Canada's Health Care System is the Best!

[blueballs]

Wonder how many of that 20% can afford the insurance but choose to spend their money on other things instead? Or work for cash only and don't pay taxes and welch off the honest folks? Or are under 21 and eligible for coverage under their parents' accounts? Etc Etc Etc...

[Ursus A. Horribilis]

Wonder how many of that 20% can afford the insurance but choose to spend their money on other things instead? Or work for cash only and don't pay taxes and welch off the honest folks? Or are under 21 and eligible for coverage under their parents' accounts? Etc Etc Etc...

I'm sure there is a study out there but I would bet it has to be at least 1/2 of them.

[BDKJMU]

And it's really expensive for all income levels.

America...We're exceptional...for many people...especially the wealthy...or for those fortunate enough to have their employers cover healthcare expenses...and for those with the socialized VA and Medicare.

First, so the wealthy, many employees, and people with VA and Medicare benefits are covered. What percentage of the population of the U.S. has good coverage? Maybe 80%. I understand that the remaining 20% is a problem; what I don't understand is why we would risk fvcking it up for the 80% who do have coverage in order to provide coverage for the 20%.

Second, is it a problem that health insurance is expensive? Think about some of what goes into quality healthcare: a long and expensive educational process, equipment that is expensive to develop and produce, drugs that are expensive to research & develop, etc. Are there inefficiencies and excess profits in healthcare? Yes. But the same could be said about other expensive products such as the automobile. Yet most people seem to be able to find a transportation solution that meets their budget, a used Civic might not be as nice as a new Cadillac but it can still get you where you need to go. Why can't we find a "used Civic" solution for the 20% who can't afford the Cadillac? They need basic coverage to help keep them well and to take care of catastrophes, they don't need all of the bells and whistles.

Actually, about 85% are covered.
"...In 2007, the Census Bureau reported that 253.4 million people -- about 85 percent of the total population -- did have health insurance....

The Citizenship Factor
According to Census Bureau data, of the estimated 46 million "Americans" without health insurance, more than 10 million are non-U.S. citizens....

Some Just Don't Want Insurance
Many young workers, whose employers do offer it, simply do not consider health insurance. According to the Census Bureau, 18.3 million of the uninsured are under age 34.

The Affordability Factor
In 2007 the Census Bureau reported that more than 14 million people without health insurance earned annual incomes of at least $50,000, with 7.2 million of them making over $75,000...."
http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/medicareh ... estats.htm

So if you're talking US Citizens who make less than 50k per year (in 07' dollars) and absolutely can't afford it, you're talking maybe 6-8% of the population.

As far as bringing the cost down, 2 easy solutions would help:
1. Tort reform- lower the malpractice costs and the excess of cya defensive medicine.
2. Allow people to purchase insurance in any state. Right now you have people limited to a limited # of options in their own states. And in many states there are expensive mandates that people don't want, don't need, or can't afford. Those people should be able to buy in states that don't have those excessive mandates. People would go from having a limited # of options in these state monopolies to literally hundreds. Just like with any product or service, if you have only a limited number of options prices tend to be higher. If you have a massive # of options, prices tend to be lower. Competition drives prices down.

[CID1990]

First, so the wealthy, many employees, and people with VA and Medicare benefits are covered. What percentage of the population of the U.S. has good coverage? Maybe 80%. I understand that the remaining 20% is a problem; what I don't understand is why we would risk fvcking it up for the 80% who do have coverage in order to provide coverage for the 20%.

Second, is it a problem that health insurance is expensive? Think about some of what goes into quality healthcare: a long and expensive educational process, equipment that is expensive to develop and produce, drugs that are expensive to research & develop, etc. Are there inefficiencies and excess profits in healthcare? Yes. But the same could be said about other expensive products such as the automobile. Yet most people seem to be able to find a transportation solution that meets their budget, a used Civic might not be as nice as a new Cadillac but it can still get you where you need to go. Why can't we find a "used Civic" solution for the 20% who can't afford the Cadillac? They need basic coverage to help keep them well and to take care of catastrophes, they don't need all of the bells and whistles.

