Universal Health Care...

[aucu 3]

So there are no caps on what a doctor in Canada can earn? I didn't know that.

They get paid for how many patients they see/treat this leads to each one getting only 3-5min of the doctors time when you visit and if you have more than one thing wrong it is common that they will only deal with one thing and ask you to make another appointment to for the other issue. I had a back problem about 5 years ago and went to see a doctor first in Namibia then Honduras then on Vancouver Island, I had an MRI with me that I got done in Honduras within a day of seeing a Dr there. The Canadian Dr recommended surgery but that the waiting list for an MRI was 2-4 months and then surgery another 2-3 years. He recommended that I go to Washington State and spend about $30K and just get it done.Yay Canada

[mrdannyg 274]

They get paid for how many patients they see/treat this leads to each one getting only 3-5min of the doctors time when you visit and if you have more than one thing wrong it is common that they will only deal with one thing and ask you to make another appointment to for the other issue. I had a back problem about 5 years ago and went to see a doctor first in Namibia then Honduras then on Vancouver Island, I had an MRI with me that I got done in Honduras within a day of seeing a Dr there. The Canadian Dr recommended surgery but that the waiting list for an MRI was 2-4 months and then surgery another 2-3 years. He recommended that I go to Washington State and spend about $30K and just get it done.Yay Canada

This is more likely, except that in any emergency situation, you would've had the MRI done in less time. Since doctors don't bill patients, they can easily bill a 'standard' appointment of 30 minutes or an hour when they've spent 5 minutes. Oh, and since they only bill for office appointments, you have to make an appointment for absolutely everything. An American doctor would likely tell you what you wanted to know over the phone, since they could bill you the same either way!

[hblask 1]

Please elaborate more on the quality of health care in prisons, versus the options available to the uninsured.

The poor have federal, state, and local government programs, plus free clinics, and just showing up and promising to pay later.Prisoners have "what the warden thinks they deserve".There have been dozens of stories lately of people with severe medical needs being neglected in prison, including an innocent person who had MS for five years and the prison refused to treat him. When DNA evidence finally freed him, doctors said the medical neglect had probably shortened his life expectency by 5 years. Stories like this are not exceptions.I know, you'll tell me your experience was different, but the evidence of systemic failure is becoming pretty prevalent.

[CaneBrain 95]

The poor have federal, state, and local government programs, plus free clinics, and just showing up and promising to pay later.Prisoners have "what the warden thinks they deserve".There have been dozens of stories lately of people with severe medical needs being neglected in prison, including an innocent person who had MS for five years and the prison refused to treat him. When DNA evidence finally freed him, doctors said the medical neglect had probably shortened his life expectency by 5 years. Stories like this are not exceptions.I know, you'll tell me your experience was different, but the evidence of systemic failure is becoming pretty prevalent.

I'm just not sure that what the poor have is much better. The horror stories my wife hears about free clinics from her ghetto parents are pretty chilling. Definitely possible that Minnesota has better options than Florida though.

[hblask 1]

I'm just not sure that what the poor have is much better. The horror stories my wife hears about free clinics from her ghetto parents are pretty chilling. Definitely possible that Minnesota has better options than Florida though.

I think the choice of "showing up and signing some stuff that says you'll promise to pay later" is better than no choice at all.

[CaneBrain 95]

I think the choice of "showing up and signing some stuff that says you'll promise to pay later" is better than no choice at all.

And that's why the real problem with US healthcare is not access but the incredible amount of medical bankruptcies. They hold you to that signature.

[mrdannyg 274]

And that's why the real problem with US healthcare is not access but the incredible amount of medical bankruptcies. They hold you to that signature.

Yeah, but they're already poor, so no big deal amirite? At least they are getting the health care they need, even if they have to decide that receiving the care will result in losing all non-essential assets and bankruptcy.

[hblask 1]

And that's why the real problem with US healthcare is not access but the incredible amount of medical bankruptcies. They hold you to that signature.

What percentage of people have a medical bankruptcy in any given year?

[vbnautilus 48]

What percentage of people have a medical bankruptcy in any given year?

Around one million Americans per year, accounting for 60% of all bankruptcies. refThat does seem like a lot -- one out of every 300 people in the country.

[hblask 1]

Around one million Americans per year, accounting for 60% of all bankruptcies. refThat does seem like a lot -- one out of every 300 people in the country.

0.3% is a lot? LOL.Especially when you compare it to the alternative, which is 18 month waiting lists for everyone to suffer or die.Let's see, 0.3% gets the treatment they need and can't pay back the loan, or everyone suffers needlessly for 18 months.Boy, that's a pretty tough choice.

[mrdannyg 274]

0.3% is a lot? LOL.Especially when you compare it to the alternative, which is 18 month waiting lists for everyone to suffer or die.Let's see, 0.3% gets the treatment they need and can't pay back the loan, or everyone suffers needlessly for 18 months.Boy, that's a pretty tough choice.

Do you occasionally visit the real world, or does that just complicate things?

[vbnautilus 48]

0.3% is a lot? LOL.

Yes, .3% of 300 million people is a lot. It's one million people every year.Here's what a million people looks like (michigan stadium X 10). Imagine that all of these people experienced medical bankruptcy this year.

[Dagata 0]

actually its okay.Half of them are probably MSU fans.

