Canadians: tell us about your health care system

[Dennis Peacock]

While this is a very good thread and I commend each of you for handling things and stating things very well, we are nearing an end for

this thread to be closed.

Please expect this thread to be closed by no later than Sunday evening as no matter how much we discuss it, we aren't going to solve the U.S. budget issues nor the health care issues.

[Dan Lee]

Darius
Good post.
So as I interpret the report most European countries now follow the same guidelines for reporting. They chose not to address the other 15-20 countries ranked ahead of the US

Also kind of curious the report says:

“Using direct standardization (10), we applied the U.S. gestational-age specific infant mortality rates to Sweden’s distribution of births by gestational age. If the United States had Sweden’s distribution of births by gestational age, the U.S. infant mortality rate (excluding births at less than 22 weeks of gestation) would go from 5.8 to 3.9 infant deaths per 1,000 live births—a decline of 33%.”

“The United States compares favorably with Europe in the survival of infants born preterm. Infant mortality rates for preterm infants are lower in the United States than in most European countries. However, infant mortality rates for infants born at 37 weeks of gestation or more are generally higher in the United States than in European countries.”

As I read it on one hand if US had lower preterm rates IM would drop significantly but the second paragraph implies our problem is with full term births.

I suppose I could dispute the report cited based on its timing relative to current events and that CDC director is a direct report to the HHS secretary as of June of this year.
Sort of like questioning the CBO report based on who requested it. But I won’t

[Glen Gunderson]

What many Americans don't seem to realize is that they are already paying as much in taxes for government health care as Canadians are. Per capita, residents in both countries pay about $3,000 USD a year in taxes at all levels of government for health care. So it's not a case of Canada having higher taxes to fund health care, but the overall cost just being a lot lower.

There a bunch of reasons for that, and with some changes the US could lower the cost of health care. Some of the changes wouldn't be that difficult to implement (managerial efficiency, tort reform), and some would be very difficult to change (demographics, nutrition and fitness, violent crime).

[paul cottingham]

Also, in BC we pay insurance premium of 100 per person per month, as well as user fees for many services. This amount is indexed, so poor people don't pay any premiums at all. Our taxes pay for the remainder, and consume about 20% of our GDP. For this, everyone is covered, regardless of pre-existing conditions, and regardless of ability to pay.

[Paul Ryan]

17 trillion dollars of national debt and other countries losing faith.

You can say it's just a nickel ...it is just a diime but in the end, regardless of how you get there, it adds up to 17 trillion dollars.

Financial responsibility.

Ken,

I would like to see your sources for the 17 trillion in debt. I have heard around 4.5 which is still ridiculous but a far cry of 17 trillion. Is the 17 total for the next 10 years or current. I don't believe it is current, I believe my number to be much closer. 17 trillion is only 4 times higher than what I have heard. No matter how you look at it, the heath care plan needs to be funded. I don't mind paying more in taxes if my cost of insurance will go down. I firmly believe if we can get a plan together that provides equal insurance regardless of income levels. In the long run costs will go down. Or atleast say at todays levels.

I think we all know the reason insurance is so high is because what the heath care facitlities charge is so high. My wife works in the Mayo Health system. Which is many times sited as being a facility that has it right. Here is a perfect example of waste. My wife recently gave birth to our 2nd child. During the delivery the doctor thought he may need the "mity vac" a vacuum device that attaches to the babies head to help remove the baby. He opend the package the "mity vac" was in tested it and set it on the table behind him. He never needed it. So after the delivery while nurses were cleaning up, they pickup up the "mity vac" and put it with the rest of the garbage. I asked what was going to happen with it, the nurses said it would be tossed out. I asked why, it had never been used. I was told since it was in a patients room regardless if it was used or not it is thrown out. Well I kept it then. Works great for vacuum tests on emission systems and bleeding brakes. Our insurance was charged for a $450 vacuum pump that was never used and was esentially thrown out. That same vacuum pump can be purchased from napa, or a tool guy for about $50 and used for years. Now I have 2 pumps, they are both a little different but accompish the same thing. If these cost go down so will our insurance rates.

