Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  

A Question For Cons That They Won't Answer

Recommended Posts

OK I live in Europe my taxes for health care are 10% dearer which means I have a total I mean total tax bill of something like 40%. If I learn less than 12,000 I pay nothing towards any of the text or social security charges, I am still entitled to free health care. If I see my doctor and I need a visit for a specialist I will normally be seen within 7 to 10 working days. For a visit to the doctor I pay him 25 I will receive in my bank account 20 back, I pay nothing for the specialist or the ongoing treatment if it is life threatening (cancer, tumours, accidents heart, disease) the list goes on. Remember if I earn 12,000 or less this all is still free, the timescale for visiting the specialist is not extended it simply free at the point of delivery. Assuming I am more than 12,000 I will whilst in hospital pay for my food, bed and room at a very reduced rate I think it is 12-15 per day. I can choose to have no additional top up insurance or to have the insurance and claim back 90% of my ongoing costs, it is under the current economic climate becoming increasingly more difficult to afford the additional insurance. However you look at the European system it is superior in my opinion to that of the US, as a poor person in Europe I am not discriminated against within the European health system.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

canada has a wonderful healthcare model. anyone can get care that needs it. if you are sick, you get care. that's it.





we should take a look at this and adapt our policy in kind.

Canada, like Great Briton has a failed and failing policy that is a social nightmare when considered with an objective eye rather than from a selfish, self serving perspective. The death panels that determine who deserves care for serious illnesses is real as are the extended times required for getting services delivered to seriously ill patients whose diseases don’t wait for socialized medicine to catch up to and actually respond to the physical needs of the patient.


Here’s an interesting article that speaks to the inadequacies of both the British and the Canadian models.

The Ugly Realities Of Socialized Medicine Are Not Going Away ...


To quote some highlights of the piece, see here:




The worldwide recession has forced countries around the world to curb public spending — or risk defaulting on their debt.

The United Kingdom is the latest to tighten its belt. The National Health Service (NHS) — the centralized public agency that runs Britain’s government healthcare system — is being forced to shave $31 billion from its budget by 2015.

These cuts are leading to a precipitous drop in the quality of care patients receive. The NHS has been living well beyond its means for quite awhile. And now brutal government-enforced cost controls are exacting a heavy human toll.

Thanks to Obamacare, America will soon face the same sort of reckoning.

Other nations with government-dominated healthcare systems offer a preview of the fiscal woes and substandard care that lie ahead thanks to the president’s spendthrift reform plan.

In order to realize some savings, the NHS is raising the threshold at which patients qualify for treatment and lengthening wait times for surgeries determined “non-lifesaving.” The Service is also cutting more than 20,000 NHS jobs over the next two years and shuttering a number of hospitals.

Patients are feeling the pain. For decades, they’ve turned over substantial portions of their hard-earned paychecks as taxes — and accepted “free”

health care from the government in return. Only about 11 percent of Britons pay for their care privately.

They’ve foregone cutting-edge medical treatments available in the United States, told by their leaders that these new therapies were no better than the old ones — just more expensive. At least in Britain, they thought, everyone has access to basic health care. That has to be better than the situation in America, where tens of millions of people lack health insurance, right?

Hardly. The British healthcare system may “guarantee” access to care — but that doesn’t mean patients actually receive it.


Take the case of David Evans, a 69-year-old farmer living in Cornwall, in southwest England. About a year ago, he developed a hernia and needed an operation. Despite government requirements that he receive treatment within 18 weeks of diagnosis, he still hasn’t been treated.

Recently, he had to use his own ultrasound equipment — typically used to examine pregnant sheep — to check the hernia himself and determine if it was getting worse.

“I was in quite a lot of pain,” explained Evans. “There will be many more people like me who are suffering and are now being forced to wait quite a long time.”

The law furnishes all Britons — Evans included — with health insurance. But he might as well not have coverage at all — because he’s certainly not getting any care.

A report released in October by Britain’s health regulator found that a stunning 20 percent of hospitals were failing to provide the minimum standard of care legally required for elderly patients.

As part of the study, inspectors dropped by dozens of hospitals unannounced. They found patients shouting or banging on bedrails desperately trying to get the attention of a nurse. At one hospital, inspectors identified bed-ridden patients that hadn’t been given water for over 10 hours.

The upcoming austerity measures will only amplify maladies like these.

The NHS is broken — and not in some superficial way that a simple tweak would fix. The incentives are wrong. The government’s main priority is keeping costs low — not providing quality care. Patients can’t choose how they receive their care — it’s one-size-fits-all medicine. And the entrenched NHS bureaucracy has no reason to improve efficiency.

And regarding Canada:



The problems with “universal” health care aren’t confined to Britain. Canada’s single-payer, government-run system — where any private health care is outlawed under the Canada Health Act — is similarly failing its patients.

The Health Council of Canada recently surveyed over three thousand patients and found that those with chronic illnesses like high blood pressure or heart disease were largely dissatisfied with the medical care they received. Less than half of respondents with such conditions reported that the care they received was excellent or very good.

But aren’t they getting it for free? Shouldn’t they be grateful?

Not really. Despite the massive taxes Canadians remit to finance universal care, they still must pay out of pocket for some services. Nearly a quarter of chronically ill respondents said that they had skipped their medications or neglected to fill a prescription because it was too expensive.


Further, many Canadians travel to the United States and pay out of pocket for treatments and procedures, as they feel the wait in Canada is too long and harmful to their health.

The American health system is far from perfect. But it’s wrong to think that government can fix it. The socialized systems found up North or across the Atlantic are proof. We need more market forces in our medical sector — not more government controls.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear Big Zero, USA has the best healthcare in the world from a quality standpoint. However, I suspect you are talking about access to healthcare for all citizens, and this is a different subject. Single-payer would eliminate access problems but would do so at the expense of quality; this is an a priori prediction. O and his Dimocrats used Ocare to redistribute wealth vis a vis forcing people who earn good money to pay via taxation for healthcare of those who purportedly can't afford it. Government cannot run such a program effectively so I would prognosticate that many people's healthcare services wold see reductions in quality and patient satisfaction.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

We Canadians have the BEST health care system in the world, the greatest military man-for-man in the world (we don't resort to putting women into combat, controlled by Negro homosexuals). You pathetic Americans waste your money dropping bombs that slaughter defenseless women and children in the middle-east - your military are cowardly murdering pigs.  For this you are cursed by the Lord Jesus.  America is finished, done-like-dinner as Tiger Williams said.


You have elected a mad man to lead you yet you fear the North Koreans. Your cowardly yellow-dog, swine, President Trump will never fight North Korea, or China, or Russia because you will lose - hell you couldn't even defeat the North Vietnamese gooks. But you have your blessed 2nd Amendment to fall back on.


Your country was once great and admired the world over but now you are a laughing stock, a pathetic joke. Your military was once mighty but now it is a joke - controlled by women, negro people, and homosexuals. You call this great ???


USA = United SNAKES of America  

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/27/2013 at 1:04 AM, logan5ran said:

this is true. but.. you may die waiting to be cared for. also ..canada has about 10% of our population making it lees unwieldy for thier system. Rich Canadians do not wait in canada to be treated. they come here.

Yes. Rich Canadians come to prestigious U.S. hospitals for grand care but what about the other 99% of Canadians? Healthcare should not be regulated for the wealthy to receive GRAND treatment and insurance companies to enjoy a 20% scam off the top. When the truth gets out the rush to single payer will be overwhelming.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this