American Healthcare: How your system works

by Diogenesister 100 Replies latest social current

  • road to nowhere
    road to nowhere

    Any " fix" has unintended consequences. Portability between jobs, waiting periods for coverage, gap insurance, deductibles......

    The waiting and denial still goes goes on, according to insurance requirements and hospital criteria

    Remember Obama care was written by lobbyists for insurance companies and hospitals

    Theoretically preventive care is good. Then remember things like soda taxes/ limits, safe injection,

  • LongHairGal


    I’m with you and want to go to the doctor when I want. I can imagine people dying because they can’t get the surgery/treatments they need in time!!

    As far as other comments: I remember many years ago I was in an emergency room because I had fallen on my tailbone. I was crying because I was in so much pain. I saw with my own eyes young mothers coming in with babies for regular care! I do understand that emergency room staff have to make a judgment call as to who is worse off. The guy coming in with the heart attack goes first, etc.

    I know people talk about Medicare and/or Healthcare for all but I don’t see how it could happen. Never mind the cost. Just who is going to pay for this??? Think about the current economic climate with no jobs. Never mind that the infrastructure isn’t even in place for something of this tremendous magnitude. Plus you need to staff these places. A doctor who paid big bucks to have his practice isn’t going to be forced to work in such a place for peanuts. I know a doctor who retired and moved because he didn’t want to deal with Obamacare.

    No, sadly, current Medicare recipients will be lucky to hold onto what they have with their supplement plans with the premiums that keep steadily inching up!

  • SydBarrett

    "I can imagine people dying because they can’t get the surgery/treatments they need in time!!"

    So you really think this is some sort of crisis in the UK, Canada, Germany, France, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Singapore, Belgium, The Netherlands, Spain, Portugal, Australia, Luxembourg, Austria, Croatia, Czech Republic etc etc etc.......and only the US has got it right? Many (most?) have higher life expectancy, lower infant mortality and easier access to treatment than the US.

    Even in the US with private insurance, it's not uncommon to have to wait for certain procedures. I've never had to wait to see my general practitioner more than a day or two for an appointment, but if something more serious is going on..people wait. Being a private system doesn't mean there are magically endless numbers of hospital beds and surgeons available. I guess if you're super rich and can hop on a jet at a moments notice you can demand to be taken to wherever in the country there is an opening immediately. But most aren't.

    As I mentioned earlier I had surgery 4 years ago. From the time of my initial consultation to actually having the operation was about 3 months. Granted it was not life threatening but it was an awfully uncomfortable for 3 months.

    " I saw with my own eyes young mothers coming in with babies for regular care! "

    Is this supposed to be an argument in favor of private insurance?? Poor people use the emergency room for regular care because they don't have insurance.

    This thread got me reading about other countries system. South Korea ranks #1 and is a mix of government and private. Maybe that is the best route. Everyday things are covered universally. So you can take your kids or yourself to the doctor for regular checkups, minor illnesses and injuries etc. But they are also required to purchase private insurance to cover catastrophic things like cancer. Perhaps a system like this would allow all americans to get basic healthcare without using the emergency room and also without the extravagent cost of expanding medicare to everyone for everything.

  • LongHairGal

    No, Syd, I never said any of those things. So, don’t put words in my mouth.

    I just don’t think it’s doable here..for many reasons.

  • Fisherman

    Money and more money. People are forced and willingly have no choice to pay everything for their lives but if they have no money then the gov will help after squeezing all the $$$ they can get out of you. Once the gov started regulating the medical business that is the end of it. In a nutshell. No money no interest.

  • Anony Mous
    Anony Mous

    What do you mean? The US does have universal healthcare, nobody is prevented from going into a hospital and requesting care. The US also has government paid healthcare as well as private healthcare systems. Turns out, private healthcare is cheaper and more accessible and has better outcomes than government run systems, look at NYS that has quite a few government run healthcare systems, they are progressively closing and higher cost and came under heavy criticism as the governor let thousands die during COVID for cost savings reasons.

    Canada has the same problems, 18 month wait periods are unheard of in the US, but UK, Canada and Europe often have these as the average. Ambulance times, critical care wait times, cancer care wait times and outcomes for all those categories are all worse anywhere else in the world and studies have shown that once taxes are taken into account, much more expensive.

  • SydBarrett


    The various points of view in this thread shows you in a nutshell the two sides of the issue any time it's ever come up for serious debate in my lifetime. (twice. During Clinton's first term and again under Obama).

    As I said, one's point of view generally aligns with your political leanings. People like me who think that some sort of Universal care (perhaps not NHS level) would be an improvement over the mess we have now. And the other side who believe it would be an expensive disaster and Canada, UK,Australia, most of Asia and all of Western Europe hate their system, are dying in droves and secretly wish they were Americans.

    Unless the demographics change drastically in the future it's likely to remain a deadlocked issue and it'll stay as it is, perhaps with a few minor cosmetic changes now and then.

  • Anony Mous
    Anony Mous

    @Syd: in both cases (Clinton and Obama) the left got what it wants, a massive expansion of government spending. The results were the same, ObamaCare tripled healthcare expenses for many people, reduced coverage and options and as a result many hospitals closed.

    Show me an example where government healthcare isn’t an utter disaster and people don’t avail themselves of private healthcare whenever possible. Medicare/Medicaid/ObamaCare however pays only 70-80% of true costs, the rest is subsidized by the rest of us.

    The problem is that government is absolutely good at nothing. It cannot compete with a free market, thus you need to force people to pay for it, and even then it ends up a disaster. If it were better, it would pay for itself and people would choose it over private options. Somehow this is not possible in the NHS, not in Canada, not in Australia, not in Europe.

    I’ve lived in many places, the best and cheapest healthcare option is in the US and that is an objective, measurable fact.

    Now you can have a conversation whether government should pay for the poorest to afford healthcare. IMHO, people making less than minimum wage (which is ~$30k/y in your pocket for those outside the US) should get some assistance covering a private insurance plan until such time an able bodied person can get a job (up to 6 months).

    Currently ObamaCare pays for a government insurance plan for people having up to $55k net wages without restrictions, so the US already has “government healthcare” for almost 50% of the population and it sucks.

    People in the EU are generally astounded that people claim not to be able to afford private coverage ($300-1200/month) with those incomes, to me it’s about priorities.

  • Anony Mous
    Anony Mous

    An oldie but still accurate:

  • LoveUniHateExams

    Unless the demographics change drastically in the future it's likely to remain a deadlocked issue and it'll stay as it is - so there we have it.

    There is no consensus among US citizens for change re health care that's free at the point of delivery.

    May things continue the way they are - I'm sure we can all respect the democratic will of the US electorate

Share this