Re: Healthcare in Canada

"Alex W." <ingilt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


"Mickey" <Mickey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:rfsln3t017o7ibh738fbtscq2glui25ckr@xxxxxxxxxx


You're kidding, right?

No, I see you're not.

OK, for starters, if it were paid for through a tax, only part of each
dollar paid would wind up going to the "premium". You have to pay for
that taxing entities overhead and bureaucracy.

Quite.

Point of interest: it might be good to compare the percentage of each dollar
that goes toward overhead and administration in either model, private and
state. This is pure speculation, but I would be surprised if the actual
difference is that huge.



In addition, you remove choice. Right now I have health insurance
providers battling over my insurance dollar. No competition equals
lazy slothful indifferent workers and service.

"battling"?

I'm not sure how appropriate that image is, Mickey. For a start, most of
those dollars being chased aren't yours, nor is it your spending decision
("you" being Joe Q. American) -- it is your employer's money and decision.

Once again, I pay for my own health insurance 100%. There is no
corporate involvement anywhere.

Yes, there was "battling" for my business. The different providers all
wanted me to sign up with their company, and give them money.

Their first priority is to keep the cost down; their second, to get value
for money for the *firm* rather than for the employee. This alone skews the
competition in ways not entirely beneficial for the individual in question.

Secondly, in all I have read about finance and insurance, one thing the
authors agree on: individuals tend to be uninformed and afraid of change.
There is tremendous inertia to be overcome before a customer will change a
bank account, and even more so an insurance policy. How many in this group
of people -- statistically above average in education and earnings -- will
actively compare insurance policies, either come renewal time or at any
other time of the year? How many of us will have cancelled their policy
before renewal time as opposed to being kicked out by the insurer? This
factor, too, will reduce active competition for your dollar.

Third, I must definitely take issue with your characterisation of "lazy
slothful indifferent workers and service".

Spend a little time in a VA hospital, and follow it up with a trip to
the DMV. You'll understand.


The main reason why these
systems have survived to deliver services to the public for so long in the
face of incessant politically motivated mismanagement and starvation of
funds is, quite simply, the dedication of its workforce. The whole
apparatus may be wildly inefficient and the buildings and private
establishments may have all the new and shiny machines, but for sheer
devotion to their vocation, I will take a NHS nurse or doctor over a private
guy any day of the week. There is nothing lazy or slothful about people who
habitually put in 10-hour working days and 60-hour working weeks for the
privilege of earning rather less than the hospital administrator's
secretary.



You've also got the problem of "sticky fingers" within the government.
While they would claim that your money was going to fund health care,
in actuality, it simply goes to fund the government, which then picks
up healthcare as an additional expense.

There is no such thing as a government "lock box".

Let me put this in perspective for you. If you want to see how the
federal government does health care, just go visit a VA hospital.

That is true; however, do not underestimate the reverse impulse, which can
be just as strong. A private healthcare provider is far less likely to
succumb to public and media pressure when deciding whether to offer a
particular service or drug. Governments can be bullied into spending funds
by voter outrage even when it may make no medical or financial sense. Get a
few celebrity types o throw their support behind an issue, find a dedicated
campaigner to keep the matter in the public eye, ensure a steady flow of
human interest stories -- plucky mothers of five battling terminal cancer,
war heroes learning how to walk again without legs, dying kids bravely
smiling into cameras -- and your chances of squeezing some sort of funding
out of government are not all that bad.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: OT The good National health care system
    ... the form of a government program, is to spread the expense so that ... spreading the expense so as to keep health care ... affordable is not and cannot be the main purpose of insurance offered by ... a clear incentive to, system-wide, focus on cost containment, ...
    (rec.arts.tv.soaps.cbs)
  • Re: OT The good National health care system
    ... the form of a government program, is to spread the expense so that ... spreading the expense so as to keep health care ... affordable is not and cannot be the main purpose of insurance offered by ... a clear incentive to, system-wide, focus on cost containment, ...
    (rec.arts.tv.soaps.cbs)
  • Re: A Canadian Health Care story
    ... the cost of insurance premiums are shifted to the treatment of the ... should taxpayers pay for health care for someone who chose not to be ... I don't understand how it is legal for the federal government to issue ... plead to the military who pledged to uphold the Constitution to commit ...
    (rec.music.gdead)
  • Re: QC-proof cipher?
    ... Health insurance is provided by privately-owned companies. ... profit is not the only responsibility of a company. ... It follows that a government should protect the people, hence the Bill of Rights, welfare and much of a government's legislation. ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: OT - A intriguing "open lette"r on health care ...
    ... I like the basis of the letter, but by the time our government gets through ... health care system can and should be built:.... ... Funds in the HSA can be spent only for Health Care, ...
    (rec.woodworking)