Just Saw Sicko, Now Have Question

[Lucky]

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]

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]

[ 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]

[ 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.

[Emperor]

[ QUOTE ]
[ 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.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, you are correct. The socialist PRC does have state/county health care (for now). Most do not.

Apologies, I misread. I thought they were paying 75% of her premium. Insurance is not inexpensive. There are ways to make it cheaper:

1. Increase the supply of insurance companies (by encouraging competition, instead of protecting the industry through legislation)

2. Increase the supply of doctors (through education and immigration).

State sponsored anything costs on average 3x what deregulated anything costs.(you can find citation on CATO)

[7ontheline]

Emperor,

Increasing the supply of doctors is unlikely to decrease the price of health care. Doctor reimbursements are generally not set by the physician, they are imposed by Medicare/insurance. Also, with plenty of physicians in financial binds already due to malpractice costs and declining overall reimbursements (particularly primary care providers) you are unlikely to find a large number of people who want to be physicians who have been denied the opportunity unless you lower standards for admission or take a large number of foreign physicians.

[guids]

If people would get their priorities straight, and rather than buy crap they dont need, and use it for health care we wouldn't be debating this. IMO, denying people of means from health care (like they do in other countries) is the biggest [censored] crime in history. My solution would be to convince some of the big retail stores, to work out a deal with health care providers, basically they provide free health care for any of their employees in lieu of pay, dollar for dollar health care, it wouldnt be any more expensive if the govt provided tax breaks for the companies, and the rest of us who arent morons and get have their priorities straight dont have to worry about getting our hard earned dollars stolen from us.


oh ya, completely streamline teh system, make malpractice suits almost non-existent (tough, [censored] happens imo) unless it was REALLY negligent.

[renodoc]

[ QUOTE ]
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 ]

WTF? I'm not charging enough.

[suzzer99]

Cataract surgery, laser surgery, corneal transplant, a million follow up things. The last I heard she said it was $120k or something so I just extrapolated.

[AdamBragar]

[ 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.