drewfx1

Mosvalve
Keeping the government establishment out of our lives should continue to be the goal. I think we are fully capable of taking care of our selves.

The problem with the government not being involved is that health care is not something where free market capitalism applies the way it does elsewhere. 
 
The reason is that if you have something like appendicitis you can't really just choose not to get treatment if it's too expensive. And choosing the cheaper treatment for a medical condition is not a good option when one's life might depend on that treatment. And you likely don't want insurance companies, whose primary motivation is their own profit margin, making those kinds of decisions for you either. 
 
Market forces are just severely limited when it comes to health care, and without regulation that leaves us in a bad situation. Free market economics only work in a market that's actually free.

When I say keeping the establishment out of our lives I meant keeping them from making our health decisions. All business needs to be monitored to some extent.

It's funny though, despite the "superior" health care systems of other countries, the US has one of the best cancer survival rates (as an example). It has a better survival rate than Europe or Canada. And the main reason for this is that the quality of care and treatment really is better. 
 
I have experience of both the British and US health care systems having grown up in the UK and lived almost a third of my life in the US. I get that health care in the US is too expensive, but I don't see the solution as socialized health care. I appreciate what a life line it is for many people, but there are pros and cons. I had the opportunity to see these up close about 7 years ago when I was diagnosed with skin cancer here in New York and was uninsured. A very frightening prospect to be sure, and naturally my first thought was to have the required surgery done back home on the NHS. The specialist at NYU told me that because of the state of my melanoma, it was very important to have the surgery done as soon as possible, definitely no longer than 6 weeks because at that point it stood a good chance of getting into my lymph system, reducing my chance of survival drastically. As it was they said I had a 95% chance of survival if I had the surgery done now. Making inquiries through a couple of channels in the UK I was told that I was likely to go on a waiting list for the NHS surgery, and although they couldn't give me a definite timeline, to my horror found that there was a possibility I could wait 11-12 weeks. I could not take that risk and so I bit the bullet and chose to pay for the surgery in NYC out of pocket. I'll never forget when I asked the specialist at NYU how soon I could have the op. His answer was "when are you next free?" And the standard of care I had in both Bellevue and NYU was, I have to admit, better than anything I'd experienced back home. 
 
What also surprised me was how flexible they were with the price. Right off the bat, the surgeon slashed a couple of thousand of his fee when I told him I was paying out of pocket. I was also offered a payment plan and was told not to worry, I could pay it back at my own pace. As it happened I had the cash, and it was a big hit (around $12,000 for all the care I got) but I didn't regret it one bit. People spend more than that on a car. I spent it to continue living my life. 
 
What people don't realize is that one of the reasons why health care is so expensive in the US is because the US spends more than anyone else on research into new medical technology and drugs. There is so much medical innovation out of this country, and other countries benefit from it enormously. With all due respect to the Canadian system, just how much in new medical innovation is coming out of there, compared to the US? Ditto Europe. Many European countries which consider themselves "superior" to the US are benefiting from so much US medical innovation you wonder just how good their socialized health care systems would be if they had to rely solely on technology developed natively. 
 
So yeah, I get it, health care in the US is too expensive and needs to be more accessible. I just think there are far better ways of doing that than going down the path of full socialization, which would lead to less money spent on R&D and losing a major source of the world's medical innovation. Insurance reform is needed. The government interferes way too much in the form of mandates and regulations which severely restrict consumer choice and thus lead to less competition and higher prices. 
 
The only time I have had medical treatment in the US and skipped paying for it was some years ago (also uninsured) when I went to the emergency room with strep throat. I had to wait 3 hours in a horrific waiting room full of drug addicts and other assorted loons, and in the end the doctor saw me for 5 minutes in which he did a quick test and injected me with penicillin. The bill shocked me. It was $250 for the test and the shot (which I thought was fair) plus a $750 surcharge for the pleasure of sitting in the emergency waiting room. I threw the thing in the trash and never heard from them again. 

Beepster
I am Canadian and although not perfect our healthcare system is one of our most cherished institutions.
 
Ever since I was a kid I have hoped and wished that someday Americans could have free access to at least basic healthcare.
 
Surviving an illness vs. going completely bankrupt is an inhuman prospect.
 
