It's funny you say that about weapons. A lot of the Canadians I know say the same. Must be pretty tough laws up there huh?

 

I too in some of my fits of rage over the medical situation have contimplated moving to Canada. It is sad to say that but the truth, as it is my mind frame and opinion on the current situation, and year after year I vote to show my opinion, and I see no change, not even a glimmer of hope for a change.

I pay $560/month for me and my family and every time we see the doctor, it's a $20 deductible. $40 if it's a specialist or $100 if it's the ER. Simply appalling.

Caution

 

"We do not want to shut this thread down," so stay on topic and keep insults, slander and direct political debate out of it as best you can.

 

Be careful lest you find yourself banned from the topic for going too far.

 

Kind regards,

 

"We do not want to shut this thread down," Why not, what useful purpose does it serve in a flt sim site. This sort of discussion only invites what you are telling us not to do. Don't worry about banning me from this thread I just did it myself. B)

"We do not want to shut this thread down," Why not, what useful purpose does it serve in a flt sim site. This sort of discussion only invites what you are telling us not to do. Don't worry about banning me from this thread I just did it myself. B)

Hanger chat serves as a point on the forums for general discussions of many wide and ranging topics, none of which necessarily have to be related to flight sim. It is a place for gaining information, for giving your point of view and discovering others points of view. It is a place where people of this hobby can come and chat about whatever they so wish, so long as it remains civil, and doesn't break the terms of service.

 

Regards,

Rónán O Cadhain.

It's been touched on in this thread.. the real problem in the U.S... is the cost of healthcare, regardless of how it's paid for. When the dust settles, there aint much difference between outrageous insurance premiums, nor outrageous health-care related taxes. Via income differences, and/or progressive taxation, the "cost-shifting" is still there.

 

Not all that long ago, health insurance was a curious rarity... people paid out of pocket for routine care, and doctors/hospitals charged according to a person's ability to pay, when it came to major treaments... and of course there were many who could not pay at all, and did not. Again, cost-shifting picked up the difference.

 

Here are some non-political, economic realities: Healthcare is a high-tech set of goods and services, delivered by highly-trained professionals. You cannot just pass a law/tax, and **poof** everybody gets everything they need. That aint reality. Our best stab at that pipe-dream is Medicare. Medicare came to be in 1965.. meaning the VERY first person to go full cycle (entered the workforce at say 20, in 1965) is just now a year or two into availing it.. has to statistically rely on it for another 20+ years, and it has long-since proven to be economically impossible. IOW, if Medicare were a piece of software, it didn't get past beta-testing.

 

So again.. deciding how to pay for healthcare is a band-aid, where the deep wound is the cost.

 

Basic economics tell you where the problem lies. If you guarantee the a good/service will be paid for (via socialized medicine OR private insurance), before it's even needed.. cost spirals out of control. Evidence our poster who's insurance company paid $500, for what was a $90 service.

 

Our best hope, at this point, is an impossibility, because it would require insurance companies to forgoe profit, and government to forfeit power and crontrol reaped from taxation for entitlement.

 

As for comparing the U.S to other countries ? That's a touchy subject that would involve some politics and tensions, getting into things like the budget head-room governments have for implimenting social programs, when the majority of the costs of defending borders and soverignty are borne by another country.. but mainly we're talking about cultural differences.. there's just an ingrained, almost socio-genetic aversion to bigger and more powerful government.. right or wrong, that's just how it is here. Canada for example, had high levels of public support for their system evolution AND had the U.S. as a safety-net RE: waiting or even service denial. On a good day, here, support for the ACA is well under 50%. People as a whole, just don't want it, and who would be our safety-net ? Doctor shortages, and rationing are a certainty. Heck, existing doctors, in larger numbers, are already refusing to take Medicare patients.

 

ANYway.. the can has been kicked down the road so far, and for so long, that there realy isn't a fix. Unfortunately, it will have to get even much worse, before meaningful steps are taken..

Edit: Nevermind, getting political.

