The Right Prescription
The Myth of the 46 Million
The truth behind everybody’s favorite health care statistic.
“Even for folks who are weathering this economic storm, and have health care right now,” President Obama said at this month’s White House health care summit, “all it takes is one stroke of bad luck — an accident or an illness, a divorce, a lost job — to become one of the nearly 46 million uninsured…”
Whether it’s in political speeches, commentary, newspaper features, or hard news stories, the statistic of 46 million uninsured is one of the most-widely cited numbers in the health care debate. It promotes the idea that nearly one out of every six Americans does not have access to health care and it plays into the arguments of those calling for massive expansion of government to fix the problem. Yet the ubiquitous figure is highly misleading.
To be clear, the statistic is not pulled out of thin air. It comes from an annual report by the Census Bureau, which most recently pegged the number of uninsured at 45.7 million for 2007. But the problem lies in the way the statistic is commonly cited and understood.
For starters, the statistic does not mean that there are “46 million uninsured Americans,” as the New York Times reported in a recent story on health care, and as is echoed throughout the media. Just a quick look inside the Census Bureau data shows that 9.7 million of the uninsured are not citizens of the United States. Liberals can argue that we still have a moral duty to cover non-citizens, but this doesn’t change the fact that as a matter of accuracy, the Census data only tells us that 36 million Americans are uninsured.
But this doesn’t fully convey the problematic nature of the 46-million statistic. As even the authors of the Census Bureau report themselves acknowledge, “health insurance coverage is likely to be underreported” in the Current Population Survey from which the health insurance data is derived. The reason is that respondents are asked in February through April about their health coverage status in the previous calendar year. Some may answer the question as intended, but others may cite their current insurance status, and others may say they were without insurance even if they only spent a portion of the year without coverage.
“[T]he estimate of the number of people without health insurance,” according to the report, “more closely approximates the number of people who are uninsured at a specific point in time during the year than the number of people uninsured for the entire year.”
In reality, a person who goes without coverage for a few months while between jobs is in a completely different boat from somebody who is permanently without insurance. But the broad citation of the headline figure would have you believe that there are literally 46 million people who never, ever, have coverage.
How many people actually spend the whole year without health insurance? It’s difficult to say, and recent data is hard to come by. But in 2003, the Congressional Budget Office took a stab at answering the question, and looked at two studies from 1998 that conducted interviews multiple times over the course of the survey period. One study pegged the number of people who were uninsured for the entire year at 31 million, while another put it even lower, at 21 million. In either case, the number was significantly lower than it was in 1998’s Current Population Survey, which found 43.9 million uninsured.
Another problem with citing the 46-million figure is that many of those who are identified as uninsured are actually eligible for existing government programs but simply never bothered to enroll. In 2003, a BlueCross BlueShield Association study estimated that about 14 million of the uninsured were eligible for Medicaid and SCHIP. These people would be signed up for government insurance if they ever made it to the emergency room.
In addition, some of the 46 million could theoretically afford health coverage, but chose not to purchase any. In 2007, 17.6 million of the uninsured had annual incomes of more than $50,000 and 9.1 million earned more than $75,000. In fact, as Sally Pipes notes in the Top Ten Myths of American Health Care: A Citizen’s Guide, those making more than $75,000 per year are part of the fastest growing segment of the uninsured population.
The Census figures also show that 18.3 million of the uninsured were under 34. Some in this age group may have simply determined that they are young and healthy and thus can do without coverage.
When all of these factors are put together, the 2003 BlueCross BlueShield study determined that 8.2 million Americans are actually without coverage for the long haul, because they are too poor to purchase health care but earn too much to qualify for government assistance. Even being without insurance still doesn’t mean they won’t have access to care, because federal law forbids hospitals from denying treatment to patients who show up at the emergency rooms.
This exercise isn’t about downplaying the problems facing the American health care system, but a necessary part of devising the proper remedies. Under current state laws, mandates force insurers to provide certain benefits, meaning that young and healthy Americans must choose between paying exorbitant premiums to cover treatments that they don’t need or going without health insurance. Many of these so-called “young invincibles” who are included in the ranks of the uninsured could be wooed into the market were they allowed to purchase catastrophic insurance with lower monthly premiums.
Right now, the tax code exempts people from paying taxes on health care benefits purchased through their employer, while denying the same tax advantages to individuals. Ending this discrimination would make health care more affordable to those who are self-employed or not covered through their workplace. In addition, this would allow Americans to have health care policies that are portable, so it would reduce the gaps in coverage people can face when they quit or lose a job.
Those pushing for a major government intervention in health care are distorting the 46-million statistic to boost their cause, and by disseminating it so widely without further elaboration, the media is rigging the game in their favor.
About the Author
Philip Klein is The American Spectator’s Washington correspondent. You can follow him on Twitter at: http://twitter.com/Philipaklein
Letter to the Editor View all comments (436) | Leave a comment
Related Articles
More Articles by Philip Klein
More Articles From The Right Prescription
http://spectator.org/archives/2009/03/20/the-myth-of-the-46-million
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
David T.| 3.20.09 @ 8:34AM
Great. Next I suppose Mr. Klein will say the number of homeless is inflated, too. Send him to re-education camp.
Savant Noir| 3.21.10 @ 4:06PM
David T:
Typical Liberal response David. The facts he stated are correct, I double checked at the United States Census Bureau. Rather than just cast your uniformed venom and narcotized rhetoric like a good little Obama-Bot, why not get off your butt and check yourself? Oh, I forgot, you are part of the "I deserve" crowd, and you would hate to discover anything that might dispel the free hand-outs.
Regal| 9.2.11 @ 12:30PM
Savant Noir and everyone else...did you miss that regardless if it's 3.2 or 4.6 or 100 million the "FACT" is that it's a number in the millions...MILLIONS...and even if it the number was in the hundred thousands, don't you think that number is STILL to high? I mean really, I'm studying for a class right now where this is the topic and it is mindblowing to think people still read between lines that don't exist. Who is the fat cat in this whole healthcare industry it's not the government alone.
Robert Rosencrans| 3.20.09 @ 8:51AM
There's nothing like sticking your neck out on an issue like universal health care to get it chopped off. Yes, I'm sure your figures are correct and your heart is in the right place. But misguided causes need inflated numbers or theories to survive.
Just look at other areas touted as areas in need of improvement and you pick up on a common theme. The poverty rate, carbon rate, equality rate and victim rate are all used to place the government in the role of Santa Claus and the Wizard of Oz mixed up into one.
The invisible after effects of the programs of The Great Society would convince anyone with an ounce of brain cells, that all government intervention is fruitless.
Just look at AIG and tell how good that's going. AIG couldn't be allowed to fail, now universal health care can't be allowed to fail. They will both fail.
janeyi| 3.14.10 @ 11:08PM
9 ghd planchas
GreginOkinawa| 3.20.09 @ 9:12AM
Here is the first mistake in this article:
""Even for folks who are weathering this economic storm, and have health care right now," President Obama said at this month's White House health care summit, "all it takes is one stroke of bad luck -- an accident or an illness, a divorce, a lost job -- to become one of the nearly 46 million uninsured…"
"Barack Obama SAID..." Change that to "Barrack Obama READ..."
Anastasia Mather| 3.20.09 @ 9:21AM
I work in healthcare, and believe me, there is ALWAYS a way to pay for necessary healthcare. New York State offers a beautiful program of Medicaid HMOs for those who make too much money but are not covered by employer insurance. It is inexpensive and covers all the basics and a few frills (like sleep studies).
My blood boils when the democrats trot out these useless numbers. NOBODY is denied healthcare if they really need it. There are ways and means to achieve these things.
Nick Devane| 9.30.09 @ 2:48PM
Isn't that part of the problem though? Not everyone is as savvy as you and who already works in the healthcare field and would know that? And just how many hours of one's day sitting at the Social Services office would it take just to obtain entry into this beautiful "government run" healthcare program that the Republicans hate so much?
Another problem, gets what those people who don't have coverage do when they need it? Go to the emergency room where everything they need there is much more expensive, they're usually sicker at that point and since they can't or choose not to buy insurance guess who foots the bill for those costs?
Savant Noir| 3.21.10 @ 4:12PM
Nick, you hit the nail on the head. How many people are denied healthcare that ARE eligible just because they cannot get thru the bureaucratic red-tape of various Government programs? So, do you really think that having MORE government programs is the answer?
Miss. Ashley| 10.23.09 @ 9:28PM
Anastasia,
I am a single mother and full time college student at the local community college. It saddens me to see how naive some people are. Usually it's the ones who have always had health insurance that just don't get it.
I never had health insurance, grew up dirt poor, my mother was too proud to get any assistance.
If something were to happen to me, I would lose everything. Living paycheck to paycheck right now, and so are most other college students.
Every month I pick what bills I pay, therefore insurance is far from my reach.
Something must be done about healthcare Anastasia. Open your eyes honey, There are alot people out there, especially single moms, that just cannot afford health insurance.
Craig| 2.23.10 @ 1:12AM
So you can afford to go to college, but can't afford healthcare for your child? When you tell me yes, because you want a better future, and then I ask why you had a child at a young age, you know where the discussion will go...so ultimately you are pinning the problems of 3% of the population (realistically less than 9 million people who can't afford healthcare) on the 97% who perhaps made better decisions?
roger| 3.2.10 @ 11:47AM
Damn Man!!!! What is wrong with you. I think the good book says judge not lest ye be judged!!!!
Barb| 3.20.10 @ 2:22AM
If, as you say, you are a single mom with the circumstances you depict, there is health care available to you under Medicaid. You have to apply. You can do this on-line or go in personally to the DSHS office near you. If you have an emergency situation, you can get emergency Medicaid. This is true in every state in the Union. Some states have other plans, too, like Tennessee, Washington, Massachusetts and others. Medical care is available to everyone. Further, if you have an emergency, your hospital will work with you to reduce the actual costs and help you apply for Medicaid. It's there, sweetie. You just have to go get it.
P. Marengo| 3.21.10 @ 10:12AM
Did you actually say that "Medical care is available to everyone?" I'm afraid you are under-informed.
Tell me, what non-emergency medical care for treatment of chronic illnesses is available to a disabled single man in Virginia whose disability income is 15K/year and who hast to pay for rent, and utilities, transportation, food, and hundreds of dollars a month in necessary medications? (Hint: the maximum income for Medicaid eligibility in this backwards state for a single individual is $4,000/year). I'm anxious to know what resources I have been missing after having been turned down for medical assistance by every state and city agency I can find -- and not being eligible for Medicare for two years after becoming permanently disabled by a heart attack following a stroke.)
Savant Noir| 3.21.10 @ 4:44PM
Health Care Myths Debunked:
* 1. We need health care reform.
We do not need health care reform. We have the best health care system in the world. We need health insurance reform.
* 2. Free market health insurance has caused our current problem.
It is the government that has caused the current problem. We have not had free market health insurance in this country since 1965. It is not possible to consider our system of medical payment free market when the government controls $.60 of every dollar spent on health care.
* 3. The evil and greedy health insurance companies have caused prices to skyrocket.
Again, it's the government that has caused prices to skyrocket. Medicare and Medicaid are the 800 pound gorilla and insurance companies are the fleas on the gorilla. Nothing can be done by the private insurance companies that has not been done by Medicare and Medicaid. The federal government opens the door and the private insurance companies follow. It is the government manipulation of the free market that has caused our current health insurance problem. The out of control medical costs in Britain and Canada, as well as in Massachusetts and other states that have tried government health care prove this point.
* 4. Nearly 50 million Americans are without health care.
Nearly 13 million Americans are without health insurance. No one in the United States is without health care. Government regulations prohibit patients from being turned away from hospitals, which must provide medical care to anyone. The huge number that the Obama administration has used is highly inflated.
* 5. A government option will lower costs and improve quality of care.
A government option will increase costs and reduce quality of care. In every instance so far government involvement in medical services has caused prices to increase. Medicare spending has increased at a rate greater than 10 times that which was projected. Medicare and Medicaid will be broke in less than nine years. Adding another entitlement program will cause economic disaster. The Congressional Office of Management and Budget has stated that the president's plan is unaffordable. Further, the necessary rationing in order to even begin the program will reduce quality of care.
* 6. If you like your insurance and your doctor you can keep them.
The same things were said at the inception of Medicare. Medicare was supposed to be a supplemental insurance plan for retired people. It now covers the disabled as well and those over the age of 65, who are now ineligible for any other type of primary medical insurance. The government option will become the only option. Therefore, it's not an option and in the end hospitals, doctors, and all health care companies will be working directly and only for the government.
* 7. Government medical insurance is more cost efficient.
Government medical insurance is less efficient. The government, by force of law, transfers administrative costs to the private sector. Hospitals and doctors' offices must assume the burden of administration under threat of criminal penalty. This unfunded administrative burden transferred to private individuals and private insurance is then added to the cost of the supposedly free-market healthcare system.
* 8. The government option is necessary in order to prevent loss of insurance by individuals with medical problems.
