Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
except they don't. Holland and other European nations do not have single payer systems.No it doesn't.
Are there things wrong with it? Yes.
Room for improvement? Lots.
Should they be focusing on fixing and improving on what we already have? Yes.
Should the government be concocting a new jumbo-sized health care bureaucracy that will introduce gobs of red tape, that will cost way more money than what they're claiming, that will work less efficiently, that we can't afford, and that has much less to do with health care and much more to do with growing the government control over our lives even more? NO.
Every other industrialized nation has a single payer healthcare and they pay HALF per person what we pay for healthcare. Why? Because the single payer system is more efficient.
The rest of the world knows this, and that is why they don't use a for profit system.
Okay, while we're on the subject of what the left doesn't tell people about US healthcare, let's discuss the REAL problems with our system that the left doesn't want you to know, because they aren't what the left would like them to be.
Rationing
Is there rationing in the US? Sure, especially in government programs like public hospitals that treat the poor, and Medicare and Medicaid.
Doctors estimate that as many as half of the 300,000 people on dialysis in the US might benefit from 6-day-a-week treatment; but Medicare only covers a maximum of 3 days a week.
Only about one in fifteen patients who could benefit from a device called HeartMate get it because Medicare won't pay for the full cost.
750,000 people suffer from sepsis each year, and 250,000 people die from it every year. Medicare balks at paying the cost ($6,800 a treatment) for Xigris, so doctors write fewer than 15,000 prescriptions for it a year.
Still, the Commonwealth Fund and Harvard School of Public Health tells us that only about 5% of Americans undergoing surgery have to wait more than four months. The figures for Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and Great Britain are 23%, 26%, 27%, and 36% respectively.
Inequality of Access
As we've all heard until our ears are ready to bleed, much of the US population does not have private health insurance and is not enrolled in public health programs. Studies show that the uninsured consume about 50% less health care than those with insurance, all other things being equal.
For decades, the European press has repeated the canard that poor people in the US get no care because they cannot afford it, and now the US press is echoing that. Not true. 95% of the elderly are enrolled in Medicare. Medicaid spends even more than Medicare does, even though it covers roughly the same number of people. The VA provides yet another safety net. And every state has a system of public hospitals and clinics for the indigent. Federal law requires emergency rooms to take all comers. State and federal laws both also require many hospitals to provide charity care, and offer matching funds for those institutions that provide a disproportionate share of care to Medicaid and the uninsured.
Low-income persons in the US without job-related health insurance spend only about fifty dollars per year more out of pocket than those with employer-provided health benefits. On average, they make 2.4 visits to doctors per year, compared to 3.4 for people with employer-provided insurance. When seriously ill, uninsured low- to moderate-income Americans receive about the same level of treatment with out of pocket costs about the same as those with employer-provided insurance.
But yeah, people with money have better health care than poor people. Being rich is always better than being poor, and that's as true in other countries as it is here.
Okay, while we're on the subject of what the left doesn't tell people about US healthcare, let's discuss the REAL problems with our system that the left doesn't want you to know, because they aren't what the left would like them to be.
Rationing
Is there rationing in the US? Sure, especially in government programs like public hospitals that treat the poor, and Medicare and Medicaid.
Doctors estimate that as many as half of the 300,000 people on dialysis in the US might benefit from 6-day-a-week treatment; but Medicare only covers a maximum of 3 days a week.
Only about one in fifteen patients who could benefit from a device called HeartMate get it because Medicare won't pay for the full cost.
750,000 people suffer from sepsis each year, and 250,000 people die from it every year. Medicare balks at paying the cost ($6,800 a treatment) for Xigris, so doctors write fewer than 15,000 prescriptions for it a year.
Still, the Commonwealth Fund and Harvard School of Public Health tells us that only about 5% of Americans undergoing surgery have to wait more than four months. The figures for Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and Great Britain are 23%, 26%, 27%, and 36% respectively.
Inequality of Access
As we've all heard until our ears are ready to bleed, much of the US population does not have private health insurance and is not enrolled in public health programs. Studies show that the uninsured consume about 50% less health care than those with insurance, all other things being equal.
For decades, the European press has repeated the canard that poor people in the US get no care because they cannot afford it, and now the US press is echoing that. Not true. 95% of the elderly are enrolled in Medicare. Medicaid spends even more than Medicare does, even though it covers roughly the same number of people. The VA provides yet another safety net. And every state has a system of public hospitals and clinics for the indigent. Federal law requires emergency rooms to take all comers. State and federal laws both also require many hospitals to provide charity care, and offer matching funds for those institutions that provide a disproportionate share of care to Medicaid and the uninsured.
Low-income persons in the US without job-related health insurance spend only about fifty dollars per year more out of pocket than those with employer-provided health benefits. On average, they make 2.4 visits to doctors per year, compared to 3.4 for people with employer-provided insurance. When seriously ill, uninsured low- to moderate-income Americans receive about the same level of treatment with out of pocket costs about the same as those with employer-provided insurance.
But yeah, people with money have better health care than poor people. Being rich is always better than being poor, and that's as true in other countries as it is here.
