Tax money already finding health care in the US

ExodusMe said:

Everything you ever wanted to know about Canadian health care

1) You're claim that Canada treats healthcare as a human right is a joke. If this were true supplemental coverage like dental care and drug coverage would be provided for. Nice soundbyte, but you have been lying.

Click to expand...

When did I ever claim those things were covered? I didn't, therefore I never lied. Withdraw your accusation or this could count as flaming

Note: I believe those things SHOULD be covered, however I never once claimed that they were.

ExodusMe said:

2) "While Canada is traditionally thought of as a publicly financed system, spending on these supplemental benefits means that 30 percent of health spending comes from private sources." Wow, 30 percent of your healthcare spending is from private sources. I thought I remember you saying that Canada was a single payer system?

Click to expand...

Do you understand what a single payer system is? If you did I'm not sure why you'd ever rather make that bizarre claim. Private funding can include people buying supplementary coverage (ie so they get a private hospital room instead of sharing with another patient), drug and dental plans, private donations to the hospitals, etc. Those things are over and above the health insurance all Canadians have though.

ExodusMe said:

3) "While Canada's health care system is publicly financed, many providers are not government employees. Instead, doctors are usually reimbursed by the government at a negotiated fee-for-service rate. The average primary care doctor in Canada earns $125,000 (in the United States, that number stands at $186,000)." I don't think I need to go into detail on this horse as it has been beaten hopelessly to death (please don't make me hit it again!).

Click to expand...

In fact, virtually all health staff are privately employed. All of the hospitals and doctors offices are privately owned and operated. It's only the insurance plan that's publicly funded.

This is why your assertion that the government creates waiting lists to control demand is absurd. The government doesn't run the hospitals or doctors offices, they have no control over who gets seen, and when they get seen. The provincial health insurance plans get the bill after the patient has been treated.

ExodusMe said:

4) "Where Canada does not do well is on wait times, which tend to be longer than in other countries, especially to see specialists or obtain an elective surgery. A Commonwealth Fund survey in 2010 found that 59 percent of respondents reported waiting more than four weeks for an appointment with a specialist, more than double the number in the United States:"

Like I said, Canada is not the best model for healthcare.

Click to expand...

The wait times to see a specialist are a problem, sure. The wait time to see a doctor for basic medical procedures is minimal. If I called up my doctor for an annual checkup, I'd very likely get in next week, if not the week after.

The problem with specialist wait times is mainly administrative, taken from a CTV News article:

"As a family doctor, Dutt said she sees a “whole host” of different reasons for varying wait times across the country, including how physicians prioritize the care of their patients and access to resources in different provinces.

However, there are “lots of things” happening in Canada to make those wait times shorter, Dutt said, adding that the medical community has seen wait times go down “significantly” in places that have centralized their referral process.

“Often, as a family doc, I send off a referral to one doctor, I don’t know their wait times,” she said. “One of the best things that we can do is centralize that and have all the people needing care going to a centralized place so the first doctor that’s available sees that patient.”

Michael Decter, chair of the advocacy group Patients Canada, told CTV’s Power Play that simply pouring more money into the system won’t fix it.

His proof, he said, is that the federal government has increased health transfers to provinces by six per cent a year for more than a decade, yet wait times have gotten worse.

“It’s about innovation, it’s about accountability, it’s about focus and it’s about transparency,” he said. “It’s not about more money.”"

No system is perfect, and reforming that system to streamline the referral process would probably help in a big way. However, just because we have an area of concern that some reforms would fix doesn't mean the whole system needs to be thrown out. Your whole line of argument seems to depend on that kind of reasoning, and it's nonsense.

The flaws in the American health system are fundamental flaws that can't be rectified through minor reforms here and there. Your health care prices are automatically going to be higher because it's for profit. You have tens of millions of people who can't even access the system because they can't afford health insurance.

A healthcare system which can't be accessed by some people who need it the most isn't a proper healthcare system. It's a business, and those that can't pay get thrown overboard.

JackRT said:

52000 seeking care outside of Canada? I have to wonder just how many were snowbirds who are mostly senior and spend up to six months in the USA or elsewhere. There are also a very large number of Canadians who work in the USA.

Click to expand...

When you look at the question that was asked in the survey, “Approximately what percentage of your patients received non-emergency medical treatment in the past 12 months outside Canada?”

That probably accounts for the vast majority. Plenty of snowbirds winter in Florida, if I was in my 70s and spent six months in Florida per year, I'd likely go in for a checkup at a local doctor as well. And my doctor back in Canada would answer yes to that question. The survey is set up to give a skewed number.

