RSS Feed for This PostCurrent Article

At Least Most Brits Like Their Government Run Health Care

By Larry Johnson on August 15, 2009 at 11:13 AM in Current Affairs

Fascinating pieces in today’s Financial Times that try to correct the misinformation being spread about the state of health care in the United Kingdom. The first piece notes that Brtis of all stripes–conservative and liberal–are coming together to defend their system:

The fractious British political classes have united in defence of the UK’s healthcare system after it has become a byword for the failings of universal, state-funded provision among the US Republican right.

Gordon Brown, prime minister, and David Cameron, leader of the Conservative opposition party, on Friday both declared their commitment to the National Health Service.

The US right has used the NHS as an example of the potential pitfalls facing President Barack Obama as he tries to push through a healthcare reform bill.

Some Republicans have ridiculed it as a bureaucratic and “Orwellian” system that often denies care to the elderly – with Sarah Palin, the former Republican presidential candidate, decrying it as “evil”.

But in Britain, where since 1948 all citizens have enjoyed free healthcare from birth to death, the attacks are widely seen as wrong and insulting.

Such is the strength of public support for the NHS in the UK, that the two main political parties have agreed to ring-fence its expenditure in the coming years – in spite of cuts to almost all other departmental budgets.

Mr Cameron, who leads the Conservative party, once headed by Margaret Thatcher, on Friday described the NHS as one of the UK’s “great national institutions” and said the service was his “number one priority”.

Nicholas Timmins also weighs in:

This is a debate being driven by blind prejudice on both sides. For a start, what Mr Obama is proposing is not a British NHS. There is no proposal that a government backed insurer would run hospitals, as is still largely the case in the UK.

Second, half of the mighty 17 per cent of gross doemstic product that the US spends on health care – roughly double the level in the UK – is already funded by tax dollars through Medicare, Medicaid and the Veterans Health Administration, which incidentally does run medical facilities and provides some of the best health care in the US.

Third some of the charges levelled against the NHS are plumb wrong. That Teddy Kennedy would not get treatment for his brain tumour in the UK. That the NHS indulges in forced euthanasia. That people over the age of 59 do not get coronary artery by-passes.

Some are true. The UK does have a lower dialysis rate for kidney disease than the US. Some of its cancer survival figures look appreciably worse and quite probably are worse: “probably” for a bunch of reasons, which include comparability of the data and the fact that five-year survival figures are by definition what was happening then, not what is happening now.

The NHS does indeed have waiting lists for non-emergency surgery, although after a doubling in spending in real terms over the past decade they are much shorter than they were. And, in contrast to the impression of “socialised medicine” held by some in the US, people can by-pass those queues by going private. About 10 per cent of the population has some sort of private insurance, paid for indivdually or by their employers. The proportion has barely shifted over a decade, implying at least some sort of satisfaction among Brits at what they get.

In response to the worst of the UK performance, Brits can also pluck selective statistics from the US showing it has much poorer overall results for diabetes and a bunch of other chronic conditions where Britain’s primary care physicians treat patients well in the community, reducing complications and avoding costly hospital care.

Both pieces are worthy of your consideration.

Then there was the chat I had yesterday with an old friend, a Republican who had a senior job at the VA during the Bush Administration who also is a veteran himself. He related how horrific some of the problems are with the U.S. Government run hospitals. One of the biggest problems are the surly bureaucrats who staff the VA. More than 275,000 employees to be precise. So what to do? Let’s push this as a standard–everyone who works at the VA must get their health care (and that of their family) from the VA.

And how about this? Eliminate all government-provided health care for every member of Congress. Let’s dispense with the cushy pensions as well. If Senators and Representatives had to live like most American they might better understand why some folks in the hinterland are angry.

I am not arguing that we should adopt a British-style system. And we still have the problem that Obama has not advanced or proposed a specific plan. To make matters worse, the House bill is a mess, reflects the meddling of special interest groups and lacks a coherent vision. Let’s focus on the facts and the substance.

  • Tammy

    So Gordon Brown says the system is great, and a few select folks on the street say it’s great and that is your evidence for the success of NHS?

    Larry, you are usually much better at uncovering the truth. If you go to the links on that article, you will find stories about what a MESS the system is.
    Just go to the Telegraph website an search NHS and you’ll find a lot more horror stories than good ones.

    But for starters, here’s one that was linked on the link you posted.
    http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d231b984-4602-11dd-9009-0000779fd2ac.html

    As I’ve said before, my father-in-law, a Brit, a WWII Vet and a retired British Diplomat, DIED because of NHS. He was told to wait six months for a new pace maker. He didn’t make it.
    Do you think the NHS cared?
    Of course not. Old people are left to die under NHS.
    And that’s not my “opinion”. I experienced it first hand in losing my dear Dad Jack.

    • MrMike

      Not just Gordon Brown.

      Gordon Brown, prime minister, and David Cameron, leader of the Conservative opposition party, on Friday both declared their commitment to the National Health Service.

      And how many people in the U S have died because their insurance company refused to pay for treatment?

      • Ferd Berfle

        And how many people in the U S have died because their insurance company refused to pay for treatment?

        I have to say that is an excellent question.

        • maryann

          I have to say a whole lot less than will die under Embalmacare. AND there’ll be no choice but to die with Embalmacare.

          Further, being THE largest employer in the UK, they, as with Embalmacare will never be gotten rid of–Embalma will become the WORLD’s third largest employer for a company, the government, who does nothing but redistribute and waste the VAST majority of monies (MOST by far do not go to health care but to bureaucrats who will seek to perpetuate their jobs).

          REVOKE YOUR US CITIZENSHIP BEFORE 2013 AND GET HEALTHCARE FOR FREE, NO FINES, AND YOU DON’T EVEN HAVE TO PAY TAXES!

          • maryann

            …and you still get to vote

          • MrMike

            And you base your ” more will die” claim on?
            How many now die because they get no care at all or wait too long to try to get care?

            • maryann

              Well, add 50 million new patients to a static professional pool, which would take another decade to expand, and people are going to wait, suffer and die…

              Further, CBO says no way can Embalmacare be paid for no matter how many taxes they raise, and they will…and so it will HAVE TO go into “crisis mode” and therefore will ration care and these people won’t have a free market choice any longer…

              There are far better ways to address this, for 1/40th the cost every low income American can be insured, doctors canbe granted tax write-offs for volunteer work at low income clinics, etc., insurance can be opened up to the free market

              government needs to GET OUT of medical care, every time they stick their noses in to it costs rise and quality plummets

              we will kiss goodbye our high end care and get great bandaid clinic mchealthcare, if you’re of tax-contributing age that is

              • MrMike

                And who cares for those 50 million patients now?

                Oh and ask those on Medicare/Medicade if they want the government out.

                • Coaster

                  Your argument is sophomoric and ignorant. They spent their entire lives being forced to give a portion of their present salary to the government on a future promise. Of course they want their medicare! It is theirs to start with (DA). I bet most if given the chance would have opted to take the money during there most productive years. You make it sound as if the government is actually providing them with something they did not all ready have access to. Quick refresher gov takes your money gov spreads it around. Enough said.

                  • Wisewoman

                    Think of it. You pay into medicare for 40 to 45 years and at the end of this time the gov decides to ignore the 1965 medicare law which defines that the money is to be spent on elderly care and decides that one half trillion dollars of this should be spent for insuring other people who have not paid into the system and more than half of which are illegals. Of note is that one can sue the insurance company for withholding treatment that result in harm to the patient. One cannot sue the gov for the same thing.

                    • oowawa

                      Gee whiz, Wisewoman, when you put it that way, it just doesn’t sound fair, does it?

                      Oh Fishy Police! I think Wisewoman might be guilty of writing a fishiness over here!

              • Cindy

                maryann-I love the term “Embalamacare”—-
                Hilarious and possibly apropos.

                • oowawa

                  Yeah–funny! I hope the poster who objected to us using “Obamacare” is relieved.

          • Ferd Berfle

            I find it quaintpar for the course that you didn’t answer the question but went on an irrelevant tangent. I am not in favor of O-hole care but am also not in favor of insurance companies. The difference between the two lacks any substantive distinction as they both insert third-party bureaucrats to second-guess decisions made jointly by patients and their physicians.

            • maryann

              If insurance were truly free market, costs would go DOWN, if insurers were strictly held to account, and if people bought insurance for health just like life, by decades-long contracts, they would not be refused.

              Remember $300 calculators? Once the transaction is incentivized to reduce fraud waste overcharges, costs will by necessity go down.

              Obamacare is nothing but government control over the population and 20% of the US economy and to continue their reign of terror by the bureaucrat/amnesty free-care vote.

              And so, why bother with US citizenship? It’s just a ticket to be punished.

              The British citizen usurper president has already shat on the constitution, why not a bunch more?

