"I'd be dead without Obamacare."

[The Scotsman]

The NHS in UK is in "humanitarian crisis" which sounds like collapse to me.

Not quite... but not far off. In terms of the eurozone I lived in Germany for 10 years and their health system is excellent.

 

[Openmind]

I critisize those who opted to not carry insurance AND THEN EXPECT THE GOVERNMENT BAIL THEM OUT OF THEIR POOR CHOICE. Not the same as your characterization.
Moreover they need not get insurance as they can get it anytime. This is sinking Romney care in Mass and whatever they called it in Hawaii before it died.
The NHS in UK is in "humanitarian crisis" which sounds like collapse to me. And cracks are showing elsewhere as costs of care in the euro zone are rising quickly. And the tsunami of so called refu gees only exacerbates matters.

What do you know about healthcare in the Euro zone? I live there. . .I know how it works, I use it and my 78 year old husband use it. Would you like a description? Would you like to know the REAL COST to people who benefit from it, like I do, and my husband does? Probably not, as it would blow your mind and take away your ridiculous "arguments" against it. So I will not waste my time unless someone shows interest in knowing the REAL NUMBERS. (can even provide copies of documents, such as billing by insurance, and billing by hospitals for such services as scanners, physiotherapy, hospitalisation in PRIVATE room, etc. . .).

 

[Openmind]

Man who says he 'would be dead' without Obamacare confronts Paul Ryan on the law's repeal


and Congress is going full steam ahead on a repeal, with no replacement in sight.

SICK! The GOP congress is the real "death panel!"

 

[dogtowner]

SICK! The GOP congress is the real "death panel!"

What's sick is NHS denying treatment forcing people to take their sick children out if the country.
And it's coming to europe, a little quicker every day.

From FT

Rising healthcare costs put countries at risk

Rising spending on healthcare will jeopardise the creditworthiness of leading industrialised countries by the middle of this decade unless reforms are enacted to stem the costs, according to Standard & Poor’s.

Healthcare spending in a number of advanced economies will almost double as a proportion of gross domestic product over the next 40 years without action to curb expenditure, according to the rating agency.

The findings underline the challenges facing fiscally stretched nations as they seek to reduce demands on public expenditure.


Highlighting Germany, the US, the UK and France, it said: “We project that healthcare costs for a typical advanced economy will stand at 11.1 per cent of GDP by 2050, up from 6.3 per cent of GDP in 2010.”

The report, published on Tuesday, warns that advanced economies, particularly in Europe, may have “only narrow room for manoeuvre” in managing health spending, compared with emerging economies “where demographics and economic growth are still slightly more favourable”.

However, S&P says its analysis suggests “that the need in some emerging market sovereigns to address demographically-driven budgetary challenges is hardly less pressing than in some advanced economies.”

The report emphasises that longer lives are only part of the explanation for the increasing pressure on healthcare services. Nondemographic factors, such as the costs of technological advances and more generous healthcare coverage, have played a significant, but under-appreciated, part in the rise in expenditure.

S&P says that while pensions look set to remain the biggest item in the budgets of the G20 group of leading nations, it is healthcare spending that represents the majority of the total increase in age-related spending in more than half of those economies.

Marko Mrsnik, who led the analysis, said the bleakest scenarios may not materialise. A combination of budgetary consolidation and systemic reform of pensions and healthcare, as well as rising economic growth, “is something that will hopefully happen over the coming years”, he said.


However, he highlighted the opposition to pension reforms in some countries, exemplified by last year’s defeated referendum on the issue in Slovenia. That experience pointed to the need to get health reform under way soon so that it could be part of a gradual process less likely to stimulate opposition, Mr Mrsnik said.

Richard Saltman, associate head of research policy at the European Observatory of health systems and policies, and professor of public health at Emory University in the US, said a key theme internationally, as governments sought to curtail healthcare costs, would be “rethinking the balance between collective and individual responsibility”.

A “contentious discussion” was in prospect in many countries about how far people should be expected to take charge of maintaining their own health, he said.

 

[The Scotsman]

What's sick is NHS denying treatment forcing people to take their sick children out if the country.

The NHS could quite easily cope with the medical provision for the UK's population if the other agencies and indeed the general population had their own affairs in order. The problems within the NHS are caused by (amongst other things) local authorities using hospitals as a dumping ground for the aged because they haven't organised or maintained the care facilites which they are tasked to provide. Also, and this is what gets me the issue of families who can't be bothered to accept their responsibility for the care of their own aging parents or family members.
A 5 year old report on the creditworthiness of countries is a rather odd prop to support a rather complex social issue like healthcare.

 

[PLC1]

What's sick is NHS denying treatment forcing people to take their sick children out if the country.
And it's coming to europe, a little quicker every day.

From FT

Rising healthcare costs put countries at risk

Rising spending on healthcare will jeopardise the creditworthiness of leading industrialised countries by the middle of this decade unless reforms are enacted to stem the costs, according to Standard & Poor’s.