Not only that... universal health care, when implemented correctly, saves a ridiculous amounts of money by removing the useless middle men AND is crucial to a healthy economy. People who can get preventive medicine BEFORE an illness becomes dire are more productive (not to mention the savings on emergency care) AND have, overall, more disposable income to put back into the most fluid parts of the economy (eg: food, clothes, shelter, consumer goods as opposed to it funnelling directly to the top by way of huge insurance companies and possible sucked right out of the country to foreign investors bank accounts).
 
Now look what you guys done did.
 
You made me go politiderp.
 
I'm out.
 
Peace.

Yeah it's a tuff subject

sharke
It's funny though, despite the "superior" health care systems of other countries, the US has one of the best cancer survival rates (as an example). It has a better survival rate than Europe or Canada. And the main reason for this is that the quality of care and treatment really is better. 
 
I have experience of both the British and US health care systems having grown up in the UK and lived almost a third of my life in the US. I get that health care in the US is too expensive, but I don't see the solution as socialized health care. I appreciate what a life line it is for many people, but there are pros and cons. I had the opportunity to see these up close about 7 years ago when I was diagnosed with skin cancer here in New York and was uninsured. A very frightening prospect to be sure, and naturally my first thought was to have the required surgery done back home on the NHS. The specialist at NYU told me that because of the state of my melanoma, it was very important to have the surgery done as soon as possible, definitely no longer than 6 weeks because at that point it stood a good chance of getting into my lymph system, reducing my chance of survival drastically. As it was they said I had a 95% chance of survival if I had the surgery done now. Making inquiries through a couple of channels in the UK I was told that I was likely to go on a waiting list for the NHS surgery, and although they couldn't give me a definite timeline, to my horror found that there was a possibility I could wait 11-12 weeks. I could not take that risk and so I bit the bullet and chose to pay for the surgery in NYC out of pocket. I'll never forget when I asked the specialist at NYU how soon I could have the op. His answer was "when are you next free?" And the standard of care I had in both Bellevue and NYU was, I have to admit, better than anything I'd experienced back home. 
 
What also surprised me was how flexible they were with the price. Right off the bat, the surgeon slashed a couple of thousand of his fee when I told him I was paying out of pocket. I was also offered a payment plan and was told not to worry, I could pay it back at my own pace. As it happened I had the cash, and it was a big hit (around $12,000 for all the care I got) but I didn't regret it one bit. People spend more than that on a car. I spent it to continue living my life. 
 
What people don't realize is that one of the reasons why health care is so expensive in the US is because the US spends more than anyone else on research into new medical technology and drugs. There is so much medical innovation out of this country, and other countries benefit from it enormously. With all due respect to the Canadian system, just how much in new medical innovation is coming out of there, compared to the US? Ditto Europe. Many European countries which consider themselves "superior" to the US are benefiting from so much US medical innovation you wonder just how good their socialized health care systems would be if they had to rely solely on technology developed natively. 
 
So yeah, I get it, health care in the US is too expensive and needs to be more accessible. I just think there are far better ways of doing that than going down the path of full socialization, which would lead to less money spent on R&D and losing a major source of the world's medical innovation. Insurance reform is needed. The government interferes way too much in the form of mandates and regulations which severely restrict consumer choice and thus lead to less competition and higher prices. 
 
The only time I have had medical treatment in the US and skipped paying for it was some years ago (also uninsured) when I went to the emergency room with strep throat. I had to wait 3 hours in a horrific waiting room full of drug addicts and other assorted loons, and in the end the doctor saw me for 5 minutes in which he did a quick test and injected me with penicillin. The bill shocked me. It was $250 for the test and the shot (which I thought was fair) plus a $750 surcharge for the pleasure of sitting in the emergency waiting room. I threw the thing in the trash and never heard from them again. 

 
I'm glad you're still with the living Sharke.  Bless!

sharke
It's funny though, despite the "superior" health care systems of other countries, the US has one of the best cancer survival rates (as an example). It has a better survival rate than Europe or Canada. And the main reason for this is that the quality of care and treatment really is better. 
 
