Americanization of health care in Canada


Suzique39
#61
I am grateful that when I had a life threatening problem I had good Canadian care. I spent 1 partial day in hosp in a regular ward. Then it became obvious that without surgery I was going to die. I had the surgery that night, and spent 6 days in ICU, and 4 more days in hosp. I am grateful for our universal medical care, believe me. I have lived under both the Canadian system and the American system and that one illness would have wiped us out in the states.

I am also in the position of having had the exact same surgery twice, once here and once there. The first time they took 1/2 of my thyroid out here in Canada, it cost us $24.00. The second time they took the other half out in the US, that was $12,000.00 !
 
Reverend Blair
#62
That's a story I've heard all too often, Suzique. People driven into bankruptcy, people paying off bills for the rest of their lives. It's terrible.
 
Suzique39
#63
Quote: Originally Posted by Reverend Blair

That's a story I've heard all too often, Suzique. People driven into bankruptcy, people paying off bills for the rest of their lives. It's terrible.

True it is terrible, and even worse often it is older people who end up wiped out, can we say cat food for dinner? It is pitiful that a nation as rich as the US says it is (forget the borrowing from China) has always resisted universal medical care , which makes the AMA very happy. I can't imagine anyone wanting that for Canada. Yet there seem to be people who actually think the American way is better. Good medical insurance there costs upwards of $1000.00 per month for a single person. For those with good insurance the medical care is good, for those without insurance the care is so-so to non existant.
 
Reverend Blair
#64
The costs are staggering in the US. GM cited medical benefits as a major reason why they were losing money there. If we had a similar system, we would have lost a lot more autoworker jobs, but because of universal healthcare we have a competitive advantage.
 
the caracal kid
Avatar
#65
now you are getting into government subsidization of corporations. I thought you did not like that (or is it alright to use healthcare as a subsidy as long as it is also benefiting citizens)?
 
Suzique39
#66
Quote:

okay I just sent out $600 to my health insurer
by - Michael 1 hour ago (Wed Dec 28 2005 10:16:40 ) Ignore this User | Report Abuse

UPDATED Wed Dec 28 2005 10:17:10

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My bill went up to six hundred a month as of Jan 1, 2006.
The country is run by the insurance companies.
In May I think I'll be eligible for medicare as I have been getting SSD since May 2004.

I just lifted this from another message board. Thought it fit in quite nicely with this discussion, The reason Canadian older people live as well as they do is because we don't pay insurance bills like that. Hubby and I for the 2 of us pay $96.00 per month now that he is retired and we are glad we can afford it and to live well too.
 
cyberclark
Avatar
#67
All Private insurance is an industry of denial; strict limitations. Computers sciences are producing locations in the country where incident of one ailment or another is prevelant. No coverage here!

The Calgary Health Authority is now writing up a list of items not covered under Alberta Health Care. Much of the coverage we now enjoy will be gone! In it's place, a recomendation to go to private health for the cure.

On the other side, the Governments are turning a "cost centre" into a "profit centre" because these same people now are collecting fees from you and paying taxes on them.

What happens to Automobile accident people? These same insuance companies are now saying "we can't be held responsible for Medical costs, we will go broke1"

These are not contradictions! This is a scenario where Governments are pressing to create a profitable industry in insurance at your expence!
--
 
Reverend Blair
#68
Quote:

What happens to Automobile accident people? These same insuance companies are now saying "we can't be held responsible for Medical costs, we will go broke1"

Public auto insurance is an excellent option too, Cyberclark. I'm sure glad that we have it here.

Quote:

All Private insurance is an industry of denial; strict limitations. Computers sciences are producing locations in the country where incident of one ailment or another is prevelant. No coverage here!

They will be fully prepared when they move in. They will dump as many expenses as possible onto to the public system. We will then be told that what's left of the public system doesn't work at all, which leads us to this:

Quote:

The Calgary Health Authority is now writing up a list of items not covered under Alberta Health Care. Much of the coverage we now enjoy will be gone! In it's place, a recomendation to go to private health for the cure.

Oops! Sorry, but you have no coverage under the public or private systems. Pay cash. Can't afford that? Then you do what poor people have been doing in the US for years, and used to be forced to do in Canada. You can wait it out. You'll either get better on your own or die.

That's the world that Stephen Harper, Paul Martin, and all of the rest of the privatizers are leading us too. Their excuse is that we cannot afford the public system, yet all of the studies show the public system costs less per capita than the private system. Canadians pay the price either way, we are the capita in the "per capita", but we are being told that we can't afford the less expensive option so must adopt the more expensive option.
 
