American Economics Thread

[Equation]

Get off the religious kick, you seem to have a personal problem with it. And I don't care to argue over it. I pointed to one type of "shared cost" arrangement, and if you like, pretend I cited a non-religious example.

It's not about religion as you are so infatuated into my insinuation. My argument was WHY is it okay for any religion group to "share or help the cost" of medical coverage but it is not okay for government? Are you implying that only the church can act like a state in this case of public health care? Yes it is okay for private groups to help lower the burden of medical cost of others, BUT there is always a catch in these types of things. One has to be very careful about it.

 

[Blackstone]

It's not about religion as you are so infatuated into my insinuation. My argument was WHY is it okay for any religion group to "share or help the cost" of medical coverage but it is not okay for government? Are you implying that only the church can act like a state in this case of public health care? Yes it is okay for private groups to help lower the burden of medical cost of others, BUT there is always a catch in these types of things. One has to be very careful about it.

I'm implying there are private organizations that have cost sharing as their healthcare business models. I listed the religious one because I happen to hear it on the radio, and not for any other reason. Hope that clears it up.

 

[SamuraiBlue]

Also, history show large-scale socialized programs provide public goods to larger segments of the society, but with lower efficiency and greater vested interests that don't necessarily have the nation's best interests in mind.

I believe this is one of those myths or what you call "American propaganda" and is too generalized to paint a realistic picture to actual systems that is being utilized.
Basically with a ubiquitous healthcare insurance policy you provide a safety net to all tax paying citizens within the nation. With this the workforce does not need to negotiate with their employers about this issue which is basically 1/3 of what is negotiated at labor unions meaning less reason for strikes resulting to higher productivity which is vested interest to the nation as a whole. The US always talks about import deficit with Japan but the biggest factor is this. Since there is no one payer insurance to the US work force the union is required to negotiates a separate policy for their members. Since it has a small denominator the premiums becomes high resulting higher expenses that is needed to be absorbed through higher pricing of the end product. Since Japan has one there is no negotiation from the beginning and does not have room for fringe benefit type luxury that will hike up the premium further.

The system can also accommodate for higher service to those who are willing to pay more by giving the healthcare practitioners wiggle room as long as they provide the regulated service to it's full extent to others.

 

[Blackstone]

I believe this is one of those myths or what you call "American propaganda" and is too generalized to paint a realistic picture to actual systems that is being utilized.
Basically with a ubiquitous healthcare insurance policy you provide a safety net to all tax paying citizens within the nation. With this the workforce does not need to negotiate with their employers about this issue which is basically 1/3 of what is negotiated at labor unions meaning less reason for strikes resulting to higher productivity which is vested interest to the nation as a whole. The US always talks about import deficit with Japan but the biggest factor is this. Since there is no one payer insurance to the US work force the union is required to negotiates a separate policy for their members. Since it has a small denominator the premiums becomes high resulting higher expenses that is needed to be absorbed through higher pricing of the end product. Since Japan has one there is no negotiation from the beginning and does not have room for fringe benefit type luxury that will hike up the premium further.

The system can also accommodate for higher service to those who are willing to pay more by giving the healthcare practitioners wiggle room as long as they provide the regulated service to it's full extent to others.

Even if everything you said about single-payer healthcare is correct, you'll still have to answer 1) how to manage the entrenchment of a giant government bureaucracy that ultimately serves itself first (this is true in US, Japan and elsewhere), 2) problem of inefficiencies from centralized decision making that apply to different regional needs, 3) government agency with largely uncountable mid and low-level bureaucrats deciding what healthcare is provided and how much the government will pay, and 4) at what point will the government stop paying expensive treatments for near end-of-life conditions (the so-called death panels)? Obama care tried to address portions of it, but the final product is so expensive, it is unsustainable.

 

[SamuraiBlue]

Even if everything you said about single-payer healthcare is correct, you'll still have to answer 1) how to manage the entrenchment of a giant government bureaucracy that ultimately serves itself first (this is true in US, Japan and elsewhere), 2) problem of inefficiencies from centralized decision making that apply to different regional needs, 3) government agency with largely uncountable mid and low-level bureaucrats deciding what healthcare is provided and how much the government will pay, and 4) at what point will the government stop paying expensive treatments for near end-of-life conditions (the so-called death panels)? Obama care tried to address portions of it, but the final product is so expensive, it is unsustainable.

Basically it's the same as Social Security and I do not see Americans having problem with that system.

 

[B.I.B.]

NZ has excellent public healthcare system which is largely funded by the Govt, most treatment in public hospitals are free and medicines are significantly subsidised (most are max NZ$5 per medicine for 3 months ..i.e Lipitor). The quality of public hospitals are excellent, the only problem is you may have to queue to get the service. The queue is largely based on how serious your illness is.

Many companies (including mine) provide full medical insurance to cover myself, my wife and children up to 20 yrs old. Because my wife's office also offer the same ... basically myself and my wife have 2 medical insurances (different modules) so we both have much wider coverage.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The most popular medical insurance in NZ is Southern Cross, it is a non profit organisastion

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

So .... if you don't have medical insurance in NZ ... in many (maybe most) cases you will be fine

Another thing that is excellent in NZ is we have Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC), basically everybody, including visitors/tourists are covered for any Accident (car crash, broken bone, sport injuries, etc). At the moment, every $100 we earn, the deduction for ACC is $1.39 max $1,696. Also every liter petrol or diesel we use, there is some ACC components, etc, etc

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

If there can be a complaint about the state health system is the slower uptake of the latest generation of drugs, but they do get there in the end.

 

[Equation]

I'm implying there are private organizations that have cost sharing as their healthcare business models. I listed the religious one because I happen to hear it on the radio, and not for any other reason. Hope that clears it up.

Private organization is not enough and that can come with its own baggage as well.

 

[solarz]

American ethos is one that distrusts governments, so it's not a tough guy argument at all. But, that discussion is for another thread.

There are lots of stories on Canadians, including ministers and high office holders, that come to the US for important healthcare. Here are some for discussion. They're not isolated incidents. On the other hand, I recognize the advantage of providing healthcare to all residents, so to me it's not an all or nothing argument.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

FYI, "PM" stands for "Prime Minister". In Canada, he's the head of the country.

Danny Williams, the person in question from your misleadingly titled "Canadian PM Defends Choosing US for Heart Surgery", was the Premier of Newfoundland. A Premier is the head of a province.

As for elites seeking health care outside the country, there's nothing special about that. Rich people can spend their own money however they like.

The fatal flaw in the argument that "privatized health care is more efficient", is that privatized health care is more efficient at making money, not at actual health care. Canadians who go to the US for health care don't do so because it's more efficient there, but because you can pay money to "jump the queue".

Privatized health care means putting the bottom line before the patients. Health care does not work as a market economy, people do not go to a hospital more often just because it's cheaper. More expensive health care does not mean there will be less demand, just that more people are not able to afford health care.

For all its problems, at least I know that in Canada, anyone can get the best medical care money can buy.

 

[Blackstone]

Basically it's the same as Social Security and I do not see Americans having problem with that system.

Au contraire mon ami, Americans have lots of problems with the Social Security Insurance system, because most of us realize it's a Ponzi scheme on a grand scale, and will collapse unless continuously infused with money. Why is that critical now? Because the ratio of working people vs. non-working people taking benefits is dropping, and the only realistic way to continue Social Security Insurance is more national debt. In the long-run, that simply isn't sustainable.

 

[PiSigma]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Good timing on the BBC. Canadian health care is superior, since Canadians live longer.