National heath care has arrived (Political)

PapersAndPaychecks · Post by **PapersAndPaychecks** » Mon Feb 16, 2009 2:42 pm

Well on "losing the ability to see the doctor you want when you want", the way it works in the UK is like this:

You register with a surgery. This will consist of one or more "GPs" or general practitioners. You can't see them when you want because you have to make an appointment, but you can choose which of the GPs at that practice you see.

If the GP needs to refer you to a specialist, you don't get to choose the specialist. And if you report to a hospital rather than a surgery (e.g. an accident and emergency ward) then you'll just get the first doctor available.

On "would it work in the United States?" I can't help observing that you appear to be able to run a police force. That's done on a local precinct basis with manpower allocated according to need rather than ability to pay, rather like a National Health Service. Are the US police inefficient or expensive?

PapersAndPaychecks · Post by **PapersAndPaychecks** » Mon Feb 16, 2009 2:46 pm

Incidentally, the NHS cost is roughly US$1,784 per capita per annum at today's exchange rates.

yrcone · Post by **yrcone** » Mon Feb 16, 2009 3:40 pm

Hi, everyone, I'm new here. I think everyone should read these stories that NPR did last year:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/stor ... d=91972152

I immigrated from Germany in the late 80's - neither my extended family over there now or me back then had any complaints about the level of care.

As most naturalized citizens, I love America dearly and it saddens me that homegrown citizens would wish for the destruction of this great country. I'm new to K&K, but almost left after reading some of the vitriol (hyperbole?) earlier in this thread.

It's frankly disgusting that we as Americans (#1 economy in the world) have to pay more for less coverage and worse results. Easing healthcare off of employers costs will ultimately help private industry.

This should be a nonpartisan issue where business interest agitate for not having to pay for healthcare and the public agitates for universal coverage to keep costs down. There has to be a way smart policy makers can make this happen in a uniquely American system (like maybe this book: Healthcare, Guaranteed).

From NPR:
United States

Population: 302 million
Life expectancy at birth: 78.1

Health spending as part of GDP: 15.3%

System type: Employer-employee based (54%) and government funding (46%). Government covers all older adults and the disabled (Medicare), the poor (Medicaid), veterans, government employees and Native Americans.

Coverage: 82% of people under 65; 100% of people 65 or over.

Average annual per-person spending: Total: $6,402. Breakdown: $2,884 by government; $2,676 for private insurance, with 52% paid by employers, 48% paid by employees; $842 by consumer out-of-pocket*

Germany

Population: 82.3 million

Life expectancy at birth: 79

Health spending as part of GDP: 10.7%

System type: Universal coverage. Mostly employer-employee based (88%).

Coverage: 99.8 % -- all citizens and legal residents

Average annual per-person spending: Total: $3,673 Breakdown: $2,518 on mandatory employment-based coverage, nonprofit insurance; $259 on for-profit insurance; $349 by government; and $547 consumer out-of-pocket*.

Dwayanu · Post by **Dwayanu** » Mon Feb 16, 2009 4:08 pm

PapersAndPaychecks wrote:Incidentally, the NHS cost is roughly US$1,784 per capita per annum at today's exchange rates.

Makes "dollars and sense" to me!

Medicare seems to work quite well.

I have yet to see the Ray-Gun-ites in Congress agitating to get rid of their publicly-provided health plan. It's what Obama has said he wants all Americans to have ... but apparently what's good enough for the politicians is too good for the rest of us.

AxeMental · Post by **AxeMental** » Mon Feb 16, 2009 4:18 pm

Greetings yrcone, and if your a gamer I hope you check out all the other non-political threads (the vast majority). I hope you realize our political ramblings are not personal attacks on one another. Disagreement has zero to do with our friendship (ex. I don't like some of P&Ps pinko slants, but he's a hell of a guy).

Y: "Easing healthcare off of employers costs will ultimately help private industry."

I don't believe this is entirely true. Remember, socialized "free" medicine isn't going to be free, people who earn salaries pay for it in taxes (you won't get to see how much). With more of your income going to taxes (and believe me, it'll be more then insurance) the less you have to buy goods with (also, the less you have to invest in your own buisness, personal education, buy stocks with etc....so bad for the private sector. When you pay more then half your pay check to the government, who can afford to buy anything but essentials. Shrinking government in half (or more) is whats needed.

Perhaps if this were France, we'd have a govt. that worked (I doubt this, but just for arguements sake). But as of today our govt. is run by some of the biggest slackers you could ever imagine. Not only that, there is zero insentive for them to work hard or save (as there is built into private businesses with bottom lines and profit margins). Infact, just the opposite. As I've brought up in other threads, govt. agencies are actually required to spend their entire budgets or loose them (so if they saved one year they'd loose that amount the next. Don't believe me, ask around (if you know people that work for the govt.), you'll here horror stories.) One poster on this very forum reported seeing dumpsters outside public highschools filled with school and office supplies (so that they could justify their new budget to buy more supplies).

