Poll: Whos is in favor of a single payer Health Care System?

[Midpack]

To me the real question is whether one believes there should be a right to healthcare.

If one believes that we should have all have personal freedom to make our own choices and live with the consequences that's fine but leaving 50 Million people to go to the emergency room as their only option isn't really healthcare.

While true, it's not quite that simple. In the USA, healthcare is one of very few products/services where competition has very little or no influence on costs/prices or quality. As a result, we pay far more per capita than any other country, and have mediocre outcomes. And those prices have/are increasing at a rate much higher than CPI.

Furthermore, health care is a major, highly variable expense. It used to be relatively inexpensive.

 

[haha]

To me the real question is whether one believes there should be a right to healthcare.

If one believes that we should have all have personal freedom to make our own choices and live with the consequences that's fine but leaving 50 Million people to go to the emergency room as their only option isn't really healthcare.

To you perhaps this is the question, however, the question posed was not that, but rather do you favor a single payer system. Unless you think that Obamacare is vaporware, we already have enacted universal care so that question is off the table. It may be morally persuasive, but like last weeks elections, it is settled.

Ha

 

[Mulligan]

As long as I stay healthy, the present system no doubt benefits me. In theory I am not opposed to single payer. But, assuming single payer also means universal coverage, and no meaningful cost controls are somehow implemented before it takes place, I doubt I could count high enough to reach the number needed the VAT tax would have to bring in to pay for it all.

 

[daylatedollarshort]

You are certainly correct. Yet for some reason that I have never had explained, US hospitals are mostly on the verge of bankruptcy. Why is this?

Ha

Have you read the Time article on the exorbitant health care costs and profit margins in the U.S. called Bitter Pill?

http://www.uta.edu/faculty/story/2311/Misc/2013,2,26,MedicalCostsDemandAndGreed.pdf

 

[Koogie]

I think everyone should have whatever they want, whenever they want, from whomever they want, and the rich should pay for it, perhaps by a tax on single malt whisky or craft spirits.
Ha

I, and the similarly avatared, are aghast at your proposal, dear Sir !

Instead, I propose a tax on ale or mead or whatever it is you peasants drink.
Also, perhaps pork rinds and Nascar..


And as a Canajun, I only have first hand knowledge of the system in the Great White North and also the NHS from time living in the UK. So, I will leave you to your debate and its relative merits.

I would say in parting, most of us foreigners can't understand it.

You're the richest country in the world.

Taking care of ALL your citizens health, in whatever manner (private/gubmint) you deem fit, should be one of the wisest uses of that wealth surely.

 

[NW-Bound]

Off topic here, but this year is the first time I need expensive healthcare, well any real care for that matter. My doctor had never been able to find anything wrong with me, and I have been careful all my life to not need any stitches, never any splint for broken bones, etc... I guess my luck ran out. Well, I digress off an off-topic post...

Anyway, I spent 5 nights in one hospital for a major surgery, then 5 nights in another hospital for a follow-up surgery. The hospital charges were not sufficiently detailed, but one hospital charged quite a bit more per night than the other. At the more expensive one, patients call up the cafeteria to order their meal from a menu that looks like one at a real restaurant. Amazing! I never saw a hospital like that. The nursing was also better than at the other one, which of course served usual hospital food.

Well, I was not able to tell the food was as good as it looked on the menu. You see, my surgeon put me on a restricted diet, and when I was well enough to try their filet mignon (think it was there, but cannot be sure now), they kicked me out of the hospital. Bummer!

The better hospital was not that good (service, not just food) back when my father was their frequent client more than 10 years ago, and I visited him almost daily. Well, the improvement appears to come at a higher cost, and I was surprised that my insurer had no problem paying for it. And I do not mean that the other hospital was bad. Far from it.

PS. I was hoping my surgeon would do the follow-up operation at that first hospital. However, it was apparently booked full (can you see why?), and he scheduled me at the other one (which was about the same, other than not having the steak that I was not allowed to order).

 

[haha]

I, and the similarly avatared, are aghast at your proposal, dear Sir !

Instead, I propose a tax on ale or mead or whatever it is you peasants drink.
Also, perhaps pork rinds and Nascar..

As a favor to you and I, I will propose that the tax be cancelled on Laphroaig.

Ha

 

[NW-Bound]

My daughter bought me a bottle of single-malt for my birthday last year, knowing that I had never tried this type. I shared it with my son, and we were not sure it was that much different from another common scotch that we had. Peasant's palate!

 

[daylatedollarshort]

Recently, I stumbled across the blog of a woman (now deceased) who lived in a country with a single-payer system. Her cancer had metastasized to her spinal column, causing a lot of pain.

There are close to 50 million people in the U.S. without any health insurance at all, and I am sure a percent of them have cancer and aren't getting any treatment.

