Did you get your money back? Doughnut/donut hole is another joke..

Sine I ignored their bill, I won't get a refund, just want to be off their mailing list.

Since then I learned that you are obligated by law to carry that coverage however it is not enforced. Further more there is a penalty for joining up after a lengthy absence. If you go without the coverage for say 20 months and then get diagnosed with a whopper and need $10,000 worth of meds per month, they will add a surcharge of 20% to your monthly premium. Its a price I'm willing to pay.

Nick

Learned something interesting about the Canadian Universal Health Insurance Plan. Or what ever it's called.

I take Avodart to keep my unruly prostate in check. Here is an interesting cost comparison:

Using the Drug Benefit Plan I withdrew from it would have cost me a co-pay of $49 per month.

Walmart sells it for $90 per month.

A Canadian Pharmacy web site offers the generic (not available in the US) it for $27 per month.

A friend of mine in Canada pays $60 per month. I thought they had all their drugs covered but suprisingly not so.

My internist's office girls love blooming orchids (the key word here is blooming). Every 2 weeks I bring them a few bloomers, take the old ones home along with 2 week's worth of samples.

Problem solved.

Nick

Nick, you should check out the cost of having a "TURP" in the USA, Mexico and Canada just in case your unruly prostrate goes the whole hog and goes from letting you produce a dribble to nothing at all.

Lots of fun and a two day stay in hospital and that is one less drug that you will have to worry about.

That's actually where Avodart comes in as it prevents further deterioration and maybe even causes a minimal improvement. A lifelong companion. I was looking a a Turnip 3 years ago and am improved now.

Nick

Yep. A gift from ol' George W. Bush himself. I hope Obama can undue all the crap that he's done!

I found this interesting article today written by a Candadian on the Canadian health care system.

Brooke

Here is a link that might be useful: Canadian Health Care

In the USA, we often hear/read how the terrific Canadian health system is better than what we have.

Here's another recent article from within Canada, same author as in Brooke's link.

--Stitz--

Here is a link that might be useful: Fraser Institute Director talks healthcare reform

I'm not saying that the Canadian system is the Holy Grail, it has its flaws as do all them have shortcomings. I'm saying that our system is broken and needs to be fixed by analyzing all the other ones that produce vastly better OVERALL statistics. Then cherry pick the best of theirs and create one of our own.

Nick

Unfortunately, grafting a multitude of the best cherry branches from many different trees onto the same tree trunk has drawbacks. It's a nice idea, in theory.

--Stitz--

Just because I personally don't know how to do it exactly right does not mean something should not be done.

We have the best health care system in the world if you can afford it. Billionaires from all over the world come to the Mayo Clinic and a few other centers for care. We also have one of the worst systems in the world when you look at our maternal death (delivery), infant mortality, preventable disease etc rates. We rank near the bottom of all Western Nations when it comes to these statistics. If you are content to be proud of a great system for the wealthy and screw the rest, then keep on trucking, I see nothing of value in the selective excellence of our way of treating or preventing illness.

Much is made of the fact that people in Canada have to wait months for elective MRIs. Trust me, the wealthy Canadians find a way to get them done when they feel they need them. The 40,000,000 uninsured Americans have to wait just as long or longer for their MRI's which will only get done when their disease has taken them to the ER in dire straights. So what's the difference?

With the changing economic circumstances more and more people are finding out that we have no safety net for those under 65 unless you are bankrupt and qualify for MediCaid. I think Medicare should be extended to everyone from birth on, the countless Billions paid to Aetna and Blue Cross could go towards funding the cost as could the multiple Billions paid to the top insurance company CEOs who would no longer be needed.

The number of institutions that could be abolished if everyone had Medicare is staggering. Workman's comp system no longer needed, car insurance premiums drop as injury insurance no longer needed, all the litigation over real or imagined injuries moot as medical cost no longer a point of contention etc, etc, etc. Our manufactured products would again be more competitive as companies no longer have to factor in the staggering costs of health care benefits.

The entire health care insurance industry could be abolished as it really serves no purpose other than to generate profit for the shareholders. It is really nothing but an elaborate parasite feeding of the American public, it contributes nothing to the well being of people.

I could go on and on, hopefully the next 4 or 8 years will bring some improvement.