I have experience of both the British and US health care systems having grown up in the UK and lived almost a third of my life in the US. I get that health care in the US is too expensive, but I don't see the solution as socialized health care. I appreciate what a life line it is for many people, but there are pros and cons. I had the opportunity to see these up close about 7 years ago when I was diagnosed with skin cancer here in New York and was uninsured. A very frightening prospect to be sure, and naturally my first thought was to have the required surgery done back home on the NHS. The specialist at NYU told me that because of the state of my melanoma, it was very important to have the surgery done as soon as possible, definitely no longer than 6 weeks because at that point it stood a good chance of getting into my lymph system, reducing my chance of survival drastically. As it was they said I had a 95% chance of survival if I had the surgery done now. Making inquiries through a couple of channels in the UK I was told that I was likely to go on a waiting list for the NHS surgery, and although they couldn't give me a definite timeline, to my horror found that there was a possibility I could wait 11-12 weeks. I could not take that risk and so I bit the bullet and chose to pay for the surgery in NYC out of pocket. I'll never forget when I asked the specialist at NYU how soon I could have the op. His answer was "when are you next free?" And the standard of care I had in both Bellevue and NYU was, I have to admit, better than anything I'd experienced back home. 
 
What also surprised me was how flexible they were with the price. Right off the bat, the surgeon slashed a couple of thousand of his fee when I told him I was paying out of pocket. I was also offered a payment plan and was told not to worry, I could pay it back at my own pace. As it happened I had the cash, and it was a big hit (around $12,000 for all the care I got) but I didn't regret it one bit. People spend more than that on a car. I spent it to continue living my life. 
 
What people don't realize is that one of the reasons why health care is so expensive in the US is because the US spends more than anyone else on research into new medical technology and drugs. There is so much medical innovation out of this country, and other countries benefit from it enormously. With all due respect to the Canadian system, just how much in new medical innovation is coming out of there, compared to the US? Ditto Europe. Many European countries which consider themselves "superior" to the US are benefiting from so much US medical innovation you wonder just how good their socialized health care systems would be if they had to rely solely on technology developed natively. 
 
So yeah, I get it, health care in the US is too expensive and needs to be more accessible. I just think there are far better ways of doing that than going down the path of full socialization, which would lead to less money spent on R&D and losing a major source of the world's medical innovation. Insurance reform is needed. The government interferes way too much in the form of mandates and regulations which severely restrict consumer choice and thus lead to less competition and higher prices. 
 
The only time I have had medical treatment in the US and skipped paying for it was some years ago (also uninsured) when I went to the emergency room with strep throat. I had to wait 3 hours in a horrific waiting room full of drug addicts and other assorted loons, and in the end the doctor saw me for 5 minutes in which he did a quick test and injected me with penicillin. The bill shocked me. It was $250 for the test and the shot (which I thought was fair) plus a $750 surcharge for the pleasure of sitting in the emergency waiting room. I threw the thing in the trash and never heard from them again. 

Very well put sharke. 

sharke
What people don't realize is that one of the reasons why health care is so expensive in the US is because the US spends more than anyone else on research into new medical technology and drugs.

 
Government and charity funded research grants are mostly unrelated to health care costs. Drug companies do research, but they manage to charge other countries less money for the fruits of their research. They also focus disproportionately on the most potentially profitable diseases with the most prevalence, even if there are already reasonably effective treatments.
 

So yeah, I get it, health care in the US is too expensive and needs to be more accessible. I just think there are far better ways of doing that than going down the path of full socialization, which would lead to less money spent on R&D and losing a major source of the world's medical innovation. Insurance reform is needed. The government interferes way too much in the form of mandates and regulations which severely restrict consumer choice and thus lead to less competition and higher prices. 

 
Socialized medicine and research are unrelated. There's lots of research being done for people on Medicare. The insurance mandate is a byproduct of the requirement to cover pre-existing conditions - without it, people would just wait until they were sick to buy insurance and then the system doesn't work.
 
Higher prices are not due to the government as much as everything from the lack of market forces noted earlier, to over-testing (out of fear of malpractice suits), to drug companies buying influence with doctors to prescribe expensive new non-generic drugs that are no more effective than established cheaper drugs, to huge expenditures for end of life treatment, to profit margins at every level of everything. There are no simple solutions here.
 
And socialized medicine is not the only option, but it is a popular approach for many people who are interested in implementing universal health care vs. those seeking only more efficient, less costly health care. Confusing those two different goals makes for a confusing discussion because different goals require different solutions. If you don't have socialized medicine and/or a mandate for everyone to buy insurance then you won't have universal coverage.
 