Government regulations make it mandatory for hospitals to treat patients regardless of their ability to pay. The government can certainly pass a simple regulation making it illegal for medical insurance plans to be canceled due to illness on the part of the insured. This would be a simple solution but of course would not increase government control over our lives.
* 9. The government option would ensure treatment for sick individuals who would otherwise have lost health care insurance. It would prevent lifetime limits on medical care.
This is blatantly untrue. There are definitive limits to Medicare that are not being publicized. For example, a review of Medicare regulations shows it will pay up to a maximum of 90 days in the hospital for each medical incident. After that, a patient must be in a rehabilitation facility for 60 days in a row in order for Medicare to begin another cycle of payment. Similarly, there are limits on most other Medicare services. While private medical insurance may have a total lifetime limit on the amount that can be spent, there is almost never a limit on the number of days in the hospital.
* 10. A government option will not result in rationing.
The major government options already in existence employ rationing every day. Prohibitively difficult preauthorization, statements of medical necessity, convoluted and complicated paperwork, and often impossible to meet requirements result in rationing on a huge scale. Furthermore, delay in payment, denial of payment for services already rendered and other tactics reduce access to medical care on a widespread basis. The government may not call this rationing but it is an insidious form of rationing that will be an integral part of any government plan. Medicare misuses and abuses its funding and is guilty of literally stealing from hospitals and physicians.
As an example of this thievery, due to a change in the corporate status of my practice I was required to apply for a new national provider identification number (NPI) in March of this year. Within several weeks, without exception, all of the private insurance companies had registered the number and were paying on claims. After five months and exhaustive work of over 140 hours by my office staff Medicare and Medicaid had still not paid on a single claim. Finally, on August 14, Medicare made their first payment on claims that were five months old. Yet, if we do not bill Medicare within three months of the date of service, Medicare will not pay us at all. Government regulation and control permeates the entire medical system.
Savant Noir| 3.21.10 @ 4:46PM
More Health Care Myths Debunked
* ObamaCare will not promote abortions.
It is true that there are no provisions in the current plan specifically providing for abortions. However, there are provisions in the plan for "family planning." Given his record, many conservatives rightly suspect that to Mr. Obama family-planning means a lot of planning, and fewer people in order to reduce the amount of carbon producing biological units. This health care plan gives the Commissioner of Health Choices the power to determine future benefits within the plan. The promotion of abortion can be easily added once the bill is passed. This is another example of liberal incrementalism at its finest.
* ObamaCare will not lead to less care for the elderly.
Mr. Obama's plan depends upon a $500 billion cut from Medicare. At the same time, he promises that the elderly will not realize reduced benefits. If this is the case, what is now being done with that $500 billion? It is obvious that this brings up a very important conundrum for Mr. Obama. If the government is able to run medical care so efficiently then how would it be possible for $500 billion in reductions in Medicare to result in no substantial reduction in benefits? However, if a substantial reduction in funding for Medicare is possible, it is further proof that the government does not run medical care efficiently?
There are other interesting aspects of medical care for the elderly. Medical care for non-therapy ancillary services will be increased by 10%. On page 215 we find that payment for therapy will be decreased by 5.5%. In other words, payment will be increased for the provision of comfort care (think: end of life). Payment will be decreased for the provision of curative care or care that prolongs life.
* ObamaCare will not result in the exclusion of private medical insurance.
Nothing could be further from the truth. Private medical insurance must be provided in plans that are approved by the new Commissioner for Health Choices. If these plans are not approved, they will not exist. Furthermore, these plans are only given grandfather status. Over time, private medical insurance will be squeezed out as the government medical plan increases its hold on everyone.
Additionally, the small business employee health coverage credit will phase out over the next several years. There will be no tax credit for employers ensuring those earning over $80,000 per year. This provision starts immediately. And, Mr. Obama's health care plan will pit the government plan against private health plans with a distinct legal advantage given to the government plan.
* ObamaCare will be paid for by increased taxes and savings from cutting Medicare.
The Office of Management and Budget projects that ObamaCare will cost at least double and perhaps triple the amount that Mr. Obama has projected. We have a history of government subsidized medical care in this country that shows the folly of Mr. Obama's promises. Medicare has never been able to pay for itself out of payroll taxes. Medicare required the infusion of general funds from the very beginning, and that infusion from the general fund has increased in proportion ever since the legislation became law. Medicare receives a larger amount from the general funds than it does from payroll taxes and will be bankrupt by 2018. Similarly, Obama's plan will never be funded by his proposed tax increases. Within a very short time, taxes will increase through all strata of income levels and as medical care costs increase the system will implode. Every bit of available evidence shows us that medical care costs will rise more rapidly under a government system.
* ObamaCare will help small businesses.
Mr. Obama's health care plan will destroy small businesses. There will be surcharges, otherwise known as taxes, on the private health plans of all employees. Additionally, businesses with payrolls greater than $250,000 but less than $300,000 yearly will have to pay 2% of that payroll toward the funding of the "Health Insurance Exchange." Employers with larger payrolls would have to pay more and the percentage increases according to the number of employees in the business. This will cause employers to reduce the number of employees in order to reduce the amount of money they owe to the government.
* The plan will not result in reduced benefits.
The plan is replete with rationing that is called everything but rationing. For example, in order to reduce the amount of money spent on readmissions to hospitals, punitive actions will be taken in order to refuse payment to hospitals if patients are readmitted. It's not the fault of hospitals or physicians when patients are readmitted and often this is necessary because of the severity of the initial illness. However, Mr. Obama's plan relies on punitive measures in order to prevent readmission.
"In order to account for excess readmissions in the hospital, the Secretary shall reduce the payments that would otherwise be made to such hospital under subsection 19 (d) (or section 1814(b)(3)"
These punitive measures are familiar to all of us who have had to work with the constraints of Medicare and Medicaid. Patients who take a turn for the worse will likely not be readmitted because of these penalties. Basically, the government would rather have the patient dead than readmitted. One must understand that the wording of these provisions is extremely important and will lead to terrible injustices being perpetrated against patients under this plan.
This readmission clause is just one example of the punitive nature of Mr. Obama's health care plan. I have read every one of the 1017 pages of the legislation and a large number of these pages are devoted to explaining the penalties that will be meted out to those who do not follow the rules of this complex legislation.
* The government health plan will not cover illegal aliens.
At first glance this seems to be the case. On page 142 the plan states:
"Nothing in the subtitle shall allow federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States."
However, it does not state specifically that federal payments for affordability credits will not be allowed and the Health Choices Commissioner has the power to change these regulations at any time without Congressional approval.
The plan also states that persons eligible to receive credits in order to help pay for medical insurance, otherwise known as credit eligible individuals, are defined as those who are lawfully present in the United States (other than as a non-immigrant). Notice the wording here. The corollary of this would be that if persons are unlawfully within the United States but are non-immigrants they would be eligible for coverage. Individuals who fit this description are otherwise known as illegal aliens.
The very wording of Mr. Obama's health care plan is meant to be confusing. It is complex, nearly incomprehensible, expands the power of the federal government and the Internal Revenue Service, even making tax preparation more complex. I have spent weeks reading and studying this plan and I am still confused. I am not, however, confused about the intent of this plan: the complete subjugation of the American people. In my opinion, ObamaCare would be the final nail in the coffin of this republic.
Savant Noir| 3.21.10 @ 4:50PM
I am amazed to read the endless stream of uninformed posts. Emotionalism, regardless how great the cathexsis, does not change the facts. Seems that no one cares about any facts, they merely spew their own emotional predilictions with enough vigor that they come to beleive their own propoganda.
Please offer alterntives| 3.23.10 @ 1:43AM
Savant noir,
you have a plethora of information. What can be done to reduce healthcare costs? What are some strategies that can be employed to avoid bankruptcy by health care. We need help!
Shannon Nicholles| 11.17.09 @ 4:50PM
Yes there are ways to achieve healthcare yes you can not be denied, but try paying for it after the fact! I have worked hard my whole life and so has my husband, we make to much to get assistence but we can not afford insurance. I am a diebetic with lupus my insurance would cost anywhere fromm 800.00 to 1600.00 monthly and that does not cover half of things. If you have not dealt with this issue personally you do not get it!
Peter M.| 3.21.10 @ 9:51AM
How ironic that you live in a traditionally liberal state, and pontificate about how there is ALWAYS a way to map for necessary healthcare. Do you not realize that it's because of a progressive, proactive approach to healthcare by your state government? Try living in Virginia and most other Southern states, where the State does everything they possibly can to to prevent people who need help from getting it. Do some research. It's already impossible for a single man or woman to get medical care, regardless of disability. Now our new governor is trying to rescind Medicaid for destitute children also.
Kevin Pedrosa| 7.11.10 @ 2:02PM
Im not part of any political party, I just want to point that out right now. All I see is very many people, whatever the amount is, who either cant afford insurance or don't want insurance because they dont think they need it. What caught my attention was what Anastasia Mather said about nobody being denied health care if they really want it. I believe you. I also believe that insurance companies are here to make money, not to save lives. If they were here to save lives, they would do it for free. You dont see the police or fire departments sending you a bill after they've saved your life. You are absolutely right about an individual getting health care, but what you fail to mention is all the exclusions and all the red tape and all the denied claims that come with your beautiful medicaid-HMO program , just because someone said that it was an experimental procedure. A friend of mine died because they said that the kidney transplant that would have saved his life was "experimental" even though it's a well- known procedure through out the medical community. So your medicaid HMO may seem fantastic to the naked eye. But look closer, and I can guarantee that there are loopholes in favor of the insurance company so that they dont have to pay. So please, if you work in the health care field, dont just give the advertisment part of the information. I can catch that on TV.
JP| 3.20.09 @ 9:24AM
Here are a few facts:
1)Every mother and child (to the age of 21) is covered by state health insurance funded through SHIPPS (sp).
2)Every male employed or unemployed is covered up to some point by Medicaid. The exact amount is unclear and is means tested. Obama wishes to epxand all citizens up to 3 times the poverty level (or about $83,000 for a family of 4).
3)Many young people who are employed opt of health insurance.
Therefore, the number 36 million does not tell the whole story. I would go as far as to say that the true number (those that wish to have health care but can't get it) is less than 10 million. And most of those people are small businessmen who are single and earn too much money. My late father-in-law fell into that boat. He made over $100,000 a year, was single and his health insurance premiums ran to over $10,000 a year with a $8000 deductible. He could afford it, but chose not to.
jharp| 3.20.09 @ 9:29AM
So what if the number is only 36 million.
Not one reference to the most important point.
American's spend 2 to 3 times what the rest of the industrialized world spends on health care. For the same level of care. Waiting and going to the emergency room (what the uninsured do) is a horrible and very costly way to get care.
This post is nothing but more wingnut stupidity on an issue that is ruining our economy.
JJ| 2.5.10 @ 12:46PM
waa
jj| 2.5.10 @ 12:47PM
insurance coverage
Craig| 2.23.10 @ 1:18AM
you really don't know much about healthcare in the rest of the world do you? Spouting of remedial talking points.
Here are the facts. If you take the top 5 causes of death here in the U.S. , you will have anywhere from a 5-10x better rate of survival getting your healthcare here in the U.S. than anywhere else in the world.
People need to get off the percentages of GDP, as most of the formulas are incorrect. Only India and China can match our population (they are more, but everyone else is much less) and, like the difference between running a small business vs. a very large business, percentages don't match up. There becomes more of an exponential factor.
The REAL number of uninsured AMERICANS is somewhere around 9 million...only 3% of the population.
Barb| 3.20.10 @ 2:26AM
Yes, that's why everyone from other countries come here to get their medical care. I live close to the Canadian border and we are totally inundated with Canadians crossing over here for their health care due to the long waits in Canada. You also don't see people illegally crossing the borders to get OUT of America! Everyone wants in!
Savant Noir| 3.21.10 @ 4:21PM
This is a ludicrous comment that is not substantiated by any facts (because you have none to support them, obviously).
On the surface, other countries that DO have socialized health care pay MUCH more than we do for health care because the citizens are paying much higher taxes! Your statement is utter foolishness and does not in the least take into account the myriad of issues affecting TRUE costs.
Health Care cost rise 5.6% per annum (on 20 yr avg), whereas the mean average for European countries is 7.8% per annum.
Further, the information the author imparted in this article is 100% correct,you merely have to get off your butt and double-check yourself at the U.S. Census Bureau website. Typical moronic Obama-bot, full of vim and vigor, yet totally anemic intellectually. Why is it that the most uninformed always seem to have the biggest mouths?
It's even worse!| 3.23.10 @ 1:50AM
Many comments from those that study the situation say that US health care outcomes average worse, yet we pay more. The figure I've heard most often is that 1 in 3 health care dollars provides no benefit towards positive outcomes.
Ack!!
