Canada health care lottery

[Dr.Who]

I don't know if you've seen it but there's a great commercial running here in Ohio by "Divided we fail". It has actual families that had health insurance that still had to file bankruptcy because of all that was not covered... and they HAD health insurance.

So is the purpose of insurance to guarantee that you will have good health or to protect your assets if you get an expensive illness. I'll give you a hint. The insurance companies cannot make you better they can only offer money that might be enough to cover the costs of an illness.

Now if your particular illness exceeded the limits of your policy then you either gambled and lost or you never bothered to read the policy.

So now that you have exceeded the limits of your policy you can declare bankruptcy and legally not pay the doctors for saving your life (that's gratitude) and then become available for medicaid so you will still have health care. So really the only complaint here is that your credit is ruined. Maybe the gamble wasn't such a loss after all.

If I remember correctly I believe they said 1.8 million people per year are put into this fix.

Said another way, 1.8 million people were underinsured by their own choice and then screwed their doctors and nurses (driving up the cost of medical care for everyone else) and they never had to be without health care. How about we make a law that if your doctor saves your life you have to make at least some payment every month for the rest of your life if need be and help keep the costs down for everyone.

You know if they'd even come up with a National plan that just covered catastrophic illness and people still purchased or were offered coverage thru work for regular basic healthcare it would be a vast improvement.

There are many such plans that do exactly that. When I was in college and sure that I could never get sick ( I was invincible after all) but not so sure that I would never hit a tree while skiing I took out a policy for catastrophic coverage only. It was less than a hundred dollars a year. That's less than the cost of a typical poor persons daily trip to McDonald's per month.

There is no need for it to be national!!! And yet this is exactly what liberals are demanding. Not because there is any need or advantage in a national program but because the social tendencies in their thinking wants that alone and health care or whatever for poor people is just the excuse or medium that will allow the creeping disease of socialism to spread.

I have just as much empathy for poor people as anyone else. In fact more since I don't want to create dependency on national programs that hurt more than they help.

There is not a single person in this country who is without insurance/health care for any reason other than they are not willing to pay for health care one way or another. If any one of you can give an example of such a person I will either show that they could use their own situation or assets to get health care or I will never make such a claim again.

 

[GenSeneca]

So why do the socialists all want universal health insurance? Not because there are not options, but because this option moves our country in the direction of more socialism.

Power... Socialists always want it and they have no compunction about lying or using disinformation to achieve their goal.

How many times have you heard what a travesty it is that the "richest nation in the world" has 45 million uninsured?

"We hear a lot these days about 45 million Americans who don't have health insurance.

...According to the US Census Bureau, 17 million of those without health insurance live in households having over $50,000 in annual income. That's 38% of the uninsured in America.(2)

In fact, 9 million - 20% of the uninsured - reside in households pulling down more than $75K a year. (3)

...And then there are the young invincibles. Over 18 million of the uninsured are people between the ages of 18 and 34. (4) They spend more than four times as much on alcohol, tobacco, entertainment and dining out as they do for out-of-pocket spending on health care.(5) They represent 40% of the uninsured in America.

...14 million people without health insurance are eligible for government health care programs like Medicaid and S-CHIP but choose not to enroll. (7) They represent %31 - nearly one third - of the uninsured in America.

...The U.S. has 12 million illegal immigrants who don't buy health insurance but still get health care.

...So, how many are truly uninsured? Around eight million. Just 18% of the 45 million that we hear about so often."

 

[Andy]

I don't know if you've seen it but there's a great commercial running here in Ohio by "Divided we fail". It has actual families that had health insurance that still had to file bankruptcy because of all that was not covered... and they HAD health insurance.

If I remember correctly I believe they said 1.8 million people per year are put into this fix.

You know if they'd even come up with a National plan that just covered catastrophic illness and people still purchased or were offered coverage thru work for regular basic healthcare it would be a vast improvement.

The only difference between that and socialize medicine, is that in socialized medicine, you are still broke, but you don't get good, or sometimes, any treatment at all.

 

[Andy]

How realistic is that concern???

Um... completely realistic. Socialism always fails. As such, in order to survive (stave off the inevitable failure as long as possible), it must expand into new areas that are growing, to draw in the support it needs to continue itself.

For example, the Soviet union. The Soviet system of communism was constantly being drained. This led to expansion. As long as the Soviets were expanding and gaining more wealth from new territory, the system continued. As soon as Reagan came and funded opposition to Soviets world wide, the system failed.

For example, Venezuela. Communism in Venezuela, has lead to near economic collapse. The black market is filled with RICE as the primary product. They have expanded to get support from the puppet in Ecuador, and would have tried to take over Columbia if not for the support of the US preventing it.

