Free Universal Healthcare

[Borodog]

This thread makes the baby Jesus cry.

[MrWookie]

[ QUOTE ]
The government does regulate certain procedures and medications. I have already pointed out pregnancy. Another place is AIDS. The volunteer coorporations press for free and discounted medications for the patients.

[/ QUOTE ]

Dave, there's a difference between the government regulating the price and the government paying the price set by companies for the people it provides medical care for. By covering prenatal care in CA, the state of CA is not declaring that hospitals have to give it away for free. Instead, they're paying the hospitals in lieu of the pregnant women. Be careful with your words here, because the distinction is important.

[ QUOTE ]
I do believe that the people doing the research is inherently up to the challenge of beating these diseases, but when we compare the price of say a pill, and Kemo, I believe that the people with the money are going to go for what gives them profit. No matter how much you want to believe that the world will be better by medication, the condition of health care will follow stringent business and money theory when the smoke clears.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have no idea what you're trying to argue here. Are you saying that people who develop cheap, effective medication will be squelched by companies that push expensive ones? If you want to talk about stringent market theory, it would be inevitable that cheap, effective medication will triumph over expensive, less effective medication in a truly free market.

[indigo]

This is interesting, I am form the UK originally but live in switzerland. These discussions come up all the time in europe, but often noone is able to quantify things.

The NHS is the largest employer in europe. It is incredibly expensive to fund, like all large scale public sector projects. Accordingly it has soviet style targets and quotas, with all the accompanied statistical rigging that you would imagine.
Though it does provide a "free" service I think most americans would be pretty staggered at the poor condition of the average UK hospital. Many hospitals are very old, it is normal to be in wards where the patients are mixed together. (Good luck getting any sleep at night in cancer ward).
I used to work for Merrill Lynch in London, my american colleagues could not believe the state of health care in the UK. Believe me it is nothing like going to a modern american hospital.

Of course the counter-argument is the "catch-all is better than nothing", but it is not clear to me how expensive and accessible US health care really is. Also, the moral argument that riches may buy you a better house, car etc but should never be able to buy better health, education, legal representation for example.

What happens in the US if you were e.g. a factory worker and were made redundant and have been out of work for say 6m, you cannot afford insurance and you are now diagnosed with e.g. cancer. Do you really just not get treated ?

Could someone please say what I would pay (typically) in healthcare / insurance in the US if I were

- a single 30 yr old with no history of serious illness
- a single 30 yr old who recovered from cancer 5 yrs ago
- married with wife, 2 children
- 50 yr old, single
- senior

Sorry for disorganised rambling / mind-dump.

[ChipWrecked]

I'm married with 2 kids. Use an HMO plan for medical: go to gatekeeper MD for any issue, then referred to specialists etc. from there.

My total bill is about $1500 per month for insurance. My benefits package picks up about $1000, so my out of pocket expense for medical not counting dental and vision is around $500 per month.

Edit: my out of pocket expense for the birth of my children was near zero. Thanks for sharing the load, single working people! [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[Zurvan]

[ QUOTE ]

my out of pocket expense for medical not counting dental and vision is around $500 per month.

[/ QUOTE ]

That absolutely boggles my mind. That's half my mortgage payment.

I complain endlessly about my taxes. I pay a lot. But I would never want to live somewhere that didn't have universal healthcare. I know that many of you here make pretty good money. You can afford to pay $500(!) a month for health insurance.

I don't make bad money, but if I had to pay for health insurance, I couldn't afford my house. When I was a kid, my parents definitely couldn't have paid for health insurance AND rent. It would be pretty sad if you had to choose between having a home, and having a doctor.

My father had a serious case of cancer last year, right after being diagnosed with type 2 diabetes. Some radiation treatments, long stays in the hospital, the whole thing. Tens of thousands of dollars worth of treatments (if not more). When he passed away, my mother was left with a single income as an executive assistant in a small town. That doesn't pay too well. If not for the healthcare system here, there is no way she would ever get out from under the hospital bills.

If given a choice between lower taxes & private healthcare, or the current system, I'll take what I have. I might have to wait 4 months to see a specialist, but I'm not going to have to come up with a few hundred dollars when I get there.

[diebitter]

I will say what inspired me to start this thread. I was listening to a podcast from 'filmspotting' (film reviews), and they were discussing Michael Moore's new film Sicko. They made the point he kept doing a schtick in overseas hospital, where people would tell him what they had done, and he'd ask how much is cost, and they'd reply it had no charge, and he'd look surprised. He'd do this over and over again.


Now, they made the point this was tiresome, but they also made the point that, as Americans, it was actually a shock to hear about all this treatment people were getting at no charge, EVERY SINGLE TIME HE DID IT. So while his thing was tiresome, they remained surprised how different it was to America.


Is it really that unusual a concept for the American psyche, do you think?

[indigo]

[ QUOTE ]
What happens in the US if you were e.g. a factory worker and were made redundant and have been out of work for say 6m, you cannot afford insurance and you are now diagnosed with e.g. cancer. Do you really just not get treated ?


[/ QUOTE ]

Can someone answer this one pls ?

[ChipWrecked]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

my out of pocket expense for medical not counting dental and vision is around $500 per month.

[/ QUOTE ]

You can afford to pay $500(!) a month for health insurance.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol. I didn't say I could afford it.

While we're on the subject I live in California, I'm the sole earner while Mom stays home with the youngest until he hits 3 years old.... and we can't afford a house.

Note the anger in my first post.

When we had to make multiple trips to the ER for IV's for my wife, we waited endless hours each time behind a horde of illegal aliens who had stopped by to use the ER for their free clinic.

[ChipWrecked]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What happens in the US if you were e.g. a factory worker and were made redundant and have been out of work for say 6m, you cannot afford insurance and you are now diagnosed with e.g. cancer. Do you really just not get treated ?


[/ QUOTE ]

Can someone answer this one pls ?

[/ QUOTE ]

You will be treated for free and the insurance payers will pick up the tab.

If I'm wrong correct me someone.

[iron81]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What happens in the US if you were e.g. a factory worker and were made redundant and have been out of work for say 6m, you cannot afford insurance and you are now diagnosed with e.g. cancer. Do you really just not get treated ?


[/ QUOTE ]

Can someone answer this one pls ?

[/ QUOTE ]
There is some government paid health care in the US, but it is reserved for the poor and the elderly. In the situation you describe, the worker would likely have to deplete much of his assets to qualify for government health care. In some states, Medicaid is only available to families with children. This varies a lot by state.