RAYMOND KNIGHT| 3.20.09 @ 9:32AM
I myself have been without a job and healthcare since November. My children are under MEDICAID so they are covered. Myself and my wife do not have healthcare since she makes 600.00 a month at a part-time job and I am on unemployment. The state of Pennsylvania gives medicaid only to individuals who have incomes of less then $600 a month which is a joke and only provides healthcare for lifetime welfare recipients. We know that employer-based healthcare does not work and neither does national healthcare. How about employee-based healthcare as I call it. Every citizen will be issued a voucher to get there own healthcare. Companies can supplement this if they want. Of course, the voucher issued by the government needs to be enough and not a joke. Individuals can form a co-op register with the government and negotiate as a group if they choose to.
RAYMOND KNIGHT| 3.20.09 @ 9:37AM
JP, SCHIPS does not cover mothers. It only covers children. Adults over the age of 21 are not covered under S-CHIPS. JP, yes emergency rooms do treat everybody but if afterward if you have any assets they will go after these assets so you can be out on the street. COBRA was most of my unemployment check so if I took it, I would lose everything anyway. JP, in Pennsylvania if you make more then 600.00 a month you are not eligible as an adult for any form of MEDICAID. JP, please get your facts straight, before making blanket statements.
Barb| 3.20.10 @ 2:29AM
Depends on what you're calling assets. And, having been there, done that, there is such a thing as down-sizing to your current financial situation. If it improves, you can always go back up. :)
S Schultze| 3.20.09 @ 10:16AM
An interesting video is available online on this very topic called Uninsured in America. Watch it to get a glimpse of the entitlement mentality that is driving the quest for other peoples money. Check out the other videos if you have a minute - you will see what is in store for us if the collectivists plan is enacted.
OLDPUPPYMAX| 3.20.09 @ 10:28AM
The point of the article is quite clear and beyond argument...the left makes fraudulent claims in order to advance its agenda. And that agenda is the destruction of free enterprise, free markets and the freedom of the individual.
Freedom| 3.23.10 @ 2:01AM
Well, as soon as the driving forces of the republican party stop trying to dictate what women can do with their bodies, who can enter into the LEGAL (religion can decide for itself) institution of marriage, and maintaining the separation of church and state, then I'll start listening to arguments of "freedom".
Dustoff| 3.20.09 @ 10:37AM
Did anyone see the news on England saying how sorry they were for it's hospitals having 3rd world health care.
So you really want Gov health care.
I say it now as I always have. (When I can get the same health care has Ted Kennedy got, then I'll take their heath care)
Good luck on that one.
jharp| 3.20.09 @ 10:49AM
"Did anyone see the news on England saying how sorry they were for it's hospitals having 3rd world health care. "
Did anyone see the news on Hong Kong, Taiwan, Japan, France, Germany, Sweden, Denmark, and Austrailia being so thrilled with their health care systems leading the world in providing everyone the same level of care as the United States at half the cost.
You have the mind of a child, Dustoff. You pick one lousy system to compare us to and the uneducated, knuckledragging, troglodyte redneck, GOPers still seem to buy it.
Dr Palmer| 3.20.09 @ 11:10AM
We spend more on healthcare per person because we have no rationing and every life-saving measure is used on every patient regardless of age, just how Americans want it. If you are over 65 in England or Canada, you can't get dialysis, many cancer treatments, almost any elective procedure (joint replacements), etc. Any doubt about the US dominance in care quality and innovation is an assertion made by a moron.
David| 2.10.10 @ 3:05PM
Tosh.
MY 67 year old Grandmother got cancer treatment for breast cancer and survived and is still kicking. My other grandmother got a replacement hip at 70. This grandmother also gets frequent dialysis.
Barb| 3.20.10 @ 2:30AM
Amen! Well said.
Health Care a MUST| 3.20.09 @ 11:15AM
Reymond Knight.
Most people who write on this page are Rich and related to Rockerfeller, they don't even need to work. They think they should be running America, telling people what they can and can't do. Most of them are religious nutters, and if you don't have any money, starve to death, or get a Job none of them even notice there is a recession.
All they know is they are against people who have abortion, they are bussy having sex with their dogs, they know there is no cross spicies, each couple have a male dog and a female dog.
These people are the biggest bunch of assholes on the planet. They think everyone has even got the money to feed two dogs to have sex with, some people in the real world can't even afford to feed their children, let alone healthcare, much more feed dogs.
Christian fundamentalist, nutters are the biggest fraud in America away from AIPAC, and the IMF.
They think Obama is wrong to even consider healthcare for all in America. And would rather people have children they can't afford so they can die for lack of health care food and education. These Dog f..kers are a distraction from the real world.
Savant Noir| 3.21.10 @ 4:29PM
Rockefeller is A Demoncrat. So yes, him and their other Liberal compadres are indeed the biggest assholes on the planet.
The only way a Demoncrat could make themselves useful to Society is if we herded the entire lot of them up, shipped them off to Antartica, and had them work on turning foul weather and ice into a renewable energy source. Then the Conservatives that actually WORK for a living can lift the country back up.
"Conservatives do all the work, while Liberals just legislate what to do with the production". This axiom is a time-proven truth.
Workin' hard| 3.23.10 @ 2:12AM
I wouldn't call myself a Democrat, but I'm definitely liberal. I work plenty hard for my small peice of the pie and I will happily share it with others.
Natural disaster after natural disaster Americans as a whole prove ourselves to be incredibly generous to those in need. But why is it so difficult for us to consider our neighbor next door or across he street?
There will always be some corruption and some abuse of the system, but should we give up hope due to a few bad apples and let them ruin it for those genuinely in need?
jharp| 3.20.09 @ 11:24AM
Dr Palmer| 3.20.09 @ 11:10AM
"We spend more on healthcare per person because we have no rationing and every life-saving measure is used on every patient regardless of age, just how Americans want it.
If you are over 65 in England or Canada, you can't get dialysis, many cancer treatments, almost any elective procedure (joint replacements), etc. Any doubt about the US dominance in care quality and innovation is an assertion made by a moron."
You don't know your ass from first base.
And you are a dirty rotten stinking slime bag liar.
Your claims are false. Or would you care to provide a link to back up your lies?
1) We do have rationing. It's done by the insurers who profit immensely from it.
2) Your claim about being over 65 in the UK and Canada is completely false
3) And the quality of care delivered in the U.S. is the same. If you can get your insurer to pay for it. And if you can't be prepared to lose everything you have.
Savant Noir| 3.21.10 @ 4:31PM
The anuual combined profit of the insurance health care insurance industry is 3.4% profit per annum. Do you know anyone, or any company, that would work for a measly 3.4%?
It's easy to be uninformed and villianize others, isn't it? Certainly much easier than lifting oneself up by their own bootstraps.
American| 3.20.09 @ 11:33AM
So what do we do about the 8.2 million without, or the many more who have a little but can't pay their medical bills due to either the cost, or unethical behavior by the insurance companies? I'm not crazy about government being the solution, so seriously, what do we do? BTW, it is a tangled mass of red tape to get government insurance, and once started it continues to be a tangled mess to keep it.
tollen| 3.20.09 @ 11:34AM
Clearly, people that cheer for the low cost and quality of health care in Europe, Asia, Australia, have never sought medical treatments on those continents.
Also, we seem to forget that included in the US health care costs are R&D benefiting the whole world.
The statistics in the article above are well researched
My question is: Why did our Congress make such an issue of HIPPA, FISA and the Patriot Act, when now it looks like all my medical data and more will be available electronically for the whole world to see?
casey| 3.20.09 @ 11:47AM
Actually, I've read reports about Japan regarding people dying because of the lack of available care, hospital room, staff, etc. I have heard similar reports regarding many other nationalized systems of care in other developed countries.
Nationalization is not the way to go for healthcare. I have a degree in the medical field and have seen the government in action and can tell you it will not work. Not unless you are Pelosi, Obama, Kennedy or someone considered essential. Standard of care and availability goes down drastically if you are an average citizen.
jharp| 3.20.09 @ 11:51AM
American| 3.20.09 @ 11:33AM
"so seriously, what do we do?"
We start by looking at the other 29 industrialized countries that provide the same level of care for half the cost.
Then we copy what works.
And for those too dense to understand. We do have a single payer in place today. Medicare, medicaid, and the VA. And they work pretty well. And you can buy private insurance to supplement whatever you are not happy with.
Savant Noir| 3.21.10 @ 4:37PM
They work well? All 3 are essentially bankrupt! lol. Medicaid/Medicare refuse treatment to twice as many people than does regular insurance providers! I think you need to do a little more research on your "facts".
The government has always made things more complicated and expensive. This is part of their rationing system. The government has a habit of requiring new provider numbers every couple of years that must be used for all claims, including private insurance claims. When these are instituted, payment can be delayed for as long as six months. To see how "simple" the federal government makes medical claims, what follows are my required identification numbers.
UPIN #G16766
OMAP#079496
Medicare#R0000BLCGY (PTAN) OLD
Medicare # R147304
(PTAN) **NEW** R147303
Railroad Medicare#110162014
NEW Tax ID # 264520277
OLD Tax ID# 911768627
DEA # BRxxxxxxx (Hidden to prevent use)
Clia# 38D0933946
NPI# 1306924691 (individual)
NPI Group # 1235371485
Every point the president has made regarding his health plan is either a gross misrepresentation or an outright lie. The purpose of this plan is to ensure dependence on government and a financial windfall for his cronies, including trial lawyers, and has nothing to do with concern about the cost of medical care or about the health or lives of American citizens.
jharp| 3.20.09 @ 11:56AM
tollen| 3.20.09 @ 11:34AM
"Clearly, people that cheer for the low cost and quality of health care in Europe, Asia, Australia, have never sought medical treatments on those continents."
A completely false post. And with nothing to back it up.
I, for one, have several experiences with health care abroad.
You have no idea what you are talking about and have obviously just started making stuff up.
Paul from SA| 3.20.09 @ 12:05PM
There are so many problems with our health care system, I don't where to start.
Health insurance should be unrelated to employment, much like auto insurance. I know about group rates and the original intent, to bypass WWII wage controls and the business deduction, but I believe this causes more problems than solves.
Something is very wrong. When I used to work for an employer a few years ago that provided health insurance as a benefit, I paid $30/month (they paid the other half $30), with a $20 deductible, and that was tax exempt. Now I pay $234/month on an individual plan with a $4000 deductible and is not tax exempt.
The difference, $270 vs. $2800, for just the premiums is a scam. I am and was in perfect health. The last time I went to see a doctor for a minor stomach problem that I felt I should check out ended up costing me a few thousand dollars. I canceled follow-up appointments when I discovered they were charging me a bundle for ‘consultation’ fees. The blood tests were unaffordable.
A friend recently suffered a heart attack and had no insurance. He received free health care (open heart surgery) and is doing well, though he’ll go to his grave owing somebody $150,000 for that. He has no plans to purchase insurance. I suspect most of us will be doing the same.
Third party payment system. Insurance for non-catostrophic care. Defensive medicine. Excessive profits. No competition. Government regulation…..
Pingback| 3.20.09 @ 12:07PM
Black Friday | And Still I Persist links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Steven H| 3.20.09 @ 12:07PM
David T: Actually the number of homeless has been inflated. In "Bias" by Bernard Goldberg there is a chapter called "How Bill Clinton Cured the Homeless Problem" or words to that effect. The answer: by getting elected. It's an interesting explanation of how even well-meaning people perpetuate and/or inflate incorrect data to aid a worthwhile cause.
Country Boy| 3.20.09 @ 12:10PM
If there was any honesty in this National Health Care, the first step would be tort reform.
There was just a SCOTUS case where a woman patient won her case. The drug (I think Wyeth or SGP) had eight warnings on it that it may cause gangrene if such and such was not considered. The physician did not heed the 8 warnings, and the patient got gangrene. The SCOTUS ruled against the Phama company, and said they needed a ninth warning.
National health care, Global Warming, and other hysterias shows how stupid most people are. They are being lead down the road to ruin by professional politicians, and they can't see it coming.
brian| 3.20.09 @ 12:16PM
Very good article and probably a lot more truth to it than a lot of posters think. I pay 538.00 a month for my wife, son, and myself. We hardly ever reach our deductable, which is 500 a piece a year. We eat good, take care of ourselves and EXERCISE! Get off the couch and from in front of the computer and put down the twinkie. Quit spending all your money on dope and booze. If you think healthcare is expensive now, wait until it's free.
Dr Palmer| 3.20.09 @ 12:18PM
jharp, name calling and telling people they are wrong are not arguments. You have yet to back up anything you have written. I am an orthopedic surgeon providing all this care you seem to know so much about. I actually speak from experience as opposed to most liberals who are only experienced at whining like a little bitch. You want to spare no expense when a whale strands on the beach, but don't expect to spend any of your own dollars when you get hurt or sick. Please get injured and come see me so that I can tell you to fix it yourself.
Paul P.| 3.16.10 @ 8:18PM
Wow, you're an orthopedic surgeon and you make comments like that? Calling people names and getting hopeful that someone will get hurt so you can tell them to fix themselves? Real nice.
jharp| 3.20.09 @ 12:30PM
Dr Palmer| 3.20.09 @ 12:18PM
"You want to spare no expense when a whale strands on the beach, but don't expect to spend any of your own dollars when you get hurt or sick."
