Healthcare comparison - a case study

[kallend 1,623]

Twins with identical cancers, treated in different systems:

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/akw4p5/one-twin-got-cancer-in-the-uk-the-other-got-it-in-the-us

[mbohu 77]

5 hours ago, kallend said:

Twins with identical cancers, treated in different systems:

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/akw4p5/one-twin-got-cancer-in-the-uk-the-other-got-it-in-the-us

I keep telling ya...

[BIGUN 1,051]

8 hours ago, kallend said:

. . . treated in different systems:

I quit reading after, "You get free medicine also: Since I'm over 60, all my medicine is free."

[kallend 1,623]

1 hour ago, BIGUN said:

I quit reading after, "You get free medicine also: Since I'm over 60, all my medicine is free."

Head-in-sand syndrome.

[wmw999 2,120]

3 hours ago, BIGUN said:

I quit reading after, "You get free medicine also: Since I'm over 60, all my medicine is free."

Had she used the politically correct wording of "taxpayer (of whom I am one) paid" would you have finished? In this case, I took "free" to be as contrasted with what her sister paid out of pocket, as in "it had no impact on my day-to-day budget." 

I doubt she's dumb enough to think that the treatment comes from the fairies, any more than you think "freeway" is a misnomer because taxes paid for it.

Wendy P.

[gowlerk 1,904]

5 hours ago, BIGUN said:

I quit reading after, "You get free medicine also: Since I'm over 60, all my medicine is free."

And only the elderly matter? Is there no one in your family or close to you with no, or more likely poor insurance? 

[turtlespeed 212]

36 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

And only the elderly matter? Is there no one in your family or close to you with no, or more likely poor insurance? 

Everyone in the US has access to healthcare.

[DJL 232]

Did the American resort to building a meth empire?

[gowlerk 1,904]

1 minute ago, turtlespeed said:

Everyone in the US has access to healthcare.

Well that’s good. Who knew it could be so simple?

[turtlespeed 212]

24 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

Well that’s good. Who knew it could be so simple?

The lie that people didn't have access to healthcare was, and is, stupid.

[Coreece 190]

16 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

The lie that people didn't have access to healthcare was, and is, stupid.

I think the key word you're missing there is "affordable."

Do you think it's affordable for cancer patients to be billed $200 for 2 weeks of TV (40 stations) and $100 for a room phone regardless of whether or not they even used them?

How much do you pay for cable per month?  How many stations do you get?

How much do you pay for your landline per month?

[DJL 232]

27 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

The lie that people didn't have access to healthcare was, and is, stupid.

Why are we playing a game of pretend that the point isn't affordability?

[turtlespeed 212]

21 minutes ago, DJL said:

Why are we playing a game of pretend that the point isn't affordability?

Because words mean stuff.

[turtlespeed 212]

24 minutes ago, Coreece said:

I think the key word you're missing there is "affordable."

Do you think it's affordable for cancer patients to be billed $200 for 2 weeks of TV (40 stations) and $100 for a room phone regardless of whether or not they even used them?

How much do you pay for cable per month?  How many stations do you get?

How much do you pay for your landline per month?

Don't you know - its not about what you pay for them now.

They are socialist entities and the public needs to pay for them.

They pay for them when they are made available for them.

 

[gowlerk 1,904]

53 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

The lie that people didn't have access to healthcare was, and is, stupid.

I’m not going to engage you in debating this clear obfuscation of the facts.

[BIGUN 1,051]

3 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

I’m not going to engage you in debating this clear obfuscation of the facts.

Then why write anything?

[BIGUN 1,051]

5 hours ago, kallend said:

Head-in-sand syndrome.

You need to do more than be a cheerleader for "free" healthcare - you need to explain how we pay the 3.5 trillion in health care costs in the US each year, You know; about 18% of our GDP. About $12,000 for every man, woman and child in the US. Where's your plan?

[Coreece 190]

1 hour ago, turtlespeed said:

1 hour ago, Coreece said:

I think the key word you're missing there is "affordable."

