Two Plus Two Newer Archives

Two Plus Two Newer Archives (http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/index.php)
-   EDF (http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/forumdisplay.php?f=81)
-   -   Just Saw Sicko, Now Have Question (http://archives1.twoplustwo.com/showthread.php?t=459575)

Lucky 07-24-2007 04:03 PM

Just Saw Sicko, Now Have Question
 
I just saw Sicko. It was actually somewhat entertaining, and I must admit I'm moving into the school of thought that health care is a right. More importantly though, regardless of what you think of Michael Moore or Universal Health Care, I think a scenario presented throughout the movie is a valid cause for concern.

Basically, if you're middle or upper middle class what is the play in the event of some insanely expensive long term illness, which doesnt kill you immediately, but requires hundreds of thousands of dollars of medical care in the interim. Now, clearly if you're in Canada/UK/all other industrialized nations, you get your care via the government health plan, and thus not go broke (excepting money you lose if you can't work). What do you do in america? I have health insurance, but I'm imagining they would stop paying at some point, so I'll be forced to go broke until I can be declared indigent? In the mean time of course, my family suffers as well, has no money, etc. because of something out of our control.

Anyway, I'm sure the more financially sophisticated posters of the EL D forum have a plan in mind, and I'm hoping you can share it.

suzzer99 07-24-2007 04:19 PM

Re: Just Saw Sicko, Now Have Question
 
I have a feeling one way or another you get taken care of. You get rid of all your $$ before the insurance runs out, then you wind of up on disability/medicaid whatever and your health ins. is covered.

The interesting thing to me is that when you talk to people from other Western countries that you think are more socialist or whatever, actually in the long run things end up running about the same.

IE in Sweden someone making about $80k/yr is taxed 45%, max tax is 50%. Here it's 38%/38% at that level. Not *that* gigantic of a difference.

In Canada you get universal healthcare but it is slow and kind of sucks. Rich people have a way around this. In the US anyone with decent insurance gets pretty close to rich people care. Poor people have to wait in line and get crappy care, but they don't get turned away. In LA, anyone who's poor gets on a Blue Cross HMO and has pretty sweet care. In Cuba I'm sure it sucks for the most part unless you're "rich" by whatever standard they use.

I'm just saying things are often not as different as you think. I'm all for universal health care here, as I think the biggest problem with our system is people who are afraid to go to work and lose their state-covered health care. My friend has diabetes. She got a job with a small company and her health insurance was going to be like 3/4 of her salary. That's nuts.

Emperor 07-24-2007 04:39 PM

Re: Just Saw Sicko, Now Have Question
 
I'm going to try and address the question and avoid a political debate.

If you are rich enough to have to worry about your described scenario, then you can afford insurance that doesn't have a cap on payments.

If you don't have that kind of policy, and are diagnosed with such an illness and would rather your family get your cash instead of the hospital then YSSCKY.

7ontheline 07-24-2007 04:46 PM

Re: Just Saw Sicko, Now Have Question
 
[ QUOTE ]
Now, clearly if you're in Canada/UK/all other industrialized nations, you get your care via the government health plan, and thus not go broke (excepting money you lose if you can't work).

[/ QUOTE ]

Unfortunately, it's not always this simple. One of the problems with Sicko is that it does not touch on the rationing of healthcare that is necessary under any government system. If you think that once you get sick under a socialized system you will be getting your ideal treatments to make you well (or keep you less un-well) then you may have a surprise in store. The system may not allow certain treatments, or you may wait a long time for certain aspects of your treatment. In the U.S., if you have a good insurance plan, you may be completely covered. If you are on disability or government assistance, your care may not be worse than what you would get in a socialized system. If you are somewhere in between, you may be screwed.

Emperor 07-24-2007 04:49 PM

Re: Just Saw Sicko, Now Have Question
 
[ QUOTE ]
I'm all for universal health care here, as I think the biggest problem with our system is people who are afraid to go to work and lose their state-covered health care.

