The Truths and Myths of Canadian Health-Care

As I said before it's all according to your province. Canadians are NOT running to the states in droves to get our "world-class" health-care. It simply isn't happening. Not to mention that our health-care is far from the best in the world...

Lucas McCain wrote:

http://www.ncpa.org/pub/ba649

Healthcare isn't just about treating illness, it's about preventing it. The US has a real problem with that. Yes, for those of us who are lucky enough to have health insurance, the US has some of the best technology in the world but the problem is, not everyone in this country has access to that treatment. And it's worth mentioning that some of the wealthiest people in the world don't choose to come to the US for their health-care. Anybody that has spent a lot of time in a hospital can tell you that they are under-educated and under-staffed but I'm fortunate enough to know this because I have health insurance so I'm actually in the hospital being treated. Most people don't make it for a regular check-up simply because they can't afford the bill. They only end up in the hospital when they have developed something life threatening that could have been avoided by proper prevention.

Article from a cardiologist about this subject

Findings from WHO where we rank 37th in health-care globally

I think that it's shameful that the United States (the most powerful country in the world) ranks 37th under countries like Costa Rica for efficient health care, the main reason being...a large majority of our citizens don't have access to our "world-class" services...

[quote="gringaloca"]

Lucas McCain wrote:

http://www.ncpa.org/pub/ba649

Healthcare isn't just about treating illness, it's about preventing it.

Doesn't make much difference if you have to wait on the tech or specialist 6 or 8 months like you have to in England and Canada...

[quote="Lucas McCain"]

gringaloca wrote:

Lucas McCain wrote:

http://www.ncpa.org/pub/ba649

Healthcare isn't just about treating illness, it's about preventing it.

Doesn't make much difference if you have to wait on the tech or specialist 6 or 8 months like you have to in England and Canada...

That is a myth. The only people who have to wait who are people who are not in immediate need or they live in the wilderness and doctors are hard to come by. Each province handles their insurance differently. British Columbia has a decent population and there is no wait. And where's the proof on this anyway? English people have to wait 6-8 months? And I've had to wait six months to see a specialist right here in the good ole USA. I once called the specialist who is the only person in this area (Louisville) that can handle my condition and told his office staff that I was having a life threatening problem, after being put on hold for 15 minutes they told me that they could see me in two months. I told them I was having severe problems and I was afraid I might be having liver failure, they said they'd call me if someone else canceled their appointment they would contact me. So saying that you can get in to see a good specialist quickly in the US is hardly true in every situation. And I'm tired of people saying that don't want government beaurocrats controlling their health care when big insurance beaurocrats already are. It's silliness.

Why does no one ever use Spain in their comparisons? Their healthcare is nationalized and I have three friends who live there and visited here for two years and were astounded at our system.

Why aren't the rich folks of this country flocking to Canada and Spain for their superior health care???

Lucas McCain wrote:

Why aren't the rich folks of this country flocking to Canada and Spain for their superior health care???

Well, mainly because rich people have enough money to get the best doctors here in the states that all the other people don't have access to. The doctors are here, we just can't afford them. But speaking of rich people flocking to other countries...some do. It's not like that's going to be some big deal broadcasted on every channel. But like I said, if you've got the money, you can find decent care in the US. I am blessed enough to have the resources to get my major medical problems evaluated by Mayo Clinic but not everybody can hop on a plane and stay in a hotel for a week while a battery of tests are run. That's the problem. If I had stayed with the local doctors, I'd be dead meat. If my grandparents hadn't of had the resources to send me to a world class surgeon 200 miles from home when I was a child, I would have been dead by the time I was 12. Not everybody is so blessed.

So with ObamaCare do you really think that the best doctors, surgeons, and techs will be available for every one??? Do you really think it's going to pay for plane trips and hotels?? Wrong and wrong... And after the age of 65 you'll be lucky to get an aspirin. The rich will still get the best care...

