More bailouts...

[Drew99GT]

Originally Posted By: Tempest
Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
http://www.faqs.org/abstracts/Health/The-deteriorating-administrative-efficiency-of-the-US-health-care-system.html

http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/short/349/8/768

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/1...strative-costs/

Here's one of the biggest problems with private healthcare run by giant insurance companies in the US: over a 1/4 of the cost of healthcare goes to pushing paper around needlessly. But the insurance companies want it that way and that's why they fight tooth and nail to stop any kind of universal healthcare.

Oh yes, private profit driven companies what to maximize costs...

What is the overhead cost of current government programs?

Private charities use money more efficiently than do government social programs, so why do you believe things will be different with health care?

I wonder if those studies factor the difference in private companies providing health care in the US vs. the government provided care in Canada which would be "off the books" but still be a real cost.


Oh yea, Canada sure has a budget problem what, with all that darn free healthcare and it's off the books costs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_federal_budget

 

[javacontour]

Originally Posted By: StevieC
We aren't arguing that our Health Care is the most efficient and/or the cheapest to operate, but it gets the job done, and good enough for us... Ask any Canadian they wouldn't trade it for what you have any day! How is it that 33 Million Canadians want to keep what we have yet so many Americans probably over 33 Million wish they had what we have?

Proof is on the wall...

Because it IS a great deal RIGHT NOW.

I'm looking 50+ years down the road. I'm sure it won't be such a great deal then.

Shifting costs to other populations only works for so long. Eventually the bubble breaks.

I've never once said it wasn't great to have coverage. I've aske the question how much longer can it last the way it is? Will it last 20 more years, 50 or 100? Who knows.

But what happens when the growth that enables such a system is no longer there?

You have not answered that question.

 

[XS650]

Originally Posted By: StevieC
We aren't arguing that our Health Care is the most efficient and/or the cheapest to operate, but it gets the job done, and good enough for us... Ask any Canadian they wouldn't trade it for what you have any day! How is it that 33 Million Canadians want to keep what we have yet so many Americans probably over 33 Million wish they had what we have?

Proof is on the wall...

The most vocal opponents to the Canadian health care system are Americans who are deathly afraid that some undeserving person might get medical care.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: javacontour
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
We have a LOT of wasteful spending. Not just in healthcare but pretty much anything in government.

The first step to taking care of rising costs should be to address the wasteful nature of the system. This would help immensely to reduce costs. But of course, they won't.

I've witnessed this first-hand.

It is not that the system is bad. It is not that it's inefficient or unsustainable. It is how it is managed.

Canadians are well aware of the mismanagement of the system. But it doesn't mean it is going to collapse. And it also doesn't mean they cannot fix it. They can. This has been an election topic for years.

Everybody whines about the cost, but nobody wants to keep their hands out of the cookie jar.

Where I live, we have THREE hospitals. But only one is really active. They are going to tear down the most recently retired old one instead of selling it off or doing something with the building. The even older one is partially used for physio for seniors.

How much of the good/newer equipment from the old hospital made its way into the new one? Not much.

Because it's tax-payer money, it's spent like it's going out of style.

The problem is mismanagement, not the system itself. Not that the system is perfect, but it works.

EDIT: And of course our federal tax has actually gone DOWN in recent years. And we do not have a deficit.... So if this is unsustainable, as Stevie said, then where's the debt load? Where' the lack of money? Why are our taxes not INCREASING?


OK, so taxes have gone down. What about spending? Up or down? And not just federal, what about provincial taxes and spending.

We've had federal taxes drop too, but spending will go up, or state taxes rise and the net result is either more federal debt or more state and therefore same total tax rate.

Or others are being taxed. Is there a larger amount of tax on Canadian oil right now? Is that providing more tax revenue than before?

If so, that is not likely to last. Oil is not forever (I know, blasphemy on BITOG!)