[mrdannyg 274]

Yes, .3% of 300 million people is a lot. It's one million people every year.Here's what a million people looks like (michigan stadium X 10). Imagine that all of these people experienced medical bankruptcy this year.

per year is what really gets me. Sure, a reasonable percentage of these people probably roll over, since, based on basically nothing, I will assume a second (or third, etc) bankruptcy is a lot less marginally harmful than a first. But a million people per year! Nuts. And that is just the bankruptcies. Never mind the people who chose to forego treatment, or were merely financially crippled by it.I haven't read your link, but if that figure is reasonably accurate, that is pretty horrendous.

[brvheart 1,752]

I haven't read your link, but if that figure is reasonably accurate, that is pretty horrendous.

Bad assumption. It was CNN.

[mrdannyg 274]

Bad assumption. It was CNN.

Dangit.

[Balloon guy 158]

Dangit.

Well they did cherry pick 1,000 people and interview them to get their statistics.Woolhandler and her colleagues surveyed a random sample of 2,314 people who filed for bankruptcy in early 2007, looked at their court records, and then interviewed more than 1,000 of them. And they made sure that some of their debt was medicine related:They concluded that 62.1 percent of the bankruptcies were medically related because the individuals either had more than $5,000 (or 10 percent of their pretax income) in medical bills, mortgaged their home to pay for medical bills, or lost significant income due to an illness.Which of course means that all of their debt was medically related. none of those people also bought fancy cars or skimped on things like ....proper coverage for their healthcare...On average, medically bankrupt families had $17,943 in out-of-pocket expenses, including $26,971 for those who lacked insurance and $17,749 who had insurance at some point.But let's just swallow the idea that 1MM people a year in the US have to declare bankruptcy because they get sick and are forced too. 1 million people a year...

[hblask 1]

Do you occasionally visit the real world, or does that just complicate things?

Which part do you disagree with, that a million is 0.3% of the US population, or that Canada has long-running problems with waiting lists?

[hblask 1]

Yes, .3% of 300 million people is a lot. It's one million people every year.

So those arguments you had with BG about per capita vs actual count only applies when you want it to? Got it.Still, a million people who got treatment and have trouble paying for it is much, much better than everyone being susceptible to dying and suffering on a waiting list, right?Or do you think a tiny fraction of the population having money problems is worse than a much larger portion of the population suffering physical pain and death?

[hblask 1]

Well they did cherry pick 1,000 people and interview them to get their statistics.Woolhandler and her colleagues surveyed a random sample of 2,314 people who filed for bankruptcy in early 2007, looked at their court records, and then interviewed more than 1,000 of them. And they made sure that some of their debt was medicine related:They concluded that 62.1 percent of the bankruptcies were medically related because the individuals either had more than $5,000 (or 10 percent of their pretax income) in medical bills, mortgaged their home to pay for medical bills, or lost significant income due to an illness.Which of course means that all of their debt was medically related. none of those people also bought fancy cars or skimped on things like ....proper coverage for their healthcare...On average, medically bankrupt families had $17,943 in out-of-pocket expenses, including $26,971 for those who lacked insurance and $17,749 who had insurance at some point.But let's just swallow the idea that 1MM people a year in the US have to declare bankruptcy because they get sick and are forced too. 1 million people a year...

This. The truth is, there is no reason to go bankrupt from medical expenses in the US except exceptionally bad decision making and priority setting.

[brvheart 1,752]

This. The truth is, there is no reason to go bankrupt from medical expenses in the US except exceptionally bad decision making and priority setting.

Well... "no reason" probably isn't true. There are always outliers.

[hblask 1]

Well... "no reason" probably isn't true. There are always outliers.

Sure, probably true, but it is a negligible amount. Either you make enough to afford insurance, or you are eligible for state and federal programs. The only exceptions would be for things like "the renewal got lost in the mail and I thought I was covered but it turns out I wasn't...."

[mrdannyg 274]

Which part do you disagree with, that a million is 0.3% of the US population, or that Canada has long-running problems with waiting lists?

This is a perfect summary of my post, thank you.Also, when considering waiting lists for Canada and similar countries, consider that they are typically long because urgent situations get priority. Typically situations are given a certain priority level, with that level being regularly reviewed based on the patient's status. This regular review of status, and capacity to act on high-priority items makes the length of the waiting list almost completely irrelevant.

Sure, probably true, but it is a negligible amount. Either you make enough to afford insurance, or you are eligible for state and federal programs. The only exceptions would be for things like "the renewal got lost in the mail and I thought I was covered but it turns out I wasn't...."

Good call, there is no middle ground. Thank goodness those popular and well-funded state and federal programs cover such a large amount of low-income people.

[brvheart 1,752]

Sure, probably true, but it is a negligible amount. Either you make enough to afford insurance, or you are eligible for state and federal programs. The only exceptions would be for things like "the renewal got lost in the mail and I thought I was covered but it turns out I wasn't...."

It's also possible that someone makes $45,000/year, doesn't have kids, work doesn't offer benefits, is very obese so can't get approved for insurance on their own: gets cancer.

[Skeleton Jelly 2]

This regular review of status, and capacity to act on high-priority items makes the length of the waiting list almost completely irrelevant.

Almost completely irrelevant?