Lucas McCain wrote:

So with ObamaCare do you really think that the best doctors, surgeons, and techs will be available for every one??? Do you really think it's going to pay for plane trips and hotels?? Wrong and wrong... And after the age of 65 you'll be lucky to get an aspirin. The rich will still get the best care...

Of course the rich will always get the best care. That's life and life isn't always fair. The difference is that the poor with have access to health-care. I think we can all agree that having access to the doctor, etc... is better than none at all. And who knows what the future may hold. In other countries with "socialized" medicine the government pays for full time nannies for the first year of a childs life and the mother gets six paid months off for maternity and an additional six months if she wants unpaid vacation. They also get three months vacation every year. Oh GOD, it just sounds awful. How on earth do they survive that horrid socialized medicine over there?

And here is some of what you are going to get from Obama:
Subject: A few highlights from the first 500 pages of the Healthcare
bill in congress
Contact your Representatives and let them know how you feel about this.
We, as a country, cannot afford another 1000 page bill to go through
congress without being read. Another 500 pages to go. I have highlighted
a few of the items that are down right unconstitutional.
* Page 22: Mandates audits of all employers that self-insure!
* Page 29: Admission: your health care will be rationed!
* Page 30: A government committee will decide what treatments and
benefits you get (and, unlike an insurer, there will be no appeals
process)
* Page 42: The "Health Choices Commissioner" will decide health benefits
for you. You will have no choice. None.
* Page 50: All non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided with
free healthcare services.
* Page 58: Every person will be issued a National ID Healthcard.
* Page 59: The federal government will have direct, real-time access to
all individual bank accounts for electronic funds transfer.
* Page 65: Taxpayers will subsidize all union retiree and community
organizer health plans (read: SEIU, UAW and ACORN)
* Page 72: All private healthcare plans must conform to government rules
to participate in a Healthcare Exchange.
* Page 84: All private healthcare plans must participate in the
Healthcare Exchange (i.e., total government control of private plans)
* Page 91: Government mandates linguistic infrastructure for services;
translation: illegal aliens
* Page 95: The Government will pay ACORN and Americorps to sign up
individuals for Government-run Health Care plan.
* Page 102: Those eligible for Medicaid will be automatically enrolled:
you have no choice in the matter.
* Page 124: No company can sue the government for price-fixing. No
"judicial review" is permitted against the government monopoly. Put
simply, private insurers will be crushed.
* Page 127: The AMA sold doctors out: the government will set wages.
* Page 145: An employer MUST auto-enroll employees into the
government-run public plan. No alternatives.
* Page 126: Employers MUST pay healthcare bills for part-time employees
AND their families.
* Page 149: Any employer with a payroll of $400K or more, who does not
offer the public option, pays an 8% tax on payroll
* Page 150: Any employer with a payroll of $250K-400K or more, who does
not offer the public option, pays a 2 to 6% tax on payroll
* Page 167: Any individual who doesn't' have acceptable healthcare
(according to the government) will be taxed 2.5% of income.
* Page 170: Any NON-RESIDENT alien is exempt from individual taxes
(Americans will pay for them).
* Page 195: Officers and employees of Government Healthcare Bureaucracy
will have access to ALL American financial and personal records.
* Page 203: "The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as
tax." Yes, it really says that.
* Page 239: Bill will reduce physician services for Medicaid. Seniors
and the poor most affected."
* Page 241: Doctors: no matter what specialty you have, you'll all be
paid the same (thanks, AMA!)
* Page 253: Government sets value of doctors' time, their professional
judgment, etc.
* Page 265: Government mandates and controls productivity for private
healthcare industries.
* Page 268: Government regulates rental and purchase of power-driven
wheelchairs.
* Page 272: Cancer patients: welcome to the wonderful world of
rationing!
* Page 280: Hospitals will be penalized for what the government deems
preventable re-admissions.
* Page 298: Doctors: if you treat a patient during an initial admission
that results in a readmission, you will be penalized by the government.
* Page 317: Doctors: you are now prohibited for owning and investing in
healthcare companies!
* Page 318: Prohibition on hospital expansion. Hospitals cannot expand
without government approval.
* Page 321: Hospital expansion hinges on "community" input: in other
words, yet another payoff for ACORN.
* Page 335: Government mandates establishment of outcome-based measures:
i.e., rationing.
* Page 341: Government has authority to disqualify Medicare Advantage
Plans, HMOs, etc.
* Page 354: Government will restrict enrollment of SPECIAL NEEDS
individuals.
* Page 379: More bureaucracy: Telehealth Advisory Committee (healthcare
by phone).
* Page 425: More bureaucracy: Advance Care Planning Consult: Senior
Citizens, assisted suicide, euthanasia?
* Page 425: Government will instruct and consult regarding living wills,
durable powers of attorney, etc. Mandatory. Appears to lock in estate
taxes ahead of time.
* Page 425: Government provides approved list of end-of-life resources,
guiding you in death.
* Page 427: Government mandates program that orders end-of-life
treatment; government dictates how your life ends.
* Page 429: Advance Care Planning Consult will be used to dictate
treatment as patient's health deteriorates. This can include an ORDER
for end-of-life plans. An ORDER from the GOVERNMENT.
* Page 430: Government will decide what level of treatments you may have
at end-of-life.
* Page 469: Community-based Home Medical Services: more payoffs for
ACORN.
* Page 472: Payments to Community-based organizations: more payoffs for
ACORN.
* Page 489: Government will cover marriage and family therapy.
Government intervenes in your marriage.
* Page 494: Government will cover mental health services: defining,
creating and rationing those services.

