9 Trillion Reasons HealthCare May Be Dead

[Industrialsize]

Not one bill making it's way through congress contains "socialized medicine".

 

[Trinity]

Not one bill making it's way through congress contains "socialized medicine".

Every example put out for how we should model our system...their people come here when they languish in queue and need good healthcare. Those systems are changing to be more like us because costs of their system is out of control. Just as the CBO said about the bills in the House.

 

[hose8]

when Bush was on vacation most of the time he was at his ranch in texas thats the difference

 

[mikeyh9in]

Yawn...

It is really a good sign that France ... who is rated #1 in healthcare is continuing to IMPROVE their system.

We, meanwhile sitting at #37, continue to pretend that our system is fine and doesn't need changing.

Talk about supporting my point... thank you Trinity!

France Fights Universal Care's High Cost



2007: French Health Care Expert: France's System Broken, Should Copy US; Media Yawn


2004:French healthcare is 'badly run'

 

[deleted15807]

Republican Health Care
​

 

[Flashy]

Republican Health Care
​

of course, you do not provide an actual solution to help this woman or her husband either.

design a system that can actually be paid for, and that will not impact the private insurance that others have and are sastisfied with, and you will have your answer.

well, guess what? we still can't pay for it.

just remember...in the mid 60s the administration of Lyndon b Johnson and congress passed medicare.

the House Ways and Means Committee, in predicting the cost of the program over the next 25 years, said that by 1990 the annual program cost would be $12 billion.

the actual cost of the medicare program in 1990? roughly
$107 BILLION

nearly 9 times the predicted cost.


the fact is, we are bankrupt.


when we enacted the prescription drug reform act, during the GWB years, it was estimated to cost 400 billion over 9 years...now it is on track to cost 725 billion over 9 years.


you can complain all you want about republicans, libertarians, blue dogs etc...

but the fact is, that with the latest numbers and the cold dark reality staring us in the face, health care will not pass until this administration can pass a plan for the same 10 year period that cuts other spending and reduces the deficit.

otherwise, there is no other way.

we have no money left, and have reached the point of no return.

 

[HazelGod]

It is really a good sign that France ... who is rated #1 in healthcare is continuing to IMPROVE their system.

We, meanwhile sitting at #37, continue to pretend that our system is fine and doesn't need changing.

Damn you punks, with your factual statements and your honest realities...
<shakes fist>

 

[seterwind]

The sad truth about the U.S of A is that, you guys have been screwed for awhile. There was "hope" when Clinton managed to turn things around and create a massive surplus. If the country had been fiscally managed properly there was hope that America could have worked it's way out of debit and provided better living conditions for it's people. However, even with a GDP of 14.3 Trillion, you just can't seem to budget accordingly.

Do you realize that, your country produces more then CHINA, JAPAN, GERMANY, and CANADA combined?(Well it would be over roughly 200 billion but still point remains at .2 on this scale of trillions) It's insane how much the U.S.A can put out. Yet your citizens live on the low end of civilized society.

9 Trillion dollars over 10 years? That isn't anything compared to the 140+ Trillion you'll produce in those years.

Anyways, just my rants. Rip away.

 

[Flashy]

The sad truth about the U.S of A is that, you guys have been screwed for awhile. There was "hope" when Clinton managed to turn things around and create a massive surplus. If the country had been fiscally managed properly there was hope that America could have worked it's way out of debit and provided better living conditions for it's people. However, even with a GDP of 14.3 Trillion, you just can't seem to budget accordingly.

Do you realize that, your country produces more then CHINA, JAPAN, GERMANY, FRANCE, and CANADA combined? It's insane how much the U.S.A can put out. Yet your citizens live on the low end of civilized society.

9 Trillion dollars over 10 years? That isn't anything compared to the 140+ Trillion you'll produce in those years.

Anyways, just my rants. Rip away.

your numbers are incorrect regarding what we produce....remove France and Canada and you have the accurate combined number.

2008 GDP
USA 14.264
Japan 4.923
China 4.4
Germany 3.667

you can add in Canada at 1.5 and it will still come out ahead of the USA by roughly 200 billion combined

you cannot add in France at 2.865

 

[seterwind]

Edited for flashy accuracy

 

[earllogjam]

So the old Trinity argument....I got my healthcare so the rest of you can just fuck off. You ain't getting a dime out of me. Welfare muther fuckers.