More typical wingnut nonsense. Just make stuff up.
Both statements directed at me are completely false.
Take a looksie at the links below for backup. And for being an orthopedic surgeon you certainly are uninformed about the system under which you operate. For that matter you seem damn dimwitted with your utterly preposterous and stupid claims about me.
http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=the_health_of_nations
http://content.healthaffairs.org/cgi/content/full/22/3/77
sowhat| 3.12.10 @ 11:54PM
Seriously? The first link you give to back you up is 'Liberal Intelligience' ?????
Seriously?
I was hoping you'd bring more to the table than liberal propaganda! You've obviously drunk the kool-aid!
L. Ross| 3.20.09 @ 12:31PM
Healthcare A Must:
Dude, I don't know what you're taking, but you need to back off on some of those meds. Seriously. Pretty funny post though. I think I'm going to go have sex with my two dogs now.
SoloDocInBusiness| 3.20.09 @ 12:32PM
Healthcare reform starts and finishes with the consumer. There is top down fix for our system. the top is too powerful. Do you think the insurance industry, big pharma, and the self perpetuating bureaucracy of Medicare is going to roll over and give back the 2 trillion dollars they take out of the economy every year. NO WAY! Either a consumer deals directly with a provider with price disclosure and can define VALUE in their quest for care or nothing else fixes our problem. No doubt we have the best healthcare in the world but why would the pre-eminent capitalist country on the planet not allow capitalism to work for 16% of our GDP?
Barb| 3.20.10 @ 2:32AM
Right on! Well said.
jharp| 3.20.09 @ 12:34PM
Country Boy| 3.20.09 @ 12:10PM
"If there was any honesty in this National Health Care, the first step would be tort reform."
You are an uninformed buffoon. You got anything to back up your claim.
Malpractice is about 1% of our health care costs.
Quit making stuff up. It's dishonest and that would make you a liar.
Dr Palmer| 3.20.09 @ 12:38PM
jharp, I don't work Fridays so I am going to head out from my mansion to the driving range and work on my swing. I might then take my gorgeous wife and kids out to a really expensive dinner. Enjoy your anger. My hard work and intelligence have made me rich and happy in the greatest country on earth. Douchebag.
Philosopher | 3.20.09 @ 12:44PM
It's amazing how nearly everyone in these posts are agonizing how to fix the broken approach of our confused market of private and socialized health care we have today.
Our current system is unsustainable, so quit trying to fix the unfixable. Reset the conditions of the problem where we can get to a viable solution.
That viable solution is the free market. It's that simple.
All of the rest of our economy is based on a free-market economy. Why do we think an important piece like health care would be better handled without it? Food is much more important in the short term to everyone than healthcare, but do we get it through a blackbox of 'insurance' subsidies where no market mechanism can work to regulate the price, quality and availability of it? Imagine how goofy it would be for the government to step in and regulate and subsidize that part of our lives ? Oh wait, they did that in the Soviet Union and had shortages of everything- when they had anything to put on the shelves.
1. Health care needs to be a per-service/per-good price that you can see like those listed at Minute Clincs or their like-entities. Apply this to hospitals and larger services. The market will adjust the cost, access, and quality to a sustainable level.
http://news.minnesota.publicradio.org/features/2006/01/23_zdechlikm_coninfo/
2. Health 'Insurance' needs to actually become insurance again like you have for your car or house. It's for catastophies, not a confused set of subsidies that inflate prices.
3. Everyone needs to make choices on this issue like with everything else in their life that is important. A faceless beaurocrat can't do that for you. You need to decide how much you want to spend on your health.
4. Every other attempt to create 'free' univeral health care in the US or abroad has failed or is failing those paying the ever-increasing taxes for it. I know, I've lived under both systems:
http://pracphilosblog.wordpress.com/2008/12/28/a-tale-of-two-types-of-health-care/
5. This may shock some people, but health care is not a 'right'. Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are rights. The rest you have to earn (food, clothes, housing, cars, etc.).
http://pracphilosblog.wordpress.com/2009/01/05/do-you-have-a-‘right’-to-health-care/
This is why we need the free market approach that has worked in every other important part of our economy. Until then, this issue will not get solved.
Think First| 3.20.09 @ 12:48PM
Dr. Palmer, you are so right. As a part of the consulting business I do, I regularly talk with people from Canada, England, Australia, New Zealand, and a few others. Suffice to say all of these countries are experiencing a resurgence of private health care where they can because the "free" care costs too much.
Lew Rockwell did a piece on England's system as one example and has a three page list of how drugs were cut off, operations denied and patients sent home to die because they were deemed too expensive.
As far the truth behind cheaper care, the main point here is most prescription drugs sell for a LOT less in other countries, as has been well documented, than in the States and even Canada. I have several friends and coworkers who routinely go to Mexico and pay half to 1/3 what even Canadas prices are, for the same bottle your pharmacy gets before it repackages it with instructions.
Now consider that the wage a Dr. gets in many of these countries in no way approaches what one does in the US and it's no mystery at all. Saying health care is half as much elsewhere is moot if you aren't also relating that cost to actual percentage of household income.
And by the way, Canada's health care is NOT free. They take a minimum of 50% of your wages off the top, of which 30-35% is to pay the Doc. Yet those I talk to who live near the border, still cross and pay cash for treatment because the quality and availability have no comparison. Hospitals are a joke and often jokingly refer to them as holding cells for future morgue patients.
England's is worse. The documented cases are far too long to list here. It's not that the evidence isn't clear it doesn't work, it's that the only ones supporting it are those who have a vested interest in the payoffs. That has also been a source of much controversy and is routinely detailed in several of England's papers if you care to read.
jharp| 3.20.09 @ 1:03PM
More stupid on what has to be the biggest collection of stupid on the intertubes.
Think First| 3.20.09 @ 12:48PM
"And by the way, Canada's health care is NOT free. They take a minimum of 50% of your wages off the top, of which 30-35% is to pay the Doc."
I've got news for ya. Nothing is free. Nothing.
And your claim that 30-35% of your wages are taken to pay the Doc is beyond stupid.
Philosopher| 3.20.09 @ 12:44PM
"All of the rest of our economy is based on a free-market economy."
Really? Our interstate highways? Air traffic control system? Military? National Parks? The Great Lakes? Our lakes and rivers? Social Security? Medicare? Medicaid? Government takeover of AIG?
You two are clueless buffoons. And are perfect examples of the stupidity that has led us into the mess we are in today.
Big Leo| 3.20.09 @ 1:15PM
When I lived in Maine, my wife was a nurse in the hospital. They had many patients from Canada who were willing to pay our allegedly high prices to get the medical care they couldn't get for free in Canada. A number of Canadian doctors and nurses were also working in the hospital because they were unwilling to deal with the medical bureaucracy in Canada.
If the Canadian system works so well, why are any of these people going to Maine for medical care?
SoloDocinBusiness| 3.20.09 @ 1:26PM
I'm from Maine as well. Border town with 9k people. We have two MRI scanners that run all day long for the Canadians who come and pay cash for their studies. I'ts great to hear the movement towards consumerism in healthcare is picking up speed. The first step in any unfettered transaction is price disclosure and we are getting closer. Take a look at Healthcarebluebook.com it's a new site that discloses what INSURANCE companies actually pay for services. Also look at HUCFM.com to find up front pricing for healthcare items. This system can be fixed but it will take Capitalism to do it. Got to get the Gov with their attendant parasitic lobbiests out of the mix!
Country Boy| 3.20.09 @ 1:32PM
jharp,
"Malpractice is about 1% of our health care costs. "
Hah, that's a funny. Unfortunately, you a probably serious.
I guess you have never bought and paid for veterinary care. You can buy major surgeries and meds for a small fraction of what human medical care costs.
Difference is, for vet care, malpractice is almost unheard of.
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 3.20.09 @ 1:50PM
As an avowed communist I support the taking of all wealth, but here are some facts to chew over before you do so.
http://www.sickoflawsuits.org/threats/HealthcareUnderAttack.cfm
Doctors are afraid to practice medicine.
* In a growing trend across the country, hospitals are now forbidding parents from videotaping to photographing the births of their babies for fear of lawsuits. One Chicago-area hospital has banned the practice because of the "volatile legal climate," according to a hospital spokesperson. (Orlando Sentinel, September 27, 2006)
* More than 40 percent of doctors reported avoiding prescribing appropriate medication because they knew the drug might be involved in litigation. (Pharmaceutical Liability Survey, Harris Interactive, July 15, 2003)
Health care costs rise as litigation costs are passed on to patients.
* PricewaterhouseCoopers calculates that medical liability concerns increase annual health care spending by $124 billion in 2006 dollars. The additional cost of liability-based health care costs adds 3.4 million Americans to the rolls of the uninsured. (“Jackpot Justice: The True Cost of America’s Tort System,” Pacific Research Institute, March 27, 2007)
* Ten percent of every dollar spent on health care is attributed to the costs of liability and defensive medicine. (“The Factors Fueling Rising Healthcare Costs 2006” PriceWaterhouseCoopers, January 2006)
Access to health care is limited.
* Almost 80 percent of Americans are concerned that frivolous lawsuits have made it harder for them and their families to get affordable health care. (Sick of Lawsuits National Survey, Conducted by Public Opinion Strategies, August 16-18, 2005)
* Quality and access to health care is being threatened in many states. The American Medical Association has identified 20 states as presently facing a medical liability crisis. ("Mass. Named State in Medical Liability Crisis," American Medical Association, June 14, 2004)
* Women in almost half of the states in the country are experiencing disruptions in obstetrical care. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists' has identified 23 states where medical liability problems threaten women's access to physicians delivering their babies, a figure that is up from 16 states two years ago. ("ACOG's Red Alert on OB-GYN Care Reaches 23 States," American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, August 26, 2004)
* The impact of lawsuits on the health care system has encroached on critical doctor-patient decisions, such as deciding on course of treatment. More than 90 percent of high-risk medical specialists said that liability pressures were important in their decision to stop providing certain services. (American Medical Association Survey, PR Newswire, April 3, 2003)
Medical innovation is threatened and patient health is jeopardized.
* More than 70 percent of patients believe it is likely that product liability litigation or fear of it has caused pharmaceutical companies to avoid research and development in certain product areas. (Pharmaceutical Liability Survey, Harris Interactive, July 15, 2003)
* Lawsuit fears have found their way into the delivery room, as 42 percent of women believe the current medical litigation environment leads providers to perform Cesarean sections that are not really needed. From 2003 to 2004, there was a 27.5 percent increase in Cesarean sections in the U.S. ("Listening to Mothers® Survey," Childcare Connection, March 20, 2006; Associated Press, November 17, 2005)
* Decades of litigation has decreased production and availability of respirator masks, the types of which would be crucial if pandemic flu hit. In fact, U.S. respirator manufacturers spent 90% of the net income from respirator sales on litigation costs in 2004 alone. (Coalition for Breathing Safety, September 19, 2006)
* Twenty-five percent of patients said they would immediately stop taking a prescribed drug if they saw an ad for a lawsuit involving that drug. (Pharmaceutical Liability Survey, Harris Interactive, July 15, 2003)
* Nine mental health patients in South Mississippi stopped taking their prescribed medications after seeing personal injury lawyer advertising regarding Zyprexa and Risperdal - drugs used to treat patients with schizophrenia and bipolar mania. "People see these ads and they think that they're bad for them, so they quit taking them," said Teri Breister, executive director of the National Alliance for the Mentally Ill in Mississippi. "But these patients' lives have come apart again. Every time they stop taking their medications, the episodes become worse." ("Tort Advertisements Worry Some Health Advocates," Biloxi Sun Herald, March 21, 2004)
ram3| 3.20.09 @ 2:09PM
Just remember that when something is "free" people treat it as such.
It is a known fact that people go to the ER for simple headaches and coughs/colds rather than urgent care, precisely because they don't have to pay for it.
The cost of health care is so high for at least two reasons:
Frivolous use of services as noted above.
High cost of liability insurance.
All you libs might re-consider your ridiculous views on stuff the govmt should provide when you find yourself with the short straw when rationing goes into effect.
Also remember that the HMO's are a creation of Democrats like Ted Kennedy, yet these same HMO's are lambasted by the same people who created them. Sounds familiar? The government CD has only one track and it skips/repeats without end.
tollen| 3.20.09 @ 2:09PM
jharp
"A completely false post. And with nothing to back it up.
I, for one, have several experiences with health care abroad.
You have no idea what you are talking about and have obviously just started making stuff up."
The negative element of this discussion is totally dominated by you, your name calling and your total disregard for the fact that other people might have knowledge on the topic, also
My mother passed away last year in one of the European countries that takes care of their citizens from "cradle to grave."
Her primary care doctor never referred her to any kind of testing, since she was old and her time was up, anyway.
