Shipping Cost

[David Kilpatrick]

Funny thing is, Britain moved in the direction of a more US-like system for health care, and this resulted in the effective destruction of quality health care in many regions, high salaries for a top-heavy class of administrators, huge debts for hospital trusts tying them into negative relationships with property and financial speculators for two generations to come.

Now Obama wants to move the US in the direction of our old (working, though it needed modernisation and more resources) National Health Service - and you can sure that the result will include deteriorating health care, high salaries for a top-heavy class...etc etc.

Sometimes, it's just the 'we must change everything' which screws up, when 'we must fix everything' or even 'we must improve everything' was the action needed - not overturning a whole structure and culture.

On topic, not doing an about-turn or sweep-clean is what has made Sony successful so far with the Alpha system. They kept the mount, the infrastructure, the factories, the staff, even some designs in progress when they could easily have imposed some radical relaunch.

European post actually has been integrated - the services are agreed and shared between the national post office orgs whether government or semi-commercial. The prices have not been equalised, nor has the reliability of delivery, which is why Brits have pay a fortune to ship anything to Italy or Spain (Spain's just a ferry trip away). From experience, the ability of the Italian postal service to lose, damage or misdeliver packages is second to none.

David

[Dusty]

The problem with health care is that it has become a "right" instead of something that we pay for if needed. And every little thing "must" be covered! Having problems with your sex life, no problem your medical insurance must pay for your Viagra!

Yes, it doesn't seem fair that some people can afford anything in health care, and some have to scrimp to have life-saving procedures. But isn't that the same with anything? Some can afford an A900 and all the CZ and G lenses they want, some of us save up for a 350 and grab off-brand lenses on the cheap.

Oh, I know, it's not the same, because health care is a necessity! But going to the emergency room when your kid gets a cut that you can easily fix with a butterfly bandage becomes the standard when you're not paying for it. I know, I've seen it. When I broke my ankle as a kid my Mom was preparing to take me to the hospital when my Dad came home and said - "It's just sprained, it'll be okay in a few days." Mom insisted on taking me because of the swelling. The point here is that making hard choices as to whether or not to use health care services is different if YOU are paying for it.

It's also unfair to the healthy to pay for the sick. If it were up to me, I'd have only high-deductible major medical, as I never have anything worse than a chest cold, until my retina detached. Now I owe a hospital $10K, but that's okay, I've NOT spent that in insurance premiums over the years when I was single. Now that I'm married, the wife insists on the best plan that the company has. We have a $20 co-pay for office visits, and the Doc only charges $43 if you don't have insurance. Yes, I have kid with bay eczema, and the specialists are more expensive, but for $500 a month, I'll have to use a lot of services to break even.

It was better when people made hard choices. 15 years ago, they spent around $1 million to keep my uncle alive for an extra year. This after he smoked heavily and drank to excess daily. So he spent the last year in the hospital half of the time, and getting wheeled around in a wheelchair on oxygen when he was home, all the time stressing out everyone around him. It would have been much better for him to say, "I'm out of money, and even selling the house won't keep my sorry butt around much longer, let's get a good supply of pain pills- no wait - I'll just double up on my drinking - and prep for my demise."

Now someone else will decide who live or dies based upon how much the State thinks your life is worth. "He may be old and decrepit, but he give the max to the President's Party every year, let's keep him around!" "This old lady gives tons of money to Churches, let's let her die and take everything she has with the oppressive Death Taxes we have that help pay for Health Care!"

I want to make my own decisions based upon my desires and financial situation.

Dusty

[Javelin]

Dusty it's hard to tell from your post whether you support public health insurance or not. I see both pros and cons in your post and some strange class division stuff in there to boot? like when you say

"Yes, it doesn't seem fair that some people can afford anything in health care, and some have to scrimp to have life-saving procedures. But isn't that the same with anything? "

Is it really the same? the rich guy or.. the "Big Inc." employee can afford to pay for a procedure to save his child's life or his primo insurance plan will do it for him. while the guy who changes your oil can't and his insurance will only pay for so much if he even has any? I mean this is a little different than wanting the guy around the corners Porsche because you drive an early 90's panel van?

Who is more important to your community the guy who answerers the phone at "Big inc" or the guy who knows your name and gives you a free paper while changing your oil?

"It's also unfair to the healthy to pay for the sick. If it were up to me, I'd have only high-deductible major medical, as I never have anything worse than a chest cold" Don't some of your taxes go to pave street you don't drive on? if you applied that logic evenly .. well it doesn't make sense. you pay those taxes for the benefit of everyone in your community why is health care that much different? Are you afraid the bum who will never have a job or be productive in the community might get some benefit he didn't deserve? I don't believe theres enough of those to be relevant.



