CNN.com does a good job of laying out the problems that the Americans face when it comes to introducing some kind of universal health care/health care reform.
In Canada, we're pretty lucky to have universal health care, and we often take it for granted. In the States, if you're not fortunate enough to be offered a health care package through your employer, you could be stuck with hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of hospital bills after an accident or bought of illness!
In spite of the truly terrible/flawed American health care system, many people are against government involvement in health care. Americans often speak about health care systems like ours in hushed tones, as if the Soviets are listening .
Have you been following the Health Care issue in the States? What do you think?
__________________
Ben Taunton
Life Science IV
McMaster University
Last edited by Taunton : 08-04-2009 at 09:06 AM.
08-04-2009 at 08:52 AM
#2
Fight0
Elite Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 689
Thanked:
79 Times
Liked:
141 Times
I am generally for socialized medicine.
08-04-2009 at 09:06 AM
#3
hyvaa
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 132
Thanked:
11 Times
Liked:
14 Times
Although I like the idea of socialized or "universal" health care, I am quite against the system itself. Let's take a look at Canadian medicare system. It is good that everyone is getting medical attention without having to pay much. However, it is quite fair to say the quality of care is not great. You need to wait for several months before even getting a simple test. I've heard some horror stories where they found cancer late because of the delay and couldn't do much to it as a result. Also, I would personally say Canadian medical system is too conservative in some ways. They implement more advanced techniques or devices too late. I know this because my dad, who is a doctor in another country, visited a hospital in Toronto for a consult or something and realized they just brought in a machine or a technique (I can't remember exactly) that doctors in his country had been using for quite a while. In a free market society like America or some Asian countries, they bring in those technologies earlier to provide people with better care as they are doing "business".
Yeah, I understand there are a lot of negative things about the "business", but it is true that people will get care when they need and don't need to wait forever. Also they will get more advanced techniques earlier.
Last edited by hyvaa : 08-04-2009 at 09:08 AM.
08-04-2009 at 09:12 AM
#4
Taunton
Elite Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,592
Thanked:
219 Times
Liked:
598 Times
I'm morally against American-style private healthcare, simply because unless you're rich or otherwise have access to money, you're screwed. I beleive that every person is equally entitled to quality health care, regardless of their social status.
Sometimes you have to wait for certain types of care here in Canada, but if your condition is immediately life threatening, you'll be seen quite quickly (virtually immediately). I've seen it happen, and it's generally quite efficient.
Has anyone seen/heard the clip where an American politician states "in Canada, 1 in 5 people have to die because there's not enough resources"? Those are the types of lies and myths that Americans have about the style of health care that Canada, the UK, France, etc all have.
__________________
Ben Taunton
Life Science IV
McMaster University
I agree with Taunton. Yes you have to wait for hip replacements and such, but if you need something and need it now, you will get it.
The problem I have is that doctors are only accountable to the College, who often defend their own. So, if I was to change something it would be to have a third party manager to oversee the conduct of doctors when there is a complaint.
I also like that Obama the "most left wing president in years" is trying to get America up to where Canada was decades ago.
__________________
Joe Finkle
Fourth Year Honours History
SRA Humanities
I'm all for it. More people will have access to health care, which is a good thing. Yes, they will likely have to wait to get looked at, but it will get looked at, unlike many do now.
I dated an American girl a couple years ago. She was AMAZED at the fact that I can just walk into the ER when I don't feel well (I dont have a family doctor), flash a card, and get looked at - even if it does takes 8 hours. She broke her toe a while back, and had to "walk it off", since she has no coverage and couldnt afford to have it fixed. Her current boyfriend broke his arm, and had to suffer through it too for the same reason. This begs the question: how many other people out there are doing the same thing?
Another friend in Brooklyn has a sick mother with no coverage, and she currently owes over 200k for medical treatment. She can't work because of her condition (I forget what it's called), and he now has to work 3 jobs to help pay for it, on top of essentially taking over raising his 8 year old sister.
Why are people in this position? Just give them the coverage. They can provide a social program without becoming socialist.
