Canadians bristle at American criticisms of their system 8/31

...
"The flaw in the American system," Ontario Health Minister David Caplan said recently, "is that first they check the size of your wallet, not the size of your need."

Obama has stepped in to defend his neighbors' system.

"I don't find Canadians particularly scary, but I guess some of the opponents of reform think they make a good bogeyman. I think that's a mistake," he said.

In seeking to spread affordable coverage, including to the nearly 50 million uninsured Americans, Obama has said he isn't looking to copy the Canadian model, but wants to build on the existing U.S. system with a mix of private and government-funded insurance.

For all the rhetoric, both Canadians and Americans appear in opinion polls to be broadly content with the care they have.

A Harris-Decima poll published last month found that 82 percent of Canadians believe their system outdoes America's, and 70 percent felt it was working very well or well. The telephone poll of 1,000 Canadians was conducted from June 4 to 8 with a margin of error of 3.1 percentage points.

A survey released this month by the nonpartisan Robert Wood Johnson Foundation said more than 86 percent of Americans rated their care as good to excellent. But 52 percent were very or somewhat worried they wouldn't be able to afford future care, and nearly 30 percent said they were very or somewhat worried it would bankrupt them. The telephone poll of 500 Americans had a margin of error of 4.4 percentage points.

Canada's system provides its citizens with coverage at a much lower per capita cost than the U.S. largely because its single-payer system, in which the government picks up the tab, greatly reduces administrative costs.
...

Millions of Americans with Health Insurance Find They are Underinsured When in Medical Need 8/31

Health care: Millions pay for coverage, but it's not what it seems

By Bobby Caina Calvan McClatchy/Tribune news

August 30, 2009

SACRAMENTO, Calif. - -- Laura Burwell was weeding her backyard vineyard last summer when she was bit by a rattlesnake.

Then came the unexpected sting of a $73,000 hospital bill -- and shock upon learning her health insurance would cover a mere $3,000.

"It was one of the longest, most stressful periods in my life," said Burwell, a self-employed wine shop owner.

...

Edited by Slartibartfast - August 31 2009 at 11:54

Slartibartfast wrote: Epignosis wrote: My wife was once was charged $600 for a late night hospital visit in which all they did was check her urine and give her a prescription.  I wrote them a letter and said that they should have made her a sandwich and massaged her feet for that price. Oh no, hospital food is terrible.

I love the phrase "no-brainer" in this discussion, as though this is some completely straightforward issue and those who oppose a universal health care system are without brains.

Most of the comments I have seen are lazy generalizations anyway.

I'm more in favor of seeing health care costs go down (again, major tort reform is one starting point), not taxpayers footing exorbitant bills,  so those who need to see a doctor for the most part can afford it.

My wife was once was charged $600 for a late night hospital visit in which all they did was check her urine and give her a prescription.  I wrote them a letter and said that they should have made her a sandwich and massaged her feet for that price.

Epignosis wrote: Relax J...we conservatives are just cold-hearted b*****ds who don't care about the little folks...even if we are the little folks (I know I am...I'm twelfth generation poor). As I mentioned, I think a moderate approach for health care could work... ...but I do find it kind of weird that people who probably would oppose slavery in America don't mind people working hard to have their money taken from them for the benefit of those who didn't lift a finger for it. Just sayin.

Robert,

I agree something needs to be done with health care. What's going on right now does not work. I just do not believe that Obama's approach will solve anything.

You know, US citizenship (or that of any other country for that matter) is not mandatory. If you don't like what the government asks of you, you can always renounce it, and found your own society where everyone is free, and no one will impose anything on you. Dream on, kids, dream on...

Poor kids, who have no idea of what life is really like, and believe in the big, bad, red bogeyman... Poor, spoiled kids with their inhuman, heartless, cruel Libertarian beliefs, who think they are God and nothing will ever happen to them just because they're gifted and work hard... Poor, fanatical, misguided idiots, who would turn the world into an even worse place that it already is. If you could only realise that everything you have could be taken away from you by a mere twist of fate, without any fault of your own, and you might find yourself in the same shoes of those people whom you are so quick to judge, without knowing anything of their circumstances. The best I can wish you and your ilk is to find yourselves on the receiving end one day, and to find the same level of 'compassion' that you are showing.

