Here's what socialized healthcare will become in the U.S.

[Andy]

Are there 3 year waits for things like knee surgery’s?


Also can someone decide to pay more for faster quicker care?

Yes they can. A patient can pay a large sum of money to move to an express list. Note: that's a large sum of money, after paying 50% of the income in taxes.

However, the amount of money is very large because, just like Medicare here in the US, the cost must not only cover the treatment, but subsidize the under paying socialized care.

This is why people, if they have the money, tend to fly to India to get treatment.

A British grandmother from Wolverhampton has returned to the UK after a successful bypass surgery in Delhi at a much lower cost, yet another testimony to india’s burgeoning medical tourism.

Mavis Childs, 67, waited for more than two years to have the surgery on the National Health Service (NHS). But she opted for india when the operation was cancelled, which meant a further six months of chronic pain.

Her medical bill came to just under 5,000 pounds, which is a fraction of the cost of having the operation in the private sector in Britain.

"We paid less than 5,000 pounds, minus the cost of the flights, for the treatment. We have been told that the same care would have cost as much as 25,000 pounds in Britain."

Check that out...

Under NHS it's 2 years, and a canceled surgery, meaning at least another 6 month wait.

Under private health care, it's ($35,200 dollars).

In India's evil capitalist, free-market, pay-for-service, it's under $7,000. And listen to how she was treated....

"I can walk anywhere now. The Apollo staff was excellent. I had eight doctors attending on me and the hospital itself was immaculate. "I was in my own private room for two weeks and then had a week in a hotel so that I was nearby for when my stitches were cut."

Oh my goodness! Why, she was treated almost like.... a VALUED CUSTOMER!

British Grandmother has timely bypass surgery in India

Let me guess Scotsmen, all this isn't what really happened... I'm just scared or something, right?

 

[Mr. Shaman]

None of those reports came from Bush, or anyone in the US. It came from countries with socialized care that is failing.

Yeah.....Porky Limbaugh never did have much use for History.

​

 

[Andy]

Gee.....when there are so many great stories, about health-care (in general), from The U.S. of A.???????????

What kind o' patriot ARE you??!!!

​

I have had to go to the hospital twice. Both times I was given great first class care, within the hour. When they said I needed some important scans of my legs, they setup an appointment for later that day, and the scans were done. Both times I was treated great, and was given medicine that helped with the pain in mere minutes.

In general, I don't see many people dying in waiting rooms like in Canada, France and the UK.

Follow this story. A medical clinic sends a man to a hospital because he needed more help than they could offer him. The man arrives at the hospital by taxi, with a letter from the medical clinic, stating the condition of the man sent.

The man sit in the ER. And sits.... and sits... and 36 hours after arriving, is found dead at midnight on Sunday.

This happened in Canada in September of 2008. Can you imagine that happening here? 36 hours and then dies, all right inside the ER? You'd be screaming to socialize our health care! But that IS socialized care.

It doesn't work.

Death in a waiting room

 

[Andy]

Yeah.....Porky Limbaugh never did have much use for History.

​

I never did have much use for talking with complete idiots.

 

[The Scotsman]

Are there 3 year waits for things like knee surgery’s?

........have'nt got a clue, as I don't need one.... ....suggest you look it up!

Also can someone decide to pay more for faster quicker care?

......if you want! But you still generally go to an NHS hospital seen by NHS staff with an NHS surgeon with aftercare provided by the NHS!

 

[The Scotsman]

Stop... She doesn't know because no one will tell her anything. Why? Because she can't get to see a dentist. Why? Because they all told her they are not taking NHS patients.

..... please Andy I thought we were having an adult conversation here....

Even more ironic... the people here in the US justify socialized care by claiming that having it will allow people to get preventative care, to stop this very situation from happening. Yet clearly your system isn't providing preventative care, or immediate care.

..that's a different subject and one that you guys will have to face if thats a problem for you. I guess that preventetive measures are a personal issue, if you want to smoke then fine but face the consequences. If you have to seek medival attention for lung cancer or whatever then I'm sure you'll be seen by a doctor - but what would you rather be doing? seeing a doctor and being told you're going to die or playing with the grandkids in the park?