              • Tuppence411

                If insurance were truly free market, costs would go DOWN

                I agree whole-heartedly. Let’s look at Big Pharma. They function very sucessfully and turn a nice profit in the free-market OTC(Over- the- Counter) drug business in this country. They know they can’t out price the market (us) or their competetion(generics); and still turn a profit and be in the business.

                And I know I sound like a broken record, but I am still trying to figure out how the hell Big Pharma can sell me at full retail price quality name brand prescriptions for my pets cheaper than my insurance co-pay for crap generics.

                • Wisewoman

                  Because congress is in the pockets of the drug companies, dems and repubs, that’s why.

            • Sally again

              How about congress take the simple route if insurance cos are so evil…make what they do wrong/immoral illegal…duh! And then remove all the stupid regulations that favor large companies over smaller ones and tada, you’ve got competition, lower prices and its easy for them to do and pass. The health care regs are written by the big congromerate’s lawyers, not the congress…that’s why they don’t understand it or read it…idiots.

              The way the behave in congress is as if they don’t have the power to do anything except break the f**king sytem completely. IDIOTS and bunch F**cists. (yes, I have to blot that word out or my statement doesn’t get through the screeners….ironic: at the very time when the word is most apropos, we can’t use it to call a duck a duck.)

          • Juliet16

            I like that….

            “EMBALMACARE”

            LOL. That should go viral!!!!!

            L

    • Larry Johnson

      Please read the articles. What is clear is that both Conservatives and Liberals appear to be together on this issue.

      • maryann

        as the largest employer in the UK I don’t think that’s a valid appraisal, perhaps from the non-employee patient standpoint would be valid

      • Tuppence411

        Hi Larry, I would be the last person to tell you that their aren’t positive health outcomes under the UK system. One only needs to compare UK infant mortality rates to the US or Canada.
        (Canada’s rates for infant deaths, considering they have universal care, are downright SHAMEFUL!) But Britain’s two tiered health care system based on class status has always been their dirty little secret. While we have that here as well, we all know money talks; Americans would never accept such obvious in-your-face class distinctions. The UK has been successful in lowering the number of people with private care. But, is it a function of quality improvement or cost and the economy? I don’t know. As as far as the 10 year average, I would be very interested in seeing year by year data.

      • FrenchNail

        What I KNOW first hand, is that as soon as they have a little money, the Brits cross the Channel and seek treatment in the French Health Private system. What I also know, is that French would not be caught dead (no pun intended) in an English Emergency Room. They prefer to get rapatriated at any cost and go to a French Emergency room.

        The only thing I ever heard the GBs say about their system is that it is based on absolute random luck. If your district is well attended and managed, your OK (not fine, but OK). If your district primary doctor is an idiot, pray to stay healthy!!! They always complain about the lack of flexibility and freedom of choice. They are not in control of their own health management. That’s a fact. Many of them do not know better, but the one who do, go abroad when they can afford it, hence paying twice…

        • ces

          And how the hell is that different from what we have in the States?

          IF you can AFFORD it, you MAY be able to ‘shop’ around for a “good” doctor…

          OTHERWISE, you’re “stuck” with the ‘doctor’ and ‘procedures’ the insurance company will pay for.

          It’s NO different.

          Choice, my ass.

      • Juliet16

        Makes you wonder if they both have “political” reasons for defending their NHS.

        Here in the STATES, we sometimes get both Dems and Reps to back some of our institutions for purely political reasons… even if one party or another secretly harbors a different opinion….

        So I wouldn’t necessarily trust Cameron’s praise of NHS…

        because other British conservatives do NOT agree…

        outspoken MEP Daniel Hannan, for one…..

        He’s trashed it big time recently on American news shows….

  • Tex-Mex Soup

    Britian has a population of a 51 million and the US has a population of 304 million. I just don’t see how the math is going to work here.

    Can someone maybe break it down? All these countries that are used as examples have far less people in their countries than the US.

    I have a client in town right now from Canada. She said she likes the US health care system better. She was born in the states however she is a Canadian citizen. She said it is worth it to her to cross over the border and pay for US health care. She also said they (Canadians) are starting to get charged for health care. Procedures that may have been free before now have a fee involved. And many Canadians pay 50% in taxes.

    Back to the math for me, I just don’t see how it would work based on the sheer number of people we have in this country.

    • ces

      As the population numbers scale so does the GDP.

      And yet, the US still uses MORE of our GDP for health care than all these other countries.

    • Obamastolemycounty

      Yes, as in my post below, the US should not be compared to another country. We don’t fit the same mold.

    • MrMike

      The costs of co-pays and what is covered varies by province in Canada.

  • Obamastolemycounty

    We should not be compared to any other country. This is the US. Some things that fly in other countries won’t fly here, just the same as some things here would never fly in other countries. My guess is that the other Governments have carefully planned their programs and have listened to their citizens to try and do the best for all citizens. That is not what is happening here. Our Government has complete disregard for the people and their real needs. It is all about a power grab, and I can assure you that this is a payback system for some groups who bought Obama the White House. The problem is not a Government run Health care plan. The problem is this Government run Health Care plan. It seems that every thing this Government touches is a disaster and all for the purposes of making some group rich at the expense of the American citizens. If our Government, people of all political persuasions, would actually take a breather and ideas from the citizens and spell out how they’ve come to their conclusions that this, that or the other thing is needed and/or going to stop waste and save money, the people would listen and be willing to come on board for a well planned, well thought out plan. It is the bs they are all spewing from their mouths and the mad rush to get something passed, just for the sake of political victory that is turning people off! They did this all “stupidly” and will not be given another chance!

  • Tammy

    I did read the article.
    Where are the numbers? Was it a poll taken? If so, where are the statistics?

    I’m sure that most Brits are fine with NHS as they’ve never experienced anything else. How would they know the difference? My Dad wasn’t too happy with it, but he’s dead so he can’t voice his opinion anymore.

    I believe in improving the health care system here in the US. Lots of changes need to be made, but I do NOT want the Government running ANYTHING that has to do with my health. They can’t even run the Post Office.

    If someone out there(and I don’t care which party they come from) comes up with a comprehensive plan that makes sense, I’m all for it. The Obama administration tried to cram through a 1,000 page bill in less than two weeks without venting it fully to the public.
    I don’t trust them. Do YOU?

    • Anon

      And now they are saying that the legislation is no where near completion. Well, what the hell were they pushing so hard to pass before recess just two weeks ago?

      • candymarl

        The non-existent bill. At least that’s what they said.

        Bush and his cronies said some off the wall stuff and tried to convince us that we should not believe our lying eyes. War? What war?

        Local news is reporting Obama is sending more troops in. Where are the anti-war protests? I forgot that war, indefinite detention, and black sites are now a good thing.

        These are the people that will run health care. Should we trust them now? After reneging on FISA, NAFTA, DADT, bailouts (GM too big to fail that declared bankruptcy), Goldman Sachs making out like bandits.

        It’s deja vu all over again.

    • MrMike

      Funny, the ones losing my packages all the time isn’t the USPS it’s one of the private carriers.

      • oowawa

        Yes–let’s leave USPS out of this health care discussion–it doesn’t belong here. The United States has always had the cheapest and most efficient mail delivery sytem in the world, and it still does. What’s wrong with O-Whole-Health has nothing whatsoever to do with the United States Postal Service, and trying to go down this road is a red herring obscuring the real issues. Funny–it was Thee One himself who first used this particular red herring.

        • Ferd Berfle

          Funny how two entirely separate topics morph into an irrelevant diversion. This is why we’ll never get anything done. The emotional basketcases on both sides of the issue continue to take their eye off the proverbial ball and focus on the weeds beneath it.

  • mountainaires

    Exactly.

    Eliminate pensions and government-provided healthcare for our “elected” representatives. Then, establish publicly funded elections for those “representatives”; all private money banned for political campaigns. Set a limit of $ 100,000 per campaign. It forces the candidates to actually travel like ordinary people, not in private jets supplied by private donors.

    Only problem? Won’t happen, until we have a revolution in this country, and people start taking it to the streets in civil disobedience in such massive numbers that they cannot be controlled, ignored, or dismissed.

    Americans are far too genteel for the elitists to pay attention. Sure, tea parties, and town hall revolts are important as a first step; but it will take much more than that to effect real change to our political system–which will require actually doing away with political parties altogether.

    • Mindy

      Woohoo! I agree 100%, we need a revolution, we are far overdue for one.

  • Obamastolemycounty

    No one should be asking Americans to back this unless and until they give us all the facts, including how much the premiums, copays, drug costs to us would be. It is irresponsible to even attempt to pass this when they have not been able or willing to give every last detail. Suppose I am for this thing, but it turns out my premiums for it would be $1,000 per month? I am not willing or able to pay that. This is just an Obama fairytale box of crap, just like everything else he’s ever done and he doesn’t even have any real clue what’s in it! He did not write it and he certainly has not read it!