Nick

While motoring in my gas guzzling pick-up truck this evening, I listened to an AM radio station originating in Toronto. The Ontario Nurses Association is distressed about job cuts. So distressed that the ONA is resorting to advertisements. It appears to me that our northern neighbors aren't as quick to fund deficit medicine as in the States.

Note that I provided a link below to the ONA.

On the same station, I also heard an advertisement for some sort of supplemental health insurance. Supplemental? I didn't get the whole story as I needed to refuel my behemoth.

--Stitz--

Here is a link that might be useful: Cutting Nurses, Cutting Care

The only way to fix the US healthcare system is to cut the insurance companies out of it. That's the biggest waste of money we have in this country.

You want to talk waste, I just had 12 stitches put in my arm, I don't have insurance, will get to that in a minute, I was charged $112.58 per stitch to get it fixed. One hundred and twelve dollars and 58 cents per stitch. Do you not think that is a little over the top? The hospital knocked 30% of the ER bill but the surgeon, who I never saw, added another $600+ to the bill.

Now why don't I have insurance? Hell, I'd be self insured anyway. The insurance companies want $300 give or take, per month as a premium and on top of that they want $1500 to $5000 as a deductible and another $5000 to $10,000 or 20% of the bill as coinsurance. So the choice is, do I file for bankruptcy over 25K or 100k? Aside from my recent ER bill, an annual exam and mammo cost a whole lot less than that. The couple meds I take, generic, cost less a year than two months of premiums.

Yes, I could get added on to my husband's insurance but then he'd never get a check. It would all go to cover my premium. The insurance I have at work is useless.

It would cost me less to fly to Paris and see a doctor, have an office visit and a chest xray, for a cold, than it would for me to pay two months of premiums in this country.

And there are hospitals in Mexico City that cater to Americans.

Don't give me that crap about Americans having excellent health care. It's total BS.

While you question Nick's authority, remember he is a retired US physician.

Laura

Laura,

I'm sorry that you needed stitches for your arm. A speedy recovery to you!

I get excellent health care. I hope that you quickly find the same.

--Stitz--

Hi Laura

How are you? A blast from the past, I remember some nice trades with you. Do you still have all your Bulbos? I got rid of mine as I moved 4 years ago and switched to growing everything outsides which eliminates the likes of Bulbos and Phalies.

I'm very happy adding to a collection of now nearly 100 Australian Dendrobiums with close to 50 speciosum varieties along with Catts, Encyclias, Coelogenies, Oncidiums etc. Since 95% of it is mounted it requires minimal care other than watering and fertilizing. Life is good, I have lost the burning desire to collect every species known to man. If they are happy living outside under shade cloth in SOCAL, they are welcome other wise "Hasta le vista Baby".

I agree with you about insurance companies, they are parasites whose only purpose is to create a profit for their shareholders. They really only exist in this form in the USA, nobody else would fall for their scam. They contribute nothing to the well being of their clients, they only watch like hawks that no penny is spent that could be avoided at all costs.

2 case studies:

My son, a pediatrician, looks after a couple of kids. Mom flies small private jets, dad works in the same company that has 260 of these things transporting the wealthy all over the world. Both lost their jobs as the company cut 40% of their staff. Both have looked for 4 months now and have not found work. Their insurance plan is now in the 'Cobra' phase where they have coverage for 1 year at a much increased cost. Their $1,500 premium eats up a good portion of their unemployment checks. They worry that if they cannot find employment before the year ends they may not be able to get insurance at all as both of their kids have a mild form of asthma. 4 of my 6 kids had mild asthma so I know that its no big thing, for the insurance companies its a red flag though, this family will have a very difficult time getting coverage on their own (assuming they can afford it) as the insurance companies only want healthy people for clients. If there is the slightest chance that you may actually need medical care, heaven forbid, they do not want you as a client. WHAT A CROCK THAT IS!!

My personal internist just struggled through a horrific illness with his wife. The total bills easily exceeded $1,000,000. He is well healed so survived the ordeal, a less affluent person would have been bankrupted by all the co-pays, non-covered items and deductibles he fought through.

Besides the 40,000 Americans with no insurance there are countless others who would be bankrupted by a real serious illness where the insurance companies would weasel out of paying as much as possible. Public assistance does not kick in until you lost your house, savings, and retirement fund.

