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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Little Joe who wrote (98757)	6/22/2009 9:09:28 AM
From: Travis_Bickle	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 116555

Depends where you are looking at it from, right now if you have a pre-existing condition and don't have a group policy from work you are totally screwed, with single payer you are not screwed. If on the other hand you have a good policy through your employer then single payer doesn't do much for you. If you are in the screwed category then whatever problems single payer may have aren't terribly relevant because no matter what problems it has, it's better than what you have now, which is nothing. Being self-employed I'd like the single payer system, on account of what I have now sucks, but it doesn't mean that much to me, if I developed a serious enough health problem I could always buy a lethal dose of barbiturates and be done with the whole problem. Whatever they come up with probably won't be helpful in any case, they'll make a big deal about how now I have a guaranteed issue policy available but won't mention the fact that it costs $1,500 a month.

To: Little Joe who wrote (98757)	6/22/2009 10:37:24 AM
From: Sultan	3 Recommendations Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 116555

Amazing amount of negative spin put out there for folks and a lot of time mentioning Canada as a negative example of Health Care.. I got a call from a friend from Maryland, totally spooked.. As a Canadian, I am pretty pleased with $96 bucks a month I pay for myself and my wife for coverage.. But that does not cover dental or prescriptin. And as far as information goes, almost all of it is available online so google away.. As for negative, it depends where you live in Canada in terms of benefits.. Some are better then others.. Some optional stuff, you are on a waiting list.. For example, knee surgery.. If it is life threatening, no problem.. You get immediate help.. And while you are in the hospital, the cost is 0 to you as far as that goes.. And you can pick any doctor you want, change your doctor if you don't like and so on.. It is not perfect but I am not tied to my employer's good graces or declare bankruptcy for huge bills or afraid to change job etc..

To: Little Joe who wrote (98757)	6/22/2009 10:42:01 AM
From: philv	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 116555

L.J., in my opinion, the problems are universal. Healthcare costs are demanding more and more funding, whether its government or private. All problems could be solved by throwing money at it, but health care costs have skyrocketed exponentially, mostly because of expensive drugs and of course procedures which were unknown before. Govt. health plans approve various procedures and drugs they will cover. A pay scale exists, and it is never enough judging by complaints from Doctors. So in order to make money, patients are rushed in and out of Doctor's offices and Hospitals. And you have heard of long waiting periods for some elective procedures. That isn't the fault of a single payer system, just that not enough money is put into the system at all levels. Emergency and critical care is much better in my opinion. For years, Canadian doctors and nurses have been recruited by the States who promised higher pay. That also has an impact. Just can't compete with all the money available down south. That said, all in all, I favor the single payer system for the good of all. Oh, by the way, you may see any doctor you want, and leave and find another. That is routine, except the doctor shortage means doctors are not taking on new patients. Being government funded, some abuse no doubt occurs by both patients and doctors. Visits for very minor scrapes and scratches, and unnecessary procedures done by doctors. But I would think those problems also exist in private insured healthcare. One thing I object to is that we never ever see a bill. You have no idea what the any of the charges for any visit or hospital stay or operation is. The patient therefore can't keep track of what costs are incurred on his behalf. I can only guess as to why a bill isn't available to the patient. People with money always find ways to circumvent the problems, even if it means going down to the States for a procedure. They will see a bill for sure!

To: Little Joe who wrote (98757)	6/22/2009 11:57:05 AM
From: fishweed	5 Recommendations Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 116555

Little Joe - Several months back, a retired 76 year old neighbor of mine collapsed in his garden. He was taken by ambulance to the local hospital, diagnosed as needing heart valve work and a coronary bypass. He was airlifted to a hospital 400 mi away that had the facility for the procedures. The procedures were performed and he was back home within 3 weeks. He is now back home working in his garden. All at no cost to him. His income was low enough that he didn't even have to pay a monthly medical premium. In Canada.