    • mountainaires

      Well, and the problem is–IF your premiums turn out to be higher than you can afford, you still won’t have any choice, you’ll have to pay them, or you’ll be fined.

      There are going to be a whole hell of a lot of liberal youngsters out there in their 20s and 30s who are going to be “SHOCKED, SHOCKED, I TELL YOU” to discover that their bills will go up as a result of this…they think they’re gonna get health care for free…

      Nah gah happen.

      • Mindy

        I’m in my 20′s. I don’t expect healthcare for free. I’m actually in favor of a tax increase on EVERYONE and certain unhealthy foods, alcohol, and drugs to pay for it, just like in the U.K. If a tax increase means that I never have to worry about bankruptcy, then sobeit. I’m happy to pay it. Otherwise, my choice is ever-increasing insurance premiums, because either way, nothing is going to be free or “cheaper” as long as private insurers are involved.

    • Obamastolemycounty

      BTW, I have read the bill, not in full because it’s a massive yawn fest, but I have focused on key parts and skimmed most of the rest. It does mention copays, etc., so there will be some. Getting behind something without knowing the full cost to you is like giving a car dealership a blank check and allowing them to name the price and pick which vehicle they’d like you to have. Would anyone do that? Not in their right mind they wouldn’t!

    • don tufts

      BRAVO!

  • Bronwyn’s Harbor

    The Obama plan does not in any way resemble the British or Canadian or French systems. That’s because Obama’s plan is not a single-payer system, which is the only system that cuts dependency on big PHARMA and corporate health insurance companies.

    Obama’s plan perpetuates what we already have, and is handing insurance companies 40 million CAPTIVE new customers. Why captive? Because that nice-sounding word “mandate” means that Americans will be forced to buy a insurance company plan, and those companies are chomping at the bit for 40 million new customers.

    PHARMA loves Obama’s plan because they will not have to give up their stranglehold on drug prices in this country, other than a token amount that Obama and his best friends in the pharmaceutical industry are touting as if it were a complete change, when in fact it will affect (what?) about 2% of pricing in this country.

    The only way to substantively improve health care for every American is to start over with a single-payer plan. See my recent post here, “What Obama Doesn’t Want You to Know About His Health Plan.” Here’s a sampling of the quotes in my post:

    “What [Obama] has essentially advocated is throwing more money into the current system. He’s treating the symptom and he’s not treating the underlying cause of our problem. Our problem is that we spend two and a half times as much per person on health care as other advanced countries, the average of other advanced countries. And we don’t get our money’s worth. So, now he says, okay, this is a terribly inefficient, wasteful system. Let’s throw some money into it. … Into the same system. That’s his problem. The other problem, in the press conference, was that he was trying to mobilize public support for a bill, and we don’t know what that bill is.”

    There are more important points in the post. Read it all!

    • FrenchNail

      Have you ever lived in a single payer system country?

      Have you ever been seriously ill there?

      Do you have any idea how much such system end up costing?

      How much it drag the economy down? How much it cripple the economy growth by absorbing huge parts of the National Budget? How it ends up being the largest employer in the nation, a giant voting block preventing ANY substantial reform and constantly lobbying for the interests of its members and not of the patients?

      • Mindy

        THe UK has single-payer system. The UK had the best economy and education system in the world, until the U.S.’s irresponsible lending habits destroyed it. I hardly think it was healthcare that ruined the U.K.’s economy. Once again, that blame can be laid on the U.S.

        Have you lived in the U.S. where no bill in Congress is brought to help members of the country, but are all for interest groups and lobbyists who have the money to pay a politician off? The system, as is, will bankrupt every middle-class American, causing great economic hardship, worse than what we are currently in, if it isn’t stopped. Greed is the end-all of conversations here in our private insurance industry.

  • EWard

    Larry

    If BO and the Democrats HC plan is so great, then why are they subject to a better and different health program? I just don’t buy it.

    Obamastole.. is correct. This is a powergrab. BO wants total control over every aspect of our lives from HC, energy, housing, banking, and so on. If this bill is passed, medical innovations will be stifled and doctors will leave their professions. Why would anyone in their right mind let BO ration our HC, pay, and lifestyle? This is nuts…..

    • MrMike

      That is one thing we can agree on. Obama-care isn’t great. It’s a give-a-way to the insurance companies and tries to do too much.
      The simple solution is we keep the hospitals, doctors and nurses as is and just change the way we pay for their services. That’s Single Payer.

  • tango

    But in Britain, where since 1948 all citizens have enjoyed free healthcare from birth to death

    But it’s not free. Taxes are collected so citizens are paying for the coverage they receive. What they have going for them is they aren’t denied treatment (coverage) for pre-existing conditions and coverage can’t be cancelled. I expect that those are the two major things the British like about their system.

    • MrMike

      Insurance works by pooling the premiums then paying out to those who need it. Economy of scale, the larger the pool the lower the costs to the participants. When the pool is the population of an entire country the costs dwindle.
      Something else I didn’t see mentioned is a citizen of Germany can get reduced cost care in France or Spain and vice versa. Oh and most plans include co-pays too, so it isn’t really free.

  • Objective Analysis

    Larry,

    And you wonder why Americans broke away from the british and had the American Revolution.

    Don’t you get it. Brits can do what they want but AMERICANS believe under the Declaration of Independence and U.S. Constitution, we can do what we want.

    But, what do you expect when Obama (POTUS) was a british citizen at birth b/c his father was a Kenyan National.

    Do you think Obama has control over the Brits media too?

  • TexasMirth

    British M.P. Daniel Hannan has been very outspoken about this subject.
    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,539273,00.html

  • donjo

    I read somewhere that in a recent poll over 80% of Canadians said they wouldn’t exchange their health care system for ours. Most of the bitching here comes from misinformation and fear spread by the insurance companies. The very ones who are causing most of the problem. No one seems to mention the benefits in the economy, new jobs, etc. that would be created with a single payer system. Here’s some links:

    http://budurl.com/2yz3

    http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2009/01/15-10

    “Specifically, notes Jenkins, expanding Medicare to include the uninsured, and those on Medicaid or employer-sponsored health plans, and expanding coverage for those with limited Medicare, would:

    1. Create 2,613,495 million new permanent good-paying jobs (slightly exceeding the number of jobs lost in 2008) — and jobs that are not easily shipped overseas

    2. Boost the economy with $317 billion in increased business and public revenues

    3. Add $100 billion in employee compensation

    4. Infuse public budgets with $44 billion in new tax revenues

    “Through direct and supplemental expenditures, healthcare is already a uniquely dominant force in the U.S. economy,” says the study’s lead author, Don DeMoro, who directs the Institute for Health and Socio-Economic Policy, the NNOC/CNA research arm. “If we were to expand our present Medicare system to cover all Americans, the economic stimulus alone would create an immense engine that would help drive our national economy for decades to come.”

    • Juliet16

      Troll. (yawn)

      This is total BS.

      We all know that you don’t have to scrap the entire system we have just to provide insurance to the truly uninsurable (indigent and those with pre-existing condidtions).

      The rest are illegal aliens (sorry, I can’t get free healthcare in Mexico) and Americans who CAN afford it but don’t want it…especially young Americans.

      no, it is clear that Obama wants to set up a HUGE national health care bureaucracy with lots, and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots …….

      of GOVERNMENT WORKERS most of which will alwasy vote DEMOCRAT and keep the DEMOCRATS in power for ever and ever and ever.

      End of Story.

  • HARP

    A question nobody seems to be asking. How many employees would be required to run a similar service for more than 300 million people if Britain [pop 65 million], needs 1.3 million workers.

    The NHS workforce has grown by 30%, new figures show, with 1.3 million people employed last year, up from one million the decade previously.

    • MrMike

      And all these employees are clerks? Or does it include providers.
      A partial answer to the post above yours would be those employees would come from the staffs working at today’s insurance companies and the excess from hospitals.
      Something I rarely see mentioned about Single Payer is that in some countries it’s administration is done by the government and in others it’s contracted out to a private group.

  • Cindy

    “And how about this? Eliminate all government provided health care for every member of Congress. Let’s dispense with the cushy pensions as well”

    Absolutely! Great point, Larry.

  • HC123

    The English like to suffer together. If you have ever lived there you will probably notice this. Its actually somewhat charming. Stiff upper lip, save the Empire, etc. Maybe its because of the weather?

    I personally find their level of healthcare unacceptable. Its based on government run rationing, and I will insert the obligatory personal story here for those who care to read it:

    My cousin, who is 43, cannot get her ACL operated on based on her age. She is healthy, active and an avid skiier. She is also over 40. She will live the rest of her life with no ACL and related swelling and pain, her kidney and liver being beaten up by Advil over time, and face a higher likelihood of arthritis in later years.