Depends on the province. Ontario, I believe it has gone up. Other provinces have gone down. They each run their own healthcare systems as they see fit.

 

[Drew99GT]

By the way Tempest, I'd like to see an objective credible source about these off the books costs.

 

[Drew99GT]

Originally Posted By: XS650

The most vocal opponents to the Canadian health care system are Americans who are deathly afraid that some undeserving person might get medical care.

EXACTLY. By undeserving, I'm sure you mean someone that works their a$$ off 24/7/365 and still cant afford private health insurance.

 

[StevieC]

No I said Growth is helping it, but the taxes are so high because we are also paying into the future system.

It's funny how many times over the years your economy has gone into a recession or fallen a part yet north of the border in our country it hasn't seen quite the same effects as yours. (Current Economy aside).

It's because we are a bit smarter and more frugal with our money versus the consumer driven, all for profit systems you have. This is just my opinion though.

So when I see our economy remain stable and not have things like mortgage melt-downs etc. I tend to think that our system is more thought out and has reserves for tomorrow.

 

[Tempest]

Quote:
Although only 12% of Canadians are age 65 or older, they account for 43% of all health care spending by provincial and territorial governments. Canadian seniors rated the quality of their medical care lower than did seniors in the United States, Australia, or New Zealand, although they were happier with their care than seniors in the United Kingdom.

About 185,000 Canadian seniors were living in nursing homes and other institutions in 1996/97. The average age of women in these facilities was 83 and the average age of men was far lower, 69. In addition, about 12% of Canadian seniors received publicly-funded home care services.

Both nurses and doctors in Canada are getting older themselves, leading to concerns about who will provide care to aging Canadians in the future. Nearly 40% of the physicians in Canada were age 50 or older in 1999, up from 35% in 1995. 90% of the nurses in Canada are over age 30, and more than 24% are age 50 or older.

http://www.elderweb.com/home/node/2636
Quote:
For far too many Canadian seniors, nursing home care is inaccessible or unaffordable. In some provinces, wait lists for nursing home beds are excruciatingly long — up to two years. Most beds become available only when residents die.

In addition to lengthening wait lists, affordable options have been disappearing for many seniors. Private nursing home care can cost between $40,000 and $70,000 a year, depending on the community. This is clearly not a viable option for most seniors.

In the patchwork system that has evolved, it is apparent that public and non-profit nursing home care provides the most affordable solution. But even this option is becoming unaffordable for many seniors as these facilities struggle to fill the funding gap left by government funding cuts.

Quote:
Governments are not only failing seniors today, but they are also woefully unprepared to meet the challenges of tomorrow — despite the demographic crisis now looming. Three important trends are occurring:

Canada has had a relatively low birth rate for the past 30 years, a trend that shows no sign of changing.

The baby boom generation is nearing retirement age and the first shock will be felt around 2010. Five years from now, one Canadian resident will turn 65 every two minutes. Within 15 years, the rate will be one a minute.

Canadians are living longer. Today, there are some 430,000 Canadians over 85 years old, twice as many as in 1981 and 20 times the number in 1921.

With this profound demographic shock just around the corner, and the increasingly unique and complex health services required by seniors, the need for a cogent, national nursing home strategy is becoming even more pressing.

http://www.nupge.ca/presidentscommentary/n05fe08e.htm
This coming from someone advocating even more social health care.

You guys are enjoying a health care bubble.

 

[javacontour]

I don't know about Canada, but in the US I believe things like medicare, medicaid and Social Security are "Off the books"

So in the 1990's when we were being told by BOTH parties that the budget was balanced, that was because entitlement spending was not considered when looking at revenue in vs costs.

It's "easy" to balance the budget if you can play with the definition of balanced.

I know we do that here. What makes any of us thing government folks from other nations won't do the same thing?

I'm not saying they do or don't. But we've seen it done here, so why not warn our friends up North based on our experience?

 

[StevieC]

Well we will live in our bubble and you can live in yours and we will see who's pops first...