There are instances where provincial health plans will pay to get a patient treated out of province or out of country if a particular procedure isn't available or there's an unacceptably long wait for a critical situation, but there's no way that is 52,000 people per year. In fact, the question specifically states "non-emergency", which means these situations wouldn't count.

So yeah, basically this counts how many snowbirds get a checkup while living in Florida in the winter.

ExodusMe said:

Teen dies from treatable disease in Canada on waiting list

52,000 Canadians receive non-emergency medical care outside of Canada in 2014

Canadian healthcare is failing: a cautionary tale

Click to expand...

Because Fox Asked, Here Are Examples Of People Who Were Denied Health Care

The South Carolina Supreme Court has ordered an insurance company to pay $10 million for wrongly revoking the insurance policy of a 17-year-old college student after he tested positive for HIV. The court called the 2002 decision by the insurance company "reprehensible."

Click to expand...

In June 2003, Shirley Loewe went to Good Shepherd Medical Center here with a softball-size lump in her breast and was diagnosed with a rare form of breast cancer. She didn't know it, but she had just made a big mistake.

Ms. Loewe was uninsured. Under federal law, she could have gotten Medicaid coverage -- and saved herself a lot of hardship -- if she'd gone to a different clinic less than a half-mile away. But by walking through Good Shepherd's doors, Ms. Loewe unwittingly let that opportunity slip and embarked on a four-year journey through the Byzantine U.S. health-care system.

It was an odyssey that would take her to five hospitals, two clinics, two charitable organizations and two nursing homes in two states. She was denied assistance or care at least six times along the way, for reasons that ranged from not being poor enough to not being sick enough.

Click to expand...

Robin Beaton found out last June she had an aggressive form of breast cancer and needed surgery -- immediately.

Her insurance carrier precertified her for a double mastectomy and hospital stay. But three days before the operation, the insurance company called and told her they had red-flagged her chart and she would not be able to have her surgery

Click to expand...

Researchers from Harvard Medical School say the lack of coverage can be tied to about 45,000 deaths a year in the United States -- a toll that is greater than the number of people who die each year from kidney disease.

Click to expand...

...and it goes on, and on, and on

Death panels.

JackRT said:

Death panels.

Click to expand...

US insurance companies you mean?

Dave Ellis said:

US insurance companies you mean?

Click to expand...

Certainly.

inquiring mind said:

This is just my opinion, but as cost of health services remain the same or even increase, and the portion paid by public tax dollars continues to be limited or even reduced, and more people are added to Medicaid (non-payers)... the private portion (personal co-pays of those who "have to pay") will continue increasing until it’s unbearable. It just appears the government is trying to stop its bleeding, while avoiding a battle with the healthcare industry over cost regulation, and the average paying citizen is paying more and more private out of pocket costs (for everyone’s health care).

In a sense, through lack of knowledge and understanding of the situation, those who "have to pay" are covering the cost of the increasing number of Medicaid recipients without the government having to bring it to the political forefront or come up with a workable solution (oh they claim they’re working on it, but nothing ever seems to happen other than premiums go up). In my opinion, Obamacare was an attempt to put more of the younger generation on high deductible (out of pocket – private) coverage to help disperse and slow the private portion increase on those who "must pay", but apparently that’s not working. All that most of us on the aging side, “who have to pay”, really know is that “our” healthcare costs continue going up.

There’s a “hard truth” we’re going to have to come to terms with: if our social programs for those who “don’t pay” continue to provide as comfortable a lifestyle as possible, and the healthcare for all who “can’t pay” is provided, then those who “have to pay” will continue to see huge increases whether it be in public tax dollars or out of pocket at the doctor’s office or hospital. It sure doesn’t appear healthcare costs will be lowered any time soon, unless the Trump administration can pull it off. So, when you’re crying “open borders” and “send us your poor and needy”… you better know where you stand and how much you can afford to give. This is just my opinion and my assumptions, I don’t have any social or healthcare industry knowledge or the numbers to back them up. Maybe someone who does will respond with any corrections and more detailed information.

Click to expand...

Healthcare in the US is driven by capitalism, first and foremost. Pharma companies, medical device companies and hospitals, make billions in profits. In fact, Europe benefits from these companies basically raping people in the United States, so Europe can get the same products, at a fraction of the costs the US pays.

Also, insurance companies are middle men in the US and they also make billions. Physicians in the US, make 3-4 times what similar physicians do in other countries.

So, you have a lot of players in healthcare, making big bucks and that means; high costs.

Dave Ellis said:

When did I ever claim those things were covered? I didn't, therefore I never lied. Withdraw your accusation or this could count as flaming

Note: I believe those things SHOULD be covered, however I never once claimed that they were.