    The funny part is shes actually fine with this (more or less), because shes English, shes proud of her country, and its what her doctors tell her she should do. So she says shes happy popping Advils daily and reducing her activity level at the ripe old age of 43. Thats right, she should just take it easy and wait to die.

    So, in short, she sees doctors all the time, they get paid, yet they dont fix a very fixable problem. They dont even discuss it, because its simply not considered “realistic” (a euphemism for “cost effective” I think).

    • MrMike

      What is preventing your sister from saving up and paying out of pocket like we do here when our claim is denied by the insurance company?

      • HC123

        I believe I answered this question, but never miss an opportunity to find a bad guy (insurance companies, all bad, all day long!)

        #1 The british suffer together, its a national past-time (see first sentence).

        #2 Her doctors have told her ACL surgery is not “realistic” (see last sentence).

        • MrMike
          • The Real HC

            You miss my point entirely.

            My cousin received almost no information beyond the ACL procedure being “unrealistic” (after SHE asked her doctor about the procedure based on MY experience of a very successful ACL repair).

            So she didn’t get the surgery – in fact never had a serious discussion about it because its simply unavailable to her via the NHS.

            She would say her care is fine if you ask her. She is British and she is OK with a level of “stiff upper lip/suck it up” than most Americans I know would ever tolerate. In general Americans expect more than Britons do. They are louder, they complain more, they expect more, they also tip more and give much more to charity.

            Her care would not be fine with me. I would not want that system here.

    • Karma

      Wow…a geezer at 43. That is obscene.

      I couldn’t imagine being sidelined that early in life. Most of the people I know still have a kid at heart mentality no matter what their age. But your friend will age quicker because of not having the full use of her leg.

      And when your friend is taken out of consideration for surgery at such a young age. Will US housewives/moms ever be considered productive members of society if they never worked to provide health care taxes for the masses?

      They’ve only really worked for their family. So does that make them worthless in the eyes of the govt?

      Expect to see the surgery vacation industry exploding in the next few decades.

      • Karma

        oops….your cousin

        • HC123

          Shes a friend too. But no, not my sister as MrMike says.

          Shes doing “water aerobics” now – you know those workouts that 97 year olds do in the swimming pool? Its just amazing.

          Most healthy people are happy with their healthcare, and thankfully most people are in fact healthy most of the time.

          This is why surveys are more meaningful when they examine groups with actual medical needs and where specific outcomes can be compared apples to apples. But I rarely see this sort of analysis.

          • Karma

            True….very true about the proper analysis. Easy to skew results for special interest groups rather than get useful information.

            Your cousin is smart to keep active with water aerobics. It probably helps on a lot of levels such as keeping inflammation low when out of the pool.

            A while back had a friend who injured herself and was packing on the pounds eating for her previous active life so she started up Callanetics and actually looked even better than before her injury. Not that she wanted the comparison…lol. She still missed her previous level of sports activity but was worried about making it worse. She didn’t have surgery either.

      • MrMike

        And when your friend is taken out of consideration for surgery at such a young age.

        Read my linked articles on ACL surgery was being a productive member of society the reason? Or was it because this person wasn’t a good candidate due to medical reasons?

        Will US housewives/moms ever be considered productive members of society if they never worked to provide health care taxes for the masses?

        Why not ask that question of German, French or Spanish housewives, they seem to be doing OK under their Single Payer Systems.

        • Karma

          Yeah but their systems also pay for what 1-3 years of maternity leave?

          http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/54512.php

          “France’s birth rate of about 1.8 children per woman is the second-highest in Europe, and France is the only European country with the possibility of maintaining its current population through births. Incentives offered by the government include a three-year paid parental leave with guaranteed job protection upon returning to the workforce; universal, full-time preschool starting at age three; subsidized day care before age three; stipends for in-home nannies; and monthly child-care allowances that increase with the number of children per family (Kaiser Daily Women’s Health Policy Report, 9/25). Most of the subsidies and stipends are based on household income, ensuring that only a fraction of every working mother’s salary goes to child-care costs, according to the Post. The French system also “fosters different attitudes about working mothers,” and French mothers say they feel less guilt while at work than their American counterparts or women in other European countries, the Post reports. “In Mediterranean countries and Germany, it’s work or children,” Marie-Therese Letablier, research director of the Center for Employment Studies, said, adding, “In France, it’s work and children.” According to the Post, three-fourths of all French mothers with at least two children are employed (Washington Post, 10/18).”

          ~~~~

          So while Europe values mothers more than the US does and there is a lot more financial help at every turn. How does that translate to the US system that doesn’t come close to any European country. I believe fathers also have generous maternity leave benefits as well. I don’t see that system being brought here.

          I have witnessed as a child the change in thinking about how horrible it was being a working/single mother with most every exchange. To now, how small a life you must lead being only a mother/housewife and the pity shown to those women.

          In my opinion, it won’t swing back to the 50′s version any time soon.

          • Karma

            Oops meant to talk about the links also.

            It is a good question to ask about the ACL surgery. Thanks for the links.

            And it should be noted that surgery doesn’t guarantee successful results even if scheduled. It is hard work to recover your ability to move and there is usually that golden first year of healing to try and rehab and recover as much use as possible.

            I do remember seeing a segment on a tv news show Dateline or something. How active baby boomers expect these surgeries while they continue to abuse the joints and hips before and after surgeries. Obviously they did put in the hard rehab work and abused themselves even more rather than protecting themselves from more damage in the name of recreation.

            • HC123

              43 is hardly a baby boomer and skiing is not exactly base jumping.

              By all means, get the medical facts about any procedure. And then do it or not do it based on the facts as you see them.

              But no, I dont want the NHS putting my knees out to pasture at 40 just because they dont think I need to be using them all that much longer or dont approve of my activities. It doesnt take a village to make my healthcare choices, period.

              Most people who arent sick like their healthcare and will say so when asked. In fact I have read quite a few surveys of Americans in which the majority express satisfaction.

              • Karma

                Oh yes, I completely agree about NHS putting people out to pasture is wrong at such an age.

                The report was about rich Americans with Cadillac care, some out of pocket surgery, and extreme sports habits. Not your average active American with a weekly baseball game or ski weekends while living in CO.

                I should have written the post better but was trying to be brief.

                • Karma

                  Tried but can’t find the report that had the people coming in several times to fix what they abused. Must not have been Dateline.

                  Anyway my father in law had a hip replacements and while he did the rehab each time, he was never the same. Which was the point poorly made about surgery doesn’t mean successful results and not ACL surgery.

  • Diana L. C.

    I have always felt we needed serious reform in the way we all pay for healthcare in the U.S. While I have always in my adult life been insured, I know it’s harder for many today to say that. It’s been one of my biggest worries for my second son. He’s gone without insurance for several years, and while he’s insured now, it’s a very basic insurance and one that won’t help him much if he has a serious illness or accident. In addition, I have never been really unsatisfied with the quality of my healthcare, but that is mostly because I take it into my own hands whenever possible. I question; I get second opinions; I “fire” doctors I can’t communicate with. It’s how we pay for it and how we control costs that concern me.

    My best friend lived in Canada for a while and testifies that there were benefits to the Canadian system that we don’t have here and that there are benefits to our system that they don’t enjoy.

    It’s the Obama cabal that I don’t trust–I really don’t trust the RUSH to get a serious, complicated problem solved so haphazardly. I hate to say it, and it may be illogical, but I don’t trust anything with his name on it.

    I want them to slow down and really explain why they are doing things the way they are doing them. In specifics, not in O’s repeated platitudes. They should tell us how in specifics it will work, what will change, what the benefits are for its provisions and what our costs as a nation will be.

    I don’t want a bill to pass while there is still so much dissension. I know we’ll never get complete agreement, but we should try to get as much as we can. I hate this constant heated division in our country–first caused by the control of the neo-cons under Bush and now by the control of the ultra left bullying progressives under O.

    Thanks, Larry, for giving a middle ground opinion.

    • Patrick Henry

      I Agree Diana L.C.

      Well said..and thanks to larry too..

      Larry…are the Britishs Politicians and bureaucrats on the NHS too.??.can you buy your own insurance plan seperate from NHS there..??

      Bronwyns harbor had great comments too..above..

      I like a single payer system…eleminate as much government control as possible…regulate the Pharmaceuticals..or subsidize some R&R to cut costs to the consumer..

      Hell Yes…Demand everyone in Government and congress be on the same plans as the rest of Us…This BS of Our LAWYER League writing up thier Own Helath and retirement plans is Disgusting..

      Thats just NOT Right..and the MSM Needs to help pt and end to this Old Boy Stuff..media and public Outcry got them to back off those new Executive jets for congress..

      And DEMAND that Obama FIRE All His CZARS..That term has NO PLACE in Our Government System..

      What another Waste of MONEY..

      I have NEVER seen such Hypocricy and Irresponsibility in My Life..

