a preview of universal health coverage

[Stego]

Universal healthcare is the ideal to which a rational nation ought to aspire.

[The Progressive]

As I've predicted earlier in this thread, a government-run health insurance plan similar to Medicare is now a [url="http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hNKpRlDbRV_-CUGJzJxHBOhGmmSQD96OOCP00"]policy proposal[/url] by the Obama administration.

Expect the insurance companies and some Republicans to wage a nasty and bitter fight over this.

[EHK for Darwin]

[quote name='Kalbear' post='1688850' date='Feb 16 2009, 18.47']My last three jobs have either removed insurance completely or had to go to a much worse insurance system because of the cost - and they still ended up paying more (well, aside from the one that dropped it completely). Totally anecdotal, but yeah, it's happening.[/quote]

Buddy of mine had this happen. Hell, he stormed out of the Orwellian double-speak corporate 'instructional' on the new health planned that explained how much 'better' it was than the old one. (Apparently tripling the deductible makes it a "Consumer driven" plan that's in your interests. No idea how, but trust me!) But instead of coming to the conclusion that there needs to be some serious reform, he jumped on his wife's better plan and remains one of the staunchest opponents you'll find to any sort of Universal Health Care.

Speaking of which, anyone have some studies that confirm or refute the HUGE LINES and 12 year wait for surgeries argument? I hear those a bunch lately.

[The Progressive]

[quote name='EHK for a True GOP' post='1711140' date='Mar 6 2009, 14.23']Speaking of which, anyone have some studies that confirm or refute the HUGE LINES and 12 year wait for surgeries argument? I hear those a bunch lately.[/quote]

That argument is bs because it combined waiting times for elective surgeries in the US with all types of surgeries in other countries under UHC. Also, while it is true that the waits for elective surgery reported in the US are shorter compared with other countries, but these may not take into account indigent or uninsured patients discouraged from seeking elective surgery altogether. Countries like Canada, New Zealand and especially England have achieved the most sustained improvement in reducing waiting times, due to "major funding boosts, ambitious wait-time targets, and a rigorous performance management system" that ensured no one waited longer than 18 months.

[url="http://www.commonwealthfund.org/Content/Publications/In-the-Literature/2007/Jul/Measuring-and-Reducing-Waiting-Times--A-Cross-National-Comparison-of-Strategies.aspx"]http://www.commonwealthfund.org/Content/Pu...Strategies.aspx[/url]

[Andriy Czarchenko]

Here in Finland the lines for non-acute cases are basically capped by law at 6 months. After 6 months the system requires either to transfer you to another area with no lines or buy care for you from private hospitals. In either case there won´t be any extra costs for the patient.

[Cuellar]

I think of the wait times more like a statistical problem. In the US, the standard deviation from the mean is huge, with all the insured people falling in the upper half, and all the uninsured simply not getting care.

In a UNH environment, the standard deviation is much much smaller, and care is given the same for everyone, and not based on how much cash you've got. There are still private hospitals though that are for the wealthy who want to skip the lines.

For every patient that complains of an 18 month wait in Canada, there are 5 americans dying at home since they can't afford health insurance, therefore will NEVER receive the surgery.

If you look at the OECD countries and the life expectancy at birth... the US is currently #23 (as of 2005, last year with most data present), down from #14 in 1980, before our boy Regan. The only countries with a WORSE life expectancy tha us was basically Czech Rep, Mexico, Poland, Slovak Republic, Hungry, and Turkey. Virtually every other "developed" country blew us completely out of the water.

[url="http://www.irdes.fr/EcoSante/DownLoad/OECDHealthData_FrequentlyRequestedData.xls"]Link to OECD health data.[/url]

At the end of the day, we can talk about anecdotal evidence on Adam Smith had to wait 15 years for a penis transplant and all that shit, but virtually every stat on actual quality of life places US based medicine far behind socialized medicine for the population as a whole. Infant mortality, #27 (only better than Turkey, Mexico, and Slovac Republic). Hospital beds per capita, #25. Ironically we had some of the highest spending per capita and in total as well... but it doesn't yield us didly shit.


Another point I just want to make about healtchare: having our current system is FAR more expensive than universal healthcare as far as buearocracy goes. Not only do hospitals have to negotiate rates and bill... maybe 5-10% of the cost of medicine, but insurance companies which had relatively little real value besides pooling, soak up ~20% or more of every dollar you give them. They only pay out 80 cents on the dollar to actually paying for medicine... that 20% "markup" that you pay would cover the 20% or so of americans without health insurance! And all jobs in healthcare insurance would be LOST, and all the americans now getting medical insurance would ADD the same amount of jobs.

[url="http://idea.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/731766/000119312509025587/d10k.htm"]Link to country's biggest health insurance company's financials (See page 33).[/url]

EDIT: Quick note on Life Expectency, Canda which is basically a socialized america and very similar to the US in diet, culture etc, is #6 on the life expectency list. Australia, somewhat the same under a psuedo UNH system ranks at #4.