Timetrvlr
Avatar
#69
Quote:

Canadians pay the price either way, we are the capita in the "per capita", but we are being told that we can't afford the less expensive option so must adopt the more expensive option.

Beautiful summary! And that is exactly why I am going to vote NDP! To hell with strategic voting, I'm going to vote for what I believe in.
 
I think not
Avatar
#70
Comparing the American health care system with Canada is like comparing bananas with a tractor trailer.

Compare Canadas health care with other socialized health care systems around the world, like France or the UK.

Some of the things I have read in this thread are beyong comprehension, $1000 a month for an individual in the states for health coverage?

I must be the only single individual then that pays $325 for a PPO plan, but I'll resell it for $500 if you guys want
 
FiveParadox
Liberal
Avatar
#71
I had no idea that health insurance premiums in the United States cost that much. My family is, let's say "low income" at the moment; if that were the case in Canada, then quite simply, we wouldn't have any health insurance. I far prefer Canada's universal health care system.
 
I think not
Avatar
#72
Quote: Originally Posted by FiveParadox

I had no idea that health insurance premiums in the United States cost that much. My family is, let's say "low income" at the moment; if that were the case in Canada, then quite simply, we wouldn't have any health insurance. I far prefer Canada's universal health care system.

$325 for an individual is alot? I think it will be increasing to $344 by next year, what do you consider low? Just curious.

"Low income" families get funded through the state by the federal government, and I am not referring to medicaid.
 
cyberclark
Avatar
#73
I know of a small shop in Montana where the owner covers himself, wife and 2 employees as a group. He has to pay 550.00 per month for each employee.

How many businesses in Canada are ready to step up to the plate for this kind of a hit?

The Workers Compensation in the US is a law that tells business what it has to cover by way of accidents. It is up to the business to buy private insurance for the coverage.

The 550 above (US) would also cover what we would call Workers Compensation Insurance.

We should start working on a way to turn out the vote and fix some of these things!
 
FiveParadox
Liberal
Avatar
#74
Well, $325 to me sounds like a lot, considering right now I pay $0. By way of comparison, it's a bit high. lol
 
I think not
Avatar
#75
Quote: Originally Posted by FiveParadox

Well, $325 to me sounds like a lot, considering right now I pay $0. By way of comparison, it's a bit high. lol

Well I should of rephrased it differently, $325 can sound like alot to a great deal of people. If you are employed btw, it's not costing you $0. But anyway, the point I am trying to make is that there are many avenues to take to get insured in the US and simply put, many people don't know about it.
 
FiveParadox
Liberal
Avatar
#76
Oh, okay, I see.

But I think that the point of the Canada Health Act is that one's health care should not be dependent upon their financial situation. For example, a rich person should have no more right to timely health care (by paying for private or "for-profit" service, for example) than would a person living in poverty.
 
Summer
#77
Agreed, Five.

And what ITN hasn't mentioned is that in the U.S., if you are unemployed or working part-time (even if you have two or more part-time jobs that add up to over 40 hours a week), it can be difficult or even impossible to obtain affordable health insurance, and yet you may not qualify for any government help with your healthcare in that situation either.

I know, because I've been there.
 
I think not
Avatar
#78
That is not an accurate statement Summer, the work hours or being unemployed have nothing to do with your health coverage, it is entirely based on income.
 
FiveParadox
Liberal
Avatar
#79
I think not, one cannot argue that work hours and unemployment are not directly related to income. If you work less hours, your income is less; if you are unemployed, then your income is zero.
 
Summer
#80
Quote: Originally Posted by I think not

That is not an accurate statement Summer, the work hours or being unemployed have nothing to do with your health coverage, it is entirely based on income.

No ITN, you are terribly misinformed if you believe that. A person who earns too much to qualify for assistance with healthcare may nevertheless work in a situation where employer-sponsored health coverage is not availalable. Part-time work is one such situation. So is being unemployed - I have been unemployed and still not qualified for any assistance with health coverage, so I know whereof I speak. And since private coverage is MUCH more expensive than group coverage provided through an employer (who also usually picks up part of the tab, dropping the price for the employee even further), it is extremely common for health insurance to be out of reach for people in the sorts of situations I mentioned. Someone who works 20 hours a week for one employer and 25 hours a week for another receives health insurance through neither, yet earns too much to qualify for any government-assisted health coverage, while at the same time making too little to afford private health insurance.

I've been there, I've done that, I know plenty of other people in the same boat, and I know what I'm talking about.
 
I think not
Avatar
#81
Quote: Originally Posted by Summer

I've been there, I've done that, I know plenty of other people in the same boat, and I know what I'm talking about.

And I've been there and done that also, and I know what I am talking about. Perhaps Ohio should catch up to New York then in that area?
 