      Shameful…Shameful…Shameful…

      • ~~JustMe~~

        Yes ANYONE can buy private Ins in the UK many companies offer it too. We had it when in the UK. however you cannot use it in some areas e.g. pregnancy or birth as the NHS offers excellent service for women when pregnant. I delivered my child in the UK and had wonderful care.

        The excellent thing after delivering a child in the UK you do not need to visit the DR midwives come to your home to take care of you and check on the babies growth, health etc.

        I used our private ins for a sinus operation basically because I would of been put on a waiting list. The work is classed as non emergency care.At the time I was due to go in I found out I was pregnant so I put the surgery off until after I delivered. I chose to have the surgery after the holidays. Pvt insurance allowed me to have the work done at a time that was convenient for me and my family.

        On a personal level I feel health care here needs reform so EVERY person is covered it’s mindblowing when I hear people cannot go to a DR when needed as they have no insurance.
        My family has had excellent care here in the States and up until this year we had ins through my husbands employer. Due to the economic climate we have since had to pay our own ins which runs at $1400 a month. YIKES!! Families in a lower income bracket cannot afford these high costs for health insurance!! That is the part that needs to be fixed.

        • Juliet16

          Can you get High Deductible Insurance and an IRS-approved HSA (Health Savings Account)?

          The monthly/annual premiums are EXTREMELY low…but what you would save in premiums would be socked into the HSA account, which operates kind of like a medical 401K –and anything not spent in any year accumulates and the balance and rolls over from year to year to year. Of course, you get a deduction on your taxes for your HSA contribution, as set by the IRS.

          Of course, it does have a rather high deductible, however if you can get through 1 or 2 releatively healthy years and don’t spend much, that HSA will pay for all your medical expenses…and it can really take off and accumulate a lot of money…that can be used for all of your medical expenses.

          So basically, it is similar to the old “hospitialization,” “major medical,” or “catastrophic” type plans.

          Basically, it covers big serious expenses but you pay for the smaller routine stuff. Since it is administered by insurance companies, they also negotiate reduction of fees for you with the doctors, labs, and hospitals.

          Works pretty well. And it is cheaper. And totally private. It totally cuts out a lot of bureacracy…like the HMO’s have. If the whole country switched over to that, it might be a good solution…at least for many people.

          • Patience

            I’m with you Juliet. This is what I’ve been saying too on other healthcare threads.

  • shannon

    My third year of med school I worked at an NHS hospital in Stockport, UK, just outside Manchester.

    My first day on the wards a patient was to be scheduled for a colonoscopy for suspected ulcerative colitis. Doctor says, “‘Right then, we’ll probably schedule something for May of next year” (i.e. 9 months later). The patient nodded, resigned to his fate. I almost wanted to laugh. My mind is thinking, Are you serious?! Nine months you have to wait?! That’s crazy.

    Same story when I was rotating in surgery. You got back pain from a nerve impingement (spinal disk herniation)? “We’ll see you in 10 months (for the spinal fusion surgery)’. Patient says, “Right then, doctor. Thank you.”

    Would that fly in the U.S? Are you nuts? Most of us would be screaming and hollering, Nine months?! You know, part of what makes us disliked around the world is also what has made us the top dog: we are impatient sons of bitches who want stuff done immediately. And if you can’t do it, we’ll find someone who can. And we think we can do it better than anyone else. We know we can do it more efficiently. We know we can sell more widgets. In short, we don’t settle. Maybe to others around the world that makes us rude and obnoxious, but the attitude of always looking for a better option is why we kick ass. Plain and simple. (Another thing I learned living in the UK: we’re always going to be disliked. Because the fact of the matter is we’re the New York Yankees. It doesn’t matter if it’s Obama. People will always find a reason to roll their eyes at America.)

    Now, I find it a bit odd that the UK is only NOW defending itself after Daniel Hannan had been stating his case for months. Only now — after a recent in studio appearance on “Hannity” I might add — has he been called “eccentric”. The kicker of calling Hannan eccentric is the man talks sense. He’s ridiculously articulate and effective and has a better knowledge of what makes the U.S. a great country: a suspicion of government’s influence. My cynical mind suspects this UK rally cry seems astroturfed; perhaps Obama called in a favor(?). Would it really surprise you? All of the sudden people are twittering about how much they love the NHS? What do they have to compare it to? It’s what they’ve known their entire life.

    I had a great experience at this NHS hospital, the staff was fantastic, the nurses and patients were wonderful. However, in my opinion, as an American, this is not a path we want to go ANYWHERE near. Once the beauracracy is in place with government jobs, you won’t be able to get rid of it. And it’s hilarious to me that people who’ve never even lived in a single payer country, have made it out to be some kind of a ‘grass is greener’ utopia. The main problem that defenders of “Obama Care” (the conceptions of the house and senate bills) is they have NO IDEA what kind of a change in culture they’re looking at. This kind of a system in the U.S. would be a radical shift in culture for the 80+% of Americans who have health insurance. Imagine how impatient you are in your daily life. Now imagine a new system where you’ll have longer waits to see your primary care, you’ll have longer projected dates for surgical procedures, and you’ll have nowhere to go for a second opinion.

    And, by the way, I take much exception to the comparisons to Norway, Denmark, Sweden, and the UK. Do these countries in any way resemble the U.S.? In size, population, geography, diversity, wealth, economic system, value of independence and autonomy. The European epidemiologists in Lancet are the one’s who are all to happy to look at the fetal mortality rate or the life span so they can beat their chests about how their system is better than those capitalist swines across the pond, but I’d submit to you, on the whole, we have the best system in the world for MORE of our population. And I for one don’t actually think it’s a bad thing that we spend more money per patient than any other country (though I’d like to see more efficiency). Allow me to make one other point: no system is perfect. There are always going to be people in ANY system who are going to be thrown under the bus and not get the care they need. And there will be outrage. Life is, in point of fact, unfair. Bad things happen to good people. We are a community with limited resources and I think that our country has found the best system FOR US to minimize as best we can some of the inequities.

    Would we have 98% insured eventually under ObamaCare? Yes. But we’ll be overhauling a system, which most of us are for the most part basically happy with (in spite of its obvious flaws that need reform), that works for a vast majority of us, in favor of a culture where we’ll all be “equally miserable”. 20 million in this country (NOT 46 million) need health insurance and don’t have the financial means for it. To be blunt, are you suggesting we overhaul a system that works for the other 280 million, for the sake of less than 1 out of every ten Americans? For what? Some idealized guilt of “it’s a shame people in this country don’t get medical care.” So what do we do for 20 million uninsured and millions more who are under-insured? TO be clear, I understand and empathize with the plight of the uninsured (we ALL do!). What I’m suggesting is that we can lower their numbers in a way that is healthy to our country and our economy.

    Well how can you have an intellectually honest conversation about cutting costs if you’re not even willing to talk about Tort reform? (Yet somehow Obama boasts about cost savings from Medical IT upgrades? Even Ezekiel Emanuel has said that IT is “window dressing”).

    You want pro-market solutions? Start with Whole Foods CEO’s suggestions, which I myself have been advocating for several weeks in private discussions:
    “Equalize the tax laws so that employer-provided health insurance and individually owned health insurance have the same tax benefits. Repeal all state laws which prevent insurance companies from competing across state lines. Repeal government mandates regarding what insurance companies must cover. Enact Medicare reform.Finally, revise tax forms to make it easier for individuals to make a voluntary, tax-deductible donation to help the millions of people who have no insurance and aren’t covered by Medicare, Medicaid or the State Children’s Health Insurance Program.”

    • Diana L. C.

      Thanks for your insider reflections. Having never worked in healthcare except for a two-year stint as a documents editor for a healthcare computer consulting business when my kids were in high school and I quit teaching so I could concentrate on my own maddening teenagers, I find it incredibly irritating that these lawyers (for the most part) who have no worries about their own healthcare should try to cobble together something and ram it down our throats based only on their theories.

    • The Real HC

      I really liked the Whole Foods concept myself, and found his article very interesting. I hear hes being boycotted by “progressives” – I wonder why? This is a company that provides excellent benefits for its workers. Why would this make progressives so angry? I guess anything does? I would think the current Obamaplan would too, its a hodgepodge of bureaucratspeak that wont do much for anyone.

      And yes, interestingly not a peep about tort reform.

      • Juliet16

        Because the owner of WHOLE FOODS didn’t “SHUT UP” and let the DNC have its way by letting Obama, Pelosi and Reid ram this through without discussion…

    • Patience

      Thanks so much for sharing your insight shannon.

  • hokma

    Eliminate all government-provided health care for every member of Congress. Let’s dispense with the cushy pensions as well. If Senators and Representatives had to live like most American they might better understand why some folks in the hinterland are angry.

    I absolutely agree with you on this – whether it is the VA or the government plan they are concocting.

