Canadians on US Health Care reform

[Sprailenes 47]

I have an idea!!

Lets all live in bubbles so we never get sick! They can be like zorb balls! This will also help with the pollution problem because we can now roll to work!

VOTE FOR ME IN 2012!!!

[DeadPoolX 9]

From my experience, what I see that is fundamentally different between the two health care systems is a set of values that are different. In Canada, the majority of people believe that everyone should receive healthcare, and that it's a basic human right. Here in the U.S. the flavour appears to be that the amount of money you make is dependent on what kind of medical assistance you should receive. A several tiered system. This is directly proportioned to the length of time you get assistance as well. Everything is tied to how much you make, as if that raises your importance in society. That attitude, is not just in the healthcare discussions but about everything here, and I think that's something that so drastically different about living here, for ME. Everything is about "me...me...me...", and all those "me" people who believe "everyone else" doesn't "deserve" it as much as them. *sigh*

Every time I get upset about living here, this is the reason.

~ Catherine

Same.

It really saddens me.

And me...and I'm the USC. It seems to be a dog eat dog world sometimes here. JMHO of course.

I know many USC who would also agree. My husband and his family all agree. His parents can afford good insurance, but even they think about the bigger picture. As much as I have differences with my MIL she does think about the bigger picture and I do respect that.

I have a few friends who don't see the bigger picture though. They say things like: "I don't trust the government making decisions for me when it comes to health care" but you'll trust an insurance company who seems more concerned with the bottom line and profits?

I don't trust either, to be honest.

But then again, I have a crazy idea: let medical professionals run health care. I have a feeling they know a little more about treating patients than "bean counters" and "bureaucrats."

[thetreble 19]

Interesting, calling Moore's SICKO propaganda without saying why. Is that called rhetoric? There's a difference between propaganda and opinion. Even throwing out the "socialist" label? Conservatives have no suggested answers.

I'll just step out of this convo and agree to disagree.

toodles.

To say that he doesn't have an agenda when making his films is very ignorant. I didn't say WHY because I didn't want to go into a 5 paragraph response on a message board. Michael Moore has been working to expose "white, conservative, America" for what, the last 10 years? Just like the point in his film Bowling for Columbine where he made it seem like you could go into any K-Mart in the US and purchase guns and bullets when that is just not the case. But for an outside of American like myself at the time, I sure as hell thought it could be true. Also, the film focuses on the deaths of Columbine. Bored and troubled kids who felt they were outsiders. There was a serious decline in murder rates in many major urban cities like New York when he made that film so again, lots of contrasting evidence you can provide for his opinion.

Propaganda is defined as, "...a communication aimed at influencing the attitude of a community toward some cause." Is that not what Moore is doing in his films? Is he not fighting for a cause?

I'm not even conservative myself, I'm pretty Liberal as it goes, but can step back and look at both sides of the story here. He just doesn't have an opinion. He does some biased research that fits his agenda and then turns it into a film that is supposed to expose certain elements of American society. That's not like me standing by the water cooler and saying to my co-worker, "Hey, I think that health care sucks" and that's the end of my opinion.

I think Moore is a smart guy, don't get me wrong here. I'm just defending the case of what is propaganda and what isn't. Most everything in this world has a bias and an agenda.

[BermyCat 1]

I have an idea!!

Lets all live in bubbles so we never get sick! They can be like zorb balls! This will also help with the pollution problem because we can now roll to work!

VOTE FOR ME IN 2012!!!

Nope. I'm voting for Palin.

Oh wait...I'm making Phil vote for Palin.

Seriously...

~ Catherine

[thetreble 19]

I have an idea!!

Lets all live in bubbles so we never get sick! They can be like zorb balls! This will also help with the pollution problem because we can now roll to work!

VOTE FOR ME IN 2012!!!

Nope. I'm voting for Palin.

Oh wait...I'm making Phil vote for Palin.

Seriously...

~ Catherine

We do get sick, don't we. And there has to be a better way. My insurance isn't bad so I've got no serious complaints on the American side at the moment.

I just wish it extended to every one, esp. children.

[DeadPoolX 9]

Okay, my solution to health care:

1. Put health care into the hands medical doctors and nurses. I bet they know just a little more about treating patients than an insurance company or the government.