These Hospitals and HMOs are non-profit! "I know right"? My friend works for St. Mary's Hospital here in SF. He says they made a profit of $100,000,000 last year!

"Non-profit" does not mean "no profit!"

 

See: http://gmhopkins.info/?p=171 (Ed. red emphasis mine)

Apparently, someone, a long time ago, started a rumor that nonprofit organizations were not supposed to make a profit. Perhaps they meant well; but that misconception has caused an awful lot of damage over the years. The precept that “for-profit” entities should make money and their “not for profit” counterparts should lose money is ridiculous at worst; and an over-simplification at best. In reality, any company, business, organization, or agency that does not make a profit will soon be out of business. Ironically, it is not the ability to generate profit, or lack thereof, that determines for-profit or nonprofit status… it is what you do with the profit that differentiates one from another. For-profit entities distribute their profits to shareholders, boards, and staff in the form of shares of stock, dividends, and bonuses. Nonprofits reinvest their profits back into the organization and the community. This fundamental difference is the core principle that guides the actions of each type of entity… it is their “purpose.”

Certainly, there is a cultural difference in the case of Canada and the United States. I agree that there were and still are high levels of public support for our medical system. I'm not, however, sure what you mean by having the US as a safety net. For what? I think I know what you mean by waiting (i.e., going to the US to avoid waiting for procedures in Canada), but I'm not sure what you mean by service denial. To my knowledge, no one is denied service.

 

By the way, the number of Canadians who go to the US to have surgeries or procedures is more than likely very small: we would have to pay for them out-of-pocket, and as has been discussed, medical care in the US is enormously expensive. It is most probably that the average Canadian wouldn't be able to afford it.

 

Canada for example, had high levels of public support for their system evolution AND had the U.S. as a safety-net RE: waiting or even service denial.

For me...I am 1/2 American and 1/2 Canadian, also a New Zealand Permanent Resident. I have lived in Canada, USA, Australia and New Zealand. I have also seen how health care works in all these nations.

 

My preference is New Zealand, They have a free health care in emergency situations, however from that point on you must pay a $70 user fee to use the system.

 

In Canada it is always 100% free, the problem with that is people go to the hospital/doctor or whatever with a runny nose because it is free anyways. If they had a user fee of $70 then that would prevent people from taking advantage of the system as every visit costs the tax payer.

 

Quality of Health Care between these four nations are comparable. Rumors of long wait lines or medical malpractice are about as common in each country (even though the USA likes to point fingers at Canada's Flaws for example) I would say every country has their own set of flaws and issues. We are talking about modern nations here and USA or Canada or Australia, NZ, UK etc are no better or worse then each other, but better then 90% of the rest of the world.

 

The USA is difficult as it a free country, citizens must pay for health care, this is costly. For me being an entrepreneur, a medical emergency would bankrupt me in the USA and totally ruin my life. This is one of the reasons I no longer live in the USA.

 

I am lucky to have a choice in three countries (Soon four) and not stuck with one. I happen to right now live in the one I prefer of them all. NZ is the lowest tax rates and most efficient delivery of services (like Health Care) of any country I have ever lived.

Very interesting topic. One of the joys of the internet is chatting it up with people from all over the world. To this day, it blows my mind that I have gamer friends (COD Clan BpT) in places like Russia... The guys we were scared S*&tless of being in WWIII with growing up... anyway.. OT:

 

Having been under the US Governments heath care for it's military families, I was shocked and horrified when I had to get "the real thing" when I came of age (21). Even with Ins, each visit is like buying a new house... with all the forms ya gotta sign.. all of which pretty much say "yea, I'll pay".

 

I have a great plan at work though... 15 bucks a week, only $2.00 for prescriptions. First visit is 45 bucks, and 0 for the rest of the year after that. The catch is... limited to 150,000 in a single year (although the Affordable Care Act will toss that next year). I'm extremely lucky, and thank the Gods for my continued excellent heath.