I will never believe that malpractice suits contribute to such high priced insurance. Sure doctors have to pay rediculous high premiums to protect them from greedly lawyers. But those costs are minor compared to $450 vacuum pumps, $25 asprin, so on a so forth. I think the malpractice adjustments need to be an after thought, not a priority.

[Art Mulder]

I understand this Art. I would like to have this as well. Let me ask you this one question as it pertains to my major issue with what is on the table now. Do the taxes you pay for health care also pay for other things? Things like a bridge in a particular state, or building a new building in another?

Bridges? Buildings? I don't follow.

I just pay tax, Belinda, it's not subdivided into building tax, road tax, or health care tax. There is no specific "health tax" here.

Of course, I'm not a tax expert. But you could read the wikipedia entry on Canadian Taxation, and that'll give you a capsule summary of our system I guess.

[Ken Fitzgerald]

Ken,

I would like to see your sources for the 17 trillion in debt.

Paul,


I am not sure where I got the 17 trillion dollar figure. I stand corrected and thanks for causing me to search. I just did a search and came up with 3 sites showing 11.9 trillion and 3 sites indicating 12.1 trillion.

Where did you get your 4 trillion figure and do you think we could get our creditors to accept that?

The main point is that in the last two weeks, countries loaning us money have cooled off doing so because they are getting squeemish about our financial woes. Some countries were even discussing finding an alternative to the US dollar as the accepted economic standard. That is scarey.

Thanks for pointing out my error. I will go back and edit each of my posts so they are correct.

[Rob Robinson VT]

But I'd be more interested to see some hard statistics on what the gov't pays per-capita for health care in Canada vs the US. My brother-in-law attended a talk by a rather prominent former US politician who claimed that the US gov't already pays more per capita on healthcare than Canada does.

If that is true, then to me that is a huge huge deal for my US friends.

According to this website, here are the United Nations figures for per capita health care costs by country for 2007 (in U.S. dollars):

U.S. $6,096
Luxembourg $5,178
Norway $4,080
Switzerland $4,011
Austria $3,418
Iceland $3,294
Canada $3,173
Germany $3,171
Belgium $3,133
Australia $3,123
Netherlands $3,092
France $3,040
Sweden $2,828
Denmark $2,780
Ireland $2,618
United Kingdom $2,560
Italy $2,414
Japan $2,293
Finland $2,203
Greece $2,179
Spain $2,099
New Zealand $2,081
Israel $1,972
Portugal $1,897

[Paul Ryan]

[QUOTE=Ken Fitzgerald;1265398]

Ken,

I would like to see your sources for the 17 trillion in debt.
QUOTE]

Paul,


I am not sure where I got the 17 trillion dollar figure. I stand corrected and thanks for causing me to search. I just did a search and came up with 3 sites showing 11.9 trillion and 3 sites indicating 12.1 trillion.

Where did you get your 4 trillion figure and do you think we could get our creditors to accept that?

The main point is that in the last two weeks, countries loaning us money have cooled off doing so because they are getting squeemish about our financial woes. Some countries were even discussing finding an alternative to the US dollar as the accepted economic standard. That is scarey.

Thanks for pointing out my error. I will go back and edit each of my posts so they are correct.

Ken,

I really dont have any sources other than what I hear on the evening news or read in the newpaper, and we all know how accurate that can be. I knew my numbers wouldn't be right on but I still didn't think the deficit was that high. But no harm no foul, no need to edit your posts, it is just a friendly discussion, as my father and I would like to call it.

