A Thought About Healthcare

[carpedm9587]

And yet you just provided an example for an argument [ATTACH=CONFIG]28358[/ATTACH]

No. I did cite an example - and then noted that it is not an argument either.

[carpedm9587]

That policy kind of pissed me off, truth be told. I know there are "exceptions", but getting fined over $1000 was crippling to my family, which was living paycheck to paycheck even with outside help.

Did you look into government contributions options for low-income families, and the hardship options for exemptions from the fine?


Assuming you did both, then your situation is indeed an awful one and I can see why you would be angry. The sad reality is that any bureaucracy is going to "lose people" in the cracks. It's unfortunate, and there should be a mechanism for redress when that happens. Sadly, there usually is not.

[carpedm9587]

Including former Newfie Premier Danny Williams, and many, many others.

And here's an article with actual numbers in it, since carpe doesn't like anecdotal accounts.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/health/63-000...tute-1.3486635

OK - did you actually read the article? This sentence kind of jumped out at me...

But one professor warns the data is based only on estimates, making it highly questionable.

So did this:

The report says "one explanation" for patients leaving the country may be the long wait times in Canada. It also notes that some patients may be sent out of country for treatment, at the expense of the public health care system, because the procedure or equipment they need are not available in their jurisdiction.

So the data is estimates, and it muddles those who elect to go out of the country, and those who are intentionally sent out of the country by the Canadian Healthcare system.

Look, I have no doubt that there are long wait times, and those three provinces seem especially susceptible (I have to wonder if Mossrose lives in one of them). I noticed Quebec is not on the list, which may partially explain why my cousin's experience and Mossrose's experience are so different.

None of this changes the data that shows Canadian and UK satisfaction with their healthcare is WAY above U.S. satisfaction. And that pattern holds true for almost all countries with universal healthcare systems. You cannot just hand-wave that data away. So how do you explain it?

[shunyadragon]

And they'd only have to wait 10 hours in an emergency room and 18-24 months for hip surgery or 6-8 months for an MRI or CT scan or 6 months to see a specialist.

That is the case at present in parts of rural health care in the USA among the low income, and no emergency room within 50 to 100 miles.

[carpedm9587]

Those are basically fake numbers as the professor quoted in the link says.

In interviews I have seen with Canadian medical professionals, they pretty much laughed at and mocked the idea that any significant number of Canadians go to the US for care. If anything it is by far the other way around: A lot of people living in the US get on a plane back to their home countries for free care if it turns out they need something significant done.

There is a solid, study-backed article about this here: https://www.marketwatch.com/story/my...ked-2012-08-09

A few statistics from the study:

- Less than 1% of Canadians go abroad for healthcare (about 1.5 million Americans go abroad for healthcare annually)
- Most hospitals/clinics at/near the Canadian border report less than 1 Canadian per month seeking services.
- Less than 0.5% of Canadian doctors come to the U.S. to work (I know U.S. doctors go north, but cannot find numbers)

The study also tackles the wait times issue. They note it is largely because Canadians have shown fiscal restraint (something they could teach our politicians) and intentionally keep costs down by limiting supply. They also note that the wait times cited by most studies combine elective and urgent times in one number. Elective treatments have enormously long wait times. Non-elective treatments far less so (no numbers provided). If you recall, I wondered that about the study Mossrose provided. I could not find where they separated out those numbers. Apparently the reason I couldn't find it is because they didn't.

[Mountain Man]

Source: Facts about America�s health care quality that the world doesn�t know, 2013

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/...esnt-know.html

© Copyright Original Source

"Free" healthcare? You know the saying: you get what you pay for.

[carpedm9587]

Source: Facts about America�s health care quality that the world doesn�t know, 2013

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/...esnt-know.html

© Copyright Original Source

"Free" healthcare? You know the saying: you get what you pay for.

Well, the "foxnews" source, coupled with it being clearly an opinion piece, set my "possible bias" radar pinging. So I read through the article, and wanted to review the sources cited, and I didn't find a single source or study specifically cited or linked. Indeed, the only link I found was the the author's own book, at the bottom of the article, and it takes you to a page where you can buy the book.