People really need to take a good look at the bill instead of blindly following Obama.. If you think health care is bad now... Just wait...

Page 195 and page 272 would be enough for me to dump this garbage of a bill.....

Page 59 has got to go.... But I guess if you want ObamaCare you would be willing to give all to Obama so he can spend it as he feels fit...

Lucas McCain wrote:

Page 195 and page 272 would be enough for me to dump this garbage of a bill.....

Source ??

Obama's health care bill.......

Lucas McCain wrote:

People really need to take a good look at the bill instead of blindly following Obama.. If you think health care is bad now... Just wait...

I think you should take your own advice. The chain e-mail you've linked is, at best, a completely dishonest attempt to incite fear. Anyone who bothers to take the five minutes to read the pages cited would see what a farce it is. For instance: The insidious "page 59" allows for payments to be made electronically, not the Big Brother story of the monitoring of all individual bank accounts. Page 95 makes no mention of ACORN. Page 272 and rationing? Not there. The email would have you believe that page 354 restricts special needs patients from obtaining healthcare, when in reality page 353-356 allow the recently diagnosed to enroll in insurance outside of an enrollment window. Quite the opposite. I could go on.

If you are going to accuse supporters of this bill as being blind followers of Obama, you should probably not yourself be a blind follower of chain e-mails.

Annie Oakley wrote:

Why does no one ever use Spain in their comparisons? Their healthcare is nationalized and I have three friends who live there and visited here for two years and were astounded at our system.

Spain is one of many countries that puts our system to shame. My Venezuelan friend has citizenship there and he said that he couldn't believe how bad the US was. Even in Venezuela if he had a problem, he just went to the local doctor and was seen that day. No costs for the visit or for his medications. Americans have no idea just how much our system sucks because they are so brainwashed from all the insurance companies propaganda. Just like PT Barnum said, there is a sucker born every minute and the people who believe that our system is the best have obviously never experienced health-care in Europe or had friends who have told them about it. I was shocked by how things worked in Venezuela. Of course, Hugo is a nut and is going to ruin it all but before it was wonderful. Everyone gets a college education for free down there. Could you imagine? No more student debt hanging over peoples heads for the first quarter of their lives.

[quote="Ja'far"]

Lucas McCain wrote:

People really need to take a good look at the bill instead of blindly following Obama.. If you think health care is bad now... Just wait...