2. Emphasize preventative measures. Sometimes you can't prevent something and all you can do is treat it. However, if prevention can be achieved by either avoiding a health issue or reducing its severity, why not do it? Regardless of which system -- American or Canadian -- exists, if people took better care of themselves and tried to prevent health problems more than expecting a "miracle cure" from their doctor, it'd have to help out.

[SomberCat 0]

Okay, my solution to health care:

1. Put health care into the hands medical doctors and nurses. I bet they know just a little more about treating patients than an insurance company or the government.

2. Emphasize preventative measures. Sometimes you can't prevent something and all you can do is treat it. However, if prevention can be achieved by either avoiding a health issue or reducing its severity, why not do it? Regardless of which system -- American or Canadian -- exists, if people took better care of themselves and tried to prevent health problems more than expecting a "miracle cure" from their doctor, it'd have to help out.

I could not agree with you more regarding preventative medicine. The company I work for changed our insurance program (which was the standard PPO previously) four years ago and has seen a HUGE decrease in costs. They made two moves.

The first was to make preventative medicine covered 100%. I can get a blood workup (cholesterol, triglycerides, etc.), full physical, all yearly girly stuff (mammogram, OBGYN appt.), all yearly guy stuff (prostate exam), monthly blood pressure checks, etc. every year at no cost. Once a particular age is hit, it includes many other preventative screenings also like a yearly colonoscopy. The dental also covers teeth cleaning twice a year at no cost. The second move was to give each employee a certain amount of money up front that we can spend on whatever before the regular PPO (deductible and then 80/20) kicks in. For a family, the yearly amount it $2000. As a bonus, if you don't use all of your $2000, it rolls over to the next year. My family's been fortunate to be healthy and currently has over $7000 to use before a dime would come out of our pocket. I should say that we do pay for our healthcare here, but it's minimal. I pay a little over $50 a paycheck (twice a month) and that covers medical, dental and life insurance for every member of my family.

What we have found is that the healthcare costs have dropped so drastically that we have not seen an increase in our rates during these four years which is relatively rare right now. Bottom line - people are finding out about issues early thus being treated early making it all much cheaper. It's a shame more companies don't institute this kind of insurance.

Edited July 30, 2009 by SomberCat

[BermyCat 1]

Okay, my solution to health care:

1. Put health care into the hands medical doctors and nurses. I bet they know just a little more about treating patients than an insurance company or the government.

2. Emphasize preventative measures. Sometimes you can't prevent something and all you can do is treat it. However, if prevention can be achieved by either avoiding a health issue or reducing its severity, why not do it? Regardless of which system -- American or Canadian -- exists, if people took better care of themselves and tried to prevent health problems more than expecting a "miracle cure" from their doctor, it'd have to help out.

On point 2, it drvies me crazy that most insurance companies won't pay a small amount for you to have a consultation with a nutritionist but they'll pay $$$$$ once you get diabetes, heart disease or whatever else a trip to the nutritionist might have helped you prevent.

~ Catherine

[JillA 2]

Perhaps insurance cos could consider paying for gym memberships as a preventative step? Obviously exercise on a regular basis prevents many health problems over time. I know that would never happen but it'd be nice!

Edited July 30, 2009 by JillA

[Kathryn41 3,205]

Okay, my solution to health care:

1. Put health care into the hands medical doctors and nurses. I bet they know just a little more about treating patients than an insurance company or the government.

2. Emphasize preventative measures. Sometimes you can't prevent something and all you can do is treat it. However, if prevention can be achieved by either avoiding a health issue or reducing its severity, why not do it? Regardless of which system -- American or Canadian -- exists, if people took better care of themselves and tried to prevent health problems more than expecting a "miracle cure" from their doctor, it'd have to help out.

I couldn't agree with you more!

[SomberCat 0]

Perhaps insurance cos could consider paying for gym memberships as a preventative step? Obviously exercise on a regular basis prevents many health problems over time. I know that would never happen but it'd be nice!

Ours does. It doesn't pay for the whole membership but I believe it's 50%. I don't use it as I have a treadmill and an elliptical machine and would rather exercise at home than drag my butt somewhere else to do it, but even 50% is a nice incentive.

[JillA 2]

Perhaps insurance cos could consider paying for gym memberships as a preventative step? Obviously exercise on a regular basis prevents many health problems over time. I know that would never happen but it'd be nice!

Ours does. It doesn't pay for the whole membership but I believe it's 50%. I don't use it as I have a treadmill and an elliptical machine and would rather exercise at home than drag my butt somewhere else to do it, but even 50% is a nice incentive.