It's been fun, but I think I have wasted enough time trying to defend and explain our systems...

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: javacontour
Originally Posted By: StevieC
We aren't arguing that our Health Care is the most efficient and/or the cheapest to operate, but it gets the job done, and good enough for us... Ask any Canadian they wouldn't trade it for what you have any day! How is it that 33 Million Canadians want to keep what we have yet so many Americans probably over 33 Million wish they had what we have?

Proof is on the wall...

Because it IS a great deal RIGHT NOW.

I'm looking 50+ years down the road. I'm sure it won't be such a great deal then.

Shifting costs to other populations only works for so long. Eventually the bubble breaks.

I've never once said it wasn't great to have coverage. I've aske the question how much longer can it last the way it is? Will it last 20 more years, 50 or 100? Who knows.

But what happens when the growth that enables such a system is no longer there?

You have not answered that question.


Theoretically, if the system is managed correctly and we reach some sort of population plateau, then with proper management of the money, the system is sustainable. As long as the following generation matches the generation it is replacing in size and the system isn't dependant upon the growth of the populous, then it will work.

Which comes back to my point about fixing the mismanagement.

I like our system. But it doesn't mean I think that it would work in the US. As alike as we are, there are some differences.

 

[StevieC]

Originally Posted By: javacontour
I don't know about Canada, but in the US I believe things like medicare, medicaid and Social Security are "Off the books"

So in the 1990's when we were being told by BOTH parties that the budget was balanced, that was because entitlement spending was not considered when looking at revenue in vs costs.

It's "easy" to balance the budget if you can play with the definition of balanced.

I know we do that here. What makes any of us thing government folks from other nations won't do the same thing?

I'm not saying they do or don't. But we've seen it done here, so why not warn our friends up North based on our experience?


Governments keeping things off the books?

NEVER! hehehe

Guess we will never know the truth... Like a reserve fund that will be there for the boomers that are retiring!

 

[javacontour]

Originally Posted By: StevieC
No I said Growth is helping it, but the taxes are so high because we are also paying into the future system.

It's funny how many times over the years your economy has gone into a recession or fallen a part yet north of the border in our country it hasn't seen quite the same effects as yours. (Current Economy aside).

It's because we are a bit smarter and more frugal with our money versus the consumer driven, all for profit systems you have. This is just my opinion though.

So when I see our economy remain stable and not have things like mortgage melt-downs etc. I tend to think that our system is more thought out and has reserves for tomorrow.



Ah, now you are suffering from the media view.

Much of what you see in the media is what happens on each coast, which are more of an economic roller coaster.

The middle is more stable.

My home may have dropped some single digit percent in value. What is played out in the news are the 30% drops.

That's a few select markets, and not nation wide.

But I do agree, much of our problem is due to leverage.

Ironically, if you find that troubling, I don't see how you are in favor of a system that borrows from a younger generation with the promise to pay your increased healthcare costs in the future?

It's really little different from the deficit spending that you just said is part of our problem.

If you find this to be troubling, then why advocate such a system for paying for your medical care? Younger generations "lending" to the government for a future promised payoff.

 

[Tempest]

Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
By the way Tempest, I'd like to see an objective credible source about these off the books costs.

Noice I said IF the study didn't include them...

 

[Tempest]

Originally Posted By: XS650
Originally Posted By: StevieC
We aren't arguing that our Health Care is the most efficient and/or the cheapest to operate, but it gets the job done, and good enough for us... Ask any Canadian they wouldn't trade it for what you have any day! How is it that 33 Million Canadians want to keep what we have yet so many Americans probably over 33 Million wish they had what we have?

Proof is on the wall...

The most vocal opponents to the Canadian health care system are Americans who are deathly afraid that some undeserving person might get medical care.

Riiiiight.... has nothing do with the unsustainable nature of ponzi schemes which is what the Canadian health care system is just like our Medicare and Social Security systems.