I think you should take your own advice. The chain e-mail you've linked is, at best, a completely dishonest attempt to incite fear. Anyone who bothers to take the five minutes to read the pages cited would see what a farce it is. For instance: The insidious "page 59" allows for payments to be made electronically, not the Big Brother story of the monitoring of all individual bank accounts. Page 95 makes no mention of ACORN. Page 272 and rationing? Not there. The email would have you believe that page 354 restricts special needs patients from obtaining healthcare, when in reality page 353-356 allow the recently diagnosed to enroll in insurance outside of an enrollment window. Quite the opposite. I could go on.

If you are going to accuse supporters of this bill as being blind followers of Obama, you should probably not yourself be a blind follower of chain e-mails.[/quote Where did you get your chain letter from??? Straight from the left's book of talking points I hear repeatedly?? Also, if I should not follow blindly, then why should I blindly accept this totally government controlled bill?? Are you happy with this bill... If so. Why? Many have told me they are for it, but they can't tell me why...

These "points" include the actual wording of the bill.. How could you seriously spin them differently??? Do you want the government taking their payment from you electronically? I know it sounds paranoid, but have you ever tried to get those type payments stopped..
• The government will audit your books if you self-insure: The newly created Commissioner will submit a report to the government that includes "any recommendations the Commissioner deems appropriate to ensure that the law does not provide incentives for small and mid-size employers to self-insure." (21.23-23.3)

• The government will define your "health benefits": "[Establish] a private-public advisory committee . . . of medical and other experts to be known as the Health Benefits Advisory Committee" to recommend what will be in the "covered benefits" and what are "essential, enhanced, and premium plans." (30.13-30.18)

• The government will ration your care: Establish an annual limitation on cost sharing to ensure that "the cost-sharing incurred . . . with respect to an individual (or family) for a year does not exceed the applicable level specified--$5,000 for an individual and $10,000 for a family." (29.4-29.16)

• The government will establish and administer a public health insurance option: "The Secretary's primary responsibility is to create a low-cost plan without compromising quality or access to care." (page 116, lines 1-17)

• The government will define how doctors manage their time: "The Secretary shall establish a process" to assign value units to "components and elements" of a doctor's health care work, basing the relative value on "time, mental effort and professional judgment, technical skill and physical effort, and stress due to risk." (page 253, lines 10-18)

• The government will tax employers for not providing healthcare: If an employer does not provide health insurance coverage, a contribution "shall be paid to the Health Choices Commissioner for deposit into the Health Insurance Exchange Trust Fund." The rate will be 8 percent for a large employer payroll (over $400,000), 6 percent and lower for a small employer payroll. (page 149, line 14--page 151, line 5)

• The government will tax individuals unless you are a foreign resident: "Tax on individuals without acceptable health care coverage...imposed tax equal to 2.5 percent of the [gross income]." (page 167, line 17--page 168, line 4) This "shall not apply to any individual who is a non-resident alien." (page 170, lines 1-3)

• The government will order you to get end-of-life counseling and show proof: "[An ] advance care planning consultation between the individual and a practitioner . . . [is required if] the individual involved has not had such a consultation within the last 5 years," including an explanation by the practitioner of "end-of-life services." (page 424, line 20--page 425, line 23) "A consultation . . . may include the formulation of an order regarding life sustaining treatment or a similar order," including end-of-life services. (page 429, lines 1-3). "Orders regarding life sustaining treatment," including "end of life" directions, can be signed either by a physician or "a nurse practitioner or physician's assistant who has the authority under State law." (page 429, line 8-16)

• The government will limit your hospital readmissions by penalizing hospitals: "The Secretary shall reduce the payments" to any hospital with "excess re-admissions," based upon a ranking of hospitals by a national readmission ratio to be developed by the Secretary. (280.10-288.22) The Secretary "shall conduct a study to determine how the readmissions policy described in the previous subsections could be applied to physicians . . . [including] a payment reduction for physicians who treat the patient during the initial admission that results in a readmission." (page 297, line 17--page 298, line 14)