The other systems may not be better (according to some) but I have friends and relatives in Canada, England, Denmark, Norway and Austria. None of them loose any sleep over the cost of future illnesses they may endure, none of them want their plans switched to anything similar to ours and all of these nations have better statistics for such thing as as life expectancy, maternal and infant health and the usual litany of measurable items where we rank near the bottom of the list.

Are they better off than we are? When it comes to health care the answer is a resounding YES.

Nick

Nick,

You are dispensing incorrect information re: COBRA. Please, read the following:

How long must COBRA continuation coverage be available to a qualified beneficiary?

Up to 18 months for covered employees, as well as their spouses and their dependents, when workers otherwise would lose coverage because of a termination or reduction of hours.
Up to 29 months is available to employees who are determined to have been disabled at any time during the first 60 days of COBRA coverage and applies as well to the disabled employee's nondisabled qualified beneficiaries.
Up to 36 months for spouses and dependents facing a loss of employer-provided coverage due to an employee's death, a divorce or legal separation, or certain other "qualifying events".

Laura, please reconsider your last sentence.

--Stitz--

If you believe the stuff in the daily blats or listen to the shock jocks in any country i bet you would believe that he health system is hopeless.

Here in (by American Standards) Socialist Australia there is a two tier system. You can opt out of the Private Hospital Fund System and rely on the public system but if you do so and you have an income above a certain amount you have to pay a medicare levy.

The latest figure i could find is that about 45% of Australians have private health cover.

Is the system here better than in the USA. Not buying into that. The only way anyone could give a decent opinion on that would be abode in both countries over a period of time.

Having said that a friend + wife went USA to visit relos. Wife suffered compound fracture of arm. Friend was astounded at size of bill and the itemised detail of bill. Strange system. Not that friend is now broke, he has heaps.

What's to stop someone putting in an extra stitch or two? Lol

As for the fund thing. Its a lottery. been in the same fund since i got married 37 years ago. With hindsight would have been better off putting the money into a "medical expenses" jam jar every month but that would have been punting on good health and having healthy children. As i said life's lottery.

Stits

I was quoting my son who was quoting his patients. You are 100% correct about the true nature of COBRA. I stand corrected.

It is never the less true that a family with 2 asthmatic kids will have a hard time obtaining private health insurance and that does not seem fair.

Nick

Nick as soon as the SCHIPS program goes into effect, the children will have insurance.

As a retired physician, I am surprised you don't know the ins and outs of getting the most bang for your buck. As a physician you know about the negotiated prices between what a doctor can charge a non-insured patient and what they can charge a patient with insurance. Tuezday and Arthur's friend would pay through the nose for being non-insured.

When I had back surgery, the bill for the surgeon was $19,000 but the negotiated price he accepted from the insurance company was $6,000, nada from me. Everything on the bill was negotiated and the only charge without much leeway was the anesthesiologist. I guess HIS insurance is so high he won't do much negotiating.

Since Laura is one of the 40,000,000 without health insurance but has access to it, then she is playing Russian roulette, sorry. I'm on the gov-mints dime now except I still have to pay health insurance and part of my drug benefits. Right now I'm pretty healthy but eventually, I'll make them pay :>)

I've paid property insurance for years and never collected one dime from them. My house isn't on fire but I still won't cancel it. I've collected one time on my auto insurance when an illegal alien hit my vehicle. Another insurance I won't be without but I still pay it.

Brooke

This discussion is getting serious so I'm going to attempt to set a few things straight.

My criticism of our health system is not meant to be a criticism of America as a whole. I was born in Austria, grew up in Canada where I went to medical school and did my post graduate work in LA. I have been sold on California ever since and cannot imagine living anywhere else. My relatives and friends in Norway, Denmark, the UK, Austria and Canada love to visit but also cannot imagine living anywhere else.

This then is not a criticism of the US nor a praise of the other countries but an evaluation of our health care system. First of all, lets not kid ourselves, we have national health care, no one is allowed to die in the streets. Our Universal Health Care Program is called 'Emergency Room' followed by 'County Hospital'. A single payer system is in place, the single payer is the US tax payer who foots the bill. This is about the most inefficient and expensive way to deliver health care and gives poor results.

Stitz, you are fine, so am I and my family all have coverage. We all get excellent health care but national statistics are computed counting everybody. Private insurance also has its limits, my Internist friends wife contracted AML (Acute Myelogenous Leukemia) a curable form of Leukemia. By the time she had the full 9 yards of chemo, bone marrow transplant and various and sundry complications he was out of pockets for nearly $250,000. I have not see him buying a new Mercedes lately but he is fine and grateful for the successful outcome. Someone less affluent would have been bankrupted, stay well Laura.