__________________
Mark Reeves
Humanities I Victory Lap!
"Both U.S. and Canadian governments spend approximately the same on healthcare-in 2001, Canada spent 7 percent of GDP while the U.S. government spent 6.7 percent. But in the U.S., 75 million are without insurance at some point every two years while in Canada, government spending provides health coverage for everyone."
"the U. S. spends $209 billion more every year on extra administrative costs than the Canadian single-payer (government) insurance system. The study didn't even take into account the additional 10 to 15 percent of revenue that is siphoned off as profit by insurance companies and profit-oriented hospitals."
For anyone to say that the US private system is more efficient than the Canadian government system is an idiot. Contrary to what Ron Paul says, health care is a right, and if it is delivered in the free market system, inevitably there will be those, who through no fault of their own, will not be able to have access to it.
The United States has been brainwashed by the republican fear machine and Fox news into believing that anything government run will be inefficient and will eventually cost more, to the point that even Barack Obama won't endorse universal health care, likely over fear of the shit-storm of accusations of "socialism" it will cause.
Big health care business in the United States is committed to maintaining the status-quo. They are paying heavily to convince the public that health reform is bad, and are lobbying conservative senators and congressman into watering down any reform bill as much as possible, who will then use the guise of "free market conservative principles" to vote against reform and pad there wallets with lobbyist money.
What's even more sickening is that the American populace is so complacent that they will not even look at the obvious facts and demand universal healthcare. Man am I glad Im not living in the US...I think the frustration would actually kill me.
I had to do some research into the American health care system (a misnomer, it's a market) last year for a course I took, and I've followed it pretty closely afterwards.
By looking at the base stats, it's painfully clear that something is wrong. Their expenditures per capita are by far the highest in the industrialized world, and their vital statistics (infant mortality, life expectancy) are among the worst.
There are three main public coverage options, Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIP, which cover the old, the poor, and children (which is on a state by state basis), and the vast majority of people are covered by employer insurance.
However, this leaves approximately 47 million people (more than the population of Canada) who don’t qualify for federal insurance and who can’t afford private insurance.
So there are two main problems seen here: Bloated costs coupled with lack of efficiency, and lack of coverage for a significant part of the population.
This article here is an interesting read that illustrates the way that health care costs are being inflated in the states (the article was required reading in the Obama White House). An unhealthy population coupled with a willingness to order unnecessary procedures and diagnostics -often by physicians worried about malpractice suits- ends up bloating the cost of healthcare, even for the public Medicaid plan.
A focus on primary prevention (preventing conditions from occurring), primary care, and evidence-based medicine (ordering treatments for a patient based on their input, the doctor’s expertise, and the best evidence available in the literature) could help curtail these costs. However, there is a desire for the latest and best in diagnostics and treatments, which is often unnecessary, and is a byproduct of a market based health care system.
To overcome these issues, serious change in health policy would be needed.
Getting those extra 47 million people without insurance covered is another thing, and is primary in the realm of the politicians.
A single-payer universal health-care system will most likely never happen in the states, and any attempt to will be decried as anti-American and (worst of all) socialist.
The powerful insurance lobby and the Association of American Physicians (which a good chunk of American physicians resent) will do all in their power to keep their profits flowing. Combined with conservative think-tanks and policy centers, we’re seeing a concerted effort to misinform the America public about Government Health care.
The outright lies are infuriating and the lack of logic is mind boggling. It’s worse to see partisan politics come into the picture, with representatives sticking to party lines instead of teaming up to help fix the health care down there.
It is however; good to see their current administration putting an effort into healthcare reform, and that the debate is open again.
Their system right now is by all measures a mess. Hopefully the barriers to reform can be overcome.
Personally, as someone who hopes to be a physician in the future, I couldn’t possibly imagine practicing in the States. Denying care to someone who cannot pay for it is immoral in my opinion.
Sorry for the long post, but this is a topic I'm pretty interested in. I'd recommend the New York Times (www.nytimes.com) for anyone who is interested.