Actually, about 85% are covered.
"...In 2007, the Census Bureau reported that 253.4 million people -- about 85 percent of the total population -- did have health insurance....

The Citizenship Factor
According to Census Bureau data, of the estimated 46 million "Americans" without health insurance, more than 10 million are non-U.S. citizens....

Some Just Don't Want Insurance
Many young workers, whose employers do offer it, simply do not consider health insurance. According to the Census Bureau, 18.3 million of the uninsured are under age 34.

The Affordability Factor
In 2007 the Census Bureau reported that more than 14 million people without health insurance earned annual incomes of at least $50,000, with 7.2 million of them making over $75,000...."
http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/medicareh ... estats.htm

So if you're talking US Citizens who make less than 50k per year (in 07' dollars) and absolutely can't afford it, you're talking maybe 6-8% of the population.

As far as bringing the cost down, 2 easy solutions would help:
1. Tort reform- lower the malpractice costs and the excess of cya defensive medicine.
2. Allow people to purchase insurance in any state. Right now you have people limited to a limited # of options in their own states. And in many states there are expensive mandates that people don't want, don't need, or can't afford. Those people should be able to buy in states that don't have those excessive mandates. People would go from having a limited # of options in these state monopolies to literally hundreds. Just like with any product or service, if you have only a limited number of options prices tend to be higher. If you have a massive # of options, prices tend to be lower. Competition drives prices down.

Those are Republican solutions, and are therefore will not be considered.

(In spite of what BHO said in his open forum with Republican lawmakers in Baltimore last week.)

[UNI88]

First, so the wealthy, many employees, and people with VA and Medicare benefits are covered. What percentage of the population of the U.S. has good coverage? Maybe 80%. I understand that the remaining 20% is a problem; what I don't understand is why we would risk fvcking it up for the 80% who do have coverage in order to provide coverage for the 20%.

Second, is it a problem that health insurance is expensive? Think about some of what goes into quality healthcare: a long and expensive educational process, equipment that is expensive to develop and produce, drugs that are expensive to research & develop, etc. Are there inefficiencies and excess profits in healthcare? Yes. But the same could be said about other expensive products such as the automobile. Yet most people seem to be able to find a transportation solution that meets their budget, a used Civic might not be as nice as a new Cadillac but it can still get you where you need to go. Why can't we find a "used Civic" solution for the 20% who can't afford the Cadillac? They need basic coverage to help keep them well and to take care of catastrophes, they don't need all of the bells and whistles.

Actually, about 85% are covered.
"...In 2007, the Census Bureau reported that 253.4 million people -- about 85 percent of the total population -- did have health insurance....

The Citizenship Factor
According to Census Bureau data, of the estimated 46 million "Americans" without health insurance, more than 10 million are non-U.S. citizens....

Some Just Don't Want Insurance
Many young workers, whose employers do offer it, simply do not consider health insurance. According to the Census Bureau, 18.3 million of the uninsured are under age 34.

The Affordability Factor
In 2007 the Census Bureau reported that more than 14 million people without health insurance earned annual incomes of at least $50,000, with 7.2 million of them making over $75,000...."
http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/medicareh ... estats.htm

So if you're talking US Citizens who make less than 50k per year (in 07' dollars) and absolutely can't afford it, you're talking maybe 6-8% of the population.

As far as bringing the cost down, 2 easy solutions would help:
1. Tort reform- lower the malpractice costs and the excess of cya defensive medicine.
2. Allow people to purchase insurance in any state. Right now you have people limited to a limited # of options in their own states. And in many states there are expensive mandates that people don't want, don't need, or can't afford. Those people should be able to buy in states that don't have those excessive mandates. People would go from having a limited # of options in these state monopolies to literally hundreds. Just like with any product or service, if you have only a limited number of options prices tend to be higher. If you have a massive # of options, prices tend to be lower. Competition drives prices down.

For the record, I pulled the 80% out of my butt. It was just a number I used to help demonstrate a concept. I guessed that it was close to accurate and I didn't want to go too high and have someone try and refute my argument simply because the percentage of those without insurance was higher.

85% and 6-8% seem reasonable and I agree with points 1 & 2.