According to WHO our national bill for health care per capita is more than double that of any of the Western Democracies and Japan. So what are we getting for this gigantic outlay?

Lets look at 3 things, life expectancy, maternal mortality and infant (under 1 year) mortality. All numbers come from WHO.

Life expectancy:

We rank #47 worldwide, Denmark is 48, Ireland is 49 and Portugal is #51. All other Western Democracies, Japan, Israel etc do better, I'm not surprised. What surprised me is that Macau, Andorra, San Marino, Guernsey, Auguilla, Cayman Islands, Faroe Islands, Martinique, Guam, Virgin Islands, Saint Pierre and Migualon, Jordan, South Korea, Puerto Rico, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bermuda and Saint Helena also surpass us when it comes to life expectancy.

Maternal Mortality:

We rank #27 tied with Norway, Israel and Netherlands. All other Western Democracies and Japan do better.

Infant Mortality:

We rank #33, absolute last of all the Western Democracies, Japan and Israel.

Statistics can lie and mistakes are surely included in the above but the overall picture is unmistakably that of a massive outlay for very second grade results. Some one mentioned 'Bang for a Buck', well we are not getting much of a Bang for a hell of a lot of Bucks.

Highjack, I know the tricks you allude to, I have been on both sides of that fence. I think we are heading in the right direction but it irritates me when I hear of talk of the best health care system in the world. We are a far cry from there. A civilized nation is judged not by the quality of life of the rich but by the quality and dignity of life of the bottom rung.

Nick

The other thing which comes into play here is the fact that we are one of the few countries (if not the only one, I don't really know) who base their health insurance on employment. This is a quirk of American history. Unions were the ones who worked to establish health insurance for their constituents, and thus, it got tied into employment.

This, of course, means that the cost of health insurance is rolled into the cost of producing items. When we compete with companies in countries where there is nationalize health, or another system of health insurance which is less costly,we cannot compete.

Now, here's my recent kicker. I have health insurance, through my husband's company. I am VERY happy we have it...and it was only through the grace of God that we do.

As many of you know, I'm a stage 4 cancer survivor (11 years now). My husband lost his job in 2003. We ran out of COBRA and were paying on our own (fortunately we had enough money so it didn't lapse) for a couple of months before my husband was employed by his present company. If we were not able to cover it, we would have lapsed. If we had lapsed, then I would not have insurance because of a pre-existing condition. God only knows what my health scare will do for my daughter's health coverage in the future.

Recently, I had to get a new prosthesis and I got one new bra (most insurances will allow you 2 bras per year...inadequate if you talk to most women). The ONLY place I can get such things is at a retail store which only deals with wigs, and mastectomy items. Most mastectomy bras are in the $50 - $75 category.

The one I got cost $67. The insurance allowed $24.95 as the cost for a mastectomy bra. Now, the rub is that I have to cover the retail cost as the store won't write it off. I paid for my portion using a flex spending account (our money, but taken out pretaxes). I just got a statement saying that the FSA won't cover it because it was over the amount allowed, and it was from a retail store, and oh, by the way, it won't cover sales tax. Remember, this is my money which was taken out of the paycheck, but I have to document my purchases....as if I would buy mastectomy bras if I didn't need them. I'm now trying to figure out a pattern where I can put in the little extra piece of fabric....at least regular bras will go on sale down to $18.

Oh...and another wonderful thing a friend of mine told me. Her insurance company allows one prosthesis per year. The problem is that she just had a double mastectomy....so I guess she's supposed to go around one breasted for a year.

Laura (I think who said this) is right. We'd save a ton of money if we could do away with insurance because just think of it...we wouldn't be employing all the insurance people, and all the people that the doctor's offices have to hire to shepherd the insurance claims through.

I'm also annoyed at the number of procedures which are labeled as "experimental" and thus are not covered in the US even though they have been doing them for years in Sweden, etc. Case in point was several years ago when I had dental implants to cover the four teeth I knocked out when I was 13... They are now covered, at the time I had to pay out of pocket for all the costs except for $400 which is what they said would cover a new partial....only problem is that continued used of a partial would do nothing for my bone loss (prevented by the implants) and over time the anchor teeth for partials and bridges are worn down and usually break, particularly for people like me who have had them for a long period of time. When I had them done in the 1990s, it was experimental although they had been being done as a regular procedure in Sweden for 35 years. 5 years later U.S. insurances accepted it as a covered expense.

