp?m=790885

(in reply to DomMeinCT)

Profile

Post #: 43

RE: National healthcare wont pay for everything - 5/15/2008 6:54:15 AM

meatcleaver

Posts: 9030
Joined: 3/13/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie

quote:

ORIGINAL: kittinSol

quote:

ORIGINAL: ownedgirlie

Nothing costs less. Taxes are higher, goods are higher, waiting lists are longer, and care is rationed.

Which country are you referring you here? And what do you mean by 'rationing'?

I was referring to Spain and Canada, going by the experiences of my family members and those family members of close friends.

By rationing I meant saving dollars by denying treatment to the very ill with lower odds, to save them for others with higher odds.

I can't speak for Canada but I know you are talking shite about Spain because they have to adhere to EU rules which means if someone thinks they are being denied treatment on clinical grounds and get ruled against in their national court they can take it to the European Court. Having just looked, there are no outstanding cases I can find. The British courts have several times forced local National Health trusts to pay for treatment of Brits in France because their local HC was unable or unwilling to provide treatment. There is no incentive for national services to deny treatment to anyone on anything other than clinical grounds because they could end up paying more, both for the treatment of a patient and their travel expenses.

Of course if someone is a lost cause and in hope against hope they insist on wanting treatment that will not do them any good, then they can mortgage their house and carry on paying for treatment in the private sector. The private sector has no morals when it comes to taking money off people for treatment they don't need. My brother only lived in the US for six months before he realized 'They (medical companies) give you treatment when you don't need when you are healthy just to make an extra buck and then you are denied treatment (by the insurance companies) when you need it so you don't cost them a buck.'

< Message edited by meatcleaver -- 5/15/2008 6:56:25 AM >

_____________________________

There are fascists who consider themselves humanitarians, like cannibals on a health kick, eating only vegetarians.

(in reply to ownedgirlie)

Profile

Post #: 44