Are you sure you want single payer healthcare in the U.S.?

Stretch

New member
Median wait time by province in 2016:
• New Brunswick: 38.8 weeks
• Nova Scotia: 34. 8
• P.E.I: 31.4
• Newfoundland and Labrador: 26
• British Columbia: 25.2
• Alberta: 22.9
• Manitoba: 20.6
• Quebec: 18.9
• Saskatchewan: 16.6
• Ontario: 15.6

In terms of specialized treatment, national wait times were longest for neurosurgery (46.9 weeks) and shortest for medical oncology (3.7 weeks).
• Neurosurgery: 46.9 weeks
• Orthopaedic surgery: 38
• Ophthalmology: 28.5
• Plastic Surgery: 25.9


First, there is a well-propagated, pernicious myth that Canadians are pioneers in health care, and that access to care is a basic human right. The universality of the system has become a key part of Canada’s national identity, thanks in no small part to propagandists who ignore the widespread suffering wrought by the CHA in order to paint the country as some sort of socialist utopia.

Second, the system’s costs are hidden. Many Canadians — and many progressives abroad — like to think that health care is “free” in Canada, when in fact, Canadian taxpayers pay, on average, $10,500 per year for all their health-care needs. Canadians simply have no concept of how much the services they consume cost, since the CHA prohibits providers from ever showing patients a bill.

Finally, there is the fact that Canada’s single-payer system is made possible only by an accident of geography: It is propped up by the U.S. health-care industry next door, which provides a parallel private system for very sick and very rich Canadians while acting as the driving force for global medical innovation.

Ultimately, the antidote for Canada’s poor health outcomes and long wait times has been for Canadians to seek care elsewhere. Don’t take my word for it. A few years ago, Dr. Martin Samuels, the founder of the neurology department at Harvard’s Brigham and Women’s Hospital, wrote in Forbes about his experiences as a visiting professor in Canada:

"The reason the Canadian health-care system works as well as it does (and that is not by any means optimal) is because 90 percent of the population is within driving distance of the United States where the privately insured can be Seattled, Minneapolised, Mayoed, Detroited, Chicagoed, Clevelanded, and Buffaloed, thus relieving the pressure by the rich and influential to change a system that works well enough for the other people but not for them, especially when they are worried or in pain. In the United States, there is no analogous safety valve, so the influential simply demand a different level of care and receive it."


In other words, Canada’s rigid state monopoly on health insurance works only because Canadians secretly have a private alternative: America’s market-based system. It isn’t just “rich and influential” Canadians who seek treatment in the U.S., either. In a recent government document obtained by the Toronto Star, five stem-cell-transplant directors laid out the “crisis” in Ontario, revealing that “the health ministry approved more than $100 million in spending recently to redirect hundreds of patients who will probably die waiting for transplants in Ontario to hospitals in Cleveland, Buffalo, and Detroit.” Likewise, a recent report from the Fraser Institute, Canada’s leading public-policy think tank, estimated that more than 52,000 Canadians received medical treatment outside of Canada in 2014.

Canadians might like their single-payer health-care system in theory, but in practice, large numbers of them are going elsewhere for care.

National Review April 13, 2017
 
I don't want to live in Canada. I want to live in the free market system of the U.S.
They extremely poor will have their Medicaid and State Public Health Departments located in every county of the country.
 
I don't want to live in Canada. I want to live in the free market system of the U.S.
They extremely poor will have their Medicaid and State Public Health Departments located in every county of the country.

Let's be clear, we don't have free market health care in the U.S. We have a better system than most other countries but what we have is not free market
 
I don't want to live in Canada. I want to live in the free market system of the U.S.
They extremely poor will have their Medicaid and State Public Health Departments located in every county of the country.

Ppl that can afford like our system, those that don't are going to be dying a lot sooner, just sayin, thnx trumpkins..
 
Ppl that can afford like our system, those that don't are going to be dying a lot sooner, just sayin, thnx trumpkins..

Providers stopped providing Obamacare, leaving tens of millions of poor children to die in the streets.

Thanks, Obama.
 
Ppl that can afford like our system, those that don't are going to be dying a lot sooner, just sayin, thnx trumpkins..

Did you read the article? People there would be dead from the wait times if not for the h.c. they can come across the border and receive here.
 
Why has this occurred, if such factors as smoking rates have dropped faster in the USA during the 30 year period of study than in the other countries?

USA does have higher obesity rates than in the other countries. But this was also the case in 1975, when America's life expectancy rivaled many on the list. If fact, obesity rates grew faster in the other countries from 1975 onwards, even though they overtook the USA in life expectancy and pulled ahead.

Homicide and traffic fatalities have not increased significantly in their share of US deaths since 1975 either, the authors report.

The authors believe the main problem lies in some failings in the US health care system. America spends a far higher percentage of GNP (gross national product) on health care than any of the other countries, but it has a system of unregulated fee-for-service payments and relies on specialty care, both of which push up prices without providing proportionate gains in life expectancy.

Peter Muennig, assistant professor at Columbia University's Mailman School of Public Health, and lead author, said:

It was shocking to see the U.S. falling behind other countries even as costs soared ahead of them. But what really surprised us was that all of the usual suspects - smoking, obesity, traffic accidents, and homicides - are not the culprits. The U.S. doesn't stand out as doing any worse in these areas than any of the other countries we studied, leading us to believe that failings in the U.S. health care system, such as costly specialized and fragmented care, are likely playing a large role in this relatively poor performance on improvements in life expectancy.

Commonwealth Fund President Karen Davis, said:

This study provides stark evidence that the U.S. health care system has been failing Americans for years. It is unacceptable that the U.S. obtains so much less than should be expected from its unusually high spending on health care relative to other countries." The good news is that the Affordable Care Act will take significant steps to improve our health care system and the health of Americans by expanding health insurance, improving primary care, and holding health care organizations accountable for their patients' overall health and ensuring the coordination of primary care and specialty care to eliminate errors, waste of patients' time, and wasteful duplication of tests and services.

Health Care Spending and Life Expectancy (Source: OECD 2007)
Australia
Life expectancy 81.4 years
Per capita health expenditure $3,137
Percentage of GDP spent on health care 8.7%
Canada
Life expectancy 80.7 years
Per capita health expenditure $3,895
Percentage of GDP spent on health care 10.1%

France
Life expectancy 81 years
Per capita health expenditure $3,601
Percentage of GDP spent on health care 11%
Germany
Life expectancy 79.8 years
Per capita health expenditure $3,588
Percentage of GDP spent on health care 10.4%
Japan
Life expectancy 82.6 years
Per capita health expenditure $2,581
Percentage of GDP spent on health care 8.1%
Norway
Life expectancy 80 years
Per capita health expenditure $5,910
Percentage of GDP spent on health care 9%
Spain
Life expectancy 80 years Per capita health expenditure $2,871
Percentage of GDP spent on health care 8.1%
Sweden
Life expectancy 81 years
Per capita health expenditure $3,323
Percentage of GDP spent on health care 9.2%
United Kingdom
Life expectancy 79.8 years
Per capita health expenditure $2,992
Percentage of GDP spent on health care 8.4%
USA
Life expectancy 78.1 years
Per capita health expenditure $7,290
Percentage of GDP spent on health care 16%

35% of America's health care expenditure is incurred by private health insurance, the highest in the OECD. Despite spending significantly more on health care, there are fewer doctors per capita in the USA than in most other OECD countries.

In 2006, infant mortality was 6.7 live births per 1,000 in the USA compared to an OECD average of 4.7.

Source: The Commonwealth Fund, OECDhttp://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/203879.php
 
Let's be clear, we don't have free market health care in the U.S. We have a better system than most other countries but what we have is not free market

All I mean by free market is to have CHOICE for IF you want h.c. and if you do, the CHOICE of WHAT company and plan you want and will pay for. I've done that since I was 18 and I'm 64 now. I either paid for it privately, used the Health Department or received my insurance through my employer. It's the simple American way. Individuals are responsible for living within their means and pay for their own way through life.
 
Last edited:
Why has this occurred, if such factors as smoking rates have dropped faster in the USA during the 30 year period of study than in the other countries?

USA does have higher obesity rates than in the other countries. But this was also the case in 1975, when America's life expectancy rivaled many on the list. If fact, obesity rates grew faster in the other countries from 1975 onwards, even though they overtook the USA in life expectancy and pulled ahead.

Homicide and traffic fatalities have not increased significantly in their share of US deaths since 1975 either, the authors report.

The authors believe the main problem lies in some failings in the US health care system. America spends a far higher percentage of GNP (gross national product) on health care than any of the other countries, but it has a system of unregulated fee-for-service payments and relies on specialty care, both of which push up prices without providing proportionate gains in life expectancy.

Peter Muennig, assistant professor at Columbia University's Mailman School of Public Health, and lead author, said:

It was shocking to see the U.S. falling behind other countries even as costs soared ahead of them. But what really surprised us was that all of the usual suspects - smoking, obesity, traffic accidents, and homicides - are not the culprits. The U.S. doesn't stand out as doing any worse in these areas than any of the other countries we studied, leading us to believe that failings in the U.S. health care system, such as costly specialized and fragmented care, are likely playing a large role in this relatively poor performance on improvements in life expectancy.

Commonwealth Fund President Karen Davis, said:

This study provides stark evidence that the U.S. health care system has been failing Americans for years. It is unacceptable that the U.S. obtains so much less than should be expected from its unusually high spending on health care relative to other countries." The good news is that the Affordable Care Act will take significant steps to improve our health care system and the health of Americans by expanding health insurance, improving primary care, and holding health care organizations accountable for their patients' overall health and ensuring the coordination of primary care and specialty care to eliminate errors, waste of patients' time, and wasteful duplication of tests and services.

Health Care Spending and Life Expectancy (Source: OECD 2007)
Australia
Life expectancy 81.4 years
Per capita health expenditure $3,137
Percentage of GDP spent on health care 8.7%
Canada
Life expectancy 80.7 years
Per capita health expenditure $3,895
Percentage of GDP spent on health care 10.1%

France
Life expectancy 81 years
Per capita health expenditure $3,601
Percentage of GDP spent on health care 11%
Germany
Life expectancy 79.8 years
Per capita health expenditure $3,588
Percentage of GDP spent on health care 10.4%
Japan
Life expectancy 82.6 years
Per capita health expenditure $2,581
Percentage of GDP spent on health care 8.1%
Norway
Life expectancy 80 years
Per capita health expenditure $5,910
Percentage of GDP spent on health care 9%
Spain
Life expectancy 80 years Per capita health expenditure $2,871
Percentage of GDP spent on health care 8.1%
Sweden
Life expectancy 81 years
Per capita health expenditure $3,323
Percentage of GDP spent on health care 9.2%
United Kingdom
Life expectancy 79.8 years
Per capita health expenditure $2,992
Percentage of GDP spent on health care 8.4%
USA
Life expectancy 78.1 years
Per capita health expenditure $7,290
Percentage of GDP spent on health care 16%

35% of America's health care expenditure is incurred by private health insurance, the highest in the OECD. Despite spending significantly more on health care, there are fewer doctors per capita in the USA than in most other OECD countries.

In 2006, infant mortality was 6.7 live births per 1,000 in the USA compared to an OECD average of 4.7.

Source: The Commonwealth Fund, OECDhttp://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/203879.php

Why this occurred in Canada is outlined in the article.
 
Median wait time by province in 2016:
• New Brunswick: 38.8 weeks
• Nova Scotia: 34. 8
• P.E.I: 31.4
• Newfoundland and Labrador: 26
• British Columbia: 25.2
• Alberta: 22.9
• Manitoba: 20.6
• Quebec: 18.9
• Saskatchewan: 16.6
• Ontario: 15.6

snip

National Review April 13, 2017

Your source, National Review, is a hyper-partisan rightwing advocacy organization that cannot be trusted to provide unbiased information on this topic.

In short, I believe nothing from your source.

Try again, with a non-partisan source.

My maternal side of the family is Canadian, and they never have had a need to come to the U.S. for healthcare, and I have never even heard them mention even in passing they would like to trade their system for the American system. There is no vestige of a constituency in Canada that wants to trade in for an American style healthcare system.

Every civilized nation on Earth has some form of universal healthcare, including us. Our nation would be a third world status without Medicare and Medicaid.

I bet when your turn comes to collect Medicaid, you will be front in line with your hand out, and you will never, ever, consider giving up your Medicare.
 
Your source, National Review, is a hyper-partisan rightwing advocacy organization that cannot be trusted to provide unbiased information on this topic.

In short, I believe nothing from your source.

Try again, with a non-partisan source.

My maternal side of the family is Canadian, and they never have had a need to come to the U.S. for healthcare, and I have never even heard them mention even in passing they would like to trade their system for the American system. There is no vestige of a constituency in Canada that wants to trade in for an American style healthcare system.

Every civilized nation on Earth has some form of universal healthcare, including us. Our nation would be a third world status without Medicare and Medicaid.

I bet when your turn comes to collect Medicaid, you will be front in line with your hand out, and you will never, ever, consider giving up your Medicare.

National Review is conservative no doubt but hyper partisan? They were the leaders of the #nevertrump movement. How can one be hyper partisan yet lead a movement against the party's nominee?
 
Your source, National Review, is a hyper-partisan rightwing advocacy organization that cannot be trusted to provide unbiased information on this topic.

In short, I believe nothing from your source.

Try again, with a non-partisan source.

My maternal side of the family is Canadian, and they never have had a need to come to the U.S. for healthcare, and I have never even heard them mention even in passing they would like to trade their system for the American system. There is no vestige of a constituency in Canada that wants to trade in for an American style healthcare system.

Every civilized nation on Earth has some form of universal healthcare, including us. Our nation would be a third world status without Medicare and Medicaid.

I bet when your turn comes to collect Medicaid, you will be front in line with your hand out, and you will never, ever, consider giving up your Medicare.

National Review did not come up with the stats...it was the Fraser Institute and reported by National Review.

It's been in rough shape and costly for quite a few years.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/health/medical-wait-times-up-to-3-times-longer-in-canada-1.2663013

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/06/...octors-appointments-have-become-the-norm.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/robert-y-mcmurtry/healthcare-wait-times_b_7292500.html

http://www.waittimealliance.ca/for-patients/

https://www.forbes.com/sites/theapo...re-is-the-goal-dont-copy-canada/#32ac0a0078d5

http://www.ctvnews.ca/health/canada...countries-in-health-care-wait-times-1.1647061

http://nationalpost.com/health/cana...-say/wcm/2e5e4f47-ddc7-4b54-8351-6d3981f10ef1 (this one actually cites the Fraser Institute and it's report)
 
it is propped up by the U.S. health-care industry next door, which provides a parallel private system for very sick and very rich Canadians while acting as the driving force for global medical innovation.
i want SP -Medicade for all, and a paralell private system..You can Pay as you go too.

If you want to spend your money -you can pay for services.

Like public schools where everybody pays, and parochial schools if you wanna pay for private education.
 
i want SP -Medicade for all, and a paralell private system..You can Pay as you go too.

If you want to spend your money -you can pay for services.

Like public schools where everybody pays, and parochial schools if you wanna pay for private education.

I guess I just don't want to pay everybody's insurance. I recognize the need for Medicaid for helping out for those in between jobs or truly disabled and I don't mind paying some taxes toward that. Otherwise there is always the Public Health Dept. (also funded by taxpayers) for the working poor, habitual abusers or chronically pregnant. I've spent my life paying for other peoples' babies and 12 years of public schooling. Thankfully, when I turn 65 I'll no longer be penalized with paying taxes for the schools anymore.

Other than all that, everyone should have the right to choose their own method of caring for their health and get the federal government out of my health concerns.
 
Back
Top