Click to expand...

You're claim was that healthcare in Canada is treated as a human right. Some provinces don't cover prescriptions or dental care. Therefore, your claim that health care is a human right and should be basic to all humans (like Canada) is a lie. My point is that you and @JackRT keep sugar coating your healthcare system as if it is the best and somehow everyone who doesn't do it Canada's way is morally inferior. Take a look in the mirror please. Health care is complicated and there is no 'one-size fits all' system.

Dave Ellis said:

Do you understand what a single payer system is? If you did I'm not sure why you'd ever rather make that bizarre claim. Private funding can include people buying supplementary coverage (ie so they get a private hospital room instead of sharing with another patient), drug and dental plans, private donations to the hospitals, etc. Those things are over and above the health insurance all Canadians have though.

Click to expand...

Yes, my point was that if people are getting supplementary coverage, then your system is deficient as you stated that "Canadian citizens get equal health coverage". That was a lie also given 30% of spending is private. You're system is just a mix of capitalism and socialism as the private spending subsidizes the poor government care.

Dave Ellis said:

In fact, virtually all health staff are privately employed. All of the hospitals and doctors offices are privately owned and operated. It's only the insurance plan that's publicly funded.

This is why your assertion that the government creates waiting lists to control demand is absurd. The government doesn't run the hospitals or doctors offices, they have no control over who gets seen, and when they get seen. The provincial health insurance plans get the bill after the patient has been treated.

The wait times to see a specialist are a problem, sure. The wait time to see a doctor for basic medical procedures is minimal. If I called up my doctor for an annual checkup, I'd very likely get in next week, if not the week after.

The problem with specialist wait times is mainly administrative, taken from a CTV News article:

"As a family doctor, Dutt said she sees a “whole host” of different reasons for varying wait times across the country, including how physicians prioritize the care of their patients and access to resources in different provinces.

However, there are “lots of things” happening in Canada to make those wait times shorter, Dutt said, adding that the medical community has seen wait times go down “significantly” in places that have centralized their referral process.

“Often, as a family doc, I send off a referral to one doctor, I don’t know their wait times,” she said. “One of the best things that we can do is centralize that and have all the people needing care going to a centralized place so the first doctor that’s available sees that patient.”

Michael Decter, chair of the advocacy group Patients Canada, told CTV’s Power Play that simply pouring more money into the system won’t fix it.

His proof, he said, is that the federal government has increased health transfers to provinces by six per cent a year for more than a decade, yet wait times have gotten worse.

“It’s about innovation, it’s about accountability, it’s about focus and it’s about transparency,” he said. “It’s not about more money.”"

No system is perfect, and reforming that system to streamline the referral process would probably help in a big way. However, just because we have an area of concern that some reforms would fix doesn't mean the whole system needs to be thrown out. Your whole line of argument seems to depend on that kind of reasoning, and it's nonsense.

Click to expand...

Naw, you are just strawmanning my argument. Your single payer system is based on rationing 'non-essential' procedures, so you are put on a waiting list as the government decides whether it is medically necessary or not. This is to keep cost down as noted in this article (they say supply and I say demand but it is all based on perspective). Therefore, the Canadian government is attempting to control the demand for healthcare.

The problem is that you have a non-medical professional deciding something medically significant. Hence, my argument that waiting lists lead to deaths, etc... as individuals who would have otherwise received treatment and gone through the process faster based on the mechanics of a free market and supply/demand. The statistics regarding wait times and deaths can be found in this article.

Here is an excerpt:
Research has repeatedly indicated that wait times for medically necessary treatment are not benign inconveniences. Wait times can, and do, have serious consequences such as increased pain, suffering, and mental anguish. In certain instances, they can also result in poorer medical outcomes—transforming potentially reversible illnesses or injuries into chronic, irreversible conditions, or even permanent disabilities. In many instances, patients may also have to forgo their wages while they wait for treatment, resulting in an economic cost to the individuals themselves and the economy in general.

Dave Ellis said:

The flaws in the American health system are fundamental flaws that can't be rectified through minor reforms here and there. Your health care prices are automatically going to be higher because it's for profit. You have tens of millions of people who can't even access the system because they can't afford health insurance.

A healthcare system which can't be accessed by some people who need it the most isn't a proper healthcare system. It's a business, and those that can't pay get thrown overboard.

Click to expand...

1) I am not defending the American healthcare system. It is broken. It is not based on free market mechanics. It has always been subsidized by the government. Therefore, to make any claim that capitalism is at fault would only be done in ignorance.

2) That is bad reasoning. Free market capitalism has reduced the cost of many goods while maintaining a 'for profit' market. I don't think I need to substantiate that claim, but let me know if you need sources.

