Wot is the problem with a national health service in USA????

[Heracles 417]

most of the countries with the top GDP per capita, that is, the ones above the US.

There are maybe a dozen countries with a higher per-capita GDP and their numbers are not that far off.

Australia: $47,400

US: $46,859

What are we talking about here, a $500 difference?

Of which most are using the parliamentary system.

Due to first mover advantage post WWII, yes, the US as a country is still quite rich, but the wealth of the average Joe suggests otherwise. The difference in poverty of your average Joe is counts. As is what is considered being poor. In Australia earning under $32k is considered being in poverty. In the US earning under $11k is considered, which is disingenuous and misleading.

Edited August 12, 2009 by haza

[mawilson 2,133]

As is what is considered being poor. In Australia earning under $32k is considered being in poverty. In the US earning under $11k is considered, which is disingenuous and misleading.

$32k? Where did you pull that from?

POVERTY LINES: AUSTRALIA MARCH QUARTER 2009

Single person, head not in workforce:

$317.73 (including housing per week) = $16,522

$189.59 (excluding housing per week) = $9,859

[rebeccajo 14]

As said before most have insurance and great health care and most of the 47 million that don't have insurance could but won't pay for it as they are younger and feel invincible. There are a few million left that don't haver and could use it but to throw out the whole to see to the few by a government take over is not the way it needs to be done. Just because many on this site come from someplace that has a Socialized health care and want to bring your inept health care here does not mean we have to do so. You either like it here or not. Simple as that.

So what's your solution for those who want insurance but don't have it?

Go get insurance. Now if they need insurance and don't work at a place that has it then start trying to get on with a company that has insuarnce like everyone else has to ever do in life here. I remember starting out in my former career and after I got experience I started to look at other companies that had benefits and eventually got with one and stayed there.

Poof! New job with health insurance! Affordable health insurance with no deductibles and no copays and no out of pocket and no pre-existing and no non-formularies and no pre-certs and all that jazz!

In all fairness, there's nothing wrong with deductibles and copays. Patients should be expected share cost with the insurer.

The problem is when the insurer puts a cap on yearly and lifetime benefits and when they exclude people for pre-existing.

You're missing the sarcasm.

All these words and concepts weren't even in the vocabulary of most Americans 30 years ago. For-profit healthcare just keeps getting more and more complex. To imply (as luckytxn does) that making career choices around such a system is asanine.

[Heracles 417]

As is what is considered being poor. In Australia earning under $32k is considered being in poverty. In the US earning under $11k is considered, which is disingenuous and misleading.

$32k? Where did you pull that from?

POVERTY LINES: AUSTRALIA MARCH QUARTER 2009

Single person, head not in workforce:

$317.73 (including housing per week) = $16,522

$189.59 (excluding housing per week) = $9,859

From the same report:

The Poverty Lines for the March Quarter 2009

The Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research has updated the poverty line for Australia to the March quarter 2009 Inclusive of housing costs, the poverty line is $736.00 per week for a family comprising two adults, one of whom is working, and two dependent children. This is a decrease of $32.22 over the poverty line for the previous quarter (December 2008).

Basically: $38,272 (USD $31,919)

Same US equivalent poverty guide lines: $22,050. I pay $24K in rent alone. Food here is also much more expensive.

Even then we can break it down further because the United States has a hell of a lot of single mothers. Lets also add the cost of health care, which is exclude from the equitation. Using Australia's scale, 100 million people would be considered living in poverty. Something people witness everyday in America. Not so much in Manhattan but try Harlem or Jersey

Same with unemployment statistics, the US drops the long-term unemployed off.

Edited August 12, 2009 by haza

[mawilson 2,133]

Basically: $38,272 (USD $31,919)

Same US equivalent poverty guide lines: $22,050. I pay $24K in rent alone. Food here is also much more expensive.

I see - so it's $22k vs $32k for a family of 4?

Keep in mind that the US is a much bigger country than Australia and costs can vary

greatly by state and localities within states. Rural areas tend to be less expensive

than larger cities.

That said, I do think the Federal Poverty guidelines are a bit of a joke.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

That said, I do think the Federal Poverty guidelines are a bit of a joke.

[Heracles 417]

Basically: $38,272 (USD $31,919)

Same US equivalent poverty guide lines: $22,050. I pay $24K in rent alone. Food here is also much more expensive.

I see - so it's $22k vs $32k for a family of 4?

Keep in mind that the US is a much bigger country than Australia and costs can vary

greatly by state and localities within states. Rural areas tend to be less expensive

than larger cities.

That said, I do think the Federal Poverty guidelines are a bit of a joke.

$32k is what is considered poverty, not what people get. Anyone unemployed with a family receives decent benefits in AUS. In addition, they also qualify for low income health care card; which gives a range of benefits such as lower taxes and discounted medication. It's not the best but you can get by. As I said earlier, the US has a lot of single mothers, therefore, that amount is reduced further. The sheer poverty around the country speaks for itself.

US poverty vs AUS poverty, there is no comparison between the two. Using Australia's guidelines as a benchmark, my guess, over 100+ million Americans would be in poverty.

[Heracles 417]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_inc...e_United_States

34% of US households earn under $32K.

34% of 300 million is about ~ $102 mill

[one...two...tree 2,762]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_inc...e_United_States

34% of US households earn under $32K.

34% of 300 million is about ~ $102 mill

That's staggering.

[mawilson 2,133]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_inc...e_United_States

34% of US households earn under $32K.

34% of 300 million is about ~ $102 mill

Well to be fair, you should include only households of four (two adults, only one of whom is working,

and two dependent children), as per Aus guidelines.

Edited August 13, 2009 by mawilson

[rebeccajo 14]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_inc...e_United_States

34% of US households earn under $32K.

34% of 300 million is about ~ $102 mill

Well to be fair, you should include only households of four (two adults, only one of whom is working,

and two dependent children), as per Aus guidelines.

It's out of your realm of thinking that it would take two people to earn $32k, isn't it?

[mawilson 2,133]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_inc...e_United_States

34% of US households earn under $32K.

34% of 300 million is about ~ $102 mill

Well to be fair, you should include only households of four (two adults, only one of whom is working,

and two dependent children), as per Aus guidelines.

It's out of your realm of thinking that it would take two people to earn $32k, isn't it?

No, but a family of two earning $32k wouldn't be considered below the poverty line by Aussie standards.

[rebeccajo 14]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_inc...e_United_States

34% of US households earn under $32K.

34% of 300 million is about ~ $102 mill

Well to be fair, you should include only households of four (two adults, only one of whom is working,

and two dependent children), as per Aus guidelines.

It's out of your realm of thinking that it would take two people to earn $32k, isn't it?

No, but a family of two earning $32k wouldn't be considered below the poverty line by Aussie standards.

Oh ok. Got it.