Canadian Health Care? Is it really like this?

[Pinepig]

Obviously you are confused by the proposed changes to our nation's healthcare system. The government will not be 'running' anything. They will simply be providing low-cost health insurance to compete with private insurance and provide an affordable option to those to don't have thousands of dollars a month to spend on private insurance for their families.

Really, so they will be expanding the way that they provide health benefits like the way they do it with Medicaid and Medicare ( forcing the doctors and hospitals to accept less money than it costs to do the work ) and it's going to cost ALL of us big dollars ( 1.5 trillion was a number I've heard thrown about ) to pay for it rather than just the folks that are using it, this does not sound like insurance in any form we have now, it sounds like a new .gov program paid for with TAX DOLLARS. You can call a pile of dog shit a rose but it doesn't change the stench it creates.
Insert the Guinness guys Brilliant picture here.

Think of it like auto insurance. Do Progressive, Geico or Allstate run the transportation system? Not at all. They just provide insurance, for a fee, to drivers. This is essentially the same thing; the government provides insurance, for a fee, to it's citizens.

It's not for a fee to the users, it's a tax for everyone in the US and it's a wee bit different when the .gov can FORCE providers to accept what they are willing to pay.

Also, you already do pay for everyone else's health care, "comrade". You pay for it through higher insurance premiums, because those without insurance go to the emergency room (which is much more expensive) and the insurance companies and hospitals pass it on to you. Getting the uninsured insurance will help to lower health care costs because not only will it prevent them from using the emergency room except for real emergencies, it will also give them access to preventative care, which is roughly 10x less expensive than treatment after the fact.

You forgot the part where we have to pay extra to cover the losses that the providers have to incur when they treat a .gov insured citizen.

I know Rush Limbaugh and Newt Gingrich disagree with me, but nearly every single professional organization of doctors, nurses and practitioners in the US do agree with me, and I trust the people who work in the profession over any politician, lobbyist or Washington think-tank.

Every single one huh? ( is there a bullshit smiley on this forum ), funny my wife is in the health care biz and the nurses and docs she works with are shitting their pants over this. Just what exactly is the difference between a professional organization ( like the ones for docs and nurses ) and a lobbying outfit ( hint, that's what they are and what they do ). It's kinda like gun control, the police unions and chiefs are all for it, ask a beat officer and they would rather have damn near everyone carrying their own protection.

[johnwoo]

Obviously you are confused by the proposed changes to our nation's healthcare system. The government will not be 'running' anything. They will simply be providing low-cost health insurance to compete with private insurance and provide an affordable option to those to don't have thousands of dollars a month to spend on private insurance for their families.

Think of it like auto insurance. Do Progressive, Geico or Allstate run the transportation system? Not at all. They just provide insurance, for a fee, to drivers. This is essentially the same thing; the government provides insurance, for a fee, to it's citizens.

Also, you already do pay for everyone else's health care, "comrade". You pay for it through higher insurance premiums, because those without insurance go to the emergency room (which is much more expensive) and the insurance companies and hospitals pass it on to you. Getting the uninsured insurance will help to lower health care costs because not only will it prevent them from using the emergency room except for real emergencies, it will also give them access to preventative care, which is roughly 10x less expensive than treatment after the fact. I know Rush Limbaugh and Newt Gingrich disagree with me, but nearly every single professional organization of doctors, nurses and practitioners in the US do agree with me, and I trust the people who work in the profession over any politician, lobbyist or Washington think-tank.

but what is going to stop those people on the national healthcare system from going to the er for a sore throat? or a rash?

if there is a national healthcare system in place they will dictate prices by how much they reimburse. medicaid i think pays about .15 on the dollar. if my bill is 100 you will be lucky to get 15 dollars.

so physicians will look at the cost and benefits of seeing people on the national health care system and realize that its not worth their time so they will refuse seeing them since they will inevitable pay so little. where do people of the national health care system go? the er, people will think its free and they go to the place that accepts them. well hmmm now your stuck in the same crap the healthcare system is in now but on a bigger scale.

here is a secret THERE IS ALREADY A NATIONAL HEALTHCARE SYSTEM its called medicaid and anyone that is in the medical field understands that its the shittiest medical system there is.

i don't think politicians are seeing the big pictures what is driving up healthcare isn't the healthcare providers, i.e. physicians, nurses, techs. what drives up healthcare is malpractice lawsuits, pharmaceutical companies, sales companies and insurance reimbursement (which someone mentioned is dictated by medicaid and medicare)

why do hospitals bill so much because they have to if they don't they won't get anything back in reimbursements. because medicaid and medicare has set precedence on what they will reimburse so the other private providers follow suit.