She died from cancer within five weeks after it was finally diagnosed, when no treatment was useful.
And that country has three MRI machines and it is reserved for the young and healthy.
And Medicare and Medicad are perfect examples of mismanagement by our government
Patrick| 3.20.09 @ 2:24PM
Good article.
Rick Josey | 3.20.09 @ 3:43PM
It's not surprising that Obama gets the uninsured number incorrect. He's not that good at math...
He said there would be ZERO lobbyists in his administration. At last count, there are 12.
www.PatriotHangout.com
Pingback| 3.20.09 @ 5:49PM
The Myth of the 46 Million links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Thomas| 3.20.09 @ 7:32PM
Just two small, possibly meaningless points here.
1: every state in the Union makes it illegal to turn away anyone needing care for a catastrophic illness or injury even if they do not have insurance.
2: There are basically two reasons for the high cost of health care in the U.S. malpractice insurance and litigation and the third party payer system. In many states, doctors may not bill a cash paying patient less that they bill a third party payer [private insurance company or government program, fund, agency], even though the third party payer will only pay about $45 of a $100 medical bill. You do the math.
TJK| 3.20.09 @ 8:12PM
One of the other common misnomers in this discussion is confusing health insurance with health care. Health insurance does not provide the actual treatments that are performed (health care). Health insurance provides the means to have those treatments paid for. So, when our illustrious leaders are talking about health care reform, make no mistake, they are talking about removing health insurance from the private sector. Taking on the health insurance costs of every American, and the 12 or so million illegals who are about to be granted amnesty so they can blindly vote for the dummycrats in the next election, is going to be an enormous undertaking for the government. Where are they going to get the money to pay for our health care treatments? From taxes, of course. All they are doing is playing a shell game. Same with promoting electric cars. Sure, they save money on gas. But you still have to pay for the electricity to charge the car. And they are typically more expensive than gasoline-powered autos. All I can say is, thank God this administration has solved the economic issues our country is facing so quickly that they can now focus on health insurance. I must have missed the story that war on drugs, the war on poverty, the war against terrorism, have all been won, not to forget the state of the art condition of our roads and transportation systems. We apparently no longer have a deficit, and only because Obama is now in control, today actually marked the end of winter. Oh, wait, we didn't even have a winter because of global warming. Hey, Mr. President, to quote Walter Sobchak, "F*** it dude, let's go bowling."
Jeremiah| 3.20.09 @ 8:22PM
The 46 million statistic may or may not be accurate.
What is for absolute CERTAIN is many millions of people who think they are covered are not.
You can sit back and quack about how evil liberals are now -- but, God forbid, if you get really sick, be prepared for the insurance company you think is on your side now to turn pretty quickly into your worst enemy.
Over half of all bankruptcies in this country result from catastrophic illnesses destroying families.
Set aside the uninsured (they're just lazy losers anyway, right?), and you still have the problem of the insured in an irrational, unsupportable, and immoral system.
jharp| 3.20.09 @ 9:21PM
Thomas| 3.20.09 @ 7:32PM
"1: every state in the Union makes it illegal to turn away anyone needing care for a catastrophic illness or injury even if they do not have insurance."
But also allows them to sue you to recover the full amount if you happen to get caught without insurance. If you're homeless you've got nothing to worry about.
"2: There are basically two reasons for the high cost of health care in the U.S. malpractice insurance and litigation"
Wrong, wrong, and wrong, Malpractice insurance is a small part of it. About 1%.
Other than that a decent post. Thanks.
Todd Evans| 3.20.09 @ 10:16PM
It is both irrational and morally repugnant to think that for-profit health care is an acceptable health care system for all Americans. By definition, in free enterprise, there are some people who are "not profitable," and, therefore, not coverage worthy. Health care is even more fundamental than the K-12 education that we offer to all Americans. Acceptable, affordable, accessible, and portable health care coverage should be no different.
Those who argue quality and medical brreakthroughs would take a hit if the industry went back to non-profit present a false argument. In fact, one could say that progress (e.g., disease cures) is likely immorally curtailed in order to maximize profits for pharmaceuticals and other deliverers. One could also make the case that what we need in the health care realm are professionals of virtue--not those driven by profits and greed.
The answer?
* Non-profit
* Regionally managed
* Decoupled from employer
* All wage earners pay
* Medical service prices publically posted
* Guaranteed by law
Michele San Pietro| 3.21.09 @ 4:20AM
I disagree with you, the 46-million statistic ist actually pulled out of thin air: enemies of America, many of which, unfortunately, are within America itself, have been repeating this crap for decades, just in order to say that America is a terrible place to live. You can't even imagine how many silly people here in my Italy are convinced that people who cannot pay are simply left to die at emergency rooms in the United States if they cannot pay, which is, of course, utterly false and would simply be absurd. Anyway, I could even be in favor of introducing free healthcare for everybody: but Clinton didn't do that, and Obama, you can be sure, won't do that, either, because for enemies of America, for the garbage who simply want its destruction, the big lie of millions of people left to die in the United States is too important to give it up.
Craig_in_Seattle| 3.21.09 @ 7:33AM
I voted for Pat Buchanan in 2000, so I'm more conservative than a Republican. But, I do think healthcare in the U.S. is a money sucking machine. I've seen the poor people at JohnPeterSmith hospital in Ft. Worth waiting 7 to 10 hours to be seen and then not given treatment anywhere near what people get who have insurance. And then the billions the feds spend on medicare/medicaid each year? Then the AMA trying to limit the number of doctors when more are clearly needed? Then hospitals charge whatever they want because insurance (not the individual) covers it?
I say go to a system where the individual pays and health benefits at work are put into an account that can't be accessed except for health related issues. Let there be government assistance for big stuff like $70,000 heart bypass operations. No more $300,000 cancer patients that are going to die anyway because the medical community still can't cure cancer.
TJK| 3.21.09 @ 7:36AM
What seems patently obvious in the posts from those who are in favor of government intervention is that someone else should pay for what they want. That's the core of liberalism, and the only answer liberals look for to solve their problems. I don't want to pay for it, you pay for it. The fact that the libs still fall back on the age old arguments that health insurance isn't portable just goes to show that they haven't been paying attention to what's been happening in the industry the last ten years or so. HIPAA made all health insurance portable, in that as long as you can show that you had prior, continuous coverage for the past 12 months, when you join a new group health plan, you are not subject to a pre-existing condition waiting period. And if you leave a group health plan, you are entitled to COBRA, which extends your group health benefits for 18 months. But, oh, I forgot, you don't want to pay for it. Sorry, but the evil, profit minded corporations don't give handouts. Too bad the concept of "you don't get something for nothing" doesn't exist in liberal world.
Shannon| 11.17.09 @ 5:22PM
EXCUSE ME! I would pay for my insurance if some one would let me! My husband and I make around 32,00.00 a year. He is trying to build a buisiness, HE works hard and all we ask for is decent coverage for a decent amount. But we make to much for assistence and guess what? I can not afford 1600.00 a month premiums. HOW ABOUT the working HARD people WHO do not get a break. Oh and here is a kick you when your down buch of crap...... I have to pay more for my insulin (because I pay cash) than an insured person or THE INSURANCE CO. I'm sorry but I think that is an issue! I do not expect hand outs but because I can not catch a break there is a lot I can not afford (test, some medicines and sometimes my insulin) so when my kidneys shut down guess who will wind up paying for my dialysis or surgery? It will be all of you. LET ME buy insurance, at least something that will help a little. To all of you who say what is the problem? Go talk to some REAL LIFE HARD WORKING people who do NOT want handouts but need SOME help.
Valentinus| 3.21.09 @ 8:03AM
You Americans can by all means have your infghts about your ramshackle healthcare system, but please leave the UK out of it. We undoubtedly have our resource problems, but even the briefest acquaintance with the National Health Service staggers my American colleagues living here––from antenatal and childbirth services to free treatment for breast cancer with the latest drugs and technologies. Against this, I have the spectacle of a young dental student signing up for summer work with a Third World charity and finding himself sent to (guess where?) Oklahoma. You should be ashamed of yourselves, that the richest society in human history permits such disparity. Student also reported to me that in the area in which he had been working two people had recently committed suicide (yes suicide) because they could get neither treatment nor pain relief for abscesses.
There is a deeper issue here that many of the comments hint at: the 'Joe the Plumber' style disdain for the poor that borders on a kind of contempt. It seems that the enemy many Americans fear most is not the drug smuggler or even the terrorist, but their fellow citizens who might be stopping them getting even richer.
jharp| 3.21.09 @ 9:26AM
TJK| 3.21.09 @ 7:36AM
"What seems patently obvious in the posts from those who are in favor of government intervention is that someone else should pay for what they want. "
Completely false. Typical moron wingnut response, just make stuff up.
Greg| 3.21.09 @ 9:52AM
There is no good reason why the US couldn't adopt a system like Canada's whereby each state sets up its own health corporation. I lived in Canada for 45 years so I know. The present system in the U.S. is a disgrace.
Here is just one example. I had heart surgery in September. Complications arose and I had to go back to the same hospital the surgery was done at. I was in for two days and received a bill for over $20,000.00. I am self-insured and paid for the original surgery myself after a fair price was negotiated but once you get into an emergency room unannounced, they take it as a license to steal.
Another example. My son has health insurance through his university. He went to the emergency room for treatment of a minor fall and we have to fight tooth and nail just to get the bills paid by the insurance company. This is quite a typical story. Insurance companies do not like to pay claims. I've been in the industry for 40 years. I know.
Most recently, I am told I need a defibrillator implant. Cost to me - $30,000.00. I can't get insurance.
Now you contrast that with what would happen in Canada. And don't tell me about waiting in line. That's a bunch of bull. You only hear very isolated cases of this. I know tons of people who have received treatment for their heart up there.
And all this is done there at about half the cost it is here so the insurance companies, hospitals and others can make obscene profits.
Anyway, it will never change.
And this all comes from a staunch conservative. I have been treated under both systems and that is my opinion.
TJK| 3.21.09 @ 10:39AM
jharp
"Completely false. Typical moron wingnut response, just make stuff up. "
Oh, you really put me in my place there. How can I possibly stand up to such a well-reasoned, thoughtful response filled with stunning, detailed facts to support your arguments?
SN| 11.17.09 @ 5:26PM
You are a real smart one aren't TJK. Get a life!
C. Steven Tucker | 3.21.09 @ 11:14AM
http://www.freemarketcure.com/uninsuredinamerica.php
ENOUGH SAID!
C. Steven Tucker | 3.21.09 @ 11:16AM
No good reason not to adopt Canada's Healthcare System? Hmm... let me see if I can dig up just a few reasons. How about these? http://www.sbisvcs.com/blog.htm
EAH| 3.21.09 @ 11:25AM
Growing up, in a self-employed family with 8 children, we had NO health insurance. That's 8 trips to the delivery room at the hospital (and one emergency c-section), with no insurance. That's 2 bouts of pneumonia, 2 bouts of salmonella, chicken pox times 7, 1 ripped off pinky finger (never play with a bicycle chain!), several stitched up heads, and lots of seasonal flu... all with no insurance. My parents were far from wealthy. One bout of pneumonia, the doctor refused to see my sick father. He said he was too busy with all the "other flu patients", and didn't bother to find out it was aspiration pneumonia. My father was not only "sick as a dog" & out of work for 3-4 months, but our family had JUST had baby number 7, and we had literally no food in the house. One Christmas we spent with no electricity, no water, no food, no heat, and no income (along with no insurance), while the entire family was down with a very bad flu.
Guess what? We were FINE! God provides. The delivery room doctors forgave my parents' debt immediately, and found ways for them to get free diapers and such. When my father had the pneumonia a local Taco Bell gave us all the meat we could use. 3-4 months of Taco Meat pies, and you'd think you'd be tired of them. Nothing has ever tasted so good, before or since. That Christmas, when we were so sick the little kids begged not to have to open presents (yes, we did have a few, bought before we got sick), and we were "destitute", was the very best Christmas we ever had, before or since. Why? Because GOD provides. He not only provides materially, but mentally.
The problem is, people today don't trust God. They trust themselves, or their incomes, or the government, or their insurance, or whatever. But they don't trust God. You can call me a religious nut-job if you like. I don't care. (My own husband think I'm that. He only believes in the almighty insurance protection.) But God has always taken care of my family and He always will. He'll take care of everyone else, if they'd let Him.
responsibile adult| 3.21.09 @ 11:53AM
I strongly agree with you! We have had health care and not had health care and we paid the doctor bills each month until they were paid off. We have maintained a happy family built on overcoming obstacles and grew closer together because we have not had every thing we wanted but God provided everything we needed.
SN| 11.17.09 @ 5:31PM
Yes I have faith in God, but he does not provide my medicine that keeps me alive. And I have gone with out it. This has caused permanete damage. I have went with out as well but you do not understand how it is for some one with a disease that eventually kills!!!!!!!
stmichrick| 3.21.09 @ 12:05PM
Libs;
If you think healthcare is expensive now; wait til it's free.