3) I agree with you on one point. The issue is price. The question is; what is the best way to reduce the price of healthcare? Free market mechanics is the best. We need to reduce the time required to educate to-be healthcare professionals and eliminate competitive barriers for insurance companies.

TheNorwegian said:

Nobody is taking money out of the picture. Police officers get a wage, paid by public funds. Police work is "socialized" and free for whoever needs the assistance of the police. No-one would suggest that police officers do not deserve wages. There is no reason why not the same can apply to health workers

Click to expand...

Seems like you jumped in at the wrong point. His original argument was that healthcare is a human right and should be free for everyone. The logical conclusion is that healthcare workers should not get a wage.

Your analogy does not work because it is not based on whether it is socialized or not, but whether it is a human right (e.g. food, clothing, shelter, etc...).

Police work is not a human right. They are there to enforce the laws of the government. It only makes sense that the government would pay them. Otherwise, you would have a conflict of interest between the government and the private police force (why wouldn't the private police force just take over the state they work in lol?).

bhsmte said:

Healthcare in the US is driven by capitalism, first and foremost. Pharma companies, medical device companies and hospitals, make billions in profits. In fact, Europe benefits from these companies basically raping people in the United States, so Europe can get the same products, at a fraction of the costs the US pays.

Also, insurance companies are middle men in the US and they also make billions. Physicians in the US, make 3-4 times what similar physicians do in other countries.

So, you have a lot of players in healthcare, making big bucks and that means; high costs.

Click to expand...

Healthcare in the US is not strictly capitalism. Healthcare in the US has always been subsidized by the government. The high cost is due to the high demand of the market. It is because the government has been interfering that individuals don't care what the bill is when they go to the doctor. The government pays for most of it and they keep going. If consumers had to foot the bill they would stop going to the doctor for the common cold, etc...

ExodusMe said:

My point is that you and @JackRT keep sugar coating your healthcare system as if it is the best and somehow everyone who doesn't do it Canada's way is morally inferior.

Click to expand...

I do not believe I have ever claimed Canadian medicare to be the best or any of that morally inferior crap. It is IMHO a better system than is presently in place in the USA.

JackRT said:

I do not believe I have ever claimed Canadian medicare to be the best or any of that morally inferior crap. It is IMHO a better system than is presently in place in the USA.

Click to expand...

Sure, then you better go back and edit all those posts saying that US treats healthcare as a commodity vs Canada as a human right. You are implying Canada's system is morally superior.

ExodusMe said:

Sure, then you better go back and edit all those posts saying that US treats healthcare as a commodity vs Canada as a human right. You are implying Canada's system is morally superior.

Click to expand...

Medicare is certainly not a human right in Canada but I would guess that the majority of Canadians are gradually coming to regard it as such. The profit motive is certainly much more of a factor in the USA but I made no judgment as to morality --- that was your inference.

ExodusMe said:

Healthcare in the US is not strictly capitalism. Healthcare in the US has always been subsidized by the government. The high cost is due to the high demand of the market. It is because the government has been interfering that individuals don't care what the bill is when they go to the doctor. The government pays for most of it and they keep going. If consumers had to foot the bill they would stop going to the doctor for the common cold, etc...

Click to expand...

Please explain, how the US government pays for most of the healthcare costs.

ExodusMe said:

Sure, then you better go back and edit all those posts saying that US treats healthcare as a commodity vs Canada as a human right. You are implying Canada's system is morally superior.

Click to expand...

It is morally superior. When a nation decides that all should have adequate healthcare, vs another nation that basically says; go fend for yourself, it is morally superior. I wonder if Jesus would want all people to have adequate healthcare?

Dave Ellis said:

It's still very common for Americans close to the border to come north to buy their prescription medication because it's usually anywhere between 30-70% cheaper here.

Click to expand...

That's because we sell them to you cheap, so we have to make up for it by charging ourselves more. Our med consumers are subsidizing Canadian med users. Also your government caps the price of drugs sold there.

OldWiseGuy said:

That's because we sell them to you cheap, so we have to make up for it by charging ourselves more. Our med consumers are subsidizing Canadian med users. Also your government caps the price of drugs sold there.

Click to expand...

Or is it because your med users have not gone to the trouble to negotiate a fair price?

JackRT said:

Or is it because your med users have not gone to the trouble to negotiate a fair price?

Click to expand...

I think we are subsidizing many countries with cheap meds, not just Canada. I can't complain however as I have a really good drug plan. I pay $5 co-pay for a month supply of 80 mg atorvastatin (Lipitor). I don't know what the cost to my insurance company is.