It is too bad that we have racked up such a debt since 1995. It is truly scary that the US dollar may not be enough to secure a loan any more. How long do we continue going into debt. I can go into how I think the heath care plan should be paid for, but my views get aweful political. Some of my previous post I had typed them, but erased them before submiting realizing they could be viewed as political. I believe there are all sorts of ways to start fixing our problem but something that will take decades to perfect. But we need to start some where, we cannot afford to do nothing. And it seems that there are to many that are afraid of change. Unfortunatly I believe this problem is not one that little baby steps can over come. We need to make a splash and start fixing from there.

[Denny Rice]

Denny, that Zamboni comment cracked me up, you made my day.

Unfortunately crime isn't non existent in Canada. I live in the largest city in Canada, and we have approximately one murder per week.

I wouldn't call that non existent.

Regards, Rod.

Rod,

Thanks...I know any murder is bad, but it seems here murder is a DAILY thing in the tri-state area. If it only happened once a week here the police force would be much smaller and I belive this country would be a much better place to live. I have been to Canada 4 times and I am amazed how friendly people there are. Are you sure there aren't any Zamboni openings?

[Dan Lee]

Greg said:
Stephen Hemsley owns $744 million in unexercised stock options.

You realize that depending on his strike price for these options they could be worthless.
Yeah he has 13,000,000 unexercised shares but if the strike price is $30 or $50 dollars per share (based on market 3 years ago) and the current Friday close market per share is $25 well ....

[Darius Ferlas]

Darius
Good post.
So as I interpret the report most European countries now follow the same guidelines for reporting. They chose not to address the other 15-20 countries ranked ahead of the US

Also kind of curious the report says:

“Using direct standardization (10), we applied the U.S. gestational-age specific infant mortality rates to Sweden’s distribution of births by gestational age. If the United States had Sweden’s distribution of births by gestational age, the U.S. infant mortality rate (excluding births at less than 22 weeks of gestation) would go from 5.8 to 3.9 infant deaths per 1,000 live births—a decline of 33%.”

“The United States compares favorably with Europe in the survival of infants born preterm. Infant mortality rates for preterm infants are lower in the United States than in most European countries. However, infant mortality rates for infants born at 37 weeks of gestation or more are generally higher in the United States than in European countries.”

As I read it on one hand if US had lower preterm rates IM would drop significantly but the second paragraph implies our problem is with full term births.

Hi Dan,

I noticed the differences between dependent on whether the birth is pre-term, but perhaps I didn't show clearly that this also might be problematic. Preterm births are, well premature and thus aberrant (no undertones). That in itself indicates medical issues that manifest themselves the most within the US population, i.e. in other countries compared in the studies more women (per capita) have proper pregnancies than in the US. Would free pre-natal care change help in the US?

I suppose I could dispute the report cited based on its timing relative to current events and that CDC director is a direct report to the HHS secretary as of June of this year. Sort of like questioning the CBO report based on who requested it. But I won’t

Agreed.
Timing, authors and whoever commissions the report should certainly be considered in any analysis of data that is debated. All these factors tend to skew the results and/or conclusions.

I have no idea who the authors are (politically) and I'm pretty sure the report has been commissioned by the current administration. As for the validity and timing of the data (in regards to rules in some EU countries) it comes from a 2008 European report that can be read here. That report, while obviously used by the current White House administration, has nothing to do with it. It was commissioned by an EU agency a year before the last US elections.

The American report (Nov. 2009) also seems consistent with the general assessment of health care in the US. While there is sufficient anecdotal material suggesting the health system is good the way it is, it is also obvious that health care in America is a huge personal and corporate burden (one of the reason GM ans such like Canada is that they do not have to pay insane rates for their employees health insurance). A large portion of the population either lacks access to medical care, or faces bankruptcy in the face of medical misfortunes.

In the area of finances I have no answers as I am not an economist, but I can see the differences between the per capita cost in various countries. In the US that cost is the highest. The US also has the highest percentage of GDP spent o medical care, and yet so many have no access to health care.

I have a feeling that, given a chance, some bright minds could not only restructure the system so that it would not cost more, but they might be even able to find ways to lessen the burden on the tax payer.