    As far as the UK, why is is that people come to the U.S. for medical care and people from the U.S. don’t go there. The fact is that we have superior medical care and capabilities than other countries. Whatever problems we have can be addressed, but to kill the entire system is irresponsible. To demonize doctors and average Americans who are fearful of this overhaul is deplorable.

    We do not have a civil debate over this because of Obama and Congressional Democrats like Pelosi.

    • Obamastolemycounty

      Have we ever been told what the costs for the congressional health plan are every year? This is a perk they have proven that they don’t deserve, along with many other perks. On their salaries, they can afford their own. Take Congress off their plan and put the uninsured on it. There you go, problem solved.

  • kate

    I live in Massachusetts-or Taxachusetts! What might pass and be mandated in all states by our out of touch reps and Senators in DC is a plan similar to what MASS has. I think I heard some talk of looking into the MASS plan during the campaigns. I don’t know all details because I have insurance-maybe someone can fill in more. Here is what I know. By the way nothing was done to control cost!
    All citizens in the state must have insurance- if not they are penalized when they file their year end MA income tax return. I have insurance so I don’t know the amount-it can run high. Employers are mandated to provide insurance if they employ-I think it is 6 and over. If not they are penalized too. If you meet some State income guidelines then you sign on for free to a plan-MASS Health. By the way the state is broke!!Zero to lower cost of Health care. So much for reform if this is what passes!

  • helenk

    http://www.puma08.com/2009/08/15/list-of-obamas-czars/

    This is something I think we should all know.

    WOMEN WITH INTELLIGENCE AND EXPERIENCE,MEN WHO SUPPORT THEM AND COUNTRY BEFORE PARTY ALWAYS

    PUMAS,BUBBAS,EQUALISTS AND THOSE PEOPLE RULE

    • MrMike

      Helping those that helped him. ;)

  • DAB

    What bothers me most about Obama’s plan is that it appears to be an ad hoc mishmash of whatever Congress throws in there. I would have much preferred an external expert panel to come up with a coherent plan that has taken all potential repercussions into account.

    I don’t believe that this has been done. As someone who has struggled with getting decent coverage much of my life due to self-employment etc. I understand the logic behind the push — I just don’t think that enough study and/or thought has been put into the approach that has been cobbled together by Congress and the special interests.

  • MrMike

    http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,638501,00.html

    http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,grossbild-1603279-638501,00.html

    Check the chart at the second link.
    It give the amount of GDP spent versus the numbers per 1000 residents.

  • HARP

    Entitlement to treatment from NHS

    The principal groups that the NHS provides free or subsidized medical treatment to are:

    * Those with the right of abode in Britain and who are currently resident in Britain (this excludes British citizens who are resident abroad)
    * Anyone who has been resident in the UK for the previous year
    * EU nationals
    * Students (on courses longer than 6 months)
    * Anyone with a British work permit

    Nationals of countries with reciprocal health agreements with Britain are also entitled to treatment from the NHS, although exemption from charges is usually limited to emergency treatment. Countries with reciprocal agreements include: EEA nations, Anguilla, Australia, Barbados, British Virgin Islands, Bulgaria, Channel Islands, Falkland Islands, Gibraltar, Montserrat, New Zealand, Romania, Russia, St Helena, Switzerland, Turkey, and the Caicos Islands.

    http://www.justlanded.com/english/UK/UK-Guide/Health/National-Health-Service

  • Frikken’s Lunch Box

    Here’s what pisses me off…while I agree that we should all have access to quality, affordable, healthcare, what are we to do with the people who just continue to make poor choices that I end up paying for? I have contributed to Medicare and SS since I was 14 years old. I have been all things – employed, unemployed, and self-employed for the last 40 years. I have always managed to maintain health-insurance and keep me and my family covered. I currently hold down the full-time job, while my husband starts up a new business. I keep the health-insurance while he pursues his dream (I had my shot). I would love to live on an island in the Caribbean, dive from airplanes, or be a stunt airplane pilot, or just sit on my ass for six months, however, my first concern is keeping my family healthy and insured(and we have had few very serious health issues for which I am grateful that I had high quality health insurance by design). Come on folks, what about personal accountability? What about making good choices or be willing to be responsible for the consequences if you take the risks?

    • Anee

      I agree totally, I pay for my own health insurance and I don’t expect others to pay for it for me. My family goes without extras (dinners out, new clothes etc) so we can afford healthcare. Why should I pay for other’s health costs when they don’t make the same sacrafices? Why should I pay for other people’s abortions? Illegals?
      We have healthcare for the poor, its called medicaid. If you can’t afford healthcare then offer a plan where you have to pay something and become part of the medicaid plan.
      Healthcare can be fixed if we start with tort reform and figuring out why it costs so much to deliver things like a tablet of aspirin for 30 dollars to patients in the hospital. The problem is the administration of healthcare, there are too many middleman between the doctor and the patient.
      These are just my observations as I have worked in the medical field for the past 20 years.

  • Anee

    Obamacare is all about control… He wants to control every aspect of our lives, and he told us that when he was running for prez. but the masses were not listening …
    He said “you can’t drive your suvs” = we have cash for clunkers
    He said you can’t run your air conditioning and heaters, = we have energy taxes
    He said we will have open transparency on the dialogue between the insurance companies, pharms and doctors to create the healthcare plan = secret meetings with big insurance companies
    He said people cling to their guns and religion = stayed tuned people, he is coming after that next.

  • http://in Elizabeth

    Although I don’t think the majority of Americans would ever support a non-profit model of health-care, I like a system that achieves outstanding health outcomes with a fraction of the cost. The Japanese, for instance, besides being far more happy with their system than Americans and enjoying the longest life expectancy in the world also spend half to a third as much.

    They use a mixture of public insurance with heavily regulated private plans (the “public utilities” model) and get cost control through an entirely private delivery system of hospitals and clinics. Every person and employer pays into a national health insurance fund at defined rates, and they have public plans for those who are unemployed, self-employed, or employed by small employers. They also have a network of public hospitals, health insurance companies are forbidden from denying coverage, and they subsidize health insurance for the poor. So in the strictest sense of the term, Japan does not have a single-payer healthcare system. In fact, it has a multi-payer system where the citizens, employers, and the Japanese government all share the costs of healthcare.

    Private insurance companies are alive and do very well in Japan. The insurance companies and provider rates are just tightly regulated by a governmental agency. The government role is to control costs and offer incentives to practitioners who have the highest rates of patient health.

    http://healthcare.change.org/blog/view/turning_japanese_we_could_do_a_lot_worse

    An individual mandate requiring everyone to have coverage. An employer mandate requiring employers provide insurance, which is how 62.8% of the population gets their coverage – a comparable number to the U.S. Fixing premiums as a percentage of income. A minimum level of comprehensive benefits that is robust and focused on primary care, prevention and outpatient services. An egalitarian approach to physician compensation. Significantly more stringent regulation of the private insurance industry, enough to completely change their business practices. And, finally, significant government intervention to control costs. It seems to me we could regulate insurers kind of the way we do with public utilities.

    • Ferd Berfle

      Although I don’t think the majority of Americans would ever support a non-profit model of health-care, I like a system that achieves outstanding health outcomes with a fraction of the cost.

      Well, I for one don’t care for “for-profit” hospitals and pharmaceutical companies, et al., for the very reason that the capitalist model doesn’t work well when your audience is a captive one. Selling cars to make a profit is one thing; selling care to make a profit is quite another.

  • PO’dVet

    I said this before here and other places, and it fits in perfectly with this topic. I am a Democrat, and plan to remain one, as well as being a “progressive” in most things. I am for a single payer system with a private option! But that is not what Obama’s proposed health care reform is. It is nothing but a very badly written piece of trash. Even if you read it no further than sec.123.Health Benefits Advisory Committee…That will recommend the covered benefits etc. etc… 2/3 of the committee is appointed directly by the President! So even if you are naive enough to believe every single lie coming out of Obama’s mouth. You have to think about what happens next time we have someone like George Dumbya Bush in office. Do you really want people like Mike (heck of a job with Katrina Brownie) Brown to be in a position to set what health care you and your family can receive?!? Only one person on the committee even has to be a doctor! It goes on to say that several groups must be represented…providers, consumer representatives, employers, labor, health insurance issuers, experts in health care financing and delivery, experts in racial and ethnic disparities etc…In other words! The people who have been screwing the system up all along must be represented!

    Someone please save us from the Far Right wacko’s AND Far Left Lunatics!!!

  • Frikken’s Lunch Box

    I didn’t risk bringing children eight children into the world at one time that I couldn’t care for, or continue to have children when I know I am a carrier of hemophilia, or eat at Burger King twice a week, or drive a motorcycle without a helmet, or not wear a seat belt, or, or, or….why the hell do I have to pay for the people who do those things? Instead I live a relatively dull but safe life. Why is the government going to make me work more to cover those who are having their fun?

