• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Former anti-UHC nut

dtugg said:
I suppose I have no solid evidence. Rather, I see two countries (Canada and the UK) that are funded similarly have (had?) similar problems so I cannot help but think the two might be related.
Click to expand...

So where do you assign the blame for the fact that in 2005 (from Professor Yaffle's link) wait times for a doctor's appointment were longer in the US than in the UK?

By the way, thanks to Professor Yaffle for that look into the recent past of various countries' wait times and problems with access to health care. (I hope that satisfies UnLoved Rebel as I've now thanked both him and Prof Y.)
 
Matthew Best said:
So where do you assign the blame for the fact that in 2005 (from Professor Yaffle's link) wait times for a doctor's appointment were longer in the US than in the UK?

By the way, thanks to Professor Yaffle for that look into the recent past of various countries' wait times and problems with access to health care. (I hope that satisfies UnLoved Rebel as I've now thanked both him and Prof Y.)
Click to expand...

I dunno. But having to wait a few days or go the ER (and I know from first hand experience that the ER sucks, I once had to wait there for 8 hours with a broken hand) sure beats having to wait a few months.
 
dtugg said:
(Please forgive me if the following posts lacks coherency; I've been drinking a bit.)

I've long considered myself a libertarian (emphasis little "l") and thus have been opposed to UHC on ideological grounds. I've recently seen the error of my ways, much through the help of this forum. I now take a more pragmatic approach to this issue. The free market obviously cannot solve the healthcare problem in the US, evidenced by the fact that healthcare costs are spiraling out of control and that every other civilized country in the world ensures that all of their citizens have access to good healthcare for cheaper than is spent in the US (and in some countries cheaper than is spent just by the US government).

Although not rich, I am young, healthy, and single with no kids, and thus can afford good coverage at a very good price ($100/month with $2000 max out of pocket annually, covers virtually everything with no lifetime max), I realize that not everybody is as lucky as I am. I am willing to pay significantly more (by that I mean maybe 2-4x), if necessary, to ensure that everybody in the country could get the same coverage no matter what (I am reasonable sure that Kaiser Permanente wouldn't drop me for some arbitrary reason, but the plan I am on only applies to Hawaii and I don't think I can get as good a deal anywhere else.)

One of the best arguments for UCH in the US is that everybody that has a job in the US is forced to pay into "socialized" medicine (Medicare/Medicaid) but most cannot access it. I find this to be totally outrageous. The idea that somebody could be forced to pay for the medical care of others but cannot get the same care himself sickens me. For example, Forum member Travis (among many others) cannot get affordable healthcare because of pre-existing conditions. (Note to Travis: If an acceptable healthcare plan does not pass in Congress, you might do well to come to Hawaii. Here employers must, IIRC, offer insurance to those working more than 20 hrs/wk, and they cannot discriminate on the basis of pre-existing conditions).

I would not prefer a single payers system like in the UK or Canada, because (1) I have serious doubts that Congress would create an effective one. (2) The wait lists in those countries seem unreasonably long (average 4-5 moths IIRC). I would much prefer a system like in the Netherlands or Switzerland where the health insurance industry is heavily regulated, everybody must purchase it, and those that cannot are assisted.

But the above is probably a pipe dream. It seems that though Congress has no spine whatsoever. They, even the Democrats, seem to care more about the bottom line of their backers rather than the well-being of their constituency. It's a shame. I suppose that I should be glad that I am one of the lucky ones that will (probably) not be screwed over by the current situation.
Click to expand...

Good post. I've been struggling a similar issue in that I think all Americans deserve healthcare (and should get it) and that I don't want the government going down the path to nationalizing 1/6th of the economy. It's really hard to get both of those to happen!

What do you think of New Zealands system?
 
BTW, I also think that the US should not adopt a model similar to the UK, simply because it would be too difficult a transition between the models. Something more similar to germany would probably be more suitable and easier to implement.
 
We also have to deal with a population 6x bigger with about 30 million illegal immigrants.
 
UNLoVedRebel said:
We also have to deal with a population 6x bigger with about 30 million illegal immigrants.
Click to expand...

I don't see why population size has to be a problem. You could implement it on a statewise basis, with reciprocal arrangements between states, similar to the arrangements we have in the EU. That way you could even have different models in each state.
 
Newtons Bit said:
Good post. I've been struggling a similar issue in that I think all Americans deserve healthcare (and should get it) and that I don't want the government going down the path to nationalizing 1/6th of the economy. It's really hard to get both of those to happen!
Click to expand...

Glad to see I am not alone!

What do you think of New Zealands system?
Click to expand...

I do not know enough about it to pass any judgment.
 
drug;5231767I would not prefer a single payers system like in the UK or Canada said:
This is a false dichotomy argument AND an incorrect one as well!

First what you are saying is you don't want A because be is bad!?
Well then WHY don't you apply this to EVERYTHING the govt does!? Your avatar is of some kind of service man ( Is that you?) Why are you willing to not only support but be part of something the govt does essentially on the same format as UHC/single payer in this but not something as important as health care?

SECOND and perhaps more important - It is false that the Govt cannot deliver health care efficiently and in a timely fashion that is better than the private sector - look at Medicaid! No I am not interested in getting into an anecdotal pissing match about a case by case basis - yes I readily admit that it is rife with fraud and inefficiencies. Yet dollar for dollar it is more efficient delivering 97c on the dollar over what the low 80 for the private sector.

I would much prefer a system like in the Netherlands or Switzerland where the health insurance industry is heavily regulated, everybody must purchase it, and those that cannot are assisted.
Click to expand...

Not going to argue with you on this. I am open to considering either option. The point is the Republicans constantly tell us how GREAT the US is and how great the free market is at solving problems. They tell us that UHC (in any form) is SOCIALIST

YET they are INCAPABLE of coming up with a better solution - and saying that the status quo is better is patently stupid - AND they actively support socialism by not helping the dems kill McCarran - Ferguson.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
But the EU does not fund any health care centrally (beyond public health matters).

If the US Federal government got out of health funding altogether the population comparison might have validity but I am not aware of anyone suggesting this (unless you just did)
 
Darat said:
No it isn't a non-sequitur since we have "reciprocal" schemes set-up between most EU states, which is something the USA could adopt if they went to a state by state set of UHC systems.

ETA: See http://www.nhs.uk/NHSEngland/Healthcareabroad/Pages/About.aspx for one example.
Click to expand...

Reciprocity would eliminate the problem of people being forced to get care in their state when the one next door offers something better. I think this is a good solution. I wish, currently, we could have reciprocity in medicaid. It would certainly benefit a lot of folks.

(Unless I'm misunderstanding what you're saying)
 
dtugg said:
The free market obviously cannot solve the healthcare problem in the US, evidenced by the fact that healthcare costs are spiraling out of control
Click to expand...

Would you honestly describe the existing US health care system as a "free market"?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom