This is what socialized medicine looks like

The head of the Veterans Health Administration announced a series of major changes at an assisted-living facility days after a dying Air Force veteran was twice found covered in ants in his bed.

www.cnn.com...

Not once covered in ants, but twice.... shame

I laughed during the Democratic debates when a candidate said teachers should get respect like soldiers. I seriously laughed. That had to be a joke, right? Should teachers be covered in ants too? Socialized medicine looks great from the outside, that's exactly where it ends. I'm tired of democrats making socialized medicine out to be something it isn't. I urge people to read up on the VA, read up on the healthcare in the UK or Canada.

If national healthcare is so wonderful why do people in the UK, the utopia of socialized medicine fly out of country for healthcare? Why?
We all know why, it sucks, people are waiting forever for care, people are not getting care.

The same thing will happen here, no thanks! I'm not saying that reform isn't needed. I think it is very much needed. I just don't think we need to swing the pendulum all the way to the left.

originally posted by: JAGStorm
If national healthcare is so wonderful why do people in the UK, the utopia of socialized medicine fly out of country for healthcare? Why?

I don't know the statistics, but there are periodic complaints that this is happening the other way round- that people are flying into the UK to take advantage of the free service. "Medical tourism".
www.thetimes.co.uk...
Free national healthcare is wonderful enough that any government which even hints at the possibility of reducing the budget will be signing its political death-warrant. In fact the dreaded accusation "NHS cuts" may well be brought up if they are only failing to increase the budget as much as people want.
You try standing for election in the UK on the platform of "Let's abandon the national health service", and see how far you get.

a reply to: JAGStorm

First off my heart goes out to that vet and his family

I don’t care what party you are from, we should all agree the least we can do for the people that fight and die for our country is cover their medical care.



To the point of socialized healthcare

I agree with you

If the government can’t get the small portion of government run health care we have now right, the BA, why do we think they could get a massive expansion correct?

a reply to: DISRAELI

Yes of course cutting benefits people are being taxed exorbitantly for will be unpopular

If the government taxes others and hand everyone in my town a million dollars, the next person running for office that promised to stop giving that money would lose handed

Or if they raced my town at 50 percent to have healthcare, and then continued to tax us at 50 percent but removed parts of that healthcare, they would lose overwhelmingly

That doesn’t mean national healthcare is good for the country

a reply to: DISRAELI

And that is one of the reasons why we don't ever want it started here.

Once you have it and some are getting free at the expense of others who are paying through the nose in taxes for it, no one will ever be able to get rid of it no matter how miserable anyone gets.

You don't take away baby's candy.

a reply to: Grambler
I was dealing with the implied argument "It can't be good, because the people of the UK prefer not to use it." I think that particular premise was mistaken.

a reply to: ketsuko
See my reply to Grambler.

originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: Grambler
I was dealing with the implied argument "It can't be good, because the people of the UK prefer not to use it." I think that particular premise was mistaken.

I think you are right it’s not that simple

Some probably love it; some with the money probably prefer to fly elsewhere for care

a reply to: JAGStorm

Until you live with socialized healthcare, you can't really understand the benefits.

When my son was diagnosed with type 1 diabetes, we stayed in the hospital for over a week with $0.00 in hospital bills to pay. Yes, we pay higher taxes, but the insurance rates you guys pay are often far and above the portion of my taxes that go towards public health.

When I was 19, so over 10 years ago, I worked at a call centre that collected U.S. medical debt, and it was INSANE. I called people with dead children, people with amputated limbs, people with cancer and had to ask them when they were going to pay the hospital bill for all that. Hack that, I'd rather pay more tax than ever see parents have to pay $67,000 to a hospital after their child is dead.

I've also had two emergency c-sections, with week long hospital stays, a broken ankle, gallbladder removal, all with no life ending bill to pay.

My partner recently tore his rotator cuff, and he has to wait for a few months for surgery, and maybe if we had access to a private clinic, we would just go get it done. But, the fact that most emergencies are taken care of is so, so critical and worth the extra taxes to us.

a reply to: Atsbhct

"portion of your taxes"

How do you know? What portion in taxes and VAT besides does that add up to, and how does your income and portion compare to what might be coming out of what one of us might make and be losing compared to what we pay for insurance?

a reply to: Atsbhct

I've also had two emergency c-sections, with week long hospital stays, a broken ankle, gallbladder removal, all with no life ending bill to pay.

Funny enough I have also had two c-sections, and a gallbladder removal. None of those were life ending bills!
I actually think two of the three surgeries saved my life. I would not trust the VA or socialized medicine in the same manner.


www.forbes.com...

Now, instead of cutting wait times, the NHS is looking to scrap the goal. Wait times for cancer treatment -- where timeliness can be a matter of life and death -- are also far too lengthy. According to January NHS England data, almost 25% of cancer patients didn't start treatment on time despite an urgent referral by their primary care doctor. That's the worst performance since records began in 2009.

I'm not saying there aren't good aspects, there probably are. I'm talking as a whole. I honestly believe as a whole socialized medicine is bad.

Patients face long wait times and rationing of care in part because the NHS can't attract nearly enough medical professionals to meet demand.

a reply to: Grambler
I would imagine that those Britons who do fly to the U.S. will be looking for expertise or equipment which a more cash-strapped NHS hasn't been able to develop. But I don't suppose that the number of people wealthy enough to take that route would be large. It's an excellent system for that huge portion of the population which doesn't have much money.

By sheer coincidence, I was reading only a few minutes ago what Richard Crossman was writing in his Cabinet diaries fifty years ago this month- at the time, he held the grand title of "Secretary of State for the Department of Health and Social Sceurity";
"I lunched at the big hospital in Truro and asked two or three consultants there about private practice. I found them vague. Cornwall is a funny place. The one who sat opposite me said he didn't have any private practice because there virtually wasn't any in Cornwall. 'Don't get the impression (he said) that there are vast numbers of Cornishmen who are willing to pay. They are too mean and they insist on getting treatment on the Health Service". [Wednesday September 17th]
Richard Crossman, Diaries of a Cabinet Minister, Vol 3, p645

a reply to: Atsbhct

We used to have socialized healthcare in my country (the Netherlands) and a percentage of your wage would simple cover any and all medical procedure. In my opinion it worked pretty good and never had anything to complain.

A few years ago they switched the system. Now we are obligated to choose an insurance but with the condition that no insurance company can refuse an insurance to anybody. Basic insurance is the same with all insurance companies at around 100,- pp and kids are included.

Basically still costing the same as the old system.

I am proud to report that my family has accumulated over 500.000,- in medical bills over the years and it is all paid for without bankrupting me..

Peace

a reply to: DISRAELI

It's an excellent system for that huge portion of the population which doesn't have much money.

Nearly a quarter of a million British patients have been waiting more than six months to receive planned medical treatment from the National Health Service,

That doesn't sound "excellent" to me. I would rather pay for healthcare, then to die waiting. 250K people are waiting more than 1/2 a year!!!!
www.forbes.com...

As a supposed conservative (that never conserve anything) I think that it would be advisable for the US to at least have catastrophic coverage for all citizens. You know, going to the emergency room?

All that we with insurance to in that regard is pay higher insurance because the people that go in without insurance have their bills to the industry written off.

a reply to: ketsuko

I work for an American company and travel regularly, so I do have a good frame of reference.

Here's an article that kind of breaks down Canadian health care spending and taxes if anyone feels like doing a deeper dive.

The US system is fine for those of us who could afford it, but crippling for most. U.S. citizens aren't going to the doctor, I can't even imagine ...not being able to go to the doctor!?

Imagine when my grandfather wasn't feeling his best, and instead of quickly getting treatment for cancer, he said, maybe I'll go next month because it's not in the budget... he'd have been dead.

The U.S. healthcare issue is lack of compassion. It's honestly sickening.

a reply to: JAGStorm
Nevertheless, the country would undoubtedly vote, if asked, for preserving the system rather than replacing it with a different system.

originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: JAGStorm
Nevertheless, the country woukd undoubtedly vote, if asked, for preserving the system rather than replacing it with a different system.

I think that is the case right now, I'd be interested to see if that is still the case 5 or 10 years from now..

Besides, should the question as it relates to the article posted not be...what is wrong with socialized medicine...but what is wrong with the US healthcare afforded to veterans? It really can't compare to other socialized systems as a whole.

a reply to: Atsbhct

I think there is a lot of apples and oranges comparisons going on in this topic.

What we just went through was a real mess. Millions lost their doctors under the ACA and deductibles went through the roof. At my age, insuring my wife an I meant monthly payments more than some make a month and deductibles shot up to over $17,000. Lower deductibles drives it up to such huge numbers a month, who could afford it? 7 million working people actually lost our healthcare over affordability. Do you pay the insurance or buy food became a reality and it was supposed to be a step towards universal care according to the authors.

We actually do have the best there is, but most can't afford it and yes people from the UK and Canada do come here. Mainly if they need quick quality care.

I got a lesson in that while working a contract in North Dakota near the border. I injured an ankle badly in a fall. Called every MD in the area and could not get in to see anyone. Finally got an appointment 3 days later as a walk in. By then the specialist I saw told me I'd waited too long. I explained I'd been trying to get in. He educated me.

It was a three day weekend in Canada and he said Canadians fill up all of the MD's schedules every Canadian holiday. The parking lot at the time was full of Canadian vehicles. They do it because it's cheaper than waiting on a long list and missing out on work while waiting. It was really something to see; the whole clinics big parking lot full of Canadian cars.

We also pay way more for drugs because we pay for the R&D and other countries don't. They just let us fund it all by paying higher prices. The drugs exist often because we pay more. If not you would have to pay more.

Your partner having to wait is why Canadians come here. Loss of work and income make it cheaper in the end.

I can schedule almost any surgery and be in the operating room in 2 to 5 days. One Canadian I spoke with while in Canada, told me he went to the US for hernia surgery. It saved him money because the wait was months and he needed to get back to work. That was in a rural area and he told me they have to wait as long as a year that he could not work.

I'm actually for Medicare for all, but our problem is anything run by government drives the costs way up. We need it, but it must be run by private business or the costs would be too insane. It takes multiple people in government jobs to do what anyone can do in the private sector with one person and that's just a fact. Right now MD's have to hire extra staff just to deal with the government red tape and they pass that cost on.

A hospital here knocked 90% of a bill because I self paid. Yes, 90%! A few years ago I ran into an ad for a hospital in California that knocked off 75% if you self pay. I had two surgeons knock 50% off because I self paid and they smile when they do it. Bureaucracy and medical care do not work well together.