Health Care

[12voltman59]

Taking on my past journalistic role--I have a question for those of you in places like the UK and Canada where your governments provide health care.

It has been sometime since I have been to either country --and when I did visit--the issue was not on my radar.

Here in the US--there have been plans floated since the end of WWII to provide "universal health care" by the government in some form, and in all of that time---one group or another rose to oppose such a thing from even being seriously discussed---major campaigns were waged to fight the rise of (cue the scary music) "SOCIALIZED MEDICINE!!!"

When Hillary Rodham Clinton brought the issue up back in the 90s-that stoked the ire of those against such a thing and even today--we have a phalanx of commentators who talk about how bad the health care systems are in Britain and Canada whenever "socialized medicine" gets so much as a glancing mention.

It is at issue now with the coming 2008 elections.

Last night I watched Michael Moore's latest docu-polemic film "Sicko"--about the issue of health care.

Among the numerous topics he covered--he and his crew traveled to both the UK and Canada (also France and Cuba) to see what the health care systems are like in each country.

Moore painted a rosy picture of them in his film---

What I want to know--are the FAUX-News talking heads right--is health care a mess in the UK and Canada or is as great as Moore makes it out to be???

As with most things--I suspect the truth lies somewhere between---I would appreciate my fellow bisexuals from the UK, Canada or anyplace else that the government provides free health care to respond if you care to--is government provided health care a disaster or does it work rather well??

Please stay civil---and I do appreciate your responses--thanks!!!!!

[DiamondDog]

The woman who wrote here as Flexuality, and her husband used to write about Socialised healthcare in Canada and the pros/cons of it. Find some of their old posts on it.

[The Barefoot Contess]

I am from Spain, a country with Universal Health Care. I am 28, and I have never had any serious illnesses myself or have to stay hospitalized, so my personal experience with the deeper processes of the system is limited to what family and friends have told me or I have seen as a visitor. Also, my mom is a nurse, so she does know how the system works.
Just some basics so people understand a bit better the case of Spain: being a Spanish citizen means you have health care coverage, no matter what your occupation or income is. Now, if you are retired, or have a serious handicapped condition, or are under 18, or depend on someone who is retired (in my case, my father), you are called “pensionista”, which means all necessary medical expenses are covered for you (visits to the doctor, medication –no matter what the illness is, hospitalization, treatment –for instance, cancer): you pay nothing. If you are a regular working citizen you only pay for a small percentage of your medication (not exactly sure which percentage now). Spain also has private health care for those who want it.
I have heard all sorts of stories about health care in Spain: some people might complain because they had to wait for an appointment, but, and I am being honest, that is about the only complaint you will ever hear. In any case, no one I know of has had to wait when he had a serious condition or his case was an emergency. Other complaints that you hear (taxes, inability to choose a doctor, poor quality, the arrival of “socialism” ---oh, my god, how terrible---, state intervention in personal affairs) all come from the US: I have never heard anyone in Spain, or France, or England complain because they have to pay taxes to help maintain Universal Health Care. It seems to me, but I might be wrong here, that those are “excuses” used by supporters of private health care in America to discredit socialized medicine. I believe in Spain... health care is thought of as one of those services that the state and the citizens should provide for the general population: it amounts to a human right that cannot be denied to anyone. Obviously, it is not a human right in the sense that it is sustained among other things by taxes, but yet again, taxes are not seen as a terrible imposition of the state, but as an exercize in solidarity: we all build the country, we all help each other regardless of how much you make.
Overall, in Spain, I’d say the system works pretty well, and no one but those with money would ever argue for private health care, and the thing is that they don’t. If someone wants private health care, they get it for themselves, but they still believe that there should be some sort of universal coverage.
I personally don’t care if I don’t get to choose my doctor: every doctor is the system is a certified one, a professional who works hard in spite of not having an appraisal system; seriously, I couldn’t care less if I don’t get to choose the food I eat at the hospital; I personally don’t mind paying higher taxes if that means that if I get cancer all my expenses will be covered, and if I have an emergency my ambulance will be free.

[HighEnergy]

I'll be very interested in seeing the responses you get from folks. Some say the gov't will only screw it up, but as someone who can't get insurance on my own, something has to be done to make it not the most profitable business our country has.

[Falke]

Hmm, no thanks. Yeah, it sucks to be in that role of not having insurence, but I would rather risk hurting myself and having to pay for it VS the government digging deeper in my pockets. After all, someone has to pay for it!