All you are trying to do is take the power away from perceived greedy corporate interests and give it to craven, resume-building bureaucrats and politicians with the force of law behind their fiats.
I choose freedom.
stmichrick| 3.21.09 @ 12:26PM
I got a chuckle reading Mr Evans comment about healthcare being more fundamental than K-12 education that is government funded. We all know how well that is working since the sixties.
Unfortunately the notion that profits and greed can be de-coupled from the risk and reward system required for innovation and excellence is the weak link in his argument.
The second rate countries with single payer health insurance live under the security and technological umbrella of the worlds lone superpower. To upset that dynamic because we want to lash out at 'those driven by profits and greed' would be folly indeed.
Thomas| 3.21.09 @ 4:30PM
jharp,
If you are going to quote me do not take me statement out of context. The relevant passage was:
"here are basically two reasons for the high cost of health care in the U.S. [is] malpractice insurance and litigation and the third party payer system."
Malpractice claims make up only 1% of the cost of healthcare, true. But the threat of litigation not only costs individual practitioners a significant amount of money for insurance, but it drives doctors into less litigious specialties and increases the cost to consumers for unnecessary testing to establish good faith defenses for medical actions.
The greatest contributor to medical costs is the third party payer system. If the Government becomes the sole payer, price controls and service cutbacks are not far behind. Just look at any of those other industrialized nations that have centrally controlled health care. Most of their citizens, who can afford it, come to the US for treatment.
Pingback| 3.21.09 @ 8:18PM
The Myth of the 46 Million - Conservative Republican Discussion Forums links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
fred| 3.22.09 @ 1:15AM
anyone who believes in a US universal health care coverage should have to spend a year in the VA system. no choice, no option.
you will run away screaming and clawing your eyes out by the years end.
i love how people who have never had to be a part of gov health care can talk so highly of it.
Heather| 3.22.09 @ 1:28AM
The people speaking highly of govt. health care are Soros paid shills. Canadian Care stinks, too. I've heard terrible things about their lack of quality care for seniors.
EAH| 3.22.09 @ 2:39PM
All anybody really needs to consider is this... Try naming one thing, anything, the government controls that runs smoothly, functions well, at a reasonable cost, and produces the results promised. Never mind, I'd die of old age waiting for the answer. NOTHING they control works. (Quick trip to the DMV anyone?)
The clearest possible example of what happens when the government takes over is the public school system. Our founders (some of the most intelligent people our country ever boasted) were highly educated - at home. From time immemorial people have educated their children at home, or with a personal teacher. Occasionally, they were taught in small private schools. All of these methods turned youngsters into well rounded, well educated, moral, productive assets to society. But our nation decided to fix what wasn't broken, and created a public school system. Now look at us. Thousands of our youth graduate, every year, still unable to read. God has been erased from their education, and sex has been added, to the point of having private "tutoring sessions" with the teacher. We are at the bottom of the heap when it comes to comparisons with other countries. The schools are just holding tanks for unruly youth until they are unleashed on society as apathetic, ignorant shirkers. And when people complain that it isn't working out, the government just throws money at it.
(Meanwhile, home-schoolers consistently test above "grade level" all the time, and grow into the same type of productive moral citizen that our society used to be full of.)
Yeah, I think any government that can handle our kids this well should definitely be handed our society's health care system to "fold, spindle, and mutilate".
Pingback| 3.23.09 @ 6:20AM
Get Your Learn On… « Shades of Gray links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Patty Bilger| 3.23.09 @ 6:46AM
No it isn't a myth. I know I'm one of the uninsured. Go on line and read the report from AARP. I've been uninsured for over 20 years, no help from anyone, can't work now and I'm only fifty years old. I have money to live on, but if I had the money to replace a heart value (423,000.00) then I could go back to work. Sorry there is a lot of people just like me, and no I won't apologize for having a bad heart nor will I apologize for wanting to live. We talk a lot about God, but when it comes right down to doing Gods work it's all about money.
JJ JR| 3.23.09 @ 9:59AM
Y'all,
So for 2.82% of the population (8.2/290 million) who really are the hardcore, perpetually uninsured, we're going to buy into a Stalinist implementation of healthcare with rationing, "sorry, your too old for that treatment" or "that cancer treatment isn't cost-effective" bromides, etc. One word for this: SUCKERS!!!
Publius| 3.23.09 @ 10:16PM
Wow...I used to think I was a rational person. Many of the posts here seem to make a lot of sense to me, but jharp says they were all written by moron wingnuts, so I guess I shouldn't believe them. I mean, if jharp says those posters are moron wingnuts, I should disagree with them, right? Isn't that the ultimate refutation of an adversary's argument--pointing out the fact he/she is a moron wingnut? That pretty much settles the matter in dispute, right?
Michele San Pietro| 3.29.09 @ 1:15PM
Dear Patty, granting that you are real and are telling the truth, you can be sure of something: Obama will never, ever insure you.
Heather | 3.30.09 @ 8:56PM
As a self-employed independent who is sympathetic to both sides of the nationalized healthcare debate, I for one am grateful to read something sober, fact-based, and comprehensible as opposed to an emotional rant, or a wonkish screed. I do favor universal health care coverage, and believe that basic health care is a human right in a modern society, but you make a strong case that proponents of universal health care are not above exaggerating to advance the cause. This dishonesty helps the cause no more than pretending a system of universal health care will be all wonderful; no doubt there will be tradeoffs and we will sacrifice some of the efficiency and excellence those - including foreigners - who can afford care in the U.S., as well as the very poor, currently enjoy. In a world of limited options and resources, something always has to give, a truth ideologues on both sides sometimes refuse to acknowledge. But pieces like yours give us more actual information as opposed to rhetoric--thank you, Mr. Klein.
Pingback| 4.2.09 @ 5:29PM
term life assurance » Shattering Myths (Again) links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 4.2.09 @ 5:30PM
term life assurance » Shattering Myths (Again) links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 4.7.09 @ 7:49AM
"The Myth of the 46 Million" | TheScholarsForum links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Steven Slim | 4.13.09 @ 6:54PM
Don't have health insurance and need to buy your prescription drugs, save with free prescription consultation and the lowest prices online at www.DrugsHome.Com, we are online since the year 2005, orders are shipped overnight with FedEx and have 24/7 live chat and toll free customer service. You can visit our website at http://www.drugshome.com
C. Steven Tucker | 4.16.09 @ 9:15PM
What has our government done, to convince people to hand over our very health freedoms for it to govern over?
Katrina……..?
Fannie Mae – bailout? (this is a government entity who's employee's receive bonuses!) What other government employee receives bonuses for doing their jobs?
Social security – bankrupt ? (robbed for other expenditures)
Medicaid – ? (robbed for other expenditures)
$2 trillion Porkulus bill - ? (and growing)
AIG – bail out, yet nobody knows where's the money gone? No committee of oversight in place (was promised by our representatives to be in place immediately)
Gas prices - ?(50% of every dollar at the pump goes to Washington) But who did you point your finger at as the problem????
Since our government "cannot" be sued, how will one be able to be recompensed for its malfeasance or neglect? How will the government, once it tells 300 million people "go see the doctor" we will pay all the bills, be able to control the consequences? By overwhelming our medical profession or break it, will come another grand government solution," we need more money to fix it"! You are already familiar and have accepted this excuse for too long, and know this to be their power solution. Our government has impoverished our families' financial freedom to pay our own way, by immoral taxation.
Furthermore how has Government run health care worked in other countries? Let's get past the emotions and examine the facts. A common example used to further the cause of "socialized medicine" in the United States is to point out how well it is working in countries such as France and Canada. However, those living in Canada know full well that their government run health care program is most certainly not working. As a matter of fact, many Canadian citizens choose to hire high priced brokers to find them quality health care right here in the United States because of the terrible bureaucracy that controls all forms of health care in Canada.
For more about what is really going on with the Canadian health care system please watch these short but very informative documentary videos:
http://www.freemarketcure.com/brainsurgery.php http://www.freemarketcure.com/twowomen.php http://www.freemarketcure.com/thelemon.php http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KiXT0P3edfs
The number of actual uninsured's in the US has also been grossly inflated as well. For the real numbers: http://www.freemarketcure.com/uninsuredinamerica.php
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aE-I0ombIEY&eurl=http://www.noinsuranceclub.com/blog.php&feature=player_embedded
Medical care in the United States is derided as miserable compared to health care systems in the rest of the developed world. Economists, government officials, insurers and academics alike are beating the drum for a far larger government role in health care. Much of the public assumes their arguments are sound because the calls for change are so ubiquitous and the topic so complex. However, before turning to government as the solution, some unheralded facts about America's health care system should be considered, says Scott W. Atlas, a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution and a professor at the Stanford University Medical Center.
Americans have better survival rates than Europeans for common cancers:
* Breast cancer mortality is 52 percent higher in Germany than in the United States, and 88 percent higher in the United Kingdom.
* Prostate cancer mortality is 604 percent higher in the United Kingdom and 457 percent higher in Norway.
* The mortality rate for colorectal cancer among British men and women is about 40 percent higher.
Americans have better access to treatment for chronic diseases than patients in other developed countries:
* Some 56 percent of Americans who could benefit are taking statins, which reduce cholesterol and protect against heart disease.
* By comparison, of those patients who could benefit from these drugs, only 36 percent of the Dutch, 29 percent of the Swiss, 26 percent of Germans, 23 percent of Britons and 17 percent of Italians receive them.
Lower income Americans are in better health than comparable Canadians:
* Twice as many American seniors with below-median incomes self-report "excellent" health compared to Canadian seniors (11.7 percent versus 5.8 percent).
* Conversely, white Canadian young adults with below-median incomes are 20 percent more likely than lower income Americans to describe their health as "fair or poor."
Americans spend less time waiting for care than patients in Canada and the United Kingdom:
* Canadian and British patients wait about twice as long -- sometimes more than a year -- to see a specialist, to have elective surgery like hip replacements or to get radiation treatment for cancer.
* All told, 827,429 people are waiting for some type of procedure in Canada.
* In England, nearly 1.8 million people are waiting for a hospital admission or outpatient treatment.
Source: Scott W. Atlas, "10 Surprising Facts About American Health Care," National Center for Policy Analysis, Brief Analysis No. 649, 3/24/09 http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=17770
Because of how the Single Payer System is designed Canadian citizens have NO WHERE NEAR the choices that we as American citizens do. As a matter of fact, until very recently (2005) it was simply not possible for a Canadian citizen to pay for their own health care or to purchase private medical insurance that would "bump them up the long waiting list" for medical treatments. The reason Canadian citizens now have the right to do so (and it is still limited) is a direct result of long hard battles (many that are still being fought) that have been waged by brave Canadian citizens like Dr. Jacques Chaoulli who took his clients case all the way to the Canadian supreme court and won! Dr. Chaoulli (http://www.healthcoalition.ca/chaoulli.html) and his patient, George Zeliotis, launched their legal challenge to the Canadian government's monopolized healthcare system after waiting more than a year for hip-replacement surgery.
Canada's high court found for the plaintiffs and in doing so issued the following statement: "The evidence in this case shows that delays in the public healthcare system are widespread, and that, in some serious cases, patients die as a result of waiting lists for public healthcare. The evidence also demonstrates that the prohibition against private health insurance and its consequence of denying people vital healthcare result in physical and psychological suffering that meets a threshold test of seriousness." Furthermore, Justice Marie Deschamps said, "Many patients on non-urgent waiting lists are in pain and cannot fully enjoy any real quality of life. The right to life and to personal inviolability is therefore affected by the waiting times."
Furthermore, the Vancouver, British Columbia-based Fraser Institute which keeps track of Canadian waiting times for various medical procedures. According to the Fraser Institute's 14th annual edition of "Waiting Your Turn: Hospital Waiting Lists in Canada (2006)," total waiting time between referral from a general practitioner and treatment, averaged across all 12 specialties and 10 provinces surveyed, rose from 17.7 weeks in 2003 to 17.9 weeks in 2006. Depending on which Canadian province you live in, a simple MRI requires a wait between 7 and 33 weeks! Orthopedic surgery could require a wait of 14 weeks for a referral from a general practitioner to the specialist and then another 24 weeks from the specialist to treatment! For even more real life horror stories about Canadian citizens left in the lurch by the Canadian healthcare system read the well researched and fact based Wall Street Journal article entitled "Too Old For Hip Surgery" here: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123413701032661445.html?mod=article-outset-box This is what happens when you put government in control of your health care decisions. Doing so in this country, would be nothing short of a train wreck. Anyone who thinks otherwise is simply uninformed or "willfully ignorant".
Real healthcare reform can be accomplished through consumer education, weeding out abuse of existing Federal entitlement programs (via a legitimate needs assessment) and continued funding of State sponsored Risk Pools so that people who are declined for insurance have an affordable option to continue coverage if declined on the individual major medical market. Following these few simple steps will go a long way towards not only maintaining our current health care system, but also towards keeping the bulk of our nations risk where it belongs, namely with the private health insurance sector. In light of the recent multi Trillion Dollar "Bail Outs" and many other failing corporations coming to the table with their hats in their hands (and their private jets on the tarmac) the last thing our government should do is start cutting more blind "bail out" checks in an effort to "reform" the U.S. health care system.