There just has to be a better way.

Obviously there is a better way, keep your eye on Obama he seems to be heading in the right direction. Now we'll find out how much raw power special interests really have as they'll be opposed to any of his changes. As he said yesterday, the only proposal not on the table is the status quo.

Not all of the universal programs are good, some are as ridiculous as what we have. In Austria everyone is assigned to a Primary MD who has a list of his patients. He gets a fixed reimbursement if he sees one of these individuals in every quarter. Whether he sees them once or 20 times, same reimbursement. If he doesn't see them in the quarter, no reimbursement.

These guys do handstands to get every patient into the office at least once every 3 month. If the patients actually get sick, they immediately refer them to a specialist as they are too busy going down their list. I'm not advocating Universal care just for the sake of UC but a sensible sane approach which covers everyone, eliminates pre-existing condition exclusions and also eliminates stopping of at the Bankruptcy Court without collecting $200 on the way to the hospital.

Nick

Stitz, have you ever priced COBRA? For someone unemployed it's beyond reach. When I was 32 and healthy and quit a job it was like$800/month just for me. COBRA until recently was 102% of the employers cost (Obama changed this). That was 15 years ago that it would have cost me $800/month.

Anyone here who thinks insurance is cheap, just go to any insurance company's website and get a quote for private insurance, and then come back and tell me I'm stupid.

Laura,

Not only did I price COBRA in the past, I paid. I managed my resources to continue medical insurance coverage.

For me, it was a bargain.

--Stitz--

I suppose one could look at this issue as survival of the fittest, but that kind of negates the whole business of "a God-fearing, Christian nation" doesn't it? When you think about it, isn't this really the ultimate Pro-Life debate?
It puzzles me how so many of the same people who have such strong feeling about protecting the unborn or even test tube embryos still hold on to this notion that once you're born, to-hell-with-you if you can't afford access to all this great medical technology.

Sorry, it just ain't a matter of managing ones assets. Since we live in a capitalist society, there are always going to be a whole lot of people at the bottom who simply don't have a lot of assets and can't afford what the ones above them can. Add to that this really out-of-whack distribution of wealth in this country - something like 10% of the population controls 70% of the wealth and I think you can make an solid argument something needs to change.

A few months ago, I was listening to a debate about health care on one of our local, conservative radio stations. Now this isn't one of those really over the top conservative stations. I guess I would call them fairly moderate in that respect, but never-the-less, most issues for them are pretty black and white. It's also one of the most popular stations in the metro area, so they have a huge audience.

OK, so the host presented the question "What happens when you can't afford the medical care you need?" Caller after caller said the same thing: "If you can't afford the medicine or medical care you need, you should just die. It's your time to go. It's what God wants for you. No public money should be used to help preserve your life." Of course, I'm paraphrasing, but that was pretty much what was being said. After about the 5th caller saying the same thing, I had to stop doing what I was doing and sit down. It was so depressing.

Fast forward to the same station, same program a couple of weeks ago. Again, the topic was health care and what needs to change, if anything. Here's the premise put forth by the host of the program: "Teacher, firefighters, police are a wonderful group of folks who all do invaluable things for our society. However, they're main reason for being involved in the occupations they are is public service. They like to help people and money isn't a motivating factor. Therefore, we really don't have to be all that concerned about how much we pay them. They do their jobs out of a strong need to help people not to make money." (OK, my jaw is hanging open at this point, but I continue to listen)

He goes on to say: "We do have to be very concerned about our health care workers - doctors, nurses etc. because if we don't pay them whatever they want and deserve, they will all move to other countries where they can make the big $$ and we will be left with nothing." After about the second caller agreeing with this dude, I turned the radio off. Couldn't take anymore.

If the health care debate is really on the table, I think we're all in for some interesting times.

Tuesday, you are in good shape. Not only do you qualify for insurance, you can afford it all though you find it hellishly expensive.

Now consider this hellish scenario. A middle class person needs insurance but has been diagnosed with (eek, horror upon horror) an actual illness. Insurance companies will have nothing to do with sick people, they prefer to deal only with healthy people. This person cannot get insurance at any price and will have to totally deplete his private resources to the point of insolvency before the "Social Safety Net" kicks in.