The US has the highest obesity rates in the world. If I was a doctor I'd suggest more exercise if one wants to have a happy retirement..... if not, don't, then fine stuff your face full its a personal choice and as a Doctor I'd gladly treat the symptoms.


On a different matter Andy you are fixating upon the NHS may I suggest you look at the German, French, Swedish and Norweigian models which are better than the UK. Personaly I found the German system to be brilliant. I would be glad to discuss that with you as a much better alternative to the UK. As I've agreed with you on many occassions the UK model is not perfect.

 

[Andy]

..... please Andy I thought we were having an adult conversation here....

So your answer to a woman with a gum disease, who asked 12 different dentistry clinics for help, and was rejected by each one, and therefore can't see a dentist to give her help in both dealing with her gum disease, and a very painful tooth ache is.... "please Andy I thought we were having an adult conversation here"?

So, this woman here...

Your answer to this woman, who due to being on a waiting list for so long, ended up having to have her bladder removed, while another person who got a sex change surgery was moved right up the list.... is "I thought we were having an adult conversation here"?

..that's a different subject and one that you guys will have to face if thats a problem for you. I guess that preventetive measures are a personal issue, if you want to smoke then fine but face the consequences. If you have to seek medival attention for lung cancer or whatever then I'm sure you'll be seen by a doctor - but what would you rather be doing? seeing a doctor and being told you're going to die or playing with the grandkids in the park?

The US has the highest obesity rates in the world. If I was a doctor I'd suggest more exercise if one wants to have a happy retirement..... if not, don't, then fine stuff your face full its a personal choice and as a Doctor I'd gladly treat the symptoms.

Well that's great and all. The point I was making was that idiots here in the US, claim that if we have universal health care, that because of the abundance of 'preventative care', that all our health problems will decline, and health care will end up being cheaper.

Thanks to you and your example, I can conclusively say that simply isn't the case.

On a different matter Andy you are fixating upon the NHS may I suggest you look at the German, French, Swedish and Norweigian models which are better than the UK. Personaly I found the German system to be brilliant. I would be glad to discuss that with you as a much better alternative to the UK. As I've agreed with you on many occassions the UK model is not perfect.

It's ironic you mention the German system, given that the German system is largely Capitalist. Did you know that the majority of German hospitals are privately owned? There are only 790 publicly funded hospitals, where as 1250 hospitals are for-profit, or non-profit, privately owned businesses.

Moreover, there are two insurance systems, and although your limited experience may not have revealed this, there is a growing number of people moving to private insurance.

First, in 2004, as part of a cost reduction plan, salaries at public hospitals were frozen. Obviously doctors don't want to work somewhere their incomes are frozen while inflation keeps going. So a mass exit from public to private hospitals by practitioners is ongoing.

Further, the public is finding that public hospitals provide long waits, and bad service. The good doctors move on, while crappy doctors who could get a job at a private hospital, work for the government.

Finely, the public system is working with budgets for regions and treatment types. That may make doctors, in whose region the budget has been overrun, to postpone treatments to the next budget period, therefore deteriorating patients service. Especially for young working singles the premiums for public insurance are higher than in the private system.

You should check out Health in Germany from Wiki, and Healthcare in Germany. There are a number of other articles. Ultimately the German health care system shows exactly what the problems with socialized medicine is, and the fact people are moving more and more towards the private free-market system, is proof it doesn't work.

 

[Andy]

........have'nt got a clue, as I don't need one.... ....suggest you look it up!

......if you want! But you still generally go to an NHS hospital seen by NHS staff with an NHS surgeon with aftercare provided by the NHS!

This is the biggest fears people in the UK have about their hospital. If this isn't telling, I don't know what is. I can't even imagine anything in the US, other than possibly VA Hospitals, that comes close. VA Hospitals by the way, are also socialized, and man do they suck.