Pingback| 4.19.09 @ 11:25AM
Myth of 46 million uninsured | The Kansas Progress links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 5.1.09 @ 4:18PM
Insurance Auto Quote, Insurance Auto Quotes - Chicago Auto Insurance - Save Money on links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 5.2.09 @ 12:27AM
Insurance Quotes Auto, Insurance Quote Auto - Gen4 Systems Delivers: Agent Portal - I links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Scott A Joseph, MD| 5.13.09 @ 4:27PM
I support Dr. Potter. Incidentally, until last month I was a New Zealand Permanent Resident (and US Citizen) and have been a senior Consultant or Medical Director in both the US and NZ. I practiced at Lakes DHB in Rotorua, NZ in late 2006- Dec 2007. My wife also needed back surgery in NZ for severe pain. Wait list was 2 years.
When we went home to the US, she got the surgery she needed at Mayo Clinics. Perfectly done, without pain since. Wait time from initial consult to appointment: 1 month. From appointment to perfectly executed surgery: 1 month.
My son will need a bone atached hearing aid. Wait time in NZ: years. On June 25th he will have t done at Mayo.
I also know the statistics about overseas care, as I was a senior consultant in a major NHS. You have my name and where I practiced. Look me up.
Ad hominem attacks are the last refuge of a scoundrel. By the way, I belong to AIPAC, too.
Scott A, Joseph, MD| 5.13.09 @ 4:31PM
Two more comments: Greg, Canada's getting worse. The wait lists for surgery ARE long. You haven't been there for a while.
Also, Dr. PALMER, I apologize for getting your name wrong. Continue to support the Hippocratic Oath that binds us.
Scott
Scott A Joseph, MD| 5.13.09 @ 4:35PM
By the way, the wait list in NZ for my wife's MRI for her back would have been 6 months if I hadn't used my pull (and chocolates) to get it down to 1 month. Mayo did the MRI on the day of examination AFTER the MD ordered it.
I will pull the strings in an NHS for my family. You poor non-Mensan shlubs will wait for months behind me, and put up with MD strikes like Canada does every year, and NZ does every year. All of you who support the NHS system will get what's due you.
Pingback| 5.23.09 @ 6:50AM
Why Treatment For Substance Abuse In Oklahoma Is More Problematic For The Youngsters links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 5.26.09 @ 10:40AM
Bookworm Room » How to Talk to a Liberal If You Really Want to Change His Mind links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Drew| 5.26.09 @ 5:25PM
"I've seen the poor people at JohnPeterSmith hospital in Ft. Worth waiting 7 to 10 hours to be seen and then not given treatment anywhere near what people get who have insurance".
I'm a comfortably off Canadian in a major city and have waited in ER with relatives for a minimum of 5 hours in different hospitals for different conditions. It is illegal in Canada (and Cuba and North Korea) to spend my money on faster access to health care. Recently my daughter was knocked down by a car and taken to ER for observation. Five hours later, she was exhausted from waiting and I decided to take her home. The nurse did not know that I had a medical background and should have tried to talk me out of it as my daughter was at risk of delayed intra-cranial bleeding etc. Instead, she ran to get a patient release form absolving the hospital (and her presumably) of any responsibility should the worst happen.
Under private care, you are a client, source of income and welcomed. Under socialized health care, you are a cost to the hospital in time and money and they are glad to see the last of you.
In Canada part of the long waiting lines is due to unionization of nursing staff who have contracts stipulating that they cannot be assigned where they are most needed in the hospital so some sit around chatting to each other while other departments are run off their feet. The other problem is that elderly immigrants who have never paid a nickel into the system have all their expensive health care needs paid for free by other peoples' taxes.
Drew| 5.26.09 @ 5:26PM
"I've seen the poor people at JohnPeterSmith hospital in Ft. Worth waiting 7 to 10 hours to be seen and then not given treatment anywhere near what people get who have insurance".
I'm a comfortably off Canadian in a major city and have waited in ER with relatives for a minimum of 5 hours in different hospitals for different conditions. It is illegal in Canada (and Cuba and North Korea) to spend my money on faster access to health care. Recently my daughter was knocked down by a car and taken to ER for observation. Five hours later, she was exhausted from waiting and I decided to take her home. The nurse did not know that I had a medical background and should have tried to talk me out of it as my daughter was at risk of delayed intra-cranial bleeding etc. Instead, she ran to get a patient release form absolving the hospital (and her presumably) of any responsibility should the worst happen.
Under private care, you are a client, source of income and welcomed. Under socialized health care, you are a cost to the hospital in time and money and they are glad to see the last of you.
In Canada part of the long waiting lines is due to unionization of nursing staff who have contracts stipulating that they cannot be assigned where they are most needed in the hospital so some sit around chatting to each other while other departments are run off their feet. The other problem is that elderly immigrants who have never paid a nickel into the system have all their expensive health care needs paid for free by other peoples' taxes.
Drew| 5.26.09 @ 5:27PM
"I've seen the poor people at JohnPeterSmith hospital in Ft. Worth waiting 7 to 10 hours to be seen and then not given treatment anywhere near what people get who have insurance".
I'm a comfortably off Canadian in a major city and have waited in ER with relatives for a minimum of 5 hours in different hospitals for different conditions. It is illegal in Canada (and Cuba and North Korea) to spend my money on faster access to health care. Recently my daughter was knocked down by a car and taken to ER for observation. Five hours later, she was exhausted from waiting and I decided to take her home. The nurse did not know that I had a medical background and should have tried to talk me out of it as my daughter was at risk of delayed intra-cranial bleeding etc. Instead, she ran to get a patient release form absolving the hospital (and her presumably) of any responsibility should the worst happen.
Under private care, you are a client, source of income and welcomed. Under socialized health care, you are a cost to the hospital in time and money and they are glad to see the last of you.
In Canada part of the long waiting lines is due to unionization of nursing staff who have contracts stipulating that they cannot be assigned where they are most needed in the hospital so some sit around chatting to each other while other departments are run off their feet. The other problem is that elderly immigrants who have never paid a nickel into the system have all their expensive health care needs paid for free by other peoples' taxes.
Drew| 5.26.09 @ 5:28PM
"I've seen the poor people at JohnPeterSmith hospital in Ft. Worth waiting 7 to 10 hours to be seen and then not given treatment anywhere near what people get who have insurance".
I'm a comfortably off Canadian in a major city and have waited in ER with relatives for a minimum of 5 hours in different hospitals for different conditions. It is illegal in Canada (and Cuba and North Korea) to spend my money on faster access to health care. Recently my daughter was knocked down by a car and taken to ER for observation. Five hours later, she was exhausted from waiting and I decided to take her home. The nurse did not know that I had a medical background and should have tried to talk me out of it as my daughter was at risk of delayed intra-cranial bleeding etc. Instead, she ran to get a patient release form absolving the hospital (and her presumably) of any responsibility should the worst happen.
Under private care, you are a client, source of income and welcomed. Under socialized health care, you are a cost to the hospital in time and money and they are glad to see the last of you.
In Canada part of the long waiting lines is due to unionization of nursing staff who have contracts stipulating that they cannot be assigned where they are most needed in the hospital so some sit around chatting to each other while other departments are run off their feet. The other problem is that elderly immigrants who have never paid a nickel into the system have all their expensive health care needs paid for free by other peoples' taxes.
Drew| 5.26.09 @ 5:33PM
My apologies for the multiple duplicate posts. The site kept saying my email was invalid so I kept adjusting and trying to post.
Hope this one goes through on one go.
Pingback| 5.27.09 @ 4:47PM
Talking to Liberals: A How-To Guide | National Federation of Republican Assemblies (N links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 5.27.09 @ 10:58PM
Health care for everyone…at a price. « Pecanpii’s Weblog links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 6.9.09 @ 3:02PM
Garden State Patriot | Breast Cancer Patients More Likely To Die Under Socialized Me links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 6.9.09 @ 11:35PM
Dirty Democrats » Nationalized Health Care and Breast Cancer Are a Deadly Mix links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 6.16.09 @ 12:04AM
The AMA Speech - Same Ole, Same Ole | The Lonely Conservative links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 6.16.09 @ 2:37PM
Are 46 Million Really Without Health Insurance In America? Yes & No. at The Brian Sul links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 6.17.09 @ 3:28PM
Are 46 Million Really Without Health Insurance In America? Yes & No. « Health-Insuran links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 6.23.09 @ 9:05PM
The Health Care Crisis Myth | Keeping Republic links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 6.28.09 @ 4:54PM
Single-payer health insurance petition - Page 5 - Political Wrinkles links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 6.29.09 @ 10:30AM
A Brief Explanation of Business Liability Insurance - The Blog Planet links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 7.7.09 @ 8:47AM
The health care debate - 75 years strong | Radio Vice Online links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 7.8.09 @ 2:23PM
OBAMA-CARE: long waits, lower quality, rationing, control… « FactReal links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 7.20.09 @ 7:40PM
Those Stubborn Facts « Evynn’s Weblog links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 7.24.09 @ 10:56AM
The Hannity Hitjob on Healthcare links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 7.25.09 @ 12:55PM
The Health Care overhaul - it’s all about the “O” - bs’s blog - RedState links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 7.25.09 @ 12:55PM
The Health Care overhaul - it’s all about the “O” - bs’s blog - RedState links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 7.25.09 @ 3:06PM
The Health Care overhaul – it’s all about the “O” | Social Debate: Barack and America links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 7.26.09 @ 7:37PM
Dirty Democrats » The Health Care overhaul - it’s all about the “O” links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 8.4.09 @ 12:27PM
Individual Blog Posts and News at AngerisBrewing.com in Reno, Sparks and Carson City links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 8.7.09 @ 1:11PM
Ed is Watching » Overhaul Detroit Schools without Giving Health Insurance to Dead Peo links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 8.11.09 @ 8:38AM
Alterntatives to Obamacare - Columns - American Issues Project links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 8.13.09 @ 12:04PM
The Health Care overhaul - it’s all about the “O” - bs’s blog - RedState web01.prod. links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 8.15.09 @ 7:03PM
Obama and the Practice of Medicine | Jeffrey A. Setaro links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 8.17.09 @ 9:11PM
Under Obamacare Cutting Costs May Include Cutting Addicts & the Elderly - Columns - links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 8.19.09 @ 6:23AM
***Health Care Thread (part two)*** - Politics and Other Controversies - Page 23 - Ci links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 8.22.09 @ 4:16AM
***Health Care Thread (part two)*** - Politics and Other Controversies - Page 26 - Ci links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 8.23.09 @ 10:13AM
Of the 46 million uninsured: 9.7 million are not citizens of the United States, 14 mi links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 8.24.09 @ 1:58PM
A United States Marine Goes to a Town Hall Meeting - Politics and Other Controversies links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 8.24.09 @ 2:06PM
A United States Marine Goes to a Town Hall Meeting - Politics and Other Controversies links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 8.24.09 @ 5:26PM
The 46 Million myth | Red, Blue & Purple links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 8.25.09 @ 2:45AM
A United States Marine Goes to a Town Hall Meeting - Politics and Other Controversies links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 8.25.09 @ 11:10PM
A United States Marine Goes to a Town Hall Meeting - Politics and Other Controversies links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Mr Conehead| 8.26.09 @ 8:58PM
To receive government help you must be a victim. Like many of those from Katrina lost their mansons near the gulf. We must destroy BEFORE we can rebuild......Duh!
Drenched| 8.27.09 @ 11:15AM
This is an interesting article, and I like that it's fact based, but I do think that part of it is making a moot point.
The article aims to deflate the number of uninsured, and arrives at 8.2 million as the number of people who are forced to be uninsured long-term.
I think being uninsured is a problem for any individual, for any amount of time, period. Regardless of the reason. Being uninsured is still being uninsured - even if you are eligible to be insured and choose not to be. An otherwise healthy uninsured young person - sure he may be eligible for insurance & wants to avoid high premiums, but if he gets hit by a car, the reality is that a long ICU stay probably won't be in his out of pocket price range.
Also, the article tries to debunk the 46 million number and shrinks it by saying that most aren't insured for the entire year, and that the number "more closely approximates the number of people who are uninsured at a specific point in time during the year than the number of people uninsured for the entire year." But when pundits cite this number, I believe this is more or less what people assume the number to mean - how many people are uninsured at any given point in time. Not how many people went without a single day of insurance for an entire 12 months. So according to the numbers presented in this article, it still holds water to say that "46 million individuals don't have insurance at any given point in time" or "36 million Americans don't have insurance at any given point in time" - which are staggering figures.
Because the fact of the matter remains that if people are uninsured, even if they are eligible and don't know it, they probably won't get preventative care. Sure, no ER will turn someone away in a medical emergency. But it's the preventative care that really saves lives.