do you know how much pharmaceutical companies and surgical sales companies charge. here's an example a hernia mesh costs the hospital anywhere between 3-5k. its a piece of nylon or synthetic mesh that is about 4x4 and at most costs 500 to produce and that is being generous that is ridiculous markup. i dated a girl that sold lights bulb for ent procedures.. one of those lights that ent docs where on their head. they charge about 5k for the bulb i asked her to tell me the benifit of the light compared to a standard light she said its halogen? and it really bright but honestly i don't know why someone would buy this over a regular bulb. you know what she sells those by the boatload.

what the government should to is regulate the pharmaceutical and surgical sales side of medicine. restrictions need to be placed on what is extreme but then you get into interference on free business. and those two groups have one of the largest lobby groups in washington.

do you guys know what all those expensive lab work and tests are ordered at the er? physicians aren't stupid. they know a person doesn't have a heart attack based on physical symptoms but they have to run a ekg, chest xray, cbc, cardiac enzymes why because of medical malpractice. so instead of letting physicians do what they are trained to do physicians often times practice based on fear of the consequences.
o and some of those guidelines on what needs to be ordered is also determined by medicaid or medicare. they have strict guidelines on what needs to be done to get reimbursed.

i don't believe scrapping the system is the answer or a national healthcare system. i do believe tweeks need to be made. i believe that if a national healthcare system is to be in place then a system of hospitals should be created that only accepts the people on national healthcare sort of like the va we have now. the people that have national healthcare can go to the shitty hospitals where service suks and the healthcare isn't the greatest. if you want to go to a state of the art hospital you would need private insurance. of course in cases of true emergencies then you would go to the nearest hospital. i also believe hospitals should have the right to turn away patients. if they don't deem it as an emergency then patients can go to the national healthcare hospitals.

and adjustments to the judicial system should be made to prevent frivilous lawsuits ultimately to help cut down on medical costs.

[mrsleeve]

Obviously you are confused by the proposed changes to our nation's healthcare system. The government will not be 'running' anything. They will simply be providing low-cost health insurance to compete with private insurance and provide an affordable option to those to don't have thousands of dollars a month to spend on private insurance for their families.

Think of it like auto insurance. Do Progressive, Geico or Allstate run the transportation system? Not at all. They just provide insurance, for a fee, to drivers. This is essentially the same thing; the government provides insurance, for a fee, to it's citizens.

Also, you already do pay for everyone else's health care, "comrade". You pay for it through higher insurance premiums, because those without insurance go to the emergency room (which is much more expensive) and the insurance companies and hospitals pass it on to you. Getting the uninsured insurance will help to lower health care costs because not only will it prevent them from using the emergency room except for real emergencies, it will also give them access to preventative care, which is roughly 10x less expensive than treatment after the fact. I know Rush Limbaugh and Newt Gingrich disagree with me, but nearly every single professional organization of doctors, nurses and practitioners in the US do agree with me, and I trust the people who work in the profession over any politician, lobbyist or Washington think-tank.

Again if you think heath care is expensive now, wait till its free.


There are several fundamental flaws in your Utopian idea there boss. 1 with a govt backed cheaper option out there, it will do 2 things. 1st off it can cut the throats of the private sector and sell its plan at a loss because it has a bottomless pit our tax dollars to pour into the program. That will slowly choke out the private sector so that will leave only the govt option. Or you will have nearly every employer in the country flocking to buy the cheaper plan for its employees thus putting millions more on the Govt plan than just the poor and people that dont have it now. This will also choke out the private sector leaving only the Govt plan.

No matter which option you go we all end up in the same govt plan and no other option available out there, with the govt dictating who can have heath care and how much we can have. The standards of care will fall through the floor.

If you trust the people in the filed why are you not listening to them, they are all screaming the same same thing we are trying to explain to you. The W.H.O. is not who you should be listening to, the UN and dose not have your best interests and or the USA best interests in mind.

The system we have may not be the best, and while it needs to be tweeked a bit getting the F-troop involved as a player anymore than they already are is the biggest fucking mistake we can make.

While yes we pay for the old and the poor to have heath care, those systems need to be revamped 1st and fore most

One of the biggest things that needs to happen in this country is to end entitlements

[Pinepig]

Hey Corvallis

Since you seem to understand how out new .gov heath care is supposed to work could you explain this to everybody here,

http://docs.house.gov/gopleader/Hous...ealth-Plan.pdf

[johnwoo]

^^^
i never said my idea was the "utopian" idea. im simply stating that IF a national healthcare system is established a national delivery of the healthcare should also be established with it.

the way the system is set up now is flawed. honestly i don't think a national system will ever work in our society. the entitlement syndrome severely hinders it.

if your poor and on medicaid you should not have the same medical as someone who is paying 300/mth for insurance. and if you don't believe me go to the er. all patients on medicaid believe that their sore throat is more important than the guy that just had a ruptured abdominal aorta.

i know that sounds harsh but that is the reality of life. a person that is dying has precedence over a sore throat. that is an easy concept to understand but it is not shared by everyone in this country. because when you tell a patient im sorry you had to wait for 30 minutes because we had a life threatening issue to tend to, most of them will understand but you will be amazed at the number of people that feel that they waited 30 minutes and they should have been seen immediately.