I know a single adult male who has Multiple Sclerosis, mild, if there is such a thing as mild MS, who gets assistance from MediCal (Medicaid in California). He has a monthly "Share of Cost" which is determined by his monthly income. Since his monthly income is $2,100 and only $800 is deemed necessary for him to enjoy the American Dream, he has to pay the first $1,300 of all medical expenses every month before Big Brother kicks in and pays the rest. If his income goes up by $200, his 'Share of Cost' will go up by $200. Now there is a real incentive to work hard and do well!!!!!

Insurance companies have one product: Income for the shareholders and the salaries of their people. The profit goes up the less they do for their clients. Large pools of pencil pushers do nothing else other than figure out ways to deny treatments. If a colonoscopy is requested one day before the mandatory 5 year interval is is their job to deny it. No one bothers to keep track of the opposite and contact the client, patient, victim and inform him that he is way overdue for the same procedure. This little example points out that the only thing the insurance company is interested in is to deny procedures that are not absolutely necessary and have no interest what so ever in making sure their clients get needed care.

I think private insurance companies are parasites and should simply be abolished. We don't really need to look to Canada or Sweden for ideas, extend Medicare to all and then tweak the program to make it right. It won't cost a penny extra as we are doing all the work right now, we'll just be doing it in a more efficient and timely fashion.

The next couple of years are going to be very interesting.

Nick

OK, NOW I'm ripped...dd has been home since Monday since she fainted at school. She's had a fever every day since Sat., and when she stands up she feels like she's going to faint again.

She's been sick off and on since January. (mostly respiratory stuff....when she whines about being sick so often, when I point out it may be because she stays up until ll pm and gets up at 6:30 during the weekday and on weekends is up until 2:00 but gets up at noon....She snarls.

But I digress (surprise!). Yesterday I called and made an appointment at her doctors. There is a staff of 7 doctors there. Her doctor wasn't in today but they scheduled me with another doctor. This morning they called and said that he wouldn't be in and if I wanted to see anyone, I'd have to go in for an urgent care visit.

Of course, my insurance doesn't cover urgent care in the same way as going to the regular doctor.

I'll also say that this is the 4th time that that office has cancelled and rescheduled. We only started going there because my daughter's pediatrician, who at 13 she felt she was getting a little old for, was convicted of using/distributing child pornography. My daughter wanted a female doc, so that's how we ended up there, and on the recommendation of the practice from another person.

This doctor wrote on her cross country forms that she was restricted....because of heart issues. The basis for this? Not the echocardiogram results that she ordered, nor the stress tests, but merely because MY PARENTS have heart issues (and I don't--verified by echocardiograms, stress tests and a multitude of other things...). My dad had a heart attack at 50, and my mom has IHSs.

So...at the moment, this system really sucks. I understand that this might be the case if health care was nationalized, but what's the difference? If I am experiencing this now and not having the beneifts of nationalized health care...what is the difference?

Nick,

Governor Schwarzenegger's name is at the top of the MediCal webpage. You have legislative representatives in Sacremento. What are they doing? Who is watching them?

Are (voting) citizens responsible for change?

--Stitz--

Michigoose: If we maintain the private deliverance of health care, i.e. private practice MD's and other facilities, they will still have to compete for the patients by being on time, smiling and delivering good care, other wise patients simply go somewhere else. That's how Medicare and Medicaid works and it works well. If you need a non-emergency MRI you will have to wait in line, still better than having to pay for it yourself if you have no coverage and still possess assets which they will seize first. The only difference will be the single payer who cuts out the insurance red tape. Anyone unfortunate enough to have a HMO for coverage will know exactly what I'm talking about when it comes to red tape.

Stitz: Ahnold is looking after us all right, no complaints with MediCal. My friend needed to be hospitalized last year for 10 days and the stay straddled 2 months. Last week of one month going into the next. He had to pay $1,300 twice but voiced no complaints as he got the best of care, his final bill came to over $30,000. The only problem is that you have to be penniless before this kind of safety net kicks in. If he had any meaningful assets, which he does not, they would have been seized long ago. He will never be able to get private insurance and with his illness there is no point for him to accumulate any kind of property, it would only be seized with his next relapse which is not a question of if only when. If we enroll everyone in Medicare the total cost to America for better health care, over all, would be less than it is today.