Dalward J DeBruzzi | 8.29.09 @ 7:26PM
Obama promised in his campaign speech that citizens should receive the same quality health care that senators and congressmen do. How absurd that is to say that. A national health care sysem would be clout affected just like everything esle governent does. If you want to see the systmen that would be in place , go see a verterans hospital and see what you would be subjected to. Obama is unruthful about cost. You can't insure 5o million more peope and not have to raise taxes and increase the deficit. Doctors in Obama's plan would have to 50 or 60 patients a day and make a lot less money. the brightest people will go into engineering and finance and not medicine. If they have to go to school 8 years go into debt with student loans andnot be able buy a BMW and a house in the country they will skip medicine and we will wind up with less bright people in medicine.
David | 11.24.09 @ 3:48PM
We can split numbers over the exact amount of uninsured and under insured. Whatever the nuber is, it is too high. All of the industrialized nations seem to have a better system. My friends and aqaintances say the care is just as good and the suystem is more equitable. It does not punsih people who are laid off, without a job, previous conditions, children that do not have insuance, young adults who cannot afford insurance due to school loans, etc.. Statitistically you can look at the quality of medical care in those countries .In a comparison of five countries, the United States had the best survival rate for breast cancer, second best for cervical cancer and childhood leukemia, worst for kidney transplants, and almost-worst for liver transplants and colorectal cancer. In an eight-country comparison, the United States ranked last in years of potential life lost to circulatory diseases, respiratory diseases and diabetes and had the second highest death rate from bronchitis, asthma and emphysema.
Pingback| 9.1.09 @ 8:45AM
Obama~~~The PRINCE OF LIES « Romanticpoet’s Weblog links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 9.1.09 @ 10:10AM
The Prince of Lies « Thoughts Of A Conservative Christian links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 9.1.09 @ 11:29AM
Brown Pelican Society of Louisiana » The Prince of Lies links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 9.1.09 @ 4:01PM
The Prince of Lies « Right Sided American Kafir links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 9.1.09 @ 8:25PM
Kathryn Brodrick - Page 10 links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 9.2.09 @ 3:42PM
America Loves Numbers! « Grammatically Correct Math Geek links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 9.3.09 @ 1:59PM
DelilahMused » Blog Archive » Ridiculous arguements…part 2 links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 9.4.09 @ 5:41PM
Emperor Obama Liar Liar Pants On Fire! (Part THREE of FOUR) « 22MOON.COM links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 9.6.09 @ 1:21PM
The Federal Observer » Griffing: The Prince of Lies links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 9.15.09 @ 7:11PM
The Lies and Misconceptions During the Joint Session of Congress (9/9/2009) « THE TAR links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Trackback| 9.28.09 @ 10:22AM
Homeowner Insurance, on Homeowner Insurance, links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 10.8.09 @ 1:18AM
Is reform for 3% really worth it? « Demand Truth links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 10.18.09 @ 2:37PM
What would you do to lower the cost of health care in the United States? - Page 8 - links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 11.14.09 @ 1:02PM
Health care NOT the Government’s responsibility, says America - bs’s blog - RedState links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 11.14.09 @ 1:02PM
Health care NOT the Government’s responsibility, says America - bs’s blog - RedState links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 11.14.09 @ 2:04PM
Health care NOT the Government’s responsibility, says America | Social Debate: Barack links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 11.14.09 @ 2:09PM
Dirty Democrats » Health care NOT the Government’s responsibility, says America links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
hjgh| 11.26.09 @ 10:03PM
Mac TOD Converter,
TOD Converter for Windows
Pingback| 11.29.09 @ 3:35PM
12 Questions for a Representative | The Second Opinion Today links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Trackback| 11.30.09 @ 4:17AM
fix my credit, on fix my credit, links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 12.4.09 @ 10:18AM
Brown Pelican Society of Louisiana » Cannibalizing America! Liberals Assault on Human links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 12.5.09 @ 7:47PM
Cannibalizing America: The harsh realities of Obamacare « Seeing Red AZ links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Links london | 12.6.09 @ 9:32PM
Merry Christmas! Wearing links London jewelry makes you out of ordinary in a crowd. Cheap links london and best service is the shortcut for you to the high-quality life. Don't hesitate! Toplinkslondon is your best choice!
Pingback| 12.13.09 @ 3:19AM
Sunday NY Times healthcare editorial is full of lies (”46 million uninsured American links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
bill m| 1.16.10 @ 6:45PM
for all those citing these horrible numbers about wait times etc. in foreign hospitals etc.... . Try this one on for size. My mother-in-law who had suffered a stroke was left in a hall way of the emergency room before she got a room. She was left there for 22 hours. What horrible country did this happen in. Buffalo New York right here in the good old USofA. This is pretty standard at this hospital. Of course we could go somewhere else and probably will in the future, but it is pretty easy to get sub-par crappy care here right now I don't think nationalized health care will make it worse.
Pingback| 2.4.10 @ 3:43PM
"Obama Girl" crush over links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 2.6.10 @ 2:46PM
If our system is so bad... - Great Debates - Page 7 - City-Data Forum links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 2.14.10 @ 12:24AM
The Hammer and Rocket Fuel « Pop Apologetics links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Kevin Mallory| 2.27.10 @ 2:06PM
This is another example of how congress can take a problem and instead of fixing it in an orderly, logical and strategic fashion...create some behemeth of a political/agenda driven concoction of a healthcare bill that is overly expensive and still does not address the problem in the very best fashion. In any other commercial business - problems are analyzed and addressed with this age old approach.
Who? Who REALLY isn't insured. We need to understand exactly who isn't insure and why in order to draft legislation in order to fix it right? Does anyone know who exactly isn't insured in terms of age, income and employment status etc.?
What? Healthcare coverage for the uninsured.
When? Do we really have to draft a bill to insure ALL in the next year or so or could we split it out in the groups of the uninsured and do the legistlation over the course of 3 to 5 years addressing 1 or 2 of the groups each year to work out all the partisan quirks.
Where? This is obvious but maybe there are some geographical factors to consider when trying to figure out which group to insure when.
How? What about a preventive care first approach and expanding upon that to reduce costs. A healthier population that has access to diet and nutritional care or advice will greatly drive down costs. Could we expand our VA network to include these preventive care options? Could we give citizens an incentive or tax break for maintaining a good or improving their BMI and so forth.
Why? A healthier population will drive down costs and make easier to get everyone access to healthcare. I think everyone agress that our nation shouldn't leave anyone behind when it comes down to healthcare but I think we also know that the federal government taking it all over nor leaving it all up to volunteerism or commercial profit-driven companies is the right answer. We really need a hybrid blend of the two and order to do it - we need to bite this off one piece at a time and get congress to work together to get it done. Right now, it looks like we're going to get majority driven bill jammed down our throats whether we like it all or not. In spite of what the majority of the public wants or expects, these egomaniacs want to hang this "accmplishment" on their wall of achievements so they may rest in peace. Specifically...the president says "this isn't about Barrack Obama...blah, blah, blah". Well, I think he wants to help the public and insure all Americans but I think he is also very interested in his own legacy in being able to claim that he's the only president in several decades that could pull off health care reform. If he does and it looks like he'll get something done...next target = Mount Rushmore.
Pingback| 3.10.10 @ 12:31PM
2/3rd of Americans want health care reform - Page 49 links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
monster energy hats | 3.18.10 @ 1:46AM
wholesale hats
Peter M.| 3.21.10 @ 9:37AM
I firmly believe that the number of Americans without health insurance is vastly under-reported. I know for a fact that nobody has asked me!
I (was) a conservative Republican who believed, and still do, in doing everything one can for oneself before asking for government help. After suffering a major stroke in 1998 and three months of hospitalization, I ended up losing everything I had worked my entire life for including my home and my savings. I never accepted a dime of government help and went back to work when I shouldn't have been able to. Then I had a heart attack and could no longer work after April 2008. At 58 years old, I am now living only on Social Security disability. I cannot work, and am uninsured with my past health issues. I take hundreds of dollars worth of medications each month., and the SSDI is my only income. I am unfortunate enough to live in Virginia, one of the most dismal states when it comes to help for its citizens.
My income is not enough to pay rent, buy food and pay for my medications never mind pay for health insurance which would be more than my total income. And yet this state sets the maximum allowable income to receive Medicaid so low that I am not eligible. It's scary. I worked hard, contributed to society, paid into the system with my social security and medicare taxes for 41 years and now when I need help I cannot get it. And no one taking any polls, nor anyone from the government, has counted me among those who are uninsured. There must be tens of million more in my situation.
I can only hope that every single one of the arrogant, unfeeling, self-centered people who do not want health care to be available to all have a catastrophic illness as I did, lose their jobs and their homes and find themselves a heartbeat away from living on the streets with no way to get the medications they need or the most basic of health care. They would change their minds in a hurry once the situation applied to them instead of some vague idea they have of a bunch of societal leeches all trying to suck away their cocktail money.
beijing massage | 3.23.10 @ 3:10AM
very godd.
mts converter mac | 3.29.10 @ 2:44AM
MTS Converter for Mac is an excellent Mac MTS conversion software which can convert MTS to all popular videos files on Mac with perfect quality and fast conversion speed
Pingback| 3.29.10 @ 5:33PM
Health Care and the alternative point of view - Personal Finance Forums links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Jen| 3.31.10 @ 2:17AM
Now that healthcare has passed it will be interesting to see how the number of uninsured changes. What the number a myth and how will the numbers of uninsured change?
LPN to BSN
dropship | 4.7.10 @ 4:13AM
hot fix rhinestone Jewish Directory
Jane | 4.7.10 @ 4:36AM
Your blog is very good,very novel,let I learned a lot from,thank you very much.if you have time also attention our website.
NFL、MLB、NHL
Welcome to our website.You can buy something you like here.Thanks!
cfaw| 5.1.10 @ 2:27AM
http://www.gongfa.net/bbs/boke.....index.html
http://www.nfs-hlj.com/bbs/bok.....0.123.html
Someone| 5.6.10 @ 12:05PM
Posting all of your thoughts and feelings about this isn't going to change anything. You want something to happen? THEN DO SOMETHING. Just don't sit at home/work/school/anywhere and post your thoughts.
planchas ghd | 6.12.10 @ 6:04AM
planchas ghd heart very fragile! ! !How hide the pain after such a long time.
Jimmy Choo | 6.27.10 @ 11:44PM
I am the first time on this site and am really enthusiastic about and so many good articles. I think it’s just very good.
Always yours
BD Johnson| 7.17.10 @ 11:36AM
I am so ashamed that I voted for Obama. I'm not sure I'll be able to forgive myself. All I know is that I'll hope to rectify that mistake, as much as I possibly can, with the next election.
UGGS UK | 7.19.10 @ 9:37PM
Just look at other areas touted as areas in need of improvement and you pick up on a common theme.jlyu
electrical manager| 9.19.10 @ 12:47PM
im one that does have health care . but i asks myself for those who do not, who pays ? from what i know the government pays , so you add 18.7 million dollars plus the thousands that each one of those cant pay, how long before the bank runs out of money. forget obamacare , higher taxes. one way or another your paying
wholesale beads | 12.8.10 @ 4:07AM
Tibetan style beads are very fashion for jewelry trends and loved by many girls. Zacoo wholesale jewelry beads, jewelry supplies, best seller for tibetan style beads.
shoesoutlets | 1.3.11 @ 2:44AM
it looks good!
christian louboutin | 3.29.11 @ 10:36PM
good
t5 slimming pills | 4.18.11 @ 6:07AM
Superb site you have here but I was wondering if you knew of any community forums that cover the same topics talked about here? I’d really like to be a part of online community where I can get suggestions from other knowledgeable individuals that share the same interest. If you have any suggestions, please let me know. Appreciate it!
seo manchester | 5.25.11 @ 8:33AM
All of the industrialized nations seem to have a better system. My friends and aqaintances say the care is just as good and the suystem is more equitable. It does not punsih people who are laid off, without a job, previous conditions, children that do not have insuance, young adults who cannot afford insurance due to school loans, etc.. Statitistically you can look at the quality of medical care in those countries .
العاب | 6.10.11 @ 5:44AM
Great posts, its has lot of great comments.
wedding blog | 8.15.11 @ 10:56PM
welcome to our fashion blog wedding blog
Craig| 5.11.12 @ 11:23AM
9/17/2010 Number of uninsured Americans rises to 50.7 million
More than 50 million people were uninsured last year, almost one in six U.S. residents, the Census Bureau reported Thursday. The percentage with private insurance was the lowest since the government began keeping data in 1987.
The reasons for the rise to 50.7 million, or 16.7%, from 46.3 million uninsured, or 15.4%, were many: workers losing their jobs in the recession, companies dropping employee health insurance benefits, families going without coverage to cut costs. Driving much of the increase, however, was the rising cost of medical care; a Kaiser Family Foundation report shows workers now pay 47% more than they did in 2005 for family health coverage, while employers pay 20% more.