A single-payer universal health-care system will most likely never happen in the states, and any attempt to will be decried as anti-American and (worst of all) socialist.
This is what I don't understand. They're so worried about be labeled socialist, that they let their own people suffer. It's just a label, and quite frankly, one that is used by many people in reference to Canada, but I think we do pretty well despite this.
__________________
Mark Reeves
Humanities I Victory Lap!
08-04-2009 at 01:09 PM
#10
samtheman89
Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 67
Thanked:
14 Times
Liked:
18 Times
Yep. Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness indeed.
08-04-2009 at 01:59 PM
#11
Taunton
Elite Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,592
Thanked:
219 Times
Liked:
598 Times
Quote:
Originally Posted by reeves
This is what I don't understand. They're so worried about be labeled socialist, that they let their own people suffer. It's just a label, and quite frankly, one that is used by many people in reference to Canada, but I think we do pretty well despite this.
It's carried over from the Cold War. They're afraid that they'll become communist like the Soviets they hated so much.
They can thank the American propaganda machine for this "anti-socialism" disposition.
__________________
Ben Taunton
Life Science IV
McMaster University
08-04-2009 at 02:51 PM
#12
reeves
Jedi IRL
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,782
Thanked:
105 Times
Liked:
557 Times
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taunton
It's carried over from the Cold War. They're afraid that they'll become communist like the Soviets they hated so much.
They can thank the American propaganda machine for this "anti-socialism" disposition.
Don't get me wrong, I understand it. I just dont get it
__________________
Mark Reeves
Humanities I Victory Lap!
08-04-2009 at 04:12 PM
#13
Lois
Elite Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,069
Thanked:
318 Times
Liked:
361 Times
It makes me laugh so hard when Americans are horrified of the Canadian health care system.
Sure, you have to wait, but the costs are covered and people don't end up bankrupt or dying of an illness that could have been prevented with regular screenings. If something is serious, hospitals have a way of fitting patients in. And there are private clinics available if you cannot wait.
Americans end up spending more, but the quality of health care is ranked lower than others with universal health care.
But of course, universal health care is "communism" and that's worst than having people die because they can't afford health care.
08-04-2009 at 05:03 PM
#14
Marlowe
Elite Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,621
Thanked:
195 Times
Liked:
421 Times
The American system doesn't work, but there aren't many countries that are actually doing a good job for them to look up to.
While I think everyone should have access to health care, its also extremely hard to sympathize with with people who bring a lot of their health problems upon themselves. It definitely isn't fair that people who live a healthy lifestyle should have to pay for smokers, heavy drinkers and people who don't eat healthily.
But you can't have the government force people to take their health seriously. There really isn't an ideal solution.
That said, it will be extremely unlikely for any real reform to happen in the states.
08-04-2009 at 05:10 PM
#15
jhan523
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 12,484
Thanked:
1,629 Times
Liked:
604 Times
Quote:
Originally Posted by A.Marlowe
The American system doesn't work, but there aren't many countries that are actually doing a good job for them to look up to.
While I think everyone should have access to health care, its also extremely hard to sympathize with with people who bring a lot of their health problems upon themselves. It definitely isn't fair that people who live a healthy lifestyle should have to pay for smokers, heavy drinkers and people who don't eat healthily.
But you can't have the government force people to take their health seriously. There really isn't an ideal solution.
That said, it will be extremely unlikely for any real reform to happen in the states.
A perfect world is one without liberties. ^-^
__________________
Jeremy Han
McMaster Alumni - Honours Molecular Biology and Genetics
Pennsylvania College of Optometry at Salus University Third Year - Doctor of Optometry
McMaster University News and Information, Student-run Community, with topics ranging from Student Life, Advice, News, Events, and General Help.
Notice: The views and opinions expressed in this page are strictly those of the student(s) who authored the content. The contents of this page have not been reviewed or approved by McMaster University or the MSU (McMaster Students Union). Being a student-run community, all articles and discussion posts on MacInsiders are unofficial and it is therefore always recommended that you visit the official McMaster website for the most accurate up-to-date information.