And please, stop mouthing off inanities about Communism... You have no idea of what you are talking about. If you want to continue making fools of yourselves, then don't complain if all the rest of the world laughs at you, ignorant Americans. The world does not revolve around you, as much as it may pain you to realize it.

About taxes:

You can earn as much money as you can because you live in a society with laws and government. Naturally, that needs to be paid for. Taxation is the only way to do that. As a citizen, you have responsibilities as well as rights.
Universal healthcare offers accountability beyond how much you're paying and the threat of mild bad publicity, it offers you more freedom (freedom is not the same as independence) if your current healthcare plan is tied to your work, chances are it'll increase life expectancy, it removes the chance you'll have to negotiate with your insurance when you're already very sick and it offers competition with which existing insurance providers will have to keep up. As far as I can see, it's a case of social cooperation which will provide benefits most obviously to the poor, but which will make a positive difference to the lives and opportunities of virtually anyone in the country.

(The Madoff case is revealing: formerly well-off people find themselves seriously concerned about their healthcare at age 65)

KoS wrote: SentimentalMercenary wrote: KoS wrote: Leningrad wrote: J-Man wrote: No. Not at all. Why should I have to pay for other people's problems? Next thing that's coming is communism. I'm watching Obama destroy America one bill at a time. You are the reason that so many people are shot in revolutions No, they are the reason Bush was elected twice.. Okaaaayy so because we disagree with socialism it means that we support Bush and stuff? No, when you make comments like " the next thing that's coming is communism" it makes you look like a dumbass.  I don't like how Obama is handling things either(he's too reactionary), but comments like aren't saying anything.  Socialism has nothing to with anything really. Bush and the Neo-cons supported a lot more legislation that is socialist of nature than Obama. I would just like to say that my political views are more libertarian than anything else.

The T pointed out that most people have no idea what communism actually is, and this is quite right. 'Communism' is a bogeyman word, used to scare Americans into supporting right wing legislation. To most people the 'c' word, doesn't have any actual definition. It's as meaningless a term to most people as 'codpiece' or 'sixpence' and yet when the word is uttered, people start flapping around like frightened ducks running for the water, when they see a dog off a leash.

People need to get a grip. A government trying to introduce some supportative policies for their populations less well off, is not an act of communism. If you think it is, go and live in North Korea for while. If you survive the experince without being beaten to death or shot, then return to the US, and start counting your lucky stars...and stripes! You're in a good place.

Communism, my arse!

The T wrote: Equality 7-2521 wrote: I don't even support Medicaid and Medicare.    You basically support death.... (not the band...)     Let the old rot, let the poor die....   Now THAT's the sign of an advanced civilization.....

He does not support death, and neither do I! There's a point where we must draw the line! The rich are rich for a reason. I'm not rich and I'm not poor, so why should I care about this plan at all? It just IS NOT RIGHT to take money that people worked hard for and give it to people collecting money in a soup can on the street. I actually donate to charities and fundraisers. I don't believe anyone should starve or not have enough money to live in this world. But when the government is FORCING you to pay for anything of theirs, then we have a problem.

The Antique wrote: So do you oppose taxes altogether? The only reason people have a right not to have money stolen from them is because we collectively agree that we have this right. I am making the argument that this right ends where it impedes our ability to provide basic services to people who cannot provide it for themselves. I am not making this rich vs. poor. It is simply the case that, if more money is needed and the only way to get it is through taxes, the fairest way to obtain it is to tax most those with the most money, since it causes them the least harm. People work jobs based in part on their opportunities (going to college will get you a better job in general, but people born into poor families are much less likely to get this opportunity than people born into rich families). As for natural abilities (in which I should not have included strength since it is very much dependent on the effort you put into it, way moreso than the others), yes, they can be improved, but no amount of hard work is going to turn me into an NBA star or a person with an IQ of 90 into a particle physicist. In addition, there are simply not enough well-paying jobs for everyone to make a reasonable living, and moreover there are low-paying jobs that need to be done (some of which are almost exclusively done by people born into poor families or born with low intelligence, such as janitors, at least in my personal experience). For these reasons, the distribution of wealth in a capitalist system will inevitably be arbitrary and unfair to a very great degree, and thus it is not immoral to take money from those this system benefits in order to help those it shafts.

Probably the most intelligently reasoned post in the entire thread. The portable version might read as:
It is scarcity alone that confers a value on anything.