Even France shows how one socialist action results in another. They keep putting in price control, to prevent spiriling prices, then wage freezes to stop droping wages, then subsidies to prevent business leaving, then taxes to cover the subsidies, then incentives to get people to invest in France, and on and on and on. Why do you think the population loses 50% of its income to the government? Socialism.

For example, Masshealth in Massachusetts. The system has run over budget every day, is constantly trying to cut services to reduce cost, and increase taxes, and all the state government that created the boondoggle can say is... we need to make it national.

In fact, every time a socialist policy fails at the state level, the political leads who caused the problem, claim the solution is to nationalize it. Remember the rolling black outs of California caused by socialist price caps? There were calls then that the federal government should have nationalized the price caps to prevent California from having this problem.

And honestly... this entire problem they we have right now is entirely the fault of Socialism. It's medicare and medicaid that are not paying the full amount it costs to provide medical care, that cause those shortfalls to be dumped on us the paying customers. And what solution do the socialists in government suggest? Why more socialism of course!

So yes, this is a very realistic concern.

 

[Andy]

You know if they'd even come up with a National plan that just covered catastrophic illness and people still purchased or were offered coverage thru work for regular basic healthcare it would be a vast improvement.

absolutely !! and it can't be all that hard to do. Just assemble the best of many good systems in the world, and design it to fit with the US needs etc. ........

There is no need for this. Catastrophic coverage is incredibly cheap. A $5,000 deductible, 30% co-pay plan with a $1 million lifetime, is only $65 a month. Anyone can afford this.

As we have pointed out a dozen times over, government will make the problem worse consistently. It never works. Socialism always fails. You keep pointed to these "good systems in the world", and yet when you actually examine the "good systems" they suck. The only good system I've found was in India where completely private hospitals have a very simple method for providing care:

You go in, get a quote on service. They give you a fee. You pay them the cost of the bill. They provide the service.

Sound a bit like the Capitalist method of free market, now doesn't it? Is it cheap? No. Cheaper than here, because they don't have government regulation, people refusing to pay, government programs that don't cover the bill, and endless paper work with insurance companies, lawsuits and so on.

But the solution is simple. They offer, you pay, they serve.

 

[Andy]

Keep on dreamin'. Won't happen. The repugs are NOT interested in the nations' health . THe only pop whos health matters is the US military. It HAS to be fit to die in the US wars.

IF the US system is so FANTASTIC.........whey are there so many buying drugs (for eg) from Canada.?? Particularly when they claim that the US drugs are so "superior". Seems that if one is going to use the system for their own advantage, they had better stop bashing it. I can be seen as hypocritical./ or juvenile. (not that this bothers many )

That was a stupid comment. Liberals want to kill people with crappy health care. Rupugs are trying to prevent them from doing that.

 

[BigRob]

Keep on dreamin'. Won't happen. The repugs are NOT interested in the nations' health . THe only pop whos health matters is the US military. It HAS to be fit to die in the US wars.

This is why no one takes you seriously.

IF the US system is so FANTASTIC.........whey are there so many buying drugs (for eg) from Canada.?? Particularly when they claim that the US drugs are so "superior". Seems that if one is going to use the system for their own advantage, they had better stop bashing it. I can be seen as hypocritical./ or juvenile. (not that this bothers many )

Maybe because the drugs coming in from Canada are the patent rip offs that are made overseas. The US drugs are superior, and then they are ripped off, and then brought back in.

 

[Phoenix68]

Canada health care lottery​

From the current issue of NR:

The left wing of the Democratic party still holds up Canada’s “single payer” — that is, entirely government-financed — health-care system as a model. The latest innovation of that system: Overextended doctors are deciding which patients will get treated by drawing names out of a hat. They are rationing health care, in other words, by lottery. Dr. Ken Runciman of Ontario told Canada’s National Post that he had to cut his workload and couldn’t find a better method. “It was just my way of trying to minimize the bias . . . rather than going through the list and saying ‘I don’t like you, and I don’t like you.’” Dr. Runciman has cut 100 patients from his practice, while another doctor in Newfoundland has cut 500 patients. All in all, too few Canadian doctors means that approximately 5 million Canadians are now without family care. What was that about “universal coverage”? ​

Universal health care, with a government in charge, is always a false claim, never a reality.

.

.
It's always fun, trippin' over these old ones....
.
.

.​

 

[mark francis]

.
View attachment 11706
.
It's always fun, trippin' over these old ones....
.
.

.​

Injecting gambling into a socialist healthcare scheme will never make it better than the crappy scheme that it is.

 

[Phoenix68]

.

.

.

.​

Injecting gambling into a socialist healthcare scheme will never make it better than the crappy scheme that it is.

.
Biden-Harris Administration Celebrates The Affordable Care Act’s 13th Anniversary and Highlights Record-Breaking Coverage
.

.​