Plus the managers/administrators of these govt. agencies are payed more for the more people they manage, so the desire for anyone of these adminstrators is to have as many people under them as possible (getting 2 or 3 people to do the job of one). Often this is accomplished by the govt. creating make believe paper work that has to be shuffled around from place to place. Despite huge advancements in computers and tools to help organize, govt. has continue to steadily grow in size. Note, private industry works opposite of this (you want to save as much as you can and have as few workers under you to do the job at high standards, utilizing skill and technology to accomplish this task).

So the point is, the American govt. is out of control in size and spending, and until its fixed (which will never happen) nationalizing anything (never mind 1/7th of the US economy) is a disaster. And thats not even bringing up the subject of rationing healthcare and avoidance of expensive experimental drugs.

As I stated earlier, lets fix the private system...back up, find out where the biggests expenses are for medicine (by asking those in medicine and drug development) and fix those problems. Then require the insurance industry to pass on those savings to make insurance, once again, affordable to most. And those that fall between the cracks be billed without it effecting their credit (so they pay when they can what they can).

Dwayanu · Post by **Dwayanu** » Mon Feb 16, 2009 5:46 pm

Axe, if we can bring down the cost to 1/2 or 1/3 as much, that is definitely going to be a boon for every business except those (e.g., insurance companies) making their profits off the current rate.

How the heck do you think the current cost gets paid??! It's part of the price of doing business in the USA.

Algolei · Post by **Algolei** » Mon Feb 16, 2009 5:47 pm

yrcone wrote:I'm new to K&K, but almost left after reading some of the vitriol (hyperbole?) earlier in this thread.

Many posters here are friends offline, and they naturally talk in extremes without hurting each others' feelings.

It's okay to stay out of the Political threads if one finds it intolerable, the rest of the site is much less "viciously friendly." But feel free to participate anywhere! (It's what I do, anyway.)

Dwayanu · Post by **Dwayanu** » Mon Feb 16, 2009 6:02 pm

One poster on this very forum reported seeing dumpsters outside public highschools filled with school and office supplies (so that they could justify their new budget to buy more supplies).

I've seen the dumpsters outside a fancy French-style bakery (where a girlfriend once worked) routinely filled with unsellable -- but quite edible -- loaves of bread. Then the dumpsters were locked, so that hungry bums could not get at them ... people most unlikely ever to bring in revenue to the store. There was a much larger population of hard-working poor people not much more likely to be patrons of such a "yuppie" oriented establishment but just as much able to make good use of food that when treated as garbage simply added to the business's garbage-hauling expense. Hardly anyone in the market for fresh bread and pastries is going to refrain from a purchase because stale goods are cheap or even free.

TRP · Post by **TRP** » Mon Feb 16, 2009 6:32 pm

PapersAndPaychecks wrote: On "would it work in the United States?" I can't help observing that you appear to be able to run a police force. That's done on a local precinct basis with manpower allocated according to need rather than ability to pay, rather like a National Health Service. Are the US police inefficient or expensive?

You've never encountered the NOPD.

Wheggi · Post by **Wheggi** » Mon Feb 16, 2009 6:42 pm

Or the LAPD

- Wheggi

jgbrowning · Post by **jgbrowning** » Mon Feb 16, 2009 6:51 pm

PapersAndPaychecks wrote:On "would it work in the United States?"

Yes, it would work better than what we have, for more people than right now.

joe b.

AxeMental · Post by **AxeMental** » Mon Feb 16, 2009 7:12 pm

[quote="Dwayanu
I've seen the dumpsters outside a fancy French-style bakery (where a girlfriend once worked) routinely filled with unsellable -- but quite edible -- loaves of bread. Then the dumpsters were locked[/quote]

I agree with you here. No reason that couldn't be sold to pig farmers or given to homeless shelters, old folks homes etc. Actually, alot of business don't throw out their food (I know Great Harvest Bread Co. for instance delivers its left over bread to homeless shelters). Actually its pretty stupid on the part of that french bakery, giving it as charity could be written off on taxes I bet (never mind good will business from word of mouth).

TRP · Post by **TRP** » Mon Feb 16, 2009 7:56 pm

jgbrowning wrote:
PapersAndPaychecks wrote:On "would it work in the United States?"
Yes, it would work better than what we have, for more people than right now.

joe b.

Do you have hard and solid, verifiable proof of the that, or is it just magical thinking? I've already read the bits regarding smaller and/or less populous countries. Maybe some statistics from Russia, India or China would be appropriate. That's assuming, of course, that the first two have nationalized medical care.

Actually, statistics from another representative republic, with at least 200 million people spread out over at least 3.5 million square miles, would go a long way toward at least getting my attention.

yrcone · Post by **yrcone** » Mon Feb 16, 2009 9:39 pm

Thanks, Axe & Algolei for the welcome and the explanation. I figured it was something like that, but figured I'd better say something...

I am a gamer, and will lurk some more and join the fun sooner or later. I'm doing grad school via an online program so that eats up a lot of time. I'm a political nerd so even though I told myself I shouldn't I kept checking back on this thread.

Wheggi · Post by **Wheggi** » Mon Feb 16, 2009 10:04 pm

Definately yrcone, check out all the old school goodness that's going on here, and welcome to the boards. There's lots of great conversations going on, and new voices and opinions are always welcome!

- Wheggi