Summer
#82
Quote: Originally Posted by I think not

Quote: Originally Posted by Summer

I've been there, I've done that, I know plenty of other people in the same boat, and I know what I'm talking about.

And I've been there and done that also, and I know what I am talking about. Perhaps Ohio should catch up to New York then in that area?

I had that problem in both New York AND Ohio, not to mention that I've had friends in the same situation across the country, including some who are in it right now as we speak. Perhaps you don't know everything you think you know?
 
I think not
Avatar
#83
Which part of been there done that didn't you grasp Summer? Maybe you think you had exhausted all avenues and yet you didn't? Can you be more specific about what happened?
 
Summer
#84
I exhasted them all, ITN. Perhaps you should explain what avenue you had open to you and how you availed yourself of it, instead.

I will outline for you the following examples, two of them my own at different times and places:

Person A, working a combined total of 45-50 hours a week at two part-time jobs, getting insurance at neither, making too much for any governmental insurance program, yet earning too little to afford private insurance.

Person B, in same basic situation as Person A, only with the addition of a prior health problem that pushed the insurance rates even higher and thus even further out of reach - but for whom no government-sponsored program existed.

Person C, same boat again as Person A, only with a minor child as well. There was coverage available for the child, but not for her, and her ex-husband was a dead-beat dad who'd totally disappeared and paid none of his court-ordered child support.

Person D, employed by a company that did not offer health insurance benefits (was in a niche that did not require them to provide it) and making just enough to not qualify for any gov't. health program but not quite enough to afford private health coverage.

Person E, supporting herself and her unemployed parents on a job that kept her schedule just two hours shy of the 40 per week level at which the company would have been required to provide health coverage. The household income was (her paycheck and her parent's unemployment checks) too high for anyone to qualify for gov't. health coverage, but again there was not quite enough money for private coverage. COBRA coverage from her father's old job (her mom had not received coverage from her employer) cost more per month than the family income, and would not have covered the employed daughter in any case as she was over 19 and not a full-time student anywhere.

Person F, unemployed, unable to afford COBRA, but ineligible for any gov't. health program because of past income history being too high.

It happens every day.
 
I think not
Avatar
#85
Quote: Originally Posted by Summer

I exhasted them all, ITN. Perhaps you should explain what avenue you had open to you and how you availed yourself of it, instead.

I will outline for you the following examples, two of them my own at different times and places:

Person A, working a combined total of 45-50 hours a week at two part-time jobs, getting insurance at neither, making too much for any governmental insurance program, yet earning too little to afford private insurance.

Person B, in same basic situation as Person A, only with the addition of a prior health problem that pushed the insurance rates even higher and thus even further out of reach - but for whom no government-sponsored program existed.

Person C, same boat again as Person A, only with a minor child as well. There was coverage available for the child, but not for her, and her ex-husband was a dead-beat dad who'd totally disappeared and paid none of his court-ordered child support.

Person D, employed by a company that did not offer health insurance benefits (was in a niche that did not require them to provide it) and making just enough to not qualify for any gov't. health program but not quite enough to afford private health coverage.

Person E, supporting herself and her unemployed parents on a job that kept her schedule just two hours shy of the 40 per week level at which the company would have been required to provide health coverage. The household income was (her paycheck and her parent's unemployment checks) too high for anyone to qualify for gov't. health coverage, but again there was not quite enough money for private coverage. COBRA coverage from her father's old job (her mom had not received coverage from her employer) cost more per month than the family income, and would not have covered the employed daughter in any case as she was over 19 and not a full-time student anywhere.

Person F, unemployed, unable to afford COBRA, but ineligible for any gov't. health program because of past income history being too high.

It happens every day.

This is where I lose you and I asked for more details, details meaning figures, not names of people.

I currently know someone with a family of 4 earns around $40,000 a year, costs him $350 a month for himself and wife and his kids cost him I think $15 a month each or thereabouts.

My situation put me in a bracket under poverty lines years ago, but I assume you speak of middle class such as the example above?

I don't doubt people are uninsured because they can't afford it, however a great many others simply don't make it a priority, but I suspect you know that already.

Bottom line in my opinion you simply cannot compare Canadian health care system with the US, they are vastly different in nature.
 
tracy
#86
I really don't see a difference in the care provided to my US or Canadian patients, so I think the systems are comparable. It's just the funding that's different.

My insurance plan is only about $80 a month (changed in January). I'm young, healthy, single with no dependents and have no pre-existing conditions. The coverage has a high deductible ($3500 a year) and sort of spotty coverage (no coverage for meds, pregnancy, etc), but at least if I'm in a car accident I won't be left with hundreds of thousands of bills. Health insurance doesn't have to be excessively expensive if all you want is bare bone coverage.
 