[Damien]

I am from Spain, a country with Universal Health Care.

Thank you for a very unique and interesting perspective on this issue..

I am not really sure as to whether or not I agree with the socialization of basic human necessities such as medical care. I sometimes suspect that a more adequate approach might be to determine why such essential human services have become so far out of reach for the average person to begin with. I have not the slighest explanation as to why medical treatment in this country should be so expensive. A few days spent in a hospital here can be tremendously expensive, often running into thousands of dollars in costs. Far, far more than most people could ever afford without insurance or other forms of medical coverage.

Perhaps the answer lies not so much in trying to have government coverage for everyone as it does in trying to find ways to make the costs of it more reasonable and more in line with the costs of other basic necessities.

Thanks for allowing my input.

Damien

[darkeyes]

The NHS ere has huge probs an it aint perfect... but no matta how muchya spend on health care that will always b the case... few yeaars ago me had misfortune of of needin an op an it wos pretty serious..or cudda been had me left it or the NHS not did its job properly. Me suffers recurrent bouts of clinical depression an the treatment for that wile neva totally satisfactory has worked in the end, an may well havta again.But it did in end, an so me as healthy as me can b 1ce gain an the follow up treatment wos brill as well. Only enda last week Naggie's ole man went inta hosp wiv pneumonia...1ce gain the HNS came up trumps an the old bugga is well on the way. Kate had Lou all courtesy of the NHS an Shiv fore that. Me nephew also born in NHS hosp. Me dad had heart attack cuppla ears ago an 1ce gain he wos treated brill. Me mum gets stuff for brittle bones an for thyroid, me gran for treatment for rheumatoid arthritis. We were all born, save for me grandparents courtesy of NHS, but only cos they wer born before it wos started up. Alla me grandparents got treatment for summat or otha by the NHS. Have mates who hav had kids, appendectomies, cancer ops, u name it they prob had it..all courtesy of NHS.

Not sayin all in the garden is rosy cos it aint. Years an years undainvestment almost did for it an wile its gettin investment now it still has huge probs 2 contend wiv. Its priorities r often rong, an it prob is 2 top heavy wiv admin peeps ratha than medical staff. MRSA is a constant prob, waitin lists r appallin sumtimes an sumtimes for 1 reason or otha it dus falls down on the job. But for sheer value for money it is a far far superior way 2 run a health service than the alternative. The health care services of France an Germany are betta than ours but they spend more money on health care, but compared 2 wotyas has ova the sea in the US gimme our health service ne time. Alla the treatments an births an god knows wot else me described above wer successes an ther r millions more.. an apart from sum peeps who havta pay prescriptions, a scandal an unnecessary, all that treatment me described cost the peeps involved precisely nuthin at point of entry. Thats wy we pay taxes.. so our old an sick an those who need health care can get it wivout havin 2 worry bout huge bills. In fact 1ce treatment is started they don hav ne bills at all apart mayb from the prescription charges.

Me dus however exempt dental care from ne nice praises cos here in the UK it is appallin.. more an more dentist r refusin 2 take NHS customers an it can b a pain findin 1.. so millions havta find lotsa cash for simple treatments an summat hasta b dun 2 sort that mess out. Dentists an government hav been rite shitty bout it all an its gettin worse an so peeps dental care is suffrin. Many can still get free treatment, kids for starters, but ya havta find a dentits that will take em. In sum parts of the country no easy task.

But wile ther r problems as me sed..overall it is a fabulous invention ..it hasta get betta..but is by no means the mess sum peeps an the media make it out 2 b... me for 1 glad of it cos it saved me life twice in last 28 years an it got me outa lotsa otha more minor jams wiv me health... an me has neva had a huge bill yet! Tween me own personal probs an thsoe of me nearest an dearest an so may otha peeps me luffs..me has lots 2 b grateful for a National Health Service. An so has millions of otha peeps.

[wolfcamp]

Hmm, no thanks. Yeah, it sucks to be in that role of not having insurence, but I would rather risk hurting myself and having to pay for it VS the government digging deeper in my pockets. After all, someone has to pay for it!