Bottom line is that the system is broken and "socialized" medicine has not been tried in the US. Looking at the experience of other developed countries it turns out that socialized health care won't make things any worse than they are, but it could make them better. Heck, socialized banking system and socialized automakers are another point in case. Just a couple of days ago GM reported a five fold decrease in their losses. If they did not have to pay health insurance premiums they might have even cranked out some profit last month.

[Anthony Scira]

Greg said:
Stephen Hemsley owns $744 million in unexercised stock options.

You realize that depending on his strike price for these options they could be worthless.
Yeah he has 13,000,000 unexercised shares but if the strike price is $30 or $50 dollars per share (based on market 3 years ago) and the current Friday close market per share is $25 well ....

I would love to sell 13,000,000 of anything for 25 bucks a share. I would even settle for 5.

But I am easy !

[mreza Salav]

Very interesting,
As a Canadian I am happy to live in this system.

Going through all the pages and posts I try to address some of the questions raised. I think Rod did a good job of listing things.

My wife and I are expecting our first child in a few months and have started dealing with the health care system more often. So far, we have been able to see our family doctor whenever we wanted, have had our annual check ups routinely, and paid nil for any of these (including a few visits to emergency rooms). My wife has regular appointments with the specialist (routing ultra sounds) we are even offered prenatal classes etc, and the cost of delivery and hospital will be nil.

All of these are paid through taxes. I used to think we pay a lot more than in US but after comparing what I pay with some of my friends in the same income bracket the difference wasn't much (would say we both pay around 35%).

Is the health care system perfect here? not at all, but I think it is far better than what my relatives/friends have it in the US.

I find the examples Ken has pointed out to very rare (a family with 20 children etc). In any system you'll have some outliers but the vast majority of public behave close to an average person.

And remember, the cost of health care system even with all the in-efficiencies of a government run system shouldn't be more than what you are already paying for through insurance companies. Here, we just don't have to pay for the profit of those companies (and the bonuses of their CEO's).

[Eric Larsen]

And remember, the cost of health care system even with all the in-efficiencies of a government run system shouldn't be more than what you are already paying for through insurance companies. Here, we just don't have to pay for the profit of those companies (and the bonuses of their CEO's).

And that is hitting the nail squarely on the head. As has been brought up time and again, Americans are already paying for a universal health care system. But we are not getting the benefits of a universal health care system. We are paying more for less. That is fiscally ridiculous, morally corrupt, and inefficient beyond belief.

The current system being bandied about by the US Congress isn't adequate for me. But it's a start. Changing our collective mindset is the first step. Once that is accomplished, the pieces will fall into place. That is inevitable. America is capable of creating a health care system that is fair, honest, decent and compassionate. This current bill isn't it. But it's a start.

The "Let's Do Nothing" crowd has had it's way for 80 years (England started putting their system into place in the 1930s.) Anything we do is going to be better than what we're doing now. This is a no-brainer in my opinion.

If JFK hadn't been shot in 1963, I think we would already have universal health care. If Bobby hadn't been shot in 1968, I think we would already have universal health care. If Bill Clinton didn't put Hillary in charge in 1993, I think we would already have universal health care.

This bill isn't universal, and it has a lot of shortcomings. But it's a start. And it's still a no-brainer.

Yesterday, at work, I talked about this with a man who escaped from Bulgaria during the Cold War. His take on the situation was that America spent so long fighting communism, that we lost sight of the fact that occasionally the socialists got it right. Health care is one of those things. Cuba has a better system than we do. Are we as a nation really satisfied with that?

I just hope we can wrap this up quickly and focus on all the rest of the mind-bogglingly important problems facing us. I hope the next things on our government's docket are jobs, jobs, and jobs. Eisenhower's Highway Investment Plan stopped a post-war recession in it's tracks. And we've been enjoying the benefits for 60 years. With luck, we can do it again. (Something to ponder on Monday's commute, if nothing else.)