  • Patrick Henry

    Elizabeth..

    Excellent Comments.!!..You and others here have great Input for this thread..

    Our Bought off Politicans have Wasted Trillions of Dollars here in the United States..up to and including Wasteful Pork barreling..and have Created
    a Uncontrollable Welfare System ..

    Our whole government System has not real checks and balances or Oversight now..and everything is designed to be a Self Serving..Cover your ass system…with the ILLUSION that they are doing Anything for the People..and the Middle Class is Stuck in the Middle of the Far Right..Far Left Manipulations..

    You cant believe anything a politician tells you any more..

    Its Really a Governemnt of the Bureaucrat, By the Bureaucrat and FOR the Bureaucrat..

    DISGUSTING..

    we deserve Better than this HYPROCISY..

  • cat

    From the Daily Mail:

    The President is discovering that people are apt to want to defend and preserve what they have. The same is true of we British and our lumbering health service. The difference, though, is that what the Americans have is, for the most part, better than the NHS.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1206149/STEPHEN-GLOVER-I-deeply-resent-Americans-sneering-health-service—thats-truth-hurts.html

    • mary

      Daily mall

      Quit maligning and misinforming. Obama the miscommunicator doesn’t have have clue. But what’s your excuse?

      National Helath Systems WORK! UK and CANADA are living proof. As someone real, don’t rely on sensationalist daily junk papers only.

      Read in N.Y. Times Nicholas Kristof’s article on 59-year-old American lawyer *Diane Tucker* who immigrated to Canada and became a permanent resident for no other reason than its NATIONAL HEALTHCARE SYSTEM that WORKS.

      Not a single Canadian files for bankruptcy as result of Medical Bills. 62% Americans do!

      And if anyone tries to mess around with this, in Canada or UK, that politician’s days in power would be numbered and he’d find himself on his posterior outside Parliament. Google Tommy Douglas….

  • LesleeE

    I’m absolutely sick and tired of seeing the NHS ripped to shreds. My sister lives in England and has a serious blood disorder; she sees a specialist on a regular basis and receives constant monitoring and medication as necessary. When she was in hospital she didn’t have to spend her time worrying about how on earth she was going to pay the bill or afford medication afterwards they way I have here, it was all supplied. This system is a disgrace and people – young and old, die and go without care and medicine daily because – and it’s not complicated – they simply can’t afford it. The response from those who have insurance to those of us who don’t is go to the emergency room if you need to see a doctor! Really? You try it. Ok, yes, you will be seen, followed by an avalanche of mind numbing bills and collection calls. Just what a sick person needs, not to mention sitting for hours in a waiting room. Yeah, you’ll enjoy that when you’re in pain and feeling like death warmed over. Please, go ahead, give it a shot. Oh, and good luck getting your medicine or seeing the specialist you’re referred to.
    It’s a simplistic heartless response by the “I’m ok, screw the rest of you, stand on your own two feet, I’m not paying for you” crowd.
    Is the NHS perfect? No, it needs work, money and reform, and yes it is taken advantage of (show me a system that isn’t!) but I’ll take it any day over this patchwork quilt of a mess, at least it offers a security and peace of mind only those of us without insurance or financial resources can truly appreciate.

    • Diana L. C.

      LesleeE,

      I do understand your point. The situations you describe are the reason healthcare IS an issue. I know about the pain of being under the curse of having to deal with the bills for emergency care in a hospital.

      My son, who did have the very basic insurance that his company offered since he wasn’t yet eligible for a better plan, got himself stupidly in the middle of a literal cat fight one night. Anyone with any knowledge of cat bites knows they are not things you take lightly, especially if your skin is broken enough for a bite into your blood system.

      He washed his wounds, poured hydrogen peroxide over them and then, because of the time of night, could not find anyone on his health plan open for a doctor’s visit. He had to go to the hospital. He couldn’t wait until the next morning because he had to work and was not yet comfortable in the job to chance calling in sick and getting a black mark on his record for being stupid enough to blunder into a cat fight.

      He was in and out of that hospital emergency visit in less than an hour (it was an unusually slow night), having received a shot for infection and then a bottle of powerful antibiotics. The hospital took a check for $50 before releasing him. Then a few weeks later he discovered the real cost for that fifteen minute examination by the doctor: a little over $1,800.00. His basic insurance covered about $800 of the entire expense. I stepped up and arranged to pay off the rest because he doesn’t make much and had just purchased a tiny foreclosed home he had expenses already mounting up for.

      It is extremely hard for young people to start their adult lives they way we were able to, especially if they don’t have mothers to help. :-)

      I think most of us understand the great complexity of the issue. What I don’t understand is the real justification for that $1,800.00 bill for a 15-minute visit. I just can’t get my head around that figure for that particular case.

      I am still not sure, however, that O’s plan will work to control costs that much. I am willing to help all people get the medical attention they deserve, but I want to know that competent, efficient, well-thought out reforms are passed. I don’t want a worse mess than we have now, and O is NOT proposing a system like the NHS. It’s really unclear to me HOW the system proposed will work.

      And I don’t want to buy a clunker.

    • Frikken’s Lunch Box

      Here in the US we have Medicare for those over 65 and the disabled, Medicaid for the poor, inexpensive insurance that covers everything you could possibly need for the working poor (I know because I used it for two years), SCHIPS, High Risk (with public assistance for premiumns), assistance programs for the indigent, etc. Afforable or free coverage for healthcare is already available in EVERY state in the union if you take the time to apply. I know because it is my job to help people get coverage for life-sustaining therapies. I am sick of hearing how many people are uninsured….is it because they haven’t looked or perhaps don’t want to pay anything at all?

      • LesleeE

        Wow! What a great response, thanks for the info, what a help. Really, you got me, I’m a lazy, tight fisted old thing. I thought that when insurance company after insurance company turned me down because of pre-existing I had nowhere to turn, except that is for coverage that cost a small fortune each month and covered sod all with a massive deduction to start, then controlled benefits. Silly me, there was coverage out there for the working poor (us) all along. Do tell, what beneficent insurance company is handing that out? And when you say covers everything, define that. Cancer, long term etc? ‘Cause, gotta tell ya, haven’t heard that, but then, maybe I’ve been too darn lazy to find out and didn’t want to pay for it anyway.

        And, just a thought, wouldn’t it be great to have just one system that covered everyone equally instead of the zillion different plans you describe?

        • The Real HC

          I dont think it would be great to have a one size fits all plan. I quite like options.

          • LesleeE

            Options! Options for what? If you have full coverage, what else do you need?

            • The Real HC

              Full coverage? What does that even mean?

              I want botox, and I can get a quack to sign a form saying it help with my migraines. So its covered, right?

              I dont feel like being on any birth control and I like having sex, so I will be needing an abortion every 4 months. So its covered, right?

              And you and I should pay the same rates, right? Everyone should share in my choices, because its full coverage!

              I currently have a plan with a relatively high deductible, because I prefer to pay my doctor directly for her time for office visits. My plan is fairly inexpensive because I *choose* to have a high deductible. My plan has excellent catastrophic coverage and hospitalization.

              Do I think this plan would be the best for everyone. Probably not. Its an OPTION that works for me.

              • LesleeE

                I’m trying to make sense of your reply, but it just aint happening. Never mind, you’re happy, so I guess that’s all that matters.

                • HC123

                  From what you are saying, you are angry your kid’s insurance didn’t fully cover a trip to the ER, and you would like the rest of America to help with this.

                  In addition, you aren’t able to understand what treatments were rendered in the ER, and you suspect they were not worth $1000. This also makes you angry and Americans as a whole need to help you out.

                  Glad we cleared up your expectations of the rest of us. I think I understand your definition of “full coverage healthcare”.

                  Go ahead and send me the bill for your kid. I will go beat $100 each out of my neighbors and send it to you.

                  Its the least we can do.

                  • LesleeE

                    Umm, I never wrote that, but I’m sure the person that did will really appreciate your kind and compassionate offer. What a sweetie you are.

        • Frikken’s Lunch Box

          Well LesleeE what are your particular circumstances and what is your condition?

    • Karma

      Sorry but the poor are taken care of if take the time to apply for it.

      We have a friend who just had her spleen taken out, she had a skin condition which they treated, and had surgery once again for another reason, as well as dental care. Her son is fully covered.

      And unfortunately his father just passed from pancreatic cancer but that was because it was caught too late. He did receive chemo and had to visit the doctor several times a week for treatment. They were given vouchers for public transit when their vehicle broke down. The public transit picked them up in front of their apt and took them to the doctors. Door to door service. His other wife, not the one with the spleen surgery, was also given money for staying home and being his caretaker.

      He then received care within the hospital towards the end and later hospice care.

      The poor are taken care of despite what some politician may claim and no one is trying to take that coverage away, except politicians who are taking funding away from Medicare for this bill.