Rather nearsighted and fucked way of living is a society IMHO.

 

[deleted15807]

The sad truth about the U.S of A is that, you guys have been screwed for awhile. There was "hope" when Clinton managed to turn things around and create a massive surplus.

The conservatives hated the idea of a 'budget surplus'. You see a budget surplus means government is 'stealing' from the people. There was no need for government to put money away for a rainy day or to reduce it's debts. Everyone was happy with the idea of s surplus, no red ink, an opportunity to pay down the debt. But nooooooooooooo that was not good. The Wall Street Journal back in 1999 ran an editorial entitled 'Give It Back'. So it was no surprise when Bush got elected it was time to indeed get us back into the red.

This little/huge piece of the puzzle of course the entity known as Trinity leaves conspicuously absent.

 

[B_VinylBoy]

So the old Trinity argument....I got my healthcare so the rest of you can just fuck off. You ain't getting a dime out of me. Welfare muther fuckers.

And ironically, they'll embrace this thought and at the same time put down anyone who then needs government assistance. So much for people being born into poverty... perhaps they shouldn't have been born?

 

[seterwind]

The conservatives hated the idea of a 'budget surplus'. You see a budget surplus means government is 'stealing' from the people. There was no need for government to put money away for a rainy day or to reduce it's debts. Everyone was happy with the idea of s surplus, no red ink, an opportunity to pay down the debt. But nooooooooooooo that was not good. The Wall Street Journal back in 1999 ran an editorial entitled 'Give It Back'. So it was no surprise when Bush got elected it was time to indeed get us back into the red.

This little/huge piece of the puzzle of course the entity known as Trinity leaves conspicuously absent.

.........

Really.... I just... the stupidity. Really? And, research says this idea had strong support. My God. I just... am completely baffled. The 1999 debt of the USA was $3,632.4 Billion or in big scary numbers $3 632 400 000 000. Clinton payed off $223 Billion or roughly 6% of that debt from the "Surplus" .

The people of the USA and Republican party actually... seriously... wanted the $223 to be payed back towards the people... instead of the debt.

... Really? Is this what Barrack has to fight against? Best of luck to him.

 

[liberalcynic]

.........

Really.... I just... the stupidity. Really? And, research says this idea had strong support. My God. I just... am completely baffled. The 1999 debt of the USA was $3,632.4 Billion or in big scary numbers $3 632 400 000 000. Clinton payed off $223 Billion or roughly 6% of that debt from the "Surplus" .

The people of the USA and Republican party actually... seriously... wanted the $223 to be payed back towards the people... instead of the debt.

... Really? Is this what Barrack has to fight against? Best of luck to him.

Your quoting consumer debt inclusing in aggregate debt of the USA, not the federal budget of the USA - two utterly different things. Clinton did have a budget surplus, just meanwhile American citizen borrowed monies from overseas, that is from nations not consuming but exporting their manufactured goods, such as China, India, Japan, Germany, Malaysia, Thailand and Arab nations which export oil.
Fiscal policy under the Clinton administration was the best in living memory; from both Puritan (supply side focused) and Keysian (demand side focused) perspectives of economics.
THe Bush and Regan administrations were amongst the most reckless in their fiscal managements.
THe Bush administration I'll speak briefly about since I know a little more about that particular administration's economic policies....
Most of the tax cuts given and the rebalancing of the tax bracket sizes was unsustainable and horrid in its audacidity; meanwhile this reakless, adventurous administration invaided Iraq knowing full well that the costs of running a war would plunge the country into a fiscal defict.
This act of policy; reducing taxes to pay for government expendature for an illegal war, under international war - weapons of mass destruction are where? and what right to veto another nation's sovereignity does the USA have? none. and did the United Nation allow the invasion? no. so the term illegal is justified, if any nut job Republican wants to argue against my word choice.

There's nothing wrong with having high deficts at the bottom of the cycle, since the debt servicing costs to the governemnt are minimal, and the price of credit is low. interest rates at the moment are the lowest for a very long time in the US, Australia, UK, Germany, Japan ect. don't be scared by the 1.6 billion defict; it doesn't crowd out business, if it did it would be reflected in the price of loans, interest rates.