• The government will restrict coverage of special needs patients: Restrict enrollment of new "special needs plans" within Social Security, beginning January 1, 2011, and "the Secretary shall submit to Congress a report" on recommendations regarding the treatment of existing plans, "as the Secretary deems appropriate." (page 353, line 13--page 355, line 6)

• The government will not let you sue over coverage limits and costs decisions: "There shall be no administrative or judicial review of a payment rate or methodology established under this section or under section 224." (page 124, line 4--page 125, line 2)

• The government will mandate what physicians make: The Secretary "shall provide for" physician participation under the public health insurance option, "for which payment may be made for services furnished during the year. . . ." (page 127, lines 1-16)

• The government will have access to your bank accounts: "Require the use of a standard electronic transaction with which health care providers may quickly and efficiently enroll with a health plan to conduct the other electronic transactions provided for in this part." (page 59, line 21--page 60, line 8)

• The government will not call the fees it imposes taxes: "The tax imposed under this section shall not be treated as tax imposed by this chapter for purposes of determining the amount of any credit under this chapter or for purposes of section 55." (page 203, lines 13-18)

• The government will issue you a health ID card: "include utilization of a machine-readable health plan beneficiary identification card." (page 58, lines 5-13)

• The government will enlist or create outreach programs like ACORN to sign-up individuals to government-run plan: "The Commissioner shall conduct outreach activities . . . for enrollments in Exchange-participating health benefits plans . . . through means such as the mail, by telephone, electronically, and in person." (page 95, line 3--page 96, line 9)

• The government will create a new bureaucracy to include phone healthcare: "The Secretary shall appoint a Telehealth Advisory Committee to make recommendations to the Secretary on policies of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services regarding telehealth services. . . ." (page 379, line 8--page 380, line 14)

The Bill
To read HR 3200 in its entirety, click here to download a pdf of the bill.

[quote="Lucas McCain"]

Ja'far wrote:

Lucas McCain wrote:

People really need to take a good look at the bill instead of blindly following Obama.. If you think health care is bad now... Just wait...

I think you should take your own advice. The chain e-mail you've linked is, at best, a completely dishonest attempt to incite fear. Anyone who bothers to take the five minutes to read the pages cited would see what a farce it is. For instance: The insidious "page 59" allows for payments to be made electronically, not the Big Brother story of the monitoring of all individual bank accounts. Page 95 makes no mention of ACORN. Page 272 and rationing? Not there. The email would have you believe that page 354 restricts special needs patients from obtaining healthcare, when in reality page 353-356 allow the recently diagnosed to enroll in insurance outside of an enrollment window. Quite the opposite. I could go on.

If you are going to accuse supporters of this bill as being blind followers of Obama, you should probably not yourself be a blind follower of chain e-mails.[/quote Where did you get your chain letter from??? Straight from the left's book of talking points I hear repeatedly?? Also, if I should not follow blindly, then why should I blindly accept this totally government controlled bill?? Are you happy with this bill... If so. Why? Many have told me they are for it, but they can't tell me why...

Can you tell me why you are happy with this bill without quoting left wing spin?? No one on this board that agrees with the bill can tell me why they agree without including the left talking points... Do any liberals have a free mind that can decide on an issue on their own...

Lucas McCain wrote:

Can you tell me why you are happy with this bill without quoting left wing spin?? No one on this board that agrees with the bill can tell me why they agree without including the left talking points... Do any liberals have a free mind that can decide on an issue on their own...

I've made several posts outlining reasons to support the bill. Here are a few that went unanswered. And I think you would be hard pressed to find anyone who would say I don't have a "free mind."

Ja'far wrote:

The nature of the US insurance industry insulates companies from the most important mechanism of capitalism: competition. The large majority of Americans get their insurance through their employer, thus the only real competition between insurance companies exists through how cheaply they can provide coverage, not providing the best coverage. People don’t choose their insurance provider, it’s chosen for them and they are not in a reasonable position to opt for a competing company’s service if they perceive it as better. Additionally, people may not fully understand their policy or their insurance company until they have used it. This could lead to people going for years without having much information to evaluate their company on and thus there is only limited potential to provide market feedback (and this is assuming providing feedback would be viable anyhow).

By its nature, insurance is not well suited for competition. Insurance is possible only through volume as insurance companies must pool risk. Clearly, in order to be profitable insurance companies need the amount of premiums coming in to exceed the amount of benefits being paid out. Therefore, insurance companies need a lot of people paying in so that when they do have to pay out for something expensive, it won’t terribly offend their bottom line. All of this is to say that insurance companies need to be very large and the nature of the industry creates a significant barrier to entry in and of itself. Put another way, competition is significantly limited. Indeed, the insurance sectors is perhaps the most consolidated in the economy, reaching monopolistic levels if analyzed along regional lines.

The opposite, in terms of information and feedback, would occur in the relationship between the consumer and the medical professional. The consumer would have a great deal of information concerning service and effect (and the ability to respond to it), but limited information concerning price since the insurance provider covers most of the cost. Therefore, the insurance companies negotiate pricing with the doctors and hospitals or they limit the choice of their coverage holders to the providers with the cheapest rates. Again, this is to say competition is convoluted and limited.

Considering this situation and that the US healthcare system is incredibly expensive I think it is reasonable policy for the government to provide an insurance option. Through this, coverage can be extended universally and preventive care can be enhanced while inefficiencies in the current insurance system can be replaced. Doctors, hospitals, and pharmaceuticals will remain private and their services and effects will be subject to competition, which is a reasoned argument for why the US may have better quality in those aspects. This could potentially boost competition among insurers as well since the government option will provide considerable pressure on existing insurance companies to do things the government does not or will not do.

Ja'far wrote:

1. As mentioned previously, insurance works by pooling risk. Requiring all to have coverage hedges that risk.
   
2. Mandating coverage increases competition and necessary market forces. Simply, a mandate means an increase in demand (vs. supply) which leads to lower prices or, to put another way, greater competition.
   
3. Ultimately, it's the only way to achieve universal coverage and is hardly-intrusive as opting to not have insurance is a miserable idea.

Ja'far wrote:

Current insurance policies are not tempered by capitalistic competition (as noted before) and are thus motivated to lessen coverage, deny coverage, and increase rates to the individual. The government option would be beholden to laws rather than monopolistic profit motives. And, again, insurance requires the collection and pooling of risk, thus the government is in a vastly superior position to do this, giving it massive leverage in negotiating the price of care it is paying for, as insurance companies do currently, thus lowering the price.

Additionally, the United States’ health system costs roughly 16% of GDP, while most other developed countries’ systems cost a fraction of that, thanks large in part to the reasons cited in this and previous posts of mine. Mixing in the increased ability for preventive care and the thinning of patients crowding into emergency rooms for routine care, the costs of the system would be further reduced while bettering service.

Competition is most always a good thing.. But under Obama plan there won't be any competition in just a short time we will only have Obamas option.. Should be easy for anyone to see... So you are happy with the bill as is and your reasoning is more competition??? Thanks, you are the first to give me a reasonable answer and I can see your point...

The government runs medicare...Rabid with waste and BROKE!
The government runs welfare...Rabid with waste and BROKE!
The government trying to run Cash for Clunkers...Within days, BROKE!
The government runs social security...BROKE!
The government runs GM...Bankrupt!
The governments bank account...BROKE!
The governments budget...Overdrawn...Grotesque waste...BROKE!
The government now runs government...BROKE!

If government runs or even dabbles in health care/insurance...Guess what? You got it. BROKE!

I don't want to offend anyone, but if you really think government will do good with health care reform. You simply are not thinking clearly.