      Maybe the solution is to raise the income limit for these programs instead of stealing from them to set up another whole system. Medicare has a 1-2% administration costs while insurance companies have 30%. Obama seems to want us to subsidize the insurance companies and their admin costs with the forced enrollment rather than add these people to Medicare or make the insurance companies honor their contracts. Which by the way they update and change yearly.

      Which makes more sense?

  • Tammy

    The videos on this website are worth taking a look at.
    These are real people with horror stories.

    I don’t want the government involved in my health decisions. There HAS to be a better plan than the one Obama is shoving down our throats.

    http://www.facesofgovernmenthealthcare.com/

  • candymarl

    Well good for the Brits. But I’m an American. Remember that pesky Revolutionary War?

    We need a plan for the American system.

  • Sally again

    How about congress take the simple route if insurance cos are so evil…make what they do wrong/immoral illegal…duh! And then remove all the stupid regulations that favor large companies over smaller ones and tada, you’ve got competition, lower prices and its easy for them to do and pass. The health care regs are written by the big congromerate’s lawyers, not the congress…that’s why they don’t understand it or read it…id**ts.

    The way the behave in congress is as if they don’t have the power to do anything except break the f**king sytem completely. ID**TS and bunch F**cists. (yes, I have to blot that word out or my statement doesn’t get through the screeners….ironic: at the very time when the word is most apropos, we can’t use it to call a duck a duck.)

  • I’m a Linda too

    Spot on.

    The Brits are making the mistake that Obama is actually trying to pass a plan like theirs. HA!

    So much for them paying attention. Obama isn’t giving a Single Payer Insurance, he is forcing market priced INSURANCE, through another government program that will cost an incredible amount, so we can pay for those who don’t have it now. The market priced insurance, so with promises NOT to negotiate lower prices so his special interests make a mint on our asses. AND, he’s making a seprate program, instead of perfecting and expanding the one we have, either Congress’es health care or Medicare. HelllOOOO???? And, also because he wants to play God and say who gets what care and will help pay for the lower incomes insurance, so they work harder for HIM, by taking it away from the people who have spent their life time giving to the collective welfare of the country and government. AND, he agreed NOT to allow an expansion of plan B on Medicare, another gift to his special interests.

    This is what Clint Eastwood in Heartbreak Ridge called a Cluster Fuck.

  • Pingback: “Not just Hannan:Tory links with NHS-bashers” and related posts - BeWell Buddy

  • European

    Daily Mail wrote an interesting piece trashing their health care system. It lets you in on some interesting statistics, such as cancer survival rate which is remarkably higher in the US where patients are actually tested. Here in Europe it’s a miracle if you even do get tested since they always go for the cheaper options and give you pills.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1206149/STEPHEN-GLOVER-I-deeply-resent-Americans-sneering-health-service—thats-truth-hurts.html

    Btw, the mother of my friend finally got tested for cancer about a month ago. She had been visiting doctors for 2 years with her symptoms but all she got was pills and “it’s nothing serious”. A line we’re so familiar with. This week doctors told her there’s nothing to do since the cancer has spread too much. So yeah, opposing this “rubbish health care for all” is personal for me. There is no point in paying taxes for this.

    • mary

      European

      How can you possible MISLEAD in your post so much. My relatives in UK and France would prove you wrong in a second. You believe, like the regressive Republicans, what a few nasty stories have to tell you. I doubt you even know anything about how healthcare runs in the UK! Giving you pills, you say? No bloody way, old chap! They refer you to specialists at a moment’s notice, and if you don’t like your practitioner, you can get another one. As a matter of fact, there’s a drive for U.K. PREVENTIVE medicine right now! Don’t lie to us!

      And just take a trip, oh European?, up north to Canada to see that they haven’t had a bankruptcy due to inability to pay medical bills since 1965!
      Why don’t you go closer to home to spin your untruths, pseudo-European my posterior!

      Go to Canada and see why people there LOVE CANADIAN HEALTHCARE! They treat people humanely, have access to state-of-the-art medicine and, yes, they may wait a bit for ELECTIVE surgeries (they have the option to go the U.S. and this may even by covered by Canadian healthcare!). But hell, don’t try to tell me that any Canadian would give up his/her HUMAN RIGHT TO HEALTHCARE to allow the damn Insurance company vultures to prey on them!
      Psst, “European”, the longevity factor has the Canadians beating the U.S. by 3 years for women! And infants’ mortality is not a Botswana equivalent as it’s here in u.s.a.! Gimme a break. Do your research.
      And read N.Y.Times, Nic Kristof’s article on 59-year-old American lawyer who immigrated to Vancouver, Canada for no other reason than….national Healthcare! Her name is DIANE TUCKER. (June 11/09 NYT) And don’t be like Obama–The Great Miscommunicator who thinks the U.S. has 57 states. Get real! READ FACTS not fiction.
      And google “Tommy Douglas” while you’re at it, oh European One!

    • mary

      “European”

      I have relatives in UK, France and what you are stating is absurd! The UK would be filled with riots were the goverment to lay a finger on healthcare system there! It works and no one goes without care if they need it! Read more facts!@
      As for Canada, jsut read this story:

      N.Y.Times (Nic Kristof) The story of Diane Tucker,
      the American 59-year-old Lawyer who immigrated to Vancouver, CANADA for one reson….its National Single-Payer Healthcare! And google Tommy Douglas.

      UK and Canada have excellent singlepayer systems that work for their citizens without allowing them to fall prey to insurance vultures. And guess what/ “European”? They spend one-third of their GDP than the U.S. And they don’t have THIRD WORLD U.S. HEALTHCARE to show for it. Longevity factor, infant mortality….#37 –one below Costa Rica!

      And you have grudges agaisnt the UK/Canadian great systems that treat their citizens like “PATIENTS” and not prey on them like “CUSTOMERS”.
      It’s a bloody Human right! Learn, European, learn!

  • mary

    Excellent, accurate analysis by Larry Johnson here!

    However, my suggestion would be to courier this to all members of Congress and Senate individually. Send it marked “URGENT” to Obama himself and ask him to read its sallient points and then COMMUNICATE it via a press conference.

    Obama has proven himself the greatest MISCOMMUNICATOR since Hoover. He squandered his greatest opportunity to EXPLAIN, INFORM AND EDUCATE people that he’s blaming now of being rowdy republicans! They’re not. They’re ordinary people concerned about their healthcare status! Obama has failed to do what he’s supposedly famous for: Communicate succinctly and accurately to these suffering people that there is no risk–only benefits.
    Instead, Obama dropped cowardly the ball and I doubt he’ll be able to bounce it back to his court anytime soon. Ironic indeed that people voted for him citing his great communication talents. But then again with l30 days in Senate inexperience, voting ‘present’ all the time, what did you expect!
    The Democratic Party blew it by pushing Hillary off the stage while still fighting and winning–and for what? The Greatest Miscommunicator’s screw-up of Helathcare Reform. Now’s it’s cowardly “insurance reform”…

    Can he explain why Canada spends one-third of the U.S. of its GDP on healthcare? Why since l965 in Canada no BANKRUPTUCIES DUE TO MEDICAL BILLS have ever occurred? Yet in the U.S. we witness the SHAMEFUL squandering of funds by insurance predators allowing to make a profit on the backs of uninformed, captive citizens?
    *****62% of all bankrutpcies in U.S. are the result
    *****of not being able to pay their Medical Bills!!!

    Why did Obama fail in telling stories of real people at the start, injecting some real Passion for healthcare from the beginning? He LOST THE MESSAGE a long time ago. (Emannuel Rahmbo failed Obama, too, but then his perennially angry middle finger excuses him)

    Amazing that Obama lost the message because he didn’t have the requisite passion to tell stories that would have resonated with the public. Instead, he allowed the fanatic regressive wingers of the Republican party to become the legitimate Communicators that carried the message to the people.
    Shame….

  • LesleeE

    “Can he explain why Canada spends one-third of the U.S. of its GDP on healthcare? Why since l965 in Canada no BANKRUPTUCIES DUE TO MEDICAL BILLS have ever occurred? Yet in the U.S. we witness the SHAMEFUL squandering of funds by insurance predators allowing to make a profit on the backs of uninformed, captive citizens?
    *****62% of all bankrutpcies in U.S. are the result
    *****of not being able to pay their Medical Bills!!!”

    That sums it up nicely Mary, thank you.

  • Pingback: Interesting US Perspective on UK Health Care « Finding Private Medical Insurance | Blog

  • Pingback: At Least Most Brits Like Their Government Run Health Care : NO QUARTER | anguillatoday

  • Pingback: At Least Most Brits Like Their Government Run Health Care : NO QUARTER | anguillatoday

  • Pingback: Affordable Care Act: A Child's Garden Of Lies And Distortions - Page 2 - US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum