Who are the 47 million Americans who ‘don’t have health care?”

[PoliticalChic]

I came upon this and it addresses the 47 million Americans who are constantly being referenced as being uninsured. The website name is laughable, but the numbers are sound.

Who are the 47 million Americans who ‘don’t have health care?”
August 27, 2008 — whatthecrap?

In 2006 the U.S. Census Bureau reported that 46.6 million are people without health insurance. You hear this number all the time today in discussions on what our public policy should be towards health care (particularly - socialized healthcare). But who are these 46.6 million people? Here are a couple things you probably won’t hear from politicians, whether Democratic or Republican:

1. Of that 46.6 million, 9.5 million were not United States Citizens
2. Another 17 million of those people live in households exceeding $50,000 and could purchase healthcare but choose to invest their money in other things.
3. 18 million were between the age of 18-34, most in good health - and either not in need of coverage - or chose not to purchase it (that includes me for a while there). (Also, note that this stat likely overlaps with the one above as commentor Kottcamp reminded me.)
4. 70% of the non-elderly population that become uninsured in a given year - are reinsured in less than one year.

Here are a couple other statistics about healthcare in Canada and Europe:

Canada:

1. More than 825,000 Canadians are on waiting lists for surgery and other necessary treatments.
2. 15 years ago the average wait for Canadians was 9 weeks - today it’s 15 weeks.
3. Over the past 10 years, 11% of physicians trained in Canada have moved to the United States.

Britain:

1. More than 1 million citizens are waiting for hospital admission.
2. Another 200,000 are waiting to get on the waiting list.
3. Each year - the national health service cancels around 100,000 operations.
4. Britain has a government agency that’s sole purpose is to limit citizens access (rationing) to prescription drugs.

Some other important items:

1. 85 new drugs hit the U.S. market from 1998-2002.
2. During that same period - only 44 of those drugs became available in Europe.
3. More than half of the 175 billion dollars in health care technology products purchased throughout the world are produced in the United States.
4. Between 1999-2005 the United States was responsible for the sale of 71% of new pharmaceutical drugs (the next two largest - Japan and Germany accounted for only 4% each).

Who are the 47 million Americans who ‘don’t have health care?” What The Crap? - whatthecrap.us

 

[Turboswede]

Here are some responses to the issues raised in objection to changing the current healthcare system. Let me point out that I do have excellent coverage through a PPO which cost’s my employer about $20K per year ($12,000 net of tax).

In 2006 the U.S. Census Bureau reported that 46.6 million are people without health insurance. You hear this number all the time today in discussions on what our public policy should be towards health care (particularly - socialized healthcare). But who are these 46.6 million people? Here are a couple things you probably won’t hear from politicians, whether Democratic or Republican:

1. Of that 46.6 million, 9.5 million were not United States Citizens
2. Another 17 million of those people live in households exceeding $50,000 and could purchase healthcare but choose to invest their money in other things.
3. 18 million were between the age of 18-34, most in good health - and either not in need of coverage - or chose not to purchase it (that includes me for a while there). (Also, note that this stat likely overlaps with the one above as commentor Kottcamp reminded me.)
4. 70% of the non-elderly population that become uninsured in a given year - are reinsured in less than one year.

Of the 9.5 million uninsured that are not US citizens how many were Legal permanent Residents or others subject to US tax?

Ever wonder why an ER band aid is $20?

Under current policy if an individual walks or is brought into an emergency room for treatment at a county medical center treatment will be provided regardless of ability to pay. If the individual is uninsured or can’t pay the cost is borne by the care provider. The care provider must then spread the cost to those with insurance.

By providing preventative care the overall cost of treatment goes down and benefits all consumers because an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

Another 17 million of those people live in households exceeding $50,000 and could purchase healthcare but choose to invest their money in other things.

This assumes that the 17M people are allowed to purchase health insurance. If these households contain individuals with serious medical issues and the household is not eligible to participate in a group insurance plan, insurance will be extremely expensive or, in many cases, impossible to obtain.

18 million were between the age of 18-34, most in good health - and either not in need of coverage - or chose not to purchase it (that includes me for a while there). (Also, note that this stat likely overlaps with the one above as commentor Kottcamp reminded me.)

So, a portion of these are included in the above example? If we take the two together it sounds like the number is talking about individuals in the 18-34 range that are not in households making more than $50K per year. I would think that would comprise the bulk of the American uninsured so I am not sure why we would disregard them.

How can we be sure “most of them are in good health”, because they don’t independently buy health insurance? That’s a circular argument, for example, are pregnant women between 18-34 considered to be “in good health” and “not in need of coverage”?

If a child is born that needs to go into the neonatal ICU because of poor prenatal care and the mother is uninsured, guess who picks up the bill? That’s right, everyone else with health insurance. That’s a whole lot of money to shell out on the back end when we didn’t want to spring for prenatal vitamins on the front end.


Here are a couple other statistics about healthcare in Canada and Europe:

Canada:

[*]More than 825,000 Canadians are on waiting lists for surgery and other necessary treatments.
[*]15 years ago the average wait for Canadians was 9 weeks - today it’s 15 weeks.
[*]Over the past 10 years, 11% of physicians trained in Canada have moved to the United States.

Or:

Per the OECD
Infant mortality rate 24% lower than in the U.S. (4.8 per 1,000 live births vs. 6.3 in the US)
Under-five mortality rate 24% lower than in the U.S. (5.9 vs. 7.8 per 1,000 live births)
Health expenditure per capita 48% Lower ($3,165 vs. $6,100 per capita)

Britain:

1. More than 1 million citizens are waiting for hospital admission.
2. Another 200,000 are waiting to get on the waiting list.
3. Each year - the national health service cancels around 100,000 operations.
4. Britain has a government agency that’s sole purpose is to limit citizens access (rationing) to prescription drugs.

Or:

Per the OECD
Infant mortality rate 24% lower than in the U.S. (4.8 per 1,000 live births vs. 6.3 in the US)
Under-five mortality rate 23% lower than in the U.S. (6.0 vs. 7.8 per 1,000 live births)
Health expenditure per capita 58% Lower ($2,546 vs. $6,100 per capita)

Some other important items:

85 new drugs hit the U.S. market from 1998-2002.

How many of these were useful against life threatening illnesses and how many were market driven solutions to cure male impotence or heartburn?

[*]During that same period - only 44 of those drugs became available in Europe.

This makes sense as European standards are much higher

[*]More than half of the 175 billion dollars in health care technology products purchased throughout the world are produced in the United States.

How would universal health insurance in the US impact international sales of medical technology?

[*]Between 1999-2005 the United States was responsible for the sale of 71% of new pharmaceutical drugs (the next two largest - Japan and Germany accounted for only 4% each).

Again, How many of these were useful against life threatening illnesses and how many were market driven solutions to cure male impotence or heartburn?

 

[DiamondDave]

Ah... but you also ASSume that infant mortality rate is directly attributed to the healthcare system, and not also situations at hand... heroin addicted babies etc... pregnant moms with special needs coming to America for more risky procedures etc....

The fact is that the quality of health care facilities, doctors, etc is highest here in the US... more types of procedures and more types of advanced procedures are readily available here in the US than anywhere else...

And I am still looking for where the constitutional right to healthcare is... and the constitutional right for others to take over your personal health, care, and upkeep responsibilities is..

 

[jillian]

you do realize that you're posting from a blog called "whatthecrap"? right?

 

[Turboswede]

I would normally just ignore this but its lunch time and I finished my Ruben early

Ah... but you also ASSume that infant mortality rate is directly attributed to the healthcare system, and not also situations at hand... heroin addicted babies etc... pregnant moms with special needs coming to America for more risky procedures etc....

You are right Dave, infant and child mortality has nothing to do with healthcare, or if it does the reason America is so down on the list is because of all those foreigners bring us all their high risk pregnancies and then all those babies dying. Remember the numbers are per LIVE births.

My argument is that with proper prenatal care we may be able to reduce the number of Heroin addicted babies by providing treatment to the potential parents, so that claim validates my argument, thanks.

The fact is that the quality of health care facilities, doctors, etc is highest here in the US... more types of procedures and more types of advanced procedures are readily available here in the US than anywhere else...

Should be, we spend 2-3 times as much on healthcare as other industrialized nations. Even nations that boast much better public health statistics than we do. Americans are getting ripped off.

And I am still looking for where the constitutional right to healthcare is... and the constitutional right for others to take over your personal health, care, and upkeep responsibilities is..

It doesn’t…yet, just like it didn’t provide for a woman’s right to vote (19th Amendment); or an income tax (16th Amendment); or that slavery and involuntary servitude were incompatible with liberty (13th amendment); or that that the bill of rights applied to the states . Besides, the constitution itself deals with limits on the federal government’s power so that’s always going to be a looser of an argument for positive rights.

I like to look to the Preamble of the Constitution where it states that the role of government is to promote the general welfare and secure the blessings of liberty.

Or the Declaration of independence where it states

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

I (along with many) feel that one of our unalienable rights in a modern society is healthcare.

 

[Odd1_Out]

Even if what you are saying is true, that still leaves 10 million Americans without insurance that want it.

What takes place in countries with socialized medicine like Canada and Britain has nothing to do with what Obama is talking about. He just wants the government to help lower costs, not control the industry to the point that we have waiting lines for treatment.

How is trying to lower the rate of disease in this country a bad thing?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Even if what you are saying is true, that still leaves 10 million Americans without insurance that want it.

What takes place in countries with socialized medicine like Canada and Britain has nothing to do with what Obama is talking about. He just wants the government to help lower costs, not control the industry to the point that we have waiting lines for treatment.

How is trying to lower the rate of disease in this country a bad thing?

So 10 million out of 300 million is roughly 3% of the U.S. population. We should set up a new healthcare plan for the 3%? BTW, from the statistics I've seen 80% of the people are happy with their healthcare plan, already.

 

[Chris]

Everyone in America can get free healthcare. It's called the emergency room. So since everyone can get free healthcare the question becomes, How do we pay for it? Do we have a bloated, expensive, and inefficient system where insurance companies, liability lawyers, and Big Pharma feast on the sick, or do we have a single payer system which has been shown to be HALF as expensive per capita? Most Republicans want to continue to pay huge premiums to bloated insurance companies because they have been brainwashed by corporate lobbyists. Meanwhile, the rest of the world laughs at us and our stupidity.

 

[Diuretic]

And some of us just scratch our heads and wonder why so many people don't or won't get it

 

[Turboswede]

And some of us just scratch our heads and wonder why so many people don't or won't get it

Right, all the cons should be bitching about how our ER's don't turn away folks without valid insurance cards. I think that what they would like to see happen in order for their insurance rate to go down.

 

[AllieBaba]

I came upon this and it addresses the 47 million Americans who are constantly being referenced as being uninsured. The website name is laughable, but the numbers are sound.

Who are the 47 million Americans who ‘don’t have health care?”

They're hiding out with the "multitudes" of disnefranchised dem voters...in the minds of the libs who insist they exist.

Has to be getting crowded in those little pea brains.

 

[CA95380]

Everyone in America can get free healthcare. It's called the emergency room.

You are not serious about this, are you? Who do you think "pay's for emergency room" care ... for those that do not have insurance? In California it is called Medi-Cal ... and it is paid for by ..... we taxpayers.

 

[Ravi]

47 million people that won't be voting for McCain, more than likely.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Right, all the cons should be bitching about how our ER's don't turn away folks without valid insurance cards. I think that what they would like to see happen in order for their insurance rate to go down.

The operative term here is "I think," which puts the spotlight right back on you. You are saying that conservatives don't want to help people: It just proves we can only judge others by ourselves. According to Syracuse University professor Arthur C. Brooks, a professor of public administration at Syracuse's Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs, in his book "Who Really Cares," conservatives give more charity than liberals, even though liberals make about 6% more in income. A perfect example is the charity history of the Obama family- who gave less than 1/2 of what the average family gives (until he started running for president), and the Bidens whose giving is abysmal.

 

[Turboswede]

You are not serious about this, are you? Who do you think "pay's for emergency room" care ... for those that do not have insurance? In California it is called Medi-Cal ... and it is paid for by ..... we taxpayers.

I think his point was that Health Care is not refused, just the costs are shifted.

 

[Skeptik]

First of all, there is no such thing as free health care.

There is such a thing as cheaper health care, however.

U.S. Still Spends More on Health Care than Any Other Country

Americans spent 53 percent per capita more than the next highest country, Switzerland, and 140 percent above the median industrialized country, according to new research from the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.

The study authors analyzed whether two possible reasons—supply constraints and malpractice litigation—could explain the difference in health care costs. They found that neither factor accounted for a large portion of the U.S. spending differential. The study is featured in the July/August 2005 issue of the journal Health Affairs.

Supply constraints? This is what they mean by that phrase, in case you were wondering:

One of the commonly cited reasons why U.S. citizens spend more on health care than other countries is that these other countries have waiting lists, especially for elective surgery.The procedures with waiting lists in these other countries, however, represent only 3 percent of spending and therefore cannot explain much of the cost differential.

However, getting back to the original question:

1. Of that 46.6 million, 9.5 million were not United States Citizens

Not US citizens doesn't mean illegal aliens, and they do have health care in the emergency room, the most expensive form of care possible, paid for by the rest of us.

Were you or I to visit Canada, legally that is, and were to fall out of one of their trees (They have a lot of them up there, you know), the Canadian health care system would pay for the cost of patching us up. Are Americans less civilized about such things?

2. Another 17 million of those people live in households exceeding $50,000 and could purchase healthcare but choose to invest their money in other things.

Yes, other things such as food, rent/mortgage payments, gasoline, auto insurance, and so on. Currently, a family making $50,000 a year would have to spend over 20% of their income on health insurance, which would not be a tax deduction.

3. 18 million were between the age of 18-34, most in good health - and either not in need of coverage - or chose not to purchase it (that includes me for a while there). (Also, note that this stat likely overlaps with the one above as commentor Kottcamp reminded me.)

That young healthy person doesn't need health insurance until he/she is involved in an auto accident that costs a few hundred grand for surgery, hospital care, and rehab to get back on his feet, or unless that young healthy person is female, and has a difficult birth, or gives birth to a baby or two that have neonatal problems costing a few hundred grand that the mother doesn't have. We could, of course, just let the auto accident victim or the infants die, if that's your choice, but to do otherwise costs a huge amount of money.

4. 70% of the non-elderly population that become uninsured in a given year - are reinsured in less than one year.

Hopefully before suffering a heart attack, stroke, accident, or cancer.

The bottom line is that we have the most expensive health care in the world, and it is getting more expensive very quickly, much more quickly than the rate of inflation. Something has to be done and soon, or only an elite few will be able to afford to get sick and live to tell about it.

 

[Chris]

I think his point was that Health Care is not refused, just the costs are shifted.

Glad somebody gets it.

We don't let people bleed to death in the street in this country....not yet anyway. The question is, What is the most efficient way to pay for healthcare? And the answer is, a single payer system where the doctors own their own practices and the government acts as the insurance company. Every other Western democracy has a single payer system and they pay HALF per capita what we pay for healthcare. Why? Because they don't have to pay liability lawyers, insurance companies, and Big Pharma. We will never get it, however, because the Republican voters are dumb as a box of rocks.

 

[Andrew2382]

HOW COVERAGE VARIES



Illegal immigrants are less likely to have health coverage than others:

Adults

Type
Uninsured



U.S. citizens
14%



Legal immigrants
25%



Illegal immigrants
59%




Children

Type
Uninsured



U.S. citizens
9%



Citizens whose parents are legal immigrants
13%



Foreign-born children of legal immigrants
25%



Citizens with illegal immigrant parents
25%



Foreign-born children of illegal immigrants
53%




Source: Pew Hispanic Center, 2005


So, to sum it up
in Adults you have 59% of the uninsured are illegal immigrants compared to 14% US citizens

Children- 53% Foreign born children of Illegal Immigrants and 25% of citizens with illegal immigrants. Compared to 9% US citizens.

Seems to me we have an immigration problem, not so much a healthcare problem.

 

[Odd1_Out]

Everyone in America can get free healthcare. It's called the emergency room. So since everyone can get free healthcare the question becomes, How do we pay for it? Do we have a bloated, expensive, and inefficient system where insurance companies, liability lawyers, and Big Pharma feast on the sick, or do we have a single payer system which has been shown to be HALF as expensive per capita? Most Republicans want to continue to pay huge premiums to bloated insurance companies because they have been brainwashed by corporate lobbyists. Meanwhile, the rest of the world laughs at us and our stupidity.

You have to pay for emergency room visits... or at least you do in Texas.

 

[user_name_guest]

41% illegals have coverage. I would rather see that number decline to zero. Especially if we are going to have a health care program supported by legal taxpayers.

HOW COVERAGE VARIES



Illegal immigrants are less likely to have health coverage than others:

Adults

Type
Uninsured



U.S. citizens
14%



Legal immigrants
25%



Illegal immigrants
59%




Children

Type
Uninsured



U.S. citizens
9%



Citizens whose parents are legal immigrants
13%



Foreign-born children of legal immigrants
25%



Citizens with illegal immigrant parents
25%



Foreign-born children of illegal immigrants
53%




Source: Pew Hispanic Center, 2005


So, to sum it up
in Adults you have 59% of the uninsured are illegal immigrants compared to 14% US citizens

Children- 53% Foreign born children of Illegal Immigrants and 25% of citizens with illegal immigrants. Compared to 9% US citizens.

Seems to me we have an immigration problem, not so much a healthcare problem.