Summer
#87
Quote: Originally Posted by I think not

This is where I lose you and I asked for more details, details meaning figures, not names of people.

I currently know someone with a family of 4 earns around $40,000 a year, costs him $350 a month for himself and wife and his kids cost him I think $15 a month each or thereabouts.

My situation put me in a bracket under poverty lines years ago, but I assume you speak of middle class such as the example above?

I don't doubt people are uninsured because they can't afford it, however a great many others simply don't make it a priority, but I suspect you know that already.

Bottom line in my opinion you simply cannot compare Canadian health care system with the US, they are vastly different in nature.

Sorry, but not everyone I know gives me all the minute details of their personal income, ITN, nor do I feel it necessary that I share the personal details of mine with you or anyone else. Suffice it to say that these incomes were above the threshold at which the government would have provided health insurance, but were not high enough to allow those earning them to purchase private health insurance after paying for housing, groceries, utilities and transportation to get to work. And yes, I am talking about people who are at least ostensibly middle-class.

Also, I think that some of our misunderstanding here is because you may be confused about what I mean by "PRIVATE insurance". Private insurance, for purposes of this discussion, is insurance that the individual pays for out of his/her own pocket with no input from an employer. "Employer-sponsored insurance" on the other hand is group insurance provided via one's employer and at a reduced rate to the insured that reflects both the group status of the coverage (group health insurance is cheaper due to risk factors and how they are calculated) and the fact that the employer generally foots at least a portion of the premium, with the remainder being paid by the insured employee.

A person who does not receive employer-sponsored health coverage and who is not eligible for government coverage may seek private individual or family coverage, but it will be at a higher rate than what most people pay for the coverage offered via an employer. Your friend earning $40k a year and paying $350 for family coverage (an unusually low rate for that these days, btw) is almost certainly getting that coverage via his employer. That same coverage independently obtained would likely cost at least twice as much, if not more. Given that, I should think it would be easy to see how a person or family without access to employer-sponsored health insurance could find themselves in that economic no-man's-land between being able to afford to buy their coverage independently and being eligible for gov't. coverage.

Many people simply cannot afford coverage. Some could afford it and don't buy it because it isn't a priority, but that's neither here nor there for purposes of this discussion (the morons we will always have with us) but even if it were, there's certainly no call to penalize their spouses or children for the idiocy of the head of household in any case.
 
I think not
Avatar
#88
Figures are the issue Summer, disclosing Person A's income can be virtually anyone, I hardly think you are divulging anyone's personal finances.

I'm going to call my friend and ask him for exact numbers and I'll get back to you how and where he gets his insurance.
 
Summer
#89
Quote: Originally Posted by tracy

I really don't see a difference in the care provided to my US or Canadian patients, so I think the systems are comparable. It's just the funding that's different.

My insurance plan is only about $80 a month (changed in January). I'm young, healthy, single with no dependents and have no pre-existing conditions. The coverage has a high deductible ($3500 a year) and sort of spotty coverage (no coverage for meds, pregnancy, etc), but at least if I'm in a car accident I won't be left with hundreds of thousands of bills. Health insurance doesn't have to be excessively expensive if all you want is bare bone coverage.

True, but a $3500 deductible can be an insurmountable obstacle for many people. If coverage doesn't kick in until after you've already paid out $3500 from your own pocket, the insurance is basically useless unless you already have an extra $3500 in your pocket to spend in the first place. The only case in which it would come into play would be some catastrophic situation in which you land in the hospital or something and the bill mounts up past $3500 from the get-go and the insurance picks up the tab for the rest and you get a bill later from the hospital for your $3500 portion. But if you're using it to pay for things like doctor visits, etc. (and especially if no meds are covered), and you don't have the money to pay for those visits out of pocket until the $3500 deductible has been met, you simply will wind up never using the coverage.

Most people don't realize it, but that's actually part of why insurance companies offer such policies... they know full well that they will make money from the premiums paid in, but that many people will never actually use a dime of their coverage in an average year. So the only one to really benefit from this equation in most cases is the insurance company. That isn't health-care delivery; that's just legalized racketeering.
 
the caracal kid
Avatar
#90
ok, i know i am going to get slammed for saying this, but in reality $3500 is pocket change in today's world. heck, $10000 is chump change in today's world.
 

Similar Threads

2
Health Care
by blues | Sep 4th, 2009
75
Should Canada adopt Swedish Health Care?
by Machjo | Aug 31st, 2009
8
Canada Losing Its Public Health Care?
by Curiosity | Mar 4th, 2006
4
Health Care
by Colpy | Nov 6th, 2005
no new posts