That's so great! I wish our insurance paid for a gym membership, we spend $60 a month for the both of us. But, it's money WELL spent!

[Emancipation 2]

I saw this ad on TV and its a Canadian with a message to Americans about governement healthcare.

name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="

type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>">

name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="

type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350">

Just been reading up on this.. The lady didn't have a brain tumer.. she had a cyst... http://www.mayoclinic.org/patientstories/story-339.html

I think some of the issue in this whole debate is consumerism vs. minimalism.. personally.. I think she should have had to wait.. esp. when it wasn't life threatening if there were people in line ahead of her with more serious illness.. I don't have a problem with that.. but then again I don't look at my health care as a consumer.

[Sprailenes 47]

Jack Layton wrote a rather wonderful article on this issue, I suggest you all read it.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jack-layton/...h_b_248212.html

[Kathryn41 3,205]

Here is an excellent article sent to me by a friend on another forum:

http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Insur...nkrupt-you.aspx

What's most likely to bankrupt you

Harvard researchers say 62% of all personal bankruptcies in the US in 2007 were caused by health problems -- and 78% of those filers had insurance.

By BusinessWeek

Medical problems caused 62% of all personal bankruptcies filed in the U.S. in 2007, according to a study by Harvard researchers. And in a finding that surprised even the researchers, 78% of those filers had medical insurance at the start of their illnesses, including 60.3% who had private coverage, not Medicare or Medicaid.

Medically related bankruptcies have been rising steadily for decades. In 1981, only 8% of families filing for bankruptcy cited a serious medical problem as the reason, while a 2001 study of bankruptcies in five states by the same researchers found that illness or medical bills contributed to 50% of all filings.

This newest, nationwide study, conducted before the start of the current recession by Drs. David Himmelstein and Steffie Woolhandler of Harvard Medical School, Elizabeth Warren of Harvard Law School and Deborah Thorne, a sociology professor at Ohio University, found that the filers were for the most part solidly middle class before medical disaster hit. Two-thirds owned their homes, and three-fifths had gone to college.

But medically bankrupt families with private insurance reported average out-of-pocket medical bills of $17,749, while the uninsured's bills averaged $26,971. Of the families that started out with insurance but lost it during the course of illnesses, medical bills averaged $22,658.

"For middle-class Americans, health insurance offers little protection. Most of us have policies with so many loopholes, co-payments and deductibles that illness can put you in the poorhouse," said lead author Himmelstein. "Unless you're Warren Buffett, your family is just one serious illness away from bankruptcy."

The study underscores President Barack Obama's arguments in calling for health care reform legislation this year. In a recent letter to Democratic Senate leaders, the president said: "Health care reform is not a luxury. It's a necessity we cannot defer. Soaring health care costs make our current course unsustainable. It is unsustainable for our families, whose spiraling premiums and out-of-pocket expenses are pushing them into bankruptcy and forcing them to go without the checkups and prescriptions they need."

The study was funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and published online by The American Journal of Medicine. It will appear in the Journal's August print edition. The researchers examined the court records of a random sample of 2,314 bankruptcy filings across the nation during early 2007 and contacted those filers for written explanations. The researchers then followed up with extensive phone interviews of 1,032 of those filers.

They found that a number of medical factors contributed to a family's financial disaster. More than 90% of medically related bankruptcies were caused by high medical bills directly or medical costs that were so high the family was forced to mortgage their home. The remaining 8% went bankrupt because a medical problem caused them to lose income.

The authors were not able to track credit card defaults caused by medical bills, but a 2007 study found that, of low- and middle-income households with credit card debt, 29% used their plastic to pay off medical expenses.

Individuals with diabetes, one of the most common chronic diseases in the U.S., and those with neurological illnesses such as multiple sclerosis had the highest costs, an average of $26,971 and $34,167, respectively. Hospital bills were the largest single expense for half of all medically bankrupt families.

Woolhandler, an advocate of a single-payer health care system, said lawmakers in Washington should reconsider health care reform in light of the study.

"Covering the uninsured isn't enough," she said. "Reform also needs to help families who already have insurance by upgrading their coverage and assuring that they never lose it."

This article was reported by Catherine Arnst for BusinessWeek.

Published July 15, 2009

Edited July 31, 2009 by Kathryn41