[/ QUOTE ]

Only pregnant mothers and seniors have state-covered health care. Everyone else can go to the ER, hospital will bill them, and then never collect (IF the person doesn't have money). Health care for these people is subsidized by paying customers. "40Million people without healthcare" is a myth. 40million people may not be covered by insurance, but they surely wont be denied care, its against the law.

[ QUOTE ]
My friend has diabetes. She got a job with a small company and her health insurance was going to be like 3/4 of her salary. That's nuts.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's life. At least the company was willing to cover 25%.

My stepdaughter has Type I diabetes and all care is paid out of pocket.


Emergency Care IS a right by law in the U.S. (which has bankrupted some hospitals.)

Rich people get better care than poor people just like they get better automobiles.

suzzer99 07-24-2007 05:12 PM

Re: Just Saw Sicko, Now Have Question
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm all for universal health care here, as I think the biggest problem with our system is people who are afraid to go to work and lose their state-covered health care.

[/ QUOTE ]

Only pregnant mothers and seniors have state-covered health care. Everyone else can go to the ER, hospital will bill them, and then never collect (IF the person doesn't have money). Health care for these people is subsidized by paying customers. "40Million people without healthcare" is a myth. 40million people may not be covered by insurance, but they surely wont be denied care, its against the law.


[/ QUOTE ]

You're talking out of your ass. In CA people on welfare are covered. But it's administered by county. In LA it's like an HMO. Some counties like Santa Barbara it sucks a lot worse. My friend has gotten $150k worth of eye surgeries at UCLA eye center because she's indigent and disabled (although not enough to get disabilty [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]) in LA County.


[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
My friend has diabetes. She got a job with a small company and her health insurance was going to be like 3/4 of her salary. That's nuts.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's life. At least the company was willing to cover 25%.


[/ QUOTE ]

Where do you get that? The company wasn't covering squat. Her premium was 75% of her salary. Large companies often cover a lot of the premium, small companies don't have to. I think after 6 months her insurance would go down substantially though.

Hoi Polloi 07-24-2007 05:30 PM

Re: Just Saw Sicko, Now Have Question
 
[ QUOTE ]
One of the problems with Sicko is that it does not touch on the rationing of healthcare that is necessary under any government system.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hate to break it to you but we ration healthcare in the US. We just do it in the most draconian fashion possible. We base it on means.

AdamBragar 07-24-2007 05:31 PM

Re: Just Saw Sicko, Now Have Question
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm all for universal health care here, as I think the biggest problem with our system is people who are afraid to go to work and lose their state-covered health care.

[/ QUOTE ]

Only pregnant mothers and seniors have state-covered health care. Everyone else can go to the ER, hospital will bill them, and then never collect (IF the person doesn't have money). Health care for these people is subsidized by paying customers. "40Million people without healthcare" is a myth. 40million people may not be covered by insurance, but they surely wont be denied care, its against the law.

[/ QUOTE ]

ER Care is not sufficient care for tons of patients. Sure if you're shot, ER care will definitely be sufficient in trying to save your life. If someone has diabetes or other chronic illnesses, they won't be covered for prescription drugs, for example.

As for the OP, most healthcare packages cover high yearly medical expenses with little extra cost to the beneficiary. Once again, the problem resides with people who do not have access to private health insurance.

The4Aces 07-24-2007 05:43 PM

Re: Just Saw Sicko, Now Have Question
 
I dont see how healthcare is a basic human right. Taking from one group of people and giving to another is socialism. The USA was built on capitalism not socialism.

amplify 07-24-2007 05:47 PM

Re: Just Saw Sicko, Now Have Question
 
[ QUOTE ]
I dont see how healthcare is a basic human right. Taking from one group of people and giving to another is socialism. The USA was built on capitalism not socialism.

[/ QUOTE ]
All due respect, this is a really dumb opinion. One might say that the USA was built on the backs of African slaves, stolen from Native Americans, and layered over the corpses of immigrant laborers. Using reductio ad absurdum on your argument would leave us with a government that doesn't tax anyone for anything and does nothing. Hey, wait a minute...


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:25 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.