Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : A US National Health Care System? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: gg cox who wrote (4285)	2/5/2008 3:39:25 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 42652

I have reached my anecdote quota for this thread long ago.<gg> If that were an anecdote, I'd be dead and obviously not typing this. I'm sure you are pissed at the speed of our system in this instance. <<You never did answer me how long it would take you to get a hammer toe fixed.>> Whaa can't you read?... You did? Where? Repeat it. <<Other ailments, you are triaged in the system, depending on severity and are looked after.>> Was that it? How long before your operation to straighten your problem out? Apparently you didn't get the word. "Free" services are overused. Study a little econ before typing. "In 1997, George Zeliotis, a citizen of Quebec, needed hip replacement surgery. As is standard in Canada for non-emergency surgery, Medicare put Mr. Zeliotis on a waiting list behind everyone else in Quebec who needed the same procedure. When he learned that his wait would be a year—and that he would have to deal with the pain of an arthritic hip in need of replacement for 12 months—Mr. Zeliotis decided to pay for the surgery himself. Then he made a disturbing discovery: he could not pay for it himself. Private payment for a covered medical service was against Canadian law. Since its inception, Canada’s Medicare has been the favorite model for single-payer health care among those who advocate socialized medicine in the United States. They tout that every Canadian is covered from cradle to grave and all have equal access to the same level of care. The facts on the ground, however, are quite different. While coverage is universal in Canada, most Americans would not consider acceptable how the Canadian system limits access to care. As Mr. Zeliotis discovered, access to care in Canada is determined by where one is on the waiting list. And there was no getting around the waiting list. Private health insurance has long been illegal in Canada, as has been contracting with a doctor directly—that is, paying out of pocket—for medical services that are covered by Canada’s Medicare program. Mr. Zeliotis teamed up with Jacques Chaoulli, a Montreal physician and Senior Fellow at the Montreal Economic Institute, to legally challenge the province of Quebec over the ban on private payment for medical services. After two defeats in lower courts, they took their appeal to the Canadian Supreme Court. On June 9, 2005, the doctor and his patient won a major victory. What The Canadian Supreme Court Said The Canadian Supreme Court ruled the ban in Quebec on private health care options was a violation of the Quebec’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms.Because the wording and concepts in Quebec’s Charter of Rights are repeated throughout the laws and charters of the other provinces, the ruling may apply elsewhere, too. The Court left undecided whether the prohibition on private contracting violated Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms. In the 4-3 decision, Chief Justice Beverly McLachlin wrote for the majority, “Access to a waiting list is not access to health care.”[1] ................................................. Waiting in Line for Treatment The Canadian case illustrates a worldwide trend. Where there is a single payer for health care, such as in Canada, delayed access to care—usually by queuing—is the easiest way to control costs. Wait times for non-emergency surgeries are several times longer in countries with government-dominated health care than in the United States. A recent survey of hospital executives in five countries (Australia, Canada, the UK, New Zealand, and the U.S.) found that none of the U.S. executives thought a 65-year-old man would have to wait 6 months or more for routine hip replacement surgery.[4] The numbers for other countries, which have greater government control of health care, were significantly higher: 81 percent of hospital executives in the UK, for example, thought the wait would be more than 6 months. (See Table 1.)[5] Cancer is a terrifying killer. Early diagnosis and quick treatment are essential. The sooner cancer is diagnosed, the sooner treatment can begin. Quick treatment, in turn, leads to higher survival rates. In the same survey, only 1 percent of U.S. hospital executives believed that a 50-year-old woman “with an ill-defined mass in her breast but no adenopathy”[6] would wait three weeks or more for a biopsy.[7] The wait in countries with greater government involvement in health care, however, is likely to be much longer. (See Table 2]" heritage.org You want more? There's plenty. The Canadian health care system is like some American HMOs. Yeah, you can get care from them- -if you live long enough. The savings needed comes from your dying first. Yes you might have to wait...do you think you should be treated for a sore ass hole ahead of heart attack, cancer or someone busted up from an accident? Your sore ass is going to have to wait. Mine will be treated within a day to a week.