Have you read any of their blogs?

 

[Gatordoc50]

Lol. Ready to ditch Obamacare already?

 

[NW-Bound]

There are close to 50 million people in the U.S. without any health insurance at all, and I am sure a percent of them have cancer and aren't getting any treatment.

Have you read any of their blogs?

No, although I am sure those blogs are there. Or perhaps the poor people may not even have the means or the time to make a blog.

But the above was not the point.

I think a system that allows people to buy additional insurance so that they get a better treatment than a 2-hr wait for blood draw would be good. Some people want to pay more for cars, or houses than their neighbors, even if they have the same income. Some narcissistic people want to pamper themselves with more expensive care than my frugal self would. Why do I deny them their choice? It appears the 4 nations that I listed allow that.

PS. Umm, in case one says that the big-and-fancy car and McMansion lovers are also narcissistic and should be reined in, I will come to their defense (I am not one of them), and say that they may simply have better taste than this cheap guy. They also stimulate the economy like crazy! And I love that it would boost the stock price of my companies. I am not just frugal, but also selfish and want to see my portfolio going up and up.

 

[Fermion]

They think they can keep their taxable incomes low enough to get somebody else to pay for their care.

Ha

Guilty

It isn't like we are ransacking a walmart or something....just trying to get some free healthcare.

 

[Fishingmn]

You are certainly correct. Yet for some reason that I have never had explained, US hospitals are mostly on the verge of bankruptcy. Why is this?

It would be interesting to see how much of the high hospital costs are because they are required to provide free emergency care to those without insurance and therefore must pass the costs on to those that do. Has there been a study that looks at that?

 

[Gatordoc50]

The last time WHO did a study of health care by country, the U.S. was first in cost (by a wide margin) and 38th in quality.

A more recent study on the health of the population of 17 developed countries, all with some form of universal care except the U.S., the U.S. came in dead last -

New Health Rankings: Of 17 Nations, U.S. Is Dead Last - Grace Rubenstein - The Atlantic

Same statistics can be stated for education. And how about defense? We're really good at taxing and spending but not so hot on efficiency.

 

[Alan]

I think a system that allows people to buy additional insurance so that they get a better treatment than a 2-hr wait for blood draw would be good. Some people want to pay more for cars, or houses than their neighbors, even if they have the same income. Some narcissistic people want to pamper themselves with more expensive care than my frugal self would. Why do I deny them their choice? It appears the 4 nations that I listed allow that.

As does the UK. The NHS is the primary healthcare provider but many people also have private health insurance. I had BUPA Health Insurance through my last 2 employers in the UK from 1979 to 1987 (when I moved to the US). Employer provided Health Insurance is a company perk in the UK, and is also purchased by individuals. My US health insurance through BCBS is accepted at many hospitals in the UK. I can go to BCBS online and look up the nearest private hospitals to where I'm staying for elective stuff. (for emergencies any ER will do).

 

[NW-Bound]

I have to make this post to ensure that my earlier post about a foreign cancer patient blog would not get misunderstood.

When I said that her cancer had metastasized and that she was deceased, it was not meant to imply that she would have lived with a different treatment. Cancer does not have a sure cure. This woman had a bad reaction to the common drugs that were used, and did not even complete the standard course of treatment. And even if she did, the same course of treatment will have different results in different people.

And I have read in a recent article in Time that there are some very expensive cancer drugs used in the US that have nebulous results, such that doctors at Sloan-Kettering have refused to prescribe for their patients. The only sure thing these drugs brings to their patients is bankruptcy. Yet, this article said that one patient wanted to extend his life for a few weeks, cost be damned. So he did, and left his wife with a bill of several hundred grands.

I was disappointed when reading this article, because I thought initially that the drugs would bring some results that would justify the cost. And I remember a few years ago, following the story on new drugs in order to make investment decisions, I saw that they were called "miracle drugs" and were announced with great fanfare.

 

[SumDay]

While I do not claim to be a healthcare expert, I think the high healthcare cost in the US is due to hospitalization costs, not the routine health care as I pointed out in the examples above. Additionally, the cost for end-of-life treatment is horrendous in the US, and it is going to go a lot higher. That's what needs to be addressed.

+1. YES!!!! But I'll take it further: most of our uninsured and unemployed visit the emergency room for their health care because emergency departments have the only legal mandate to provide health care: the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA). That is THE most expensive care one can find, and then you couple that with the fact they won't be paying any of their bill, well, there you go.

Don't even get me started on end-of-life care. Kaiser has some very interesting reading and stats on this topic, but when you try to open that discussion the death panel kooks come out of the woodwork.

I just think it's sad that the richest country in the world has turned health care for its citizens into such a divisive political battle.