Personally, I consider the greatest flaw in the American economy is the heath care system: how can so much money be poured into on sector of the economy, in the suposidly richest nation on earth, and not have everyone universally covered.
the PURE capitalist system results in what the US has today, millions not covered by insurance and high costs.
The systems in other capitalist developed nations, such as Australia, Japan, the UK, Germany and Switzerland, where the state subsardises medical care through an organised structure with less legality issues - lower costs - with everyone paying - the healthy, the sick; the poor and the rich - making the systems work because the egalitarian nature of the schemes allow the economics of everyone collectively paying for everyone's wellbeing; everyone does get sick, or breaks their leg or whatever, and the community as a whole realises that the citizen with a broken leg or some other illness will not be as functional, efficient or effectual in their society or in their work.

meh.... my rant; it's just outrageous seeing the Republican party trying to deny health care to people. healthcare is really the same as education in other developed nations, everyone recieves an education because the entire community benifits from everyone having an education; strangely the USA is the only nation not to have health care paid by the community, and doesn't consider it to be an universal right.

 

[Penis Aficionado]

So the old Trinity argument....I got my healthcare so the rest of you can just fuck off. You ain't getting a dime out of me. Welfare muther fuckers.

Rather nearsighted and fucked way of living is a society IMHO.

But, of course, they don't have their healthcare. They just think they do, because they've never been really sick.

 

[cdarro]

Massachusetts instituted universal health reform and it is near collapse in costs and it did not increase access or better care.

Canada is looking to add private insurance to their health care plan.

If the plan and approach is not the right one, we won't be making things better only worse for alot more people.

I don`t know where you get your information but Canada is NOT looking at adding private health insurance. Private health insurance already exists in various forms in the various provinces. Canada, per se, does not have any health insurance whatsoever. It is the reponsibility of each province to provide for the health care needs of their respective populations. In my province, Alberta, basic healthcare insurance premiums were until recently $54 per month for a single person, $108 for a family. These premiums are now paid by the provincial government, as I believe they are in eight of then ten provinces. The plan is funded through Health and Wellness Alberta, a crown corporation operating at arms length from the government, and was until recently adminstered through seven regional authorities, which are now being amalgamated into one super-board.

On basic health care, I am able to see any physician I choose, no limit on number of visits, and hospitals stays are fully insured, as are any number of additional health services such as diagnostic tests, podiatry, chiropractic, surgery, emergency and outpatient services. I can usually get in to see my family physician within 3-5 days of calling. If not, I could go to walk-in clinic and wait my turn.

People are able to purchase additional health insurance from whomever they choose; many like me who are not in a group plan get theirs through Alberta Blue Cross, a not-for-profit corporation. For $41 per month, I have 70% of precription drug cost paid, eyeglasses every 3 years, ambulance service and more, too much to list.

The regional referral hospital in my hometown is an excellent facility which offers almost all services, notable exceptions being some cancer and neurology services, but a cancer centre is currently under construction.

Sorry for the rant, but sometimes I think Americans have absolutely no idea what goes on outside their own borders except what Fox News tells them. Not saying our health care is perfect, but everyone is covered, and in my experience in my province, rationing is not an issue and wait times are insignificant.

Oh, and we are not going bankrupt. Our federal and provincial governments are projecting deficits this year and next, but this is due to the economic downturn, not health care spending.

 

[midlifebear]

Thanks, cdarro, for the truth about health care over on your side of the border. Somehow, I'm certain the Trinity person/thing will insist everything you've posted is a lie.

Yup, there was a time when it would have been easy to pass universal health coverage in the USA -- but 'Mericuhns are too fond of having imaginary evils threatening their form of democracy. Flashy (the ingorant slut :smile is often correct in his observations regarding the jumble of numbers and how the US Government simply has to print and more more money, thereby throwing a match on inflation, and the USA going further into so much debt that the house of cards will fall. But the alternative of no health care -- especially the single payer variety covered for each individual in your province by taxes -- is something that will eventually have to be addressed.

Spain has a similar health care system. Currently, it's an enormous burden on the regional and central governments, but even physicians, nurses, and pharmacists are willing to take a temporary cut in salaries to help Spain keep public health care alive. Fortunately, the country will most likely recover much more rapidly than the USA from this global downturn.