 

When my Mom passed in 2000, her last day in the hospital was 15,000 alone. She was in IC for one week leading up to that, and that was 35,000. Her last week of life was more then she made at work that year. Thankfully it was all covered by her INS.

 

In the US, until they take out "for profit", it will be this way. The Ferengies have a tight grip in the country.

I agree. One of my favorite parts about this topic and others like it is the views we get from outside the US.

 

Sometimes it it oh so easy to forget that we are not the center of the universe and didn't invent the wheel when it comes to issues and how to shape and solve them.

The difference between the USA and most other nations healthcare is healthcare began in the time following World War 2. After World War 2 many nations were welcoming home their veterans, part of that was to offer healthcare to the veterans, then they decided to extend that coverage to their dependents as these veterans started to get married, settle down and have children.

 

Then the political debate was to extend this health care to all citizens and not just veterans and their dependents.

 

In Canada, many people are aware of the actor Keifer Sutherland. His grandfather is Tommy Douglas who is credited as being the Father of Medicare. In reality he is the first person to setup HealthCare in North America in the province of Saskatchewan. Before that it was Prime Minister John Deifenbaker started this ball rolling back in 1958 when he offered 50 cents on the dollar to any province willing to setup a healthcare system, Tommy Douglas was the first to do this in 1962.

 

The USA didn't setup Healthcare in this time. John F Kennedy did make it part of his election promises in the 1960 election. Most likely because of the costs associated with the cold war and at that time the Cuban Missile Crisis, as well as the assassination of JFK, then the Vietnam War, the USA had other issues to deal with. For the USA to try and put together a Healthcare system like Canada today would be extremely difficult. It was much easier to do this back in the late 1950's and early 1960's as that was a different time when setting up government programs was much easier. To do this today is near impossible.

 

That ship had sailed a long time ago and the time to make healthcare work was the 15 to 20 years following World War 2, this was the period when the other nations made it happen.

Certainly, there is a cultural difference in the case of Canada and the United States. I agree that there were and still are high levels of public support for our medical system. I'm not, however, sure what you mean by having the US as a safety net. For what? I think I know what you mean by waiting (i.e., going to the US to avoid waiting for procedures in Canada), but I'm not sure what you mean by service denial. To my knowledge, no one is denied service.

 

By the way, the number of Canadians who go to the US to have surgeries or procedures is more than likely very small: we would have to pay for them out-of-pocket, and as has been discussed, medical care in the US is enormously expensive. It is most probably that the average Canadian wouldn't be able to afford it.

 

Service denial and waiting, are one in the same. Canada's system (which I admire BTW), had some growing pains.. there were (and still are, to a point), situations where the wait/denial could be as simple as not seeing a doctor, or specialist, right off the bat.

 

Now I'll admit to not knowing the current situation, but I know that when I injured my shoulder playing tennis, the MRI was that day, and surgery two days later. A pilot buddy of mine (dentist in Thunder Bay) came to the U.S. for a similar procedure, because of the several week wait he faced in Canada (circa 1990)..

Thanks for clearing that up, Brett.

 

There can be wait times, but they are certainly not as bad as media reports in the US (or even here in Canada) would have people believe. People who are in need of urgent care get that care ... urgently. As for non-urgent care, as in the case of your friend, I believe that compared with the 1990's, wait times are less now in Canada than they were then, although they are still probably not comparable to what your friend experienced.

 

By the way, there's a good article on the AARP website (see here) concerning myths (I would assume of Americans) about the Canadian health care system. See myth 3 for a discussion of wait times.

That sounds very similar to the UK - urgent emergency care (in my experience) has been excellent but non-urgent care can mean quite a long wait. The NHS is good but not without its flaws - too much red tape and middle/upper management.

 

We have private healthcare services as well and it's a large industry - I have cover with from work as part of my benefits package. This means that you can get access more quickly if you need to; however if you were to have a serious emergency whilst in one of the private hospitals you would be straight off to an NHS hospital.