So, I cannot say that the numbers were made up or that the presentation is biased. I also cannot say it is not biased. I can say I am skeptical, and I am not inclined to go chasing down every claim made when the author cannot be bothered to cite sources or link to the related studies from which the numbers were pulled.

[mossrose]

That is the case at present in parts of rural health care in the USA among the low income, and no emergency room within 50 to 100 miles.

I never inferred that there aren't problems with the American health care system. However, the solution is not to change to socialized medical care. There must be another solution that would work better than any that are currently in place. All socialization does is throw taxpayer dollars down a bottomless hole.

[mossrose]

Well, the "foxnews" source, coupled with it being clearly an opinion piece, set my "possible bias" radar pinging. So I read through the article, and wanted to review the sources cited, and I didn't find a single source or study specifically cited or linked. Indeed, the only link I found was the the author's own book, at the bottom of the article, and it takes you to a page where you can buy the book.

So, I cannot say that the numbers were made up or that the presentation is biased. I also cannot say it is not biased. I can say I am skeptical, and I am not inclined to go chasing down every claim made when the author cannot be bothered to cite sources or link to the related studies from which the numbers were pulled.

I really, really hope that you get what you wish for.

[Starlight]

There must be another solution that would work better than any that are currently in place.

Why? Are you saying of the dozens of advanced countries with dozens of different healthcare models, none of them have ever discovered the One Great System that you believe exists but have no evidence that it does?

All socialization does is throw taxpayer dollars down a bottomless hole.

I wouldn't call the well-being and health of citizens a bottomless hole.

[rogue06]

So, two things. First, there ACA was structured to provide significant support for those who could not afford health insurance. That was one of the key reasons for the law in the first place. If a person applied, and could not afford it, their income is used to determine what they will actually pay and the government paid the rest. Second, there is a long list of hardship exemptions that would apply if someone did not have the insurance, and poverty level is one of the items on the list. So this appears to be a claim without a lot of merit.

A lot of folks living paycheck to paycheck fell through the cracks and discovered the hard way that despite the rhetoric it wasn't all that easy getting an exemption

Pure speculation. I have no idea where you could possibly go to find any data that would support this position, other than to point to the military budgets of various countries - which would be correlation and not causation. Personally, I think we put far too much money into our own military than we should - especially when it is the only part of our government (outside of black ops) that has successfully dodged a thorough audit now for over half a century.

It is hardly speculation to say if someone else is paying the bill for your defense that this allows you to spend your money elsewhere and if you had to pay for it yourself there won't be as much money for these other things.

Yeah - this is a common complaint/tactic of the right...

My favorite carpism. Let's all say it together folks, it's nothing but a right wing meme

00000000000000ars8a.gif
If handwaving off things you don't like was an
Olympic sport, carpe would easily take the gold

[KingsGambit]

Second, there is a long list of hardship exemptions that would apply if someone did not have the insurance, and poverty level is one of the items on the list. So this appears to be a claim without a lot of merit.

If there is "no merit" here, then why was I unable to get an exemption despite at times not even having money for food?

[Starlight]

If there is "no merit" here, then why was I unable to get an exemption despite at times not even having money for food?

I'm guessing this was because the Republican politicians in your state choose to opt-out of the medicaid expansion, which meant you didn't qualify for the subsidies?

[KingsGambit]

I'm guessing this was because the Republican politicians in your state choose to opt-out of the medicaid expansion, which meant you didn't qualify for the subsidies?

This is the actual answer. carpe's post seemed to imply that they were a panacea that would prevent anybody from slipping through the cracks.

[RumTumTugger]

I never inferred that there aren't problems with the American health care system. However, the solution is not to change to socialized medical care. There must be another solution that would work better than any that are currently in place. All socialization does is throw taxpayer dollars down a bottomless hole.

Yes something the Democrats fight against everytime it is brought up Tort reform. get rid of frivolous lawsuits and you cut the cost of malpractice insurance which will cut the cost of health care.