For now you are healthy so you wonder why you would pay extra for insurance. well one day you will need it. aren't you an older white guy? isn't it worth a few extra bucks to get an extra year or 2 with your wife and family after you retire? Statistically we are the ones who benefit most by social health care. N American men work themselves to death, retire at 65 and only have a few more years (at least in the US average 13 more years. In Canada we get an average a little more than 15 more years). Also I'm not convinced it cost more for it than using a private system. everything I read seems to indicate about 2k a year difference on average between Canada and the US for health care as a portion of our income tax (in Canada's favour) even with the 2 stitch wounds and sniffles sitting in our emergency rooms, and having 10 times the population we do would bring that cost way down if you went with public health care wouldn't it?. My business partner is a huge proponent of private health care.. or was until he found out he would be uninsurable in the US (he has leukemia that has relapsed badly in recent years) .. he was pretty passionate about it but I think maybe his recent experiences have tempered that. it hasn't been a topic of discussion for a long time now whith him.

[David Kilpatrick]

You never know who needs 'saving' from health problems, or providing with a social safety net. There is one man in my town who doesn't work, big lad, maybe not low intelligence but certainly something there which has made him unemployable - wandered around the streets for one period with a stereo player on his shoulder listening to music all day. Always says hello, smiles, but not communicative. I would have considered him slow. One day I was in the supermarket and he was ambling around without a basket, I think just to be inside for a bit. A small girl was in the seat at the end of a trolley, and her mum turned round to pick something up - the girl stood up and the trolley tipped, she was heading for the floor, I took a step forward but much too far away and I had a basket in my hands.

Our 'simple' friend moved faster than you can imagine and caught the girl on the way to the floor. He moved so quickly he could not even have thought about it - not quite the caped crusader, he was maybe five feet away, but reactions like lightning.

We all have no idea at all what value other people we do not know may be to us. We do not know if one of the so-called 'feral' children being brought up on benefits in problem households will grow up and do something, write something, discover something which changes the future (or lack of it) for humanity. OK, you can be fairly sure that someone in the last few months of terminal illlness is statistically unlikely to benefit others, but it's not impossible. It could be a deathbed confession which reprieves someone else wrongly convicted years ago... or even just remembering which floorboard the money not mentioned in the will was hidden under!

David

[bossel]

It's also unfair to the healthy to pay for the sick.

Do you have an insurance for your car? For your house? Why not for your health? (Let's hope you never loose your job and then get ill! ).

And what is the value of a life? Of an ill child that will cost and cost all his life? The guy who has a hard attack at 40 and'll need medication for the next 40 years. Should we deny healthcare to smokers? Should we deny healthcare for those who consider themselves healthy, active and sportive and then have a ski or bike accident?

I consider myself intellegent, hard working and worth my salary, but if I were born in the middle of Africa? If my parents didn't have $2 for a vaccination? Or to send me to school or even university?

If my health insurance is a loss for me because I am healthy, that's ok for me. If I pay my car insurance year by year but never have an accident, works for me. We even sometimes donate some money,that's certainly money I will never benefit from - but our hearts do benefit.

[Dusty]

Javelin, I don't support either socialized medicine nor the current health care monopoly of insurance monsters. We have in the US a bastardized system where there is some socialized medicine and some government mandated requirements for insurance companies, along with insurance monopolies. If your group has the bucks, you can get your issue mandated to be paid for by the insurance companies, and make everyone in the pool share that cost instead of those who opt for such coverage. Several years ago, the feminist lobby got our state legislature to mandate coverage for "woman's health issues" to be covered in every policy. They don't have to cover prostrate issues without a rider, but you can get a mammogram at any time you think you need one, even if you're way too young to worry about breast cancer. I get to pay for that with higher premiums.

A fair system would be where I can but the coverage I need, and opt out of other things to reduce costs. We have no history of prostrate problems in my family, even with males at 85, so I won't buy the rider. Historically, my families biggest problems are bad teeth - great roots, but lousy enamel - and knees wearing out after 70. Also heart issues in the overweight ones - clogged arteries. Of course, we've been blue-collar workers for the most part, so it's environment more than heredity. Grandma died in the early '70s at 81 years old. She had fallen and broke a leg, and soon afterward a clot broke loose and did her in. My uncle, at 85, is still built like a moose, but 50 years of bricklaying mandated knee replacements. He also had a roto-rooter job on his heart a year or 2 ago.

Looking at my families health history I should be able to buy a policy that covers the issues we're likely to face, and covers other non-likely issues with very high deductibles, like we do with car insurance. Live in the country where the chance of your car getting stolen is slight? Get a policy that pays less if your car gets stolen. Live in a crime ridden inner city? Go for the zero dollar deductible. The problem now, of course, is that we have government tying that hands of insurance companies, telling them they must cover all at level X, and let everyone pay those costs.