Healthcare spending in a number of advanced economies will almost double as a proportion of gross domestic product over the next 40 years without action to curb expenditure, according to the rating agency.

The findings underline the challenges facing fiscally stretched nations as they seek to reduce demands on public expenditure.


Highlighting Germany, the US, the UK and France, it said: “We project that healthcare costs for a typical advanced economy will stand at 11.1 per cent of GDP by 2050, up from 6.3 per cent of GDP in 2010.”

The report, published on Tuesday, warns that advanced economies, particularly in Europe, may have “only narrow room for manoeuvre” in managing health spending, compared with emerging economies “where demographics and economic growth are still slightly more favourable”.

However, S&P says its analysis suggests “that the need in some emerging market sovereigns to address demographically-driven budgetary challenges is hardly less pressing than in some advanced economies.”

The report emphasises that longer lives are only part of the explanation for the increasing pressure on healthcare services. Nondemographic factors, such as the costs of technological advances and more generous healthcare coverage, have played a significant, but under-appreciated, part in the rise in expenditure.

S&P says that while pensions look set to remain the biggest item in the budgets of the G20 group of leading nations, it is healthcare spending that represents the majority of the total increase in age-related spending in more than half of those economies.

Marko Mrsnik, who led the analysis, said the bleakest scenarios may not materialise. A combination of budgetary consolidation and systemic reform of pensions and healthcare, as well as rising economic growth, “is something that will hopefully happen over the coming years”, he said.


However, he highlighted the opposition to pension reforms in some countries, exemplified by last year’s defeated referendum on the issue in Slovenia. That experience pointed to the need to get health reform under way soon so that it could be part of a gradual process less likely to stimulate opposition, Mr Mrsnik said.

Richard Saltman, associate head of research policy at the European Observatory of health systems and policies, and professor of public health at Emory University in the US, said a key theme internationally, as governments sought to curtail healthcare costs, would be “rethinking the balance between collective and individual responsibility”.

A “contentious discussion” was in prospect in many countries about how far people should be expected to take charge of maintaining their own health, he said.

Wow! Their costs could double in the next 40 years. If that happens, their health care costs will equal what ours are today.

 

[Walter]

caused by (amongst other things) local authorities using hospitals

Oh, I thought only our local politics are so silly.

 

[PLC1]

Oh, I thought only our local politics are so silly.

That appears to be a worldwide phenomenon.

 

[Walter]

Yeah.

But: you won't find anyone in Europe who envies the US healthcare system before Obamacare. Thats one of the things that were worse in the US compared to Europe.

 

[dogtowner]

Yeah.

But: you won't find anyone in Europe who envies the US healthcare system before Obamacare. Thats one of the things that were worse in the US compared to Europe.

Then why did so many come here for it ?

 

[Openmind]

What's sick is NHS denying treatment forcing people to take their sick children out if the country.
And it's coming to europe, a little quicker every day.

From FT

Rising healthcare costs put countries at risk

Rising spending on healthcare will jeopardise the creditworthiness of leading industrialised countries by the middle of this decade unless reforms are enacted to stem the costs, according to Standard & Poor’s.

Healthcare spending in a number of advanced economies will almost double as a proportion of gross domestic product over the next 40 years without action to curb expenditure, according to the rating agency.

The findings underline the challenges facing fiscally stretched nations as they seek to reduce demands on public expenditure.


Highlighting Germany, the US, the UK and France, it said: “We project that healthcare costs for a typical advanced economy will stand at 11.1 per cent of GDP by 2050, up from 6.3 per cent of GDP in 2010.”

The report, published on Tuesday, warns that advanced economies, particularly in Europe, may have “only narrow room for manoeuvre” in managing health spending, compared with emerging economies “where demographics and economic growth are still slightly more favourable”.

However, S&P says its analysis suggests “that the need in some emerging market sovereigns to address demographically-driven budgetary challenges is hardly less pressing than in some advanced economies.”

The report emphasises that longer lives are only part of the explanation for the increasing pressure on healthcare services. Nondemographic factors, such as the costs of technological advances and more generous healthcare coverage, have played a significant, but under-appreciated, part in the rise in expenditure.

S&P says that while pensions look set to remain the biggest item in the budgets of the G20 group of leading nations, it is healthcare spending that represents the majority of the total increase in age-related spending in more than half of those economies.

Marko Mrsnik, who led the analysis, said the bleakest scenarios may not materialise. A combination of budgetary consolidation and systemic reform of pensions and healthcare, as well as rising economic growth, “is something that will hopefully happen over the coming years”, he said.


However, he highlighted the opposition to pension reforms in some countries, exemplified by last year’s defeated referendum on the issue in Slovenia. That experience pointed to the need to get health reform under way soon so that it could be part of a gradual process less likely to stimulate opposition, Mr Mrsnik said.

Richard Saltman, associate head of research policy at the European Observatory of health systems and policies, and professor of public health at Emory University in the US, said a key theme internationally, as governments sought to curtail healthcare costs, would be “rethinking the balance between collective and individual responsibility”.