Do you think it's affordable for cancer patients to be billed $200 for 2 weeks of TV (40 stations) and $100 for a room phone regardless of whether or not they even used them?

How much do you pay for cable per month?  How many stations do you get?

How much do you pay for your landline per month?

Don't you know - its not about what you pay for them now.

They are socialist entities and the public needs to pay for them.

They pay for them when they are made available for them.

No, I don't know what you're talking about.

I'm just saying that these costs should be built into the cost of the room that insurance should pay.  And even if some insurances do pay, why is the hospital trying to make a profit off cable TV and phones that people didn't ask for or may not even use?  I mean the hospitals are charging at least 5 times more in two weeks for TV than what cable companies charge for 1 month.

I mean it's almost as ridiculous if they started charging you for toilet paper and sending you electric/water bills for your hospital stay.

[wmw999 2,120]

"Here’s the real reason health care costs so much more in the US"

I've linked to an article from a couple of years ago that goes into some detail. 

Number one is that medical care costs more. Our (same) drugs are more expensive, and the same procedures in hospitals are more expensive than in other first-world countries. Our doctors make more, but they also spend a significantly larger portion of their time and resources on administrative costs -- insurance billing, justifying courses of care, etc. 

I have a friend who's a GP; she said that her most important and valuable employee is her insurance coder. Not any clinical staff, but the one who makes the paperwork easier. 

The biggest thing that a nationalized scheme will do is likely consolidate some of the costs of the multiple networks. People with lots of money will always have access to whatever medical care they want. But while 30 years ago people all came to the US for care, now it's pretty common for Americans to go elsewhere.

There is no system that will have no negative effects whatsoever. But because the people who are hurt most by our current system don't really have a voice (poor, or poor health without job-related insurance), we don't hear them, or we discount them because they're not us.

Wendy P.

[Coreece 190]

5 minutes ago, wmw999 said:

Our (same) drugs are more expensive, and the same procedures in hospitals are more expensive than in other first-world countries.

Part of me wonders if our high costs are subsidizing other countries indirectly.

Also, are these high costs essential to the quality of medicine and development of pharmaceuticals?  If the U.S had a system similar to other countries, would the high costs then be spread out and passed on to other countries?

[yobnoc 142]

1 hour ago, BIGUN said:

You need to do more than be a cheerleader for "free" healthcare - you need to explain how we pay the 3.5 trillion in health care costs in the US each year, You know; about 18% of our GDP. About $12,000 for every man, woman and child in the US. Where's your plan?

Um...get rid of the administrative costs associated with private insurance plans as well as the built-in safeguards in the form of jacked up prices on basic medical products and services (inflated by the hospitals to get more money from insurance companies so they don't get screwed by providing care for people who can't pay), decrease our defense spending (fraud, waste, and abuse), and increase taxes (offset by having no out-of-pocket expense for healthcare).

[SkyDekker 1,121]

3 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

The lie that people didn't have access to healthcare was, and is, stupid.

Financial barriers are barriers. It does stop people from accessing health care. In some cases it also slows down access to health care, with people trying to find doctors who accept their type of insurance. Often during stressful and difficult times. That too is a barrier.

Life isn't as simple as you often seem to think it is.

[turtlespeed 212]

13 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:

Financial barriers are barriers. It does stop people from accessing health care. In some cases it also slows down access to health care, with people trying to find doctors who accept their type of insurance. Often during stressful and difficult times. That too is a barrier.

Life isn't as simple as you often seem to think it is.

It is also not always as complicated as complicated as you would have us believe.

[billvon 2,394]

7 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

It is also not always as complicated as complicated as you would have us believe.

Exactly.  Getting good healthcare is easy.  That's why the US has such cheap, cost effective health care.

[yobnoc 142]

1 minute ago, billvon said:

Exactly.  Getting good healthcare is easy.  That's why the US has such cheap, cost effective health care.

And with provably and objectively worse outcomes.