Your partner is probably still thinking of the pre-HIPPA era of health insurance. That was an act I mostly supported because it closed a loophole that the insurance companies were using to off-load costs. "If you have an existing condition, then it's not covered if you switch to us, even though it's covered under your policy now". What doggie-doo! For every guy that joins with a condition, on average someone is leaving with the same condition. That's not saying get sick and then get insurance, it's just covering existing conditions that are already covered by another insurance policy, and letting you keep that coverage when you change jobs and, therefore, policies.

Canada spends less per person because a large number of Canadians hop the border and pay out of pocket for better service in the States, or at the end of the year when your system is out of money. I have several Canuck friends in Ontario that do that on a regular basis, eh?

Those 2 years extra that you talk about aren't worth bankrupting my family to get. I have no fear of dying, as I know what awaits me. That doesn't mean I don't want to spend that time with them - my 3 year old is begging me to "play puzzles", so I have to go soon - but I'll take the time I have and spend it well. Today we may go plant our seeds together, and it's been requested that we "go somewhere together". That's little kid for take me shopping or out to Dairy Queen, Taco Bell, Etc.

All in all I want a system where more of minor health care costs are put back on individuals so that they take responsibility, which will control costs, and that I'm not forced my law to pay inflated insurance premiums so that those with the best lobbyists can force me to subsidize their costs.

Dusty

[Dusty]

Bossel, you misunderstand my point, perhaps because it wasn't fully fleshed out.

Insurance is shared risk, and I'm all for that, as long as I have some control over what coverage I get and pay for. My old cars don't have theft or collision coverage. It's not worth the additional cost each year to get a $1500 payout of something happens. We just have liability insurance, where we pay your costs to get your car repaired and you fixed up if we have an accident. But even that gets bastardized as the state mandates 'no-fault' insurance. We both pay even if I slam into you when you're parked. That's stupid, as now I have to factor every lousy driver into the pool.

Smokers should have to pay more, as should anyone who does things to increase their health risks. Or else not have that portion of health care cost covered. I have to have extra insurance to pilot a plane and also to skydive, as my regular insurance won't cover either. I accept that and gladly pay the extra.

Sadly, a life is only worth whatever value society puts on it. We (Western Society) value life more than other cultures do, but skew that towards the popular or famous and neglect others. That's one of the reasons I support those who help the less fortunate overseas. I also spent 2 years on Brazil doing it myself.

Insurance is there for those who have needs, but making it available to everyone with out 'cost' by paying for it with other people's money only increases the cost. Whenever someone thinks something is free, they have a tendency to use more and waste more, it's simple human nature.

I consider myself intellegent, hard working and worth my salary, but if I were born in the middle of Africa? If my parents didn't have $2 for a vaccination? Or to send me to school or even university?

Then I wouldn't be talking to you, but that doesn't mean that you wouldn't have risen to the top of the heap in wherever it was you were born. Who know, you may have grown up to be the one who's sending me those offers to move your late father's millions into my bank account to keep it from the 'bad' government that's out to get you!

We don't select our parents or the circumstances that we're born into, but it's still up to us to make the most of them.

By some people's standards none of us should be wasting our money on expensive digital cameras, we should be taxed into poverty so that others can have a better life. We know how well that's worked before, right?

I support free markets and people making the most of themselves, but I also heavily support charity to give those less fortunate a chance to be all that they can, too.

Dusty

[Javelin]

"Javelin, I don't support either socialized medicine nor the current health care monopoly of insurance monsters. "

Wouldn't it make more sense to pay about the same as you would pay but to cover everything?]
Insurance company's can't be trusted to keep their customers best interest. medical insurance of some sort is a necessity especially if you have family and kids. they can charge whatever they want without some mechanism to control it. for something this important I'd rather have the people I elect look after my interests than some corporation that can hide from the public behind a board of directors that are untouchable by anyone including the government

Yes your probably right about my partner. his problems have been going on for a long time. The other problem though is the treatments he is getting were not available in the US at all. he had on top of everything else a heart attack while he was in LA. the bypass he needed was only available in Boston (it was in the lea or 2 arteries and was a very specialised type). they were able to put 2 stents in some other arteries and sent him home where the bypass was done in Toronto. But later he found out that the US installed stents were an older type and prone to clogging up again. where they should have used medicated or coated ones for the position they had to go. those were not available in the US either and also had to be done in Toronto which was a much more dangerous operation because the old ones had to be removed first.. these things were, I think, what woke him up in the end and why he doesn't talk about it much anymore.