A “contentious discussion” was in prospect in many countries about how far people should be expected to take charge of maintaining their own health, he said.

Do you have ANY IDEA WHAT "RISING HEALTH CARE" means in Europe? Do you have any idea what Europeans pay for health care insurance? I DO. And I also know what insurance costs in the US! I am in this very special situation where I KNOW by experience how both systems function and the cost of both systems.

Less than 2 years ago, my then 76 years old husband, with a lot of health problems (including 2 AVC, an Aorta aneurysm, colon surgery, high blood pressure, foot surgery) was covered by
1. medicare, at the cost of around $100.00 a month, and 2. private insurance (medicare supplemental insurance) at a cost of $235.00 per month. The $100.00 medicare (government coverage!) covered 80% of his healthcare costs. The $235.00 private insurance covered 20% of the cost (anyone who can count can figure out which of the two was more efficient and cost effective!). So, he received excellent care at a monthly cost of $335.00 per month, or about $4,000.00 a year.

Today, my husband is covered by the Belgian healthcare, which includes universal health care provided to EVERYONE in Belgium at a cost of $9.79 a month, and private insurance (called "mutuelle" here) at a cost of $68.79 per month (this "mutuelle" covers private room, pays doctors 300% of what the basic, universal coverage covers). The total for this 78 year old man, with all the "pre-existing conditions" that he brought with him from the US comes to a little over $800.00 per YEAR.

There is NO long waiting period, there is no limitations on the tests or care that he can receives, and medication price is about 1/10th of medication price in the US.

So. . .yes, the price of healthcare in a country like Belgium is going up. . .the $800.00 for 2017 I just mentioned represents a 3% increase over last year.

Regarding British NHS. . .there are a lot fewer people (including children) being turned away for care in England than those turned away in the US because they were not covered prior to ACA! And. . .if you don't like the NHS system for "extreme healthcare needs," England DOES HAVE A PRIVATE health care system of providers where you can pay higher fees IF YOU CHOOSE to do so! Still most British people very much enjoy to have FREE ACCESS to health care for their every day needs, and only the wealthiest (or foreigners who travel to England to get specialised care) choose to access those expensive resources and pay for their healthcare.

In Europe, you have the REAL CHOICE! You can choose to be covered solely by universal healthcare which cost from nothing (in the UK) to very little (in France, Italy or Belgium), or/and to access private healthcare.

But EVERYONE is covered by at least the Universal health care!

Don't talk about what you don't know! I have lived in the US for the better part of 45 years, I lived in England (with 3 kids) for 4 years, in France (with 2 kids) for 4 years, and in Belgium (now and 40 years ago). I also have a son in Australia who is raising his family on UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE and is more than satisfied with it.

You know NOTHING about healthcare, and your rant are just the repeat of some old fear mongering that has kept America from demanding to have access to the same advantage in health care as the rest of all developed nations.

 

[Openmind]

Then why did so many come here for it ?

You are so full of BS! Nobody, specifically goes to the US for healthcare, unless they want "elective" surgery, such as cosmetic or such. There are just as many AMERICANS going to Cuba, Thailand, France, Germany, or Belgium for surgery than those going to the US.

Once again, you are spreading false news. These are no more than urban legends!
Just because ONE or TWO famous people choose to have surgery in the US, doesn't mean that people around the world are flocking to the US for their super over rated and over priced health care.

 

[PLC1]

You are so full of BS! Nobody, specifically goes to the US for healthcare, unless they want "elective" surgery, such as cosmetic or such. There are just as many AMERICANS going to Cuba, Thailand, France, Germany, or Belgium for surgery than those going to the US.

Once again, you are spreading false news. These are no more than urban legends!
Just because ONE or TWO famous people choose to have surgery in the US, doesn't mean that people around the world are flocking to the US for their super over rated and over priced health care.

You mean to say that the busloads of Canadians crossing the border for health care that we saw when "Hillarycare" was being discussed weren't real?

But, someone paid to put those pictures on our TV! Any ad has to be real, right?

 

[Openmind]

You mean to say that the busloads of Canadians crossing the border for health care that we saw when "Hillarycare" was being discussed weren't real?

But, someone paid to put those pictures on our TV! Any ad has to be real, right?

Do you mean the "Hilarycare" of 20 years ago? You are so funny!

Let's look at a most recent figure, shall we?

www.vox.com/2016/10/9/.../canadians-seeking-medical-care-us-trump-debate

No, Canadians do not flee en masse for US health care
Updated by Julia Belluz@juliaoftorontojulia.belluz@voxmedia.com Feb 7, 2017, 9:45pm EST

You may want to go look at this. There is a very interesting graph that relates to the number of Canadians seeking healthcare in the US!

 

[PLC1]

Do you mean the "Hilarycare" of 20 years ago? You are so funny!

Yes, that's it. I distinctly remember the insurance companies' ads showing Canadians coming into the US by the busload for health care that they couldn't get in Canada.

I'm sure that must have been for real, right?