Yes, someone does pay for it. Being a working person for 30 plus years, I paid a monthly premium, either as a payroll deduction, or in lieu of wages, or directly out of my pocket, for all that time and rarely needed to visit a doctor. Sometimes that premium was quite large. Now I am going back to college and I've had no income for around a year. (Education is another big issue with me.) The only insurance I can afford protects me in case of a catastrophic health event, but does nothing for day to day health maintenance. My biggest concern with my current situation is that something will happen and I need to draw on my insurance, but then I will be dropped and it will be impossible to get onto another health plan. I call it health gambling. I'm surprised Vegas hasn't gotten into the business.

The thing that gripes me is that all that money I paid in doesn't mean squat. I am sitting here just as vulnerable as if I had never paid a dime. I figure my premiums subsidized other more frequent visitors to the doctor's office, or they went to help pay the half billion dollar bonuses of the health company CEOs. Those premiums didn't all go to my health care.

And Zwitter, your statement about preferring to just pay for it if you hurt youself? Bankruptcy is no fun.

[Cesca]

I'll be very interested in seeing the responses you get from folks. Some say the gov't will only screw it up, but as someone who can't get insurance on my own, something has to be done to make it not the most profitable business our country has.
The governments of Western Europe havent screwed it up, nor the Governments of other advanced countres around the world. Those that say Government will are those who are too mean to help pay for a health service, or even as in the case of Zwitter for himself ( I hope he never has a family he requires to provide for) or those who have a vested interest in retaining the present system. When younger I required hospitalisation in Germany, which is a publicly funded service and the treatment I received was wonderful. Many people I know have been treated by our own Health service, as I have myself all my life, and some it has even saved their lives. I am not saying that other ways do not provide wonderful treatement, but there are just to many horror stories emanating from the US about health care that it appears to me it is a society in desperate need of a National Health Service set up and provided by the taxpayer to help everyone whether they are rich or poor.

Elsewhere in threads there is a huge argument about war and support for the military. Someone said that before handing out aid to foriegn people, we should look after our own first. Surely the good health of the citizens of any nation is the first duty of Government, and all else comes after? Form my very limited knowledge of health care in the US I would argue that before any war is even considered, taxpayers money would be better spent of creating and funding a state health care service to look after all of the people, not just those who have the luck to be able to afford it, or are in jobs where health care insurance is offered.

[darkeyes]

Yas rite Ces... bout time they did get up off ther arses an do summat bout it... 2 many americans r bizzy bleatin bout government interference an taxation 2 give a sod bout health care cept wer it affects them as individuals an maybe ther immedate family. Bout time they realised government is ther 2 serve them not otha way round, an its incumbent on government 2 do all it can 2 care for all of ts citizens..not jus them wiv potsa dosh...

Now me knows quite a few americans that live ova ere, an like em mostly..but summa them hav rite odd ideas bout wot government shud b... not taxin em for 1 thing... big bugbear... ok they bleat on bout big corporations makin millions corruptly, rich folks rippin em off, but thats ok..it the free enterprise system an deep down many hav a grudgin respect for it.. partly cos they wud b doin jus same if they cud... land of the free.. not ifyas poor, not ifya has bad health an not if ya needs expensive medical treatment..aint landa the free then.... they keep referrin 2 it as "socialised medicine".. not cos thats wot it is..cos the word Socialism or owt like it stiks in ther craw...its the thin enda the wedge... its a socialist philosophy that jus aint acceptable in a capitalist country. Wosnt ere... a Lord Beveridge was the man who thot it up wos no socialist.. e was an ole Liberal party man who cared enuff for the alla the people of our country an had the wit an imagination 2 c a betta way 2 care fr the nations health...

Hasta b paid for sure...but outa tax as insurance for wen we or our families fall ill... for all peeps... its nowt 2 do wiv socialism..its all 2 do wiv makin life betta for every 1 in that society..an surely thats how we shud all want it?

[bigirl_inwv]

Hmm, no thanks. Yeah, it sucks to be in that role of not having insurence, but I would rather risk hurting myself and having to pay for it VS the government digging deeper in my pockets. After all, someone has to pay for it!



Hospitals dig deeper into your pockets than the government would. Do you know how much it costs for an asprin at the hospital? It ranges anywhere between 25 cents and 4 dollars. Doesn't really sound like much but when you take into account the fact that the hospital itself paid a penny for that asprin...it's kind of ridiculous.