"Canada spends less per person because a large number of Canadians hop the border and pay out of pocket for better service in the States, or at the end of the year when your system is out of money. I have several Canuck friends in Ontario that do that on a regular basis, eh?"

Well thats really a myth and where it is happening it's unnecessary. mostly what you hear about is people running across to get cheap MRI's instead of waiting for one here. . these are the people with non serious ailments and our system doesn't work fast enough for them because their impatient, yes a knee replacement can take a few months sometimes but those are not life threatening things. That was one of the things my partner would say all the time too. "I gotta wait 2 weeks for whatever treatment, I could hop across the border and have the results tomorrow" then he would show the ad .. The Buffalo doctors used to advertise in the Toronto papers .. Our system doesn't run out of money. this is the first year in about 10 that the federal and Ontario government is running a defecit. So no financing charges and exploding debt and year after year everything comes in on budget and sometimes with a surplus both at the fed level and provincial level. The surpluses are because our taxes were too high by a few billion dollars which makes the argument against universal healthcare even weaker.

"Those 2 years extra that you talk about aren't worth bankrupting my family to get."

But we are spending less on average than you are.. I don't get your point? The majority of people here have never seen the inside of a hospital and they pay a portion of their wages in the form of tax the more they make the more they pay and vice versa. Yes it's forced on you. you do have to pay it, but it makes a society where you are looking after your poor and the unfortunate circumstances of your neighbors, it can't bankrupt them personally. In your example anything .. like prostate cancer to use your example could bankrupt you if you didn't buy the rider. Just because your family history doesn't show it, certainly doesn't mean you can't get it. But who does that help? The bankruptcy itself is a bad thing because then nobody gets paid and this puts the hospital in a position they shouldn't be in. whether to take the loss or don't treat it. One rule applies here, don't let people who have to make decisions on profitability have power over your life. That’s what elected officials are for

I was just comparing our tax rates. a single no-family guy is paying practically the same tax in the US and Canada (and gets health insurance). married with 2 kids it's 10% lower in the US than Canada. families get bigger breaks there I guess. that’s only a 10% difference in tax .. I'm just saying....

Got 4 kids myself 16yo - 27 taco bell... theres an argument for universal healthcare right there.. haven't been back to one since I realized they use power caulking guns to put the stuff in the meals, sorry but good food just shouldn't be squirted through a nozzle right in front of you]

"All in all I want a system where more of minor health care costs are put back on individuals"

Thats the thing about your post that makes the most sense and I agree, mostly. we could do with that here too where the kid with the sniffles better have some cash. our system does discourage people from taking care of the little stuff themselves. the downside is, well, for example that lady actress with the head trauma that was in the news a couple weeks ago. she initially refused treatment. how was she to know the little bump was potentially fatal? and thats what scares young parents a lot and why they always take their kids to the closest most available non appointment required doctor.. the emergency room. My generation doesn't run to emergency unless something is hanging off or the people that survived packed you into an ambulance We always had someone around that said... just put a cold cloth on that and it'll go away. Really though this is only a problem in the cities.. we are halfway between 2 emergency rooms where we live. both have trauma capabilities one has a heliport, it's in a large town the other is a rural hospital in a small town both have to be staffed.. the city hospital is always packed with people who shouldn't be there but the system is such that if you shouldn't be there you wait.. sometimes, for many hours, to see a doctor because they have to keep their availability up. if the doctors on at the time are all treating sprains and coughs it would be bad if they had to divert more serious problems to other facilities. and this is exactly why the system gets criticized because people particularly th 20-30 somethings who are apparently entitled to everything right this minute just don't don't get it. if they did they would drive the extra half hour to the less populated area where the 2 staff docs haven't seen anyone all night.

[Javelin]

Dusty I forgot one thing I wanted to say.

The problem with health care is that it has become a "right" instead of something that we pay for if needed

That might be the salient doiference in the way this subject is though about. These are modern societies we live in. we should be judged by how we as a society by look after the poor, the people we have done wrng to, and the enemies we have in our care (prisoners of war and of crimes) and how we respond to stangers that need help.

Why shouldn't quality healthcare be a right? especially in the western countries shouldn't everyone be equally have access to the same levels of care?. insurance for cars and property can't be compared, it's not the same thing at all where the quality of a persons life is concerned aside from material things. In fact it shouldn't even be called insurance and privatly held insurance companies should be exressly excluded from the important parts of healthcare. In Canada not every single thing is covered. dental is paid for privatly for example. eyeglasses too and laser eye surgery. medications are paid for out of pocket. but important stuff is covered for everybody. Injuries. disease, (especially contageous ones). vaccines .. surgeries.