You really are living in a fantasy world.
Poor people have almost no access to healthcare outside of the emergency room, especially if you have a chronic condition.
Okay, while we're on the subject of what the left doesn't tell people about US healthcare, let's discuss the REAL problems with our system that the left doesn't want you to know, because they aren't what the left would like them to be.
Rationing
Is there rationing in the US? Sure, especially in government programs like public hospitals that treat the poor, and Medicare and Medicaid.
Doctors estimate that as many as half of the 300,000 people on dialysis in the US might benefit from 6-day-a-week treatment; but Medicare only covers a maximum of 3 days a week.
Only about one in fifteen patients who could benefit from a device called HeartMate get it because Medicare won't pay for the full cost.
750,000 people suffer from sepsis each year, and 250,000 people die from it every year. Medicare balks at paying the cost ($6,800 a treatment) for Xigris, so doctors write fewer than 15,000 prescriptions for it a year.
Still, the Commonwealth Fund and Harvard School of Public Health tells us that only about 5% of Americans undergoing surgery have to wait more than four months. The figures for Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and Great Britain are 23%, 26%, 27%, and 36% respectively.
Inequality of Access
As we've all heard until our ears are ready to bleed, much of the US population does not have private health insurance and is not enrolled in public health programs. Studies show that the uninsured consume about 50% less health care than those with insurance, all other things being equal.
For decades, the European press has repeated the canard that poor people in the US get no care because they cannot afford it, and now the US press is echoing that. Not true. 95% of the elderly are enrolled in Medicare. Medicaid spends even more than Medicare does, even though it covers roughly the same number of people. The VA provides yet another safety net. And every state has a system of public hospitals and clinics for the indigent. Federal law requires emergency rooms to take all comers. State and federal laws both also require many hospitals to provide charity care, and offer matching funds for those institutions that provide a disproportionate share of care to Medicaid and the uninsured.
Low-income persons in the US without job-related health insurance spend only about fifty dollars per year more out of pocket than those with employer-provided health benefits. On average, they make 2.4 visits to doctors per year, compared to 3.4 for people with employer-provided insurance. When seriously ill, uninsured low- to moderate-income Americans receive about the same level of treatment with out of pocket costs about the same as those with employer-provided insurance.
But yeah, people with money have better health care than poor people. Being rich is always better than being poor, and that's as true in other countries as it is here.
You really are living in a fantasy world.
Poor people have almost no access to healthcare outside of the emergency room, especially if you have a chronic condition.
That's not true. There are federally funded clinics everywhere that will treat you with or without insurance and charge you on a sliding scale basis, free if your income in low enough. Type in your city and find one close to you.
HRSA - Find a Health Center - Search Page
You are a stone liar.You really are living in a fantasy world.
Poor people have almost no access to healthcare outside of the emergency room, especially if you have a chronic condition.
except they don't. Holland and other European nations do not have single payer systems.No it doesn't.
Are there things wrong with it? Yes.
Room for improvement? Lots.
Should they be focusing on fixing and improving on what we already have? Yes.
Should the government be concocting a new jumbo-sized health care bureaucracy that will introduce gobs of red tape, that will cost way more money than what they're claiming, that will work less efficiently, that we can't afford, and that has much less to do with health care and much more to do with growing the government control over our lives even more? NO.
Every other industrialized nation has a single payer healthcare and they pay HALF per person what we pay for healthcare. Why? Because the single payer system is more efficient.
The rest of the world knows this, and that is why they don't use a for profit system.
Not at all.Holland has a duel system that is means tested where the wealthy elite pay for theirs (private) and everyone else's (public) insurance. Are you sure you want to emulate them?
Not at all.Holland has a duel system that is means tested where the wealthy elite pay for theirs (private) and everyone else's (public) insurance. Are you sure you want to emulate them?
Elvis merely pointed out an obvious counter-example to Christine's simplistic sweeping generalization.
except they don't. Holland and other European nations do not have single payer systems.Every other industrialized nation has a single payer healthcare and they pay HALF per person what we pay for healthcare. Why? Because the single payer system is more efficient.
The rest of the world knows this, and that is why they don't use a for profit system.
France, which seems to be Chris's latest hard-on subject, has a hybrid system, and the most serious problems it has have been addressed by adding more free market options, not by adding more government control.
Insurer asks docs to report on new patients with pre-existing conditions - On Deadline - USATODAY.com
Blue Cross of California recently asked doctors to look for pre-existing conditions that could be used to justify the cancellation of insurance policies held by new patients, according to the Los Angeles Times.
Byron Tucker, a spokesman for the Insurance Department, tells the Times that this letter is "extremely troubling on several fronts. It really obliterates the line between underwriting and medical care. It is the insurer's job to underwrite their policies, not the doctors'. Doctors deliver medical care. Their job is not to underwrite policies for insurers."
Apples and B-52s.I suppose you don't trust the police, firemen, school, library, garbage men, military and mail to be run by gov either huh Dr. House?
Many people do use Fed-Ex and UPS....So what?you don't like the mail service then you can go to Fed-x and as far as the military should that be privately run too?