My father is a coal miner. The only job worth a damn in the little tiny town they live in. I was covered on his insurance until I was 23....as long as I was in school. Then I made the mistake of dropping out when I was 18. Now I have no insurance....no job....and I'm back in school. Last year I had to have emergency surgery to have my appendix taken out. I had no insurance. All together...that surgery was 10,000 dollars. Surgery, medicine, doctors time, hospital room, etc. Thankfully, they have a Charity Care program here for people who are below the poverty line. But that still didn't take care of everything. I have around 2,000 dollars worth of hospital bills that I can't pay. I get phone calls every day from law offices who are trying to collect money that I don't have. It's a shitty life to live running from debt all the time. I didn't have a choice whether or not to have that surgery. If I didn't, I would have died. After the surgery, my doctor told me I have an enlarged uterus and that it could be a serious problem. I haven't been back to the doctor for it because of the simple fact that if there is something seriously wrong...I'm not going to have the money to pay for it. And then I'll just have more debt collectors calling me.


It shouldn't be like this. I shouldn't have to worry about the fact that if I go to the doctor I might not be able to pay my rent, or my power bill, or buy food. If I can't buy food I can't live....but sometimes....if you can't go to the doctor you can't live either. So I get to choose how I want to die...starve to death? Or die of uterine cancer I can't get to the doctor for because I don't have the money to pay for it? Fun choices to make when you are 20, huh.


There are over 300 million people living in America. If all those people paid only a single dollar towards health care per pay check...think of how many people you would be helping...lives you could potentially be saving...

Let's stop thinking about the government for a minute and think about the REAL people who need REAL help.

[slocum5]

Several years back, Time Magazine reported that seven trial lawyers in America had received more than a billion dollars each from tobacco settlements. (Billion is not a typing error and "received" was used, as oposed to "earned" was also no typo.) One lawyer in Louisiana "received" $7.2 billion dollars from those settlements. For comparative purposes, Bill Gates who is worth appx $70 billion could not come up with $7 billion dollars in cash without borrowing it or selling enough Microsoft stock to yeild that number, which would have a disastrous effect on the balance of the other stockholders.

The contributions of trial lawyers to congress dwarf the contributions of the National Rifle Association. Be assured that they will be "accomodated" by any legislation passed. They will not go quitely into the night. (My personal physician pays $120,000 per year for malpractice insurance and has never had a suit filed against him. That's $60 per hour he must pay for the privilege of seeing patients.)

It will be interesting to watch how the trial lawyers manipulate the legislators and thus the legislation ensuing. Be assured they will not allow the demise of their primary cash cow. The huge enrichment they enjoyed from tobacco settlement was short lived. They couldn't prevail against McDonalds. They will attach the liquor industry next, but that will yield only astounding short term profits. Nursing homes and physicians are their only remaining targets to rape for continuing long term largesse.

Legislation on health care will happen. It will be interesting to watch how the trial lawyers manipulate it.

[diseminator]

Taking on my past journalistic role--I have a question for those of you in places like the UK and Canada where your governments provide health care.

It has been sometime since I have been to either country --and when I did visit--the issue was not on my radar.

Here in the US--there have been plans floated since the end of WWII to provide "universal health care" by the government in some form, and in all of that time---one group or another rose to oppose such a thing from even being seriously discussed---major campaigns were waged to fight the rise of (cue the scary music) "SOCIALIZED MEDICINE!!!"

When Hillary Rodham Clinton brought the issue up back in the 90s-that stoked the ire of those against such a thing and even today--we have a phalanx of commentators who talk about how bad the health care systems are in Britain and Canada whenever "socialized medicine" gets so much as a glancing mention.

It is at issue now with the coming 2008 elections.

Last night I watched Michael Moore's latest docu-polemic film "Sicko"--about the issue of health care.

Among the numerous topics he covered--he and his crew traveled to both the UK and Canada (also France and Cuba) to see what the health care systems are like in each country.

Moore painted a rosy picture of them in his film---

What I want to know--are the FAUX-News talking heads right--is health care a mess in the UK and Canada or is as great as Moore makes it out to be???

As with most things--I suspect the truth lies somewhere between---I would appreciate my fellow bisexuals from the UK, Canada or anyplace else that the government provides free health care to respond if you care to--is government provided health care a disaster or does it work rather well??

Please stay civil---and I do appreciate your responses--thanks!!!!!



Amerika has decided that if it's not for profit it is by definition commie godless and evil. WRONG.
Our system is not perfect, but your life does NOT depend on the decisions of some fucking insurance companies balance sheet.

The greater good is served by giving all citizens an equal footing.
The right to stay alive should never be a profit decision.
It is just that in the US.
When you are only worth your weight in dollars you amount to nothing.