[mrsleeve]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Sorry that was not meant for you it was for our resident commie.

[johnwoo]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Sorry that was not meant for you it was for our resident commie.

oh sorry for my post. i read your post and realized that we shared the same view. entitlement sucks

o and whoever quoted WHO has absolutely no clue. WHO is a complete joke. see if the ama 100% behind this national healthcare plan.

[Pinepig]

Sometimes I think Corvallis and Holmes are the same guy, I can't figure out which one is the troll account though.:p

[mrsleeve]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I know its funny isn't it




John

While in general I feel entitlements need to go, you have to look at the S.S. and medicare a bit differently, If the fucking ass hats in DC had done what they were supposed to do and left all that money in the trust fund for the now old feckers this mess would not be likt it is. Rather they saw all that money sitting there and decide that it needed to be spent rather than saved for its intended purpose.

While I dont like the "New Deal" it been around much longer than I have been and we are stuck with it. And while I agree with the welfare system for the truly disenfranchised and those that truly need it it needs to be revamped to get the lifers off, and get people off of it ASAP to get them back on their feet. These systems are not a career, they should be for those that really need it.

[johnwoo]

i do view ss and medicare differently. medicare is meant for a different population and i do believe that the concept of medicare is great but again like alot of things wrong the execution of it is flawed. do i believe a system needs to be in place for the elderly yes. there needs to be something there for those people that have put in their time and money into the big pot. but again the execution of the system was and is completely botched. so i really don't want another big great system that sounds so much like medicaid to be put into place.

i just get very excited when the topic of the national healthcare comes up especially when the topic of er comes up. when someone states that ensuring everyone will make it so that the needless visits to the er will decrease has no idea. what keeps alot of people away from the er is the bill they get. if you make it free and easily accessible then everyone is gonna want to go to the er. i have a rash lets go to the er? a hang nail er it is. i have poison ivy the er.

im sorry i am in the medical profession and for the longest time wanted to work in the er but after a month of that i said screw this. i saw people with poison ivy, sore throats, rashes and spent more time seeing that than actually dealing with real emergencies. my first day in the er i had a patient chew me out and cuss at me for not giving her lortab for her back because she slept on it wrong. funny i couldn't produce the pain on physical exam.
and even now i have er docs call and say "hey guy im sorry about ordering that ct it was complete shit but i had to do it cuz this one is a lawsuit waiting to happen." so there was an un needed cost because the er doc was afraid of getting sued.

i wish the current administration would do more research and look at every angle on the issue and not just one.

[lowlightbw]

i love how there tons of experts on here ;)
edit: i am from alabama. this is the way we speaks

[Turf1600]

i love how there tons of experts on here ;)

I'll assume you don't claim to be the grammar expert.

[lowlightbw]

whatz grammer?

[kommissar]

i love how there tons of experts on here ;)

Honestly. This entire thread is just a back-and-forth of one side making things up that support their arguments, without providing any sort of source for what they are saying.

the fallacy that smokers cost a lot more

Interestingly, not much is known about this. It was thought to be true that if everyone quit smoking costs come down initially but eventually cost more in the long run (see this article from the New England Journal of Medicine); however, later studies suggest the opposite is true (this article).

Or you will have nearly every employer in the country flocking to buy the cheaper plan for its employees...

This is wrong. If employer based coverage is in place, then the employer can't switch unless they can't afford the private coverage they have now. It's right in the plan, give it a read.

I'm not trying to pick on any one side here. The point is that you should actually get out there and read news from a variety of sources, instead of just Fox News (for the right-wingers here) or MSNBC (for the left-wingers). It disappoints me that some people believe everything that is written here on R3V is true. I mean, my god, this is a car forum.

[Turf1600]

Honestly. This entire thread is just a back-and-forth of one side making things up that support their arguments, without providing any sort of source for what they are saying.



Interestingly, not much is known about this. It was thought to be true that if everyone quit smoking costs come down initially but eventually cost more in the long run (see this article from the New England Journal of Medicine); however, later studies suggest the opposite is true (this article).



This is wrong. If employer based coverage is in place, then the employer can't switch unless they can't afford the private coverage they have now. It's right in the plan, give it a read.

I'm not trying to pick on any one side here. The point is that you should actually get out there and read news from a variety of sources, instead of just Fox News (for the right-wingers here) or MSNBC (for the left-wingers). It disappoints me that some people believe everything that is written here on R3V is true. I mean, my god, this is a car forum.

Who's making stuff up? I don't need to read the news I work in this industry. This is what I do.