Currently, Spain is enjoying a major influx of US Dollars from medical tourists looking for the latest and best health care for advanced prostate cancer treatments -- treatments not yet approved by the FDA or AMA. And the super rich Spanish who have their own private health care usually go to Cape Town, South Africa if they need a heart transplant or cardiac surgery. Not because they'd be put on a waiting list in Spain. It's just that the initial and continuing advances in heart transplant, general cardiac, and organ transplant surgery are a point of national pride in South Africa. After all that's where the first first heart transplant took place. The medical research that continues in that part of the world (and supported by the government) is staggering.

But you'll never get the majority of US citizens to admit that they do not have the best medical care in the world. Some may have access to it, but only a select few.

 

[cdarro]

Thanks midlifebear for your comments. I should perhaps forestall any comments on how high taxes supposedly are in Canada by a few words. Federal income taxes start at 15% on taxable income over $9,600 - $37,885, 22% from $37,886 - $75,769, 26% from $75,770 - $123,184, and 29% above $123,185. These figures do not include exemption and credits for such things as age, dependents, pension and employment insurance contributions and ancillary medical expenses. My province (Alberta) has a flat rate on taxable income over $16,161, also with the above exclusions. The province has no sales tax or VAT, but the federal government levies a 5% Goods and Services Tax on most transactions.

Just as a sideline, when my oldest nephew lived in New York State, he paid a higher total tax rate than I did. Now that he's in Texas, it's changed I'm sure, but he did recently tell me that a 3 night hospital stay for the birth of his son cost him over $7,000 out of pocket - and that he had the "good insurance". A younger nephew just had a daughter here in Alberta. His out of pocket cost? $28, for a TV rental.

 

[Trinity]

I don`t know where you get your information but Canada is NOT looking at adding private health insurance. Private health insurance already exists in various forms in the various provinces. Canada, per se, does not have any health insurance whatsoever. It is the reponsibility of each province to provide for the health care needs of their respective populations. In my province, Alberta, basic healthcare insurance premiums were until recently $54 per month for a single person, $108 for a family. These premiums are now paid by the provincial government, as I believe they are in eight of then ten provinces. The plan is funded through Health and Wellness Alberta, a crown corporation operating at arms length from the government, and was until recently adminstered through seven regional authorities, which are now being amalgamated into one super-board.

On basic health care, I am able to see any physician I choose, no limit on number of visits, and hospitals stays are fully insured, as are any number of additional health services such as diagnostic tests, podiatry, chiropractic, surgery, emergency and outpatient services. I can usually get in to see my family physician within 3-5 days of calling. If not, I could go to walk-in clinic and wait my turn.

People are able to purchase additional health insurance from whomever they choose; many like me who are not in a group plan get theirs through Alberta Blue Cross, a not-for-profit corporation. For $41 per month, I have 70% of precription drug cost paid, eyeglasses every 3 years, ambulance service and more, too much to list.

The regional referral hospital in my hometown is an excellent facility which offers almost all services, notable exceptions being some cancer and neurology services, but a cancer centre is currently under construction.

Sorry for the rant, but sometimes I think Americans have absolutely no idea what goes on outside their own borders except what Fox News tells them. Not saying our health care is perfect, but everyone is covered, and in my experience in my province, rationing is not an issue and wait times are insignificant.

Oh, and we are not going bankrupt. Our federal and provincial governments are projecting deficits this year and next, but this is due to the economic downturn, not health care spending.

Canada Considering Healthcare Overhaul With Private Insurance

The incoming president of the Canadian Medical Association says this country's health-care system is sick and doctors need to develop a plan to cure it.

Dr. Anne Doig says patients are getting less than optimal care and she adds that physicians from across the country - who will gather in Saskatoon on Sunday for their annual meeting - recognize that changes must be made.

"We all agree that the system is imploding, we all agree that things are more precarious than perhaps Canadians realize," Doing said in an interview with The Canadian Press. [...]

[Dr. Robert Ouellet, the current president of the CMA] has been saying since his return that "a health-care revolution has passed us by," that it's possible to make wait lists disappear while maintaining universal coverage and "that competition should be welcomed, not feared."

In other words, Ouellet believes there could be a role for private health-care delivery within the public system.
​

Overhauling health-care system tops agenda at annual meeting of Canada's doctors

​