The only time I have had medical treatment in the US and skipped paying for it was some years ago (also uninsured) when I went to the emergency room with strep throat. I had to wait 3 hours in a horrific waiting room full of drug addicts and other assorted loons

The ER is how we do charity care for people who have no insurance. It's a dumb way of doing it that is neither cost effective nor helpful to the people who actually need emergency care.

Single payer, baby. It's what Obama wanted in the first place, not the compromise Frankenstein debacle of "Obamacare" that actually fines the healthy and young to pay for the old and sick.
 
I know many Americans who have finagled Canadian contacts, moved to Canada, just to specifically get some access to health care. Run it down all you want, but if you've ever had a $200,000 health care bill for a procedure, as I have, you'll need some help with that unless you are DJ Trump.
 
Currently I'm "lucky" enough to be paying $1400 a month for health care insurance for me and my kid. And the coverage has shrunk/deductibles raised every year for the last 15 years. 
 
Conclusion: the "for profit" free market health care sucks - it's a transfer of wealth mechanism. So I'd gladly complain about the inefficiencies of a single payer, government-administered system. Yes, I know my taxes would be higher, but my medical bills would be taken care of 100% - that's a good trade-off in my book.
 
And you can read about who predicted the "Rust Belt Brexit" here:
http://michaelmoore.com/trumpwillwin/
say what you want about Michael Moore, but he Nostradamused it completely.
 
time to heal now, it will be OK . . . pendulum's gotta swing . . .
 
-Tom
 
 

While there are many facets and issues I will just say I believe the primary issue is with the hospitals and providers. When the hospitals charge $25 for an aspirin, $60 for a cotton ball, several hundred $ for a blood test that, pretty much is 1950's tech, there is something wrong. While they claim those prices are to offset costs they can't recover, I call BS. While the county hospitals here allow for medical care to the indigent, hospitals rife with certain segments of the population that pay nothing (sometimes not even taxes), that does not account for private hospitals that will only take people based on insurance or ability to pay. The same hospitals have even higher costs. The effect is to drain the insurance for as much as possible and has nothing to do with market forces or expenses.
 
If you look around, the hospitals and hospital systems are expanding by leaps and bounds. They don't expand without making money and they don't expand in their current methods without making LOTS of money.
 
There should be regulations for price caps to prevent gouging and it should not be left to the insurance companies. The insurance companies don't care about prices as they just pass along the costs and take their percentage. Yes, they make it appear they are trying to keep prices low but they really aren't. The more that flows through their hands the more they make from that percentage.
 

Beepster
hmm...
 
Based on some of the comments in this thread it almost sounds like the United States is ready for a proper universal healthcare system... like the ones just about every other civilized first world country offers it's citizens.
 
...
 
*crickets*

Taken from the Urban Dictionary -
 
beepster
Someone who is, or thinks themself above the rules. 

A person with virtually no regard for those around him. 

One who's sheer disrespect for all things acceptable is almost admirable.
"He's such a beepster" 

"Thay beepsters is the crunchiest group a janks I eva knew."
#beepsta #rule-breaker #rebel #punk #radical
 
Derp! LMAO!!!
 
Dude, as FZ says, Just Shut Up and Play Yer Guitar...
 
TOS? What TOS? We doan need no stinkin' TOS!?!

Beepster
hmm...
 
Based on some of the comments in this thread it almost sounds like the United States is ready for a proper universal healthcare system... like the ones just about every other civilized first world country offers it's citizens.
 
...
 
*crickets*

Beep I don't know about the rest of the world and since I've always been provided insurance through employers I don't know what's like for those not having "group" rates but;
 
I usually see very little of my yearly raise, if any. Although the amounts of "out of pocket" vary they get what was left of any of the raise that the premium didn't get.
 
As I say, I don't know all the ins and outs about it but I've heard that much of our expense is to cover very expensive rates that hospitals charge because they're needing the insured to cover expenses they're left with from people that don't have insurance or skip out on paying.
 
Insurance is a very big issue. I know many, including myself would retire early but paying for insurance keeps them working. I really doubt anybody will have a solution in my lifetime so I just pay and keep on keeping on.
 
It's also a crazy issue; https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2016/05/03/researchers-medical-errors-now-third-leading-cause-of-death-in-united-states/
 
The good side; If you have good insurance and luck out getting to the right caregivers when needed you get to go home. They can do some amazing things. I know that for a fact.