Canadians that support your system only look to our systems to see where yours is headed.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: javacontour
Originally Posted By: StevieC
No I said Growth is helping it, but the taxes are so high because we are also paying into the future system.

It's funny how many times over the years your economy has gone into a recession or fallen a part yet north of the border in our country it hasn't seen quite the same effects as yours. (Current Economy aside).

It's because we are a bit smarter and more frugal with our money versus the consumer driven, all for profit systems you have. This is just my opinion though.

So when I see our economy remain stable and not have things like mortgage melt-downs etc. I tend to think that our system is more thought out and has reserves for tomorrow.



Ah, now you are suffering from the media view.

Much of what you see in the media is what happens on each coast, which are more of an economic roller coaster.

The middle is more stable.

My home may have dropped some single digit percent in value. What is played out in the news are the 30% drops.

That's a few select markets, and not nation wide.

But I do agree, much of our problem is due to leverage.

Ironically, if you find that troubling, I don't see how you are in favor of a system that borrows from a younger generation with the promise to pay your increased healthcare costs in the future?

It's really little different from the deficit spending that you just said is part of our problem.

If you find this to be troubling, then why advocate such a system for paying for your medical care? Younger generations "lending" to the government for a future promised payoff.


Theoretically, it is that we are supposed to be paying into our own generation's healthcare "pool" during our life based on the premise that the majority of the population will pay into the system more money in taxes than what they will accumulate in healthcare costs. Then the "difference" is used during our senior years.

The problem at the moment is that the boomer generation is larger than ours and our generation is over-using the system, essentially depleting the pool.

 

[Tempest]

Quote:
The problem at the moment is that the boomer generation is larger than ours and our generation is over-using the system, essentially depleting the pool.

And you consider that good and sustainable??

It's a ponzi scheme.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: Tempest
Originally Posted By: XS650
Originally Posted By: StevieC
We aren't arguing that our Health Care is the most efficient and/or the cheapest to operate, but it gets the job done, and good enough for us... Ask any Canadian they wouldn't trade it for what you have any day! How is it that 33 Million Canadians want to keep what we have yet so many Americans probably over 33 Million wish they had what we have?

Proof is on the wall...

The most vocal opponents to the Canadian health care system are Americans who are deathly afraid that some undeserving person might get medical care.

Riiiiight.... has nothing do with the unsustainable nature of ponzi schemes which is what the Canadian health care system is just like our Medicare and Social Security systems.

Canadians that support your system only look to our systems to see where yours is headed.


Man, with all your inside knowledge on MY country, maybe you should write a book? After all, you seem to have it pretty well figured out.

It could be titled "Tempest and Google: A Canadian History Lesson".

You could sell it at Chapters in the Fiction section, stuffed right between Flava-Flav's History of America and The Hobbit.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: Tempest
Quote:
The problem at the moment is that the boomer generation is larger than ours and our generation is over-using the system, essentially depleting the pool.

And you consider that good and sustainable??

It's a ponzi scheme.


Sure. Stop the current gen from taking their kids to the Hospital because Jenny has a light fever or Timmy has a cough.

This is already in the works. Canadians have actively been working toward making Emergency Room visits for actual emergencies to reduce the strain on the system.

We are not stupid. The system is a balance. You off-set that balance and we have a problem.

The paranoia of society due to "Internet Diagnosis" had led to a huge increase in the number of visits to the ER, dramatically increasing costs, wait times and the like. We are currently working to reverse that.

Once the boomer generation dies off, the load on the system will lessen even more.

 

[Tempest]

Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL

Man, with all your inside knowledge on MY country, maybe you should write a book? After all, you seem to have it pretty well figured out.

It could be titled "Tempest and Google: A Canadian History Lesson".

You could sell it at Chapters in the Fiction section, stuffed right between Flava-Flav's History of America and The Hobbit.

And with that, you have yet to refute anything that this outsider has posted.