 

[Gatordoc50]

I have to make this post to ensure that my earlier post about a cancer patient blog would not get misunderstood.

When I said that her cancer had metastasized and that she was deceased, it was not meant to imply that she would have lived with a different treatment. Cancer does not have a sure cure. This woman had a bad reaction to the common drugs that were used, and did not even complete the standard course of treatment. And even if she did, the same course of treatment will have different results in different people.

And I have read a recent article in Time that there are some very expensive cancer drugs used in the US that have nebulous results that doctors at Sloan-Kettering have refused to prescribe for their patients. The only sure thing these drugs brings to their patients is bankruptcy. Yet, this article said that one patient wanted to extend his life for a few weeks, cost be damned. So he did and left his wife with a bill of several hundred grands.

I was disappointed when reading this article, because I thought initially that the drugs would bring some results that would justify the cost. And I remember a few years ago, following the story on new drugs in order to make investment decisions, I saw that they were called "miracle drugs" and were announced with great fanfare.

There was a local guy who had leukemia and dedicated his last few years of life trying to find a cure. No formal education but he came up with the idea of using radio waves to kill cancer cells. I'll be damned if it's not being tested with promising results. This is where America really excels. Private citizens inventing amazing stuff in their garages!

 

[bondi688]

The last time WHO did a study of health care by country, the U.S. was first in cost (by a wide margin) and 38th in quality.

A more recent study on the health of the population of 17 developed countries, all with some form of universal care except the U.S., the U.S. came in dead last -

New Health Rankings: Of 17 Nations, U.S. Is Dead Last - Grace Rubenstein - The Atlantic

Why are there so many foreigners, including the Premier of Newfoundland, made special trips to the US, to pay big bucks to get your alleged sub-par medical treatments?

 

[haha]

Why are there so many foreigners, including the Premier of Newfoundland, made special trips to the US, to pay big bucks to get your alleged sub-par medical treatments?

Well, he is a Newfie.

Ha

 

[eridanus]

Why are there so many foreigners, including the Premier of Newfoundland, made special trips to the US, to pay big bucks to get your alleged sub-par medical treatments?

Didn't even glance at the article, didja?

 

[easysurfer]

Wow, all these posts and no bacon yet.

 

[daylatedollarshort]

Why are there so many foreigners, including the Premier of Newfoundland, made special trips to the US, to pay big bucks to get your alleged sub-par medical treatments?

Instead of anecdotal incidents, like what anonymous bloggers write or the the actions of a single politician for one specific health issue, an alternative source of information might be studies by international nonprofit organizations like WHO and the OECD that use metrics like life expectancy and infant mortality rates to rate health care systems.

Here is another article on US health care versus the rest of the developed world -

Costly U.S. health system delivers uneven care: OECD | Reuters

"The cost of healthcare in the United States is 62 percent higher than that in Switzerland, which has a similar per capita income and also relies substantially on private health insurance.

Meanwhile, Americans receive comparatively little actual care, despite sky-high prices driven by expensive tests and procedures. They also spend more tax money on healthcare than most other countries, the study showed."

"Pharmaceuticals also cost about 60 percent more than in a range of European countries.

Pearson said one reason prices are higher in the United States is that the healthcare system lacks what other countries have: an effective government mechanism that acts to keep prices down."

 

[samclem]

Instead of anecdotal incidents, like what anonymous bloggers write or the the actions of a single politician for one specific health issue, an alternative source of information might be studies by international nonprofit organizations like WHO and the OECD that use metrics like life expectancy and infant mortality rates to rate health care systems.

True, but be sure to compare apples to apples. Very many countries (including some in Europe) don't count live births the same as we do in the US, so their infant mortality figures look better than they would if they used the same criteria. And there is plenty of US morbidity and mortality that has nothing to do with US healthcare. If people in Germany ate and exercised as Americans do, their life expectancy would be different.
Control for these factors and the quality of US medical care actually looks very good. The cost, however, still does not.

 

[daylatedollarshort]

And there is plenty of US morbidity and mortality that has nothing to do with US healthcare. If people in Germany ate and exercised as Americans do, their life expectancy would be different.
Control for these factors and the quality of US medical care actually looks very good. The cost, however, still does not.

I haven't seen anything to suggest that in any of the research reports I have read. Perhaps you have some references to back that up? The summary of the link above has comments like these:

"Meanwhile, Americans receive comparatively little actual care, despite sky-high prices driven by expensive tests and procedures. They also spend more tax money on healthcare than most other countries, the study showed."

"Americans have fewer doctors and hospital beds, make fewer doctor visits, go to the hospital less often and stay for shorter lengths of time than about three-quarters of the other OECD countries."

Plus there is the whole 50 million uninsured issue.