What led to the initiation of this blurb was my involuntary enrollment in Anthem, a branch of Blue Cross. I finally got out of it after 4 correspondences and numerous phone calls. I have to stay in it until the end of March according to the powers that be and will be billed dutifully until then. I never used their program so did not cost them a penny. I have no intention of paying their bill and am wondering how far they'll go in their collection effort. I intend to let them drag me into Small Claims Court if they want but suspect that they got a deal going with SS and I will find their bill subtracted from my monthly SS payment. That would really tick me off but I'd be powerless to do anything about it.

Nick

When medical care becomes universal in the USA and "free", how will the resources be shared? Rationing?

Anthem has a less than stellar reputation. Don't assume that they're all like that.

--Stitz--

Stitz, cobber, mate, strike me pink , we have Universal health care here and the sky has not fallen.

I have never heard of anyone going bankrupt here when stricken with a life threatening illness.

The couple of stories aired on the National Broadcaster last week should be viewed by your lot as a National disgrace. I cannot imagine being stricken with cancer or MS and being forced to negotiate the cost of treatment.

The two tier system here works fine. If you cannot afford private health insurance you fall back on the public system. Though the public system is fine about 45% of the population have private health insurance because there are no waiting lists for elective surgery as there are in the public system. Also they imagine that there are better facilities in a public hospital.

There is nothing wrong with Cherry Picking. I do it all the time when watching TV. Lots of good stuff from the USA, here and elsewhere.

Biased reporting? perhaps. If you have a spare half hour or so......

Here is a link that might be useful: American Emergency Story.

'American Emergency Story' is a great link, take the time to listen to it. Micheal Moore's 'Sicko' is also good but since he is a 'bleeding heart pinko commie' anything he says is off course suspect.

My friend the internist had an eerie similar experience with his wife who contacted leukemia. He had excellent insurance but they weaseled out of any number of things because they were 'experimental' etc and by the time his wife was cured he was out of pocket for 1/4 Million Dollars. And this with truly excellent insurance.

A combination of private enterprise and universal coverage is the answer, cherry picking is OK but not when the private insurance companies pick the healthy people only and let the tax payers look after the sick ones.

Like Barak Obama said: "Anything is on the table but the present system, that's unsustainable and is not on the table." I hope he can make it stick.

Nick

Stitz, sorry, I didn't see your post until now.

How will medical care be rationed? The same way it is now. As the ER physician in American Emergency stated, at this point (the ER) insurance coverage is no longer of consequence. Bone Marrow Transplant is only available up to a certain age, certain criteria have to be met for a heart or liver transplant, we have sensible rationing right now.

Universal care is NOT FREE! Someone has to pay the bill. In a single payer system the government aka taxpayer pays all the charges. That does not necessarily make it more expensive, the opposite is true, the overall cost is much less with better results.

Lets follow a hypothetical 60 year old man who is destined to get colon cancer. He has no insurance so he forgoes colonoscopies. At one point he notices rectal bleeding and goes to the ER. There he is diagnosed with advanced disease and soaks up a mountain of money (taxpayer's after he files for bankruptcy) and may or may not be cured. If he had insurance and had obtained a colonoscopy every 5 years he would have been diagnosed at an earlier stage, less cost and greater chance of cure.

The ER which is point of entry for most of the uninsured is an extreemly wasteful; way to go and produces poor results.

Getting back to the concept of Universal Care being 'FREE' one has to add up all the cost of our current system, private, public and anything in between. All these funds have to be redirected to the single payer, this should not result in a tax increase as the total cost of care will be less rather than more.

There are many unintended or intended consequenses. Many of our products will be more competitive. GM spends more on health care for each car than on steel. Car insurance for example will become cheaper, medical cost for injuries are automatically covered and litigation is not necessary. No doubt many PI lawyers will have to get smaller boats, what a shame!

Universal care will become true insurance where the risk is spread. Right now the risk is not spread, if you are HIV positive, chances are the taxpayer foots the bill, private insurance companies do not shoulder a proportionate risk. Even 'good plans' have a limit, maybe they will cover the first $250.000 after that let the taxpayer foot the bill. Don't forget to stop off at Bankruptcy Court first, you don't collect $200.

I just hope Obama has the stamina to face the special interests down.

Nick

Finally!!!!!!!!!!!

Nick