This massive line of people isn't for the Soccer. It's for the Dentist. People desperate to get help, line up for hours on hours, not to see the dentist... no no... just to get registered to see the dentist. Just to REGISTER! Then they wait for another year to get to see the actual dentist!

Long wait for a dentist

Look, thus far you really haven't provided me with any compelling information, while completely ignoring story after story after article after article, all detailing the same thing over and over... socialized care sucks.

Now, you want to have an "adult discussion" that's great. Adults base their views and opinions on substance, not feelings. You can "feel" that Germany has a great system, and "feel" that NHS is wonderful. But Adults look at the facts and the outcomes, and make a judgment call on whether it works or not. So far, I'm making the judgment that socialized care is awful, and kills people. Based on what? Based on the mounting evidence given.

 

[Dr.Who]

Thirdly, the US spends more on health care than any other nation on Earth. You can argue that we have the best health care on Earth to go with the expense, but I doubt you'll convince anyone.

Finally, if you add the 18% of GDP we spend on health care to the 20% the federal government spends, then add in state and local taxes, are we really paying less overall than other nations?

The Congressional Budget Office says:

"a recent CBO report ("Key Issues in Analyzing Major Health Insurance Proposals, " December 2008) is clear on one issue: Working to achieve universal coverage through expanding government's role in health care will increase total costs and therefore either increase premiums or taxes, not reduce them. "

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123629779856246193.html

 

[Dr.Who]

Moreover, there are two insurance systems, and although your limited experience may not have revealed this, there is a growing number of people moving to private insurance.

First, in 2004, as part of a cost reduction plan, salaries at public hospitals were frozen. Obviously doctors don't want to work somewhere their incomes are frozen while inflation keeps going. So a mass exit from public to private hospitals by practitioners is ongoing.

Further, the public is finding that public hospitals provide long waits, and bad service. The good doctors move on, while crappy doctors who could get a job at a private hospital, work for the government.

Finely, the public system is working with budgets for regions and treatment types. That may make doctors, in whose region the budget has been overrun, to postpone treatments to the next budget period, therefore deteriorating patients service. Especially for young working singles the premiums for public insurance are higher than in the private system.

This is why every socialized program should have to exist side by side with a free market system. But the socialist always insist that their system is better while demanding that no other system be allowed.

 

[Andy]

This is why every socialized program should have to exist side by side with a free market system. But the socialist always insist that their system is better while demanding that no other system be allowed.

Of course. Socialism is really about control, disguised as benefiting the people. It will help you, if I control your life. I'll make sure nothing bad happens.

Obviously, if people had a choice in socialism or not, no socialism would ever exist.

For example, if they allowed people to opt-out of social security, how long would it last?

If people could opt-out of medicare, how long would it last?

Ironically, supporters of socialism know this, which is why they claim they can't let people opt-out because it would fail. But obviously it would fail because people don't want it. If social programs were as great and wonderful as they claim, then they could allow for opting out, without fear of it failing.

 

[Andy]

The Congressional Budget Office says:

"a recent CBO report ("Key Issues in Analyzing Major Health Insurance Proposals, " December 2008) is clear on one issue: Working to achieve universal coverage through expanding government's role in health care will increase total costs and therefore either increase premiums or taxes, not reduce them. "

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123629779856246193.html

It's amazing how obvious this is to most of us, and yet the forest gump left never seems to catch this. You simply can not and in millions of newly insured people, and think that rates will decrease.

 

[PLC1]

For example, if they allowed people to opt-out of social security, how long would it last?

About as long as a snowball in Needles (So Cal desert, hotter than Hades) in August.

If people could opt-out of medicare, how long would it last?

You can opt out of Medicare. I'm old enough for Medicare, but have private insurance (for now), so don't use Medicare.

The problem is, unless you have access to a group insurance of one kind or another, it is not possible for most seniors to get coverage that is affordable and yet actually covers most medical needs. An individual insurance plan will either leave out the most likely costs, or will cost so much that you'd have to be Bill Gates to afford it. Who is going to insure someone who is over 70? How about over 40, with high blood pressure? No one. There needs to be a way to buy in to group insurance that isn't necessarily connected to a job.

 

[Andy]

You can opt out of Medicare. I'm old enough for Medicare, but have private insurance (for now), so don't use Medicare.

I can? This is news to me. Tell me how I can opt-out of paying for Medicare. I'd like to get back the $400 they stole from me.

The problem is, unless you have access to a group insurance of one kind or another, it is not possible for most seniors to get coverage that is affordable and yet actually covers most medical needs. An individual insurance plan will either leave out the most likely costs, or will cost so much that you'd have to be Bill Gates to afford it. Who is going to insure someone who is over 70? How about over 40, with high blood pressure? No one. There needs to be a way to buy in to group insurance that isn't necessarily connected to a job.

Not true. I found a plan that covers husband and spouse, both age 64, for only $291 a month, and it's not connected to a job. I myself, have a health plan not connected to my job. It's just like any other service. You choose to either go with a plan from your job, or you choose to get your own.

My own plan is only $109/mo.

Now granted over 65, it's very hard to purchase a new health insurance policy. I agree with that. This is why it's so important to keep the insurance you have once you get older. Both my parents are in the late 60s and have the same insurance company as when they were employed.

And yes, insurance for older people is more costly, and it should be. They are more likely to make claims. The only way to change that, would be to charge more to the people who are not making claims. In effect, having the younger generation subsidize the older. And we all know how well that works.

This is also why it's so important that people save up money for when they get older. You blow all your money when you are young, and then wonder why your broke and without health insurance when you get older? Hello... cause and effect!

 

[PLC1]

I can? This is news to me. Tell me how I can opt-out of paying for Medicare. I'd like to get back the $400 they stole from me.

Well, no, you can't opt out of paying for Medicare any more than you can opt out of paying for any other government program. If you could, a lot of people might opt to not pay for the newest military hardware, either.

Not true. I found a plan that covers husband and spouse, both age 64, for only $291 a month, and it's not connected to a job. I myself, have a health plan not connected to my job. It's just like any other service. You choose to either go with a plan from your job, or you choose to get your own.

My own plan is only $109/mo.

Now granted over 65, it's very hard to purchase a new health insurance policy. I agree with that. This is why it's so important to keep the insurance you have once you get older. Both my parents are in the late 60s and have the same insurance company as when they were employed.

And yes, insurance for older people is more costly, and it should be. They are more likely to make claims. The only way to change that, would be to charge more to the people who are not making claims. In effect, having the younger generation subsidize the older. And we all know how well that works.

This is also why it's so important that people save up money for when they get older. You blow all your money when you are young, and then wonder why your broke and without health insurance when you get older? Hello... cause and effect!

I'm not sure where you are getting your figures. I got quotes for a phantom couple age 64 from Kaiser, which is one of the most affordable HMOs I know of. The cost starts at $568 a month if you pay 30% of the cost after a deductible of $5,450.

There is also the little disclaimer at the bottom:

PAY SPECIAL ATTENTION TO THE EFFECTIVE DATE, PREMIUM AMOUNT, WAITING PERIOD, BENEFITS, LIMITATIONS, EXCLUSIONS, AND RIDERS.

Just what those limitations, exclusions, and riders might be I'm not sure.


A $100,000 procedure, which sounds like a lot, but really isn't given the cost of medical care, would cost the insured $35,450. That is a real bargain, given that an uninsured person would be billed a lot more than the hundred grand.

That is, if the procedure were not part of the limitations, exclusions, and riders.

Of course, they could buy a better plan for $1,122 a month.

I'd be very skeptical of that $291 a month, not knowing just what exclusions and formularies there might be attached.

I'd be skeptical of your $109 a month plan, also. Do you know what is and is not covered? It might be a good idea to know that before someone crosses the double yellow, some uninsured deadbeat, that is, and you wind up fighting with your insurance company over that quarter of a mil for intensive care and rehab.

Sure, if that phantom couple I got the quote for had planned for medical costs to soar into the stratosphere, and had planned to see their 401k go in the toilet, then they'd be sitting pretty.