On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 15:28:37 -0500, "HeyBub"
wrote:

Smitty Two wrote:
In article ,
"HeyBub" wrote:

In the United States, we don't want to die early from heart failure
or cancer

Really? Then why do we live on McDonalds and Cheetohs? A woman I know,
lifelong smoker, got lung cancer three years ago. Vowed to fight it
and win. Did the whole chemo thing, and was in remission for 16
months. Now it's back.

Through the whole thing, she never stopped smoking. Americans want to
die early, that's for damn sure.

Well, not wanting to die doesn't preclude wanting other things...

Fact is, once cancer or heart disease IS diagnosed, Americans live longer
than Canadians.

That is a *disputed* fact, and way to general to be of any use in
comparing the overall desirability of one system over the other.

for lack of time or desire to find my own source- here's a Wikipedia
article to get the ball rolling-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compari...care_sy stems


As an aside, we're living longer and we're getting fatter. I wonder if
there's a connection...


I doubt it-- but I see a connection between living longer through
better medicine and higher costs for consumers. It ain't cheap to
keep fixing clunkers, whether they be human or automobile.

Jim
[will there be a 'cash for grandma' program in our futures?]

"Smitty Two" wrote

Based on personal observation, government employees of almost any type
have excellent health insurance policies paid by the employer, with
funds graciously provided by my taxes. Those policies cover vision and
dental as well as regular insurance, and include the employee's family.

And I thank you for that, being one of them. My costs are 478$ a year just
now. There is talk about doubling or tripling it but haven't seen it happen
yet. I do not have vision or dental care though. Those policy additions
are cheaper to get 'out in town' than via the government.

It was medical free before I honorably retired but the family didnt have
dental unless I paid extra and the dental plan for family was so poor, it
was actually better in the end to put the money on the side and just pay as
needed. The dental for example has a lifetime cap of 1,500$.

The 'vision plan' BTW is 'space available' and there has never been space
for dependants in my 26 years except in Sasebo Japan and for the school age
kids only. (it was impossible to find a local optometrist who spoke enough
english to give a child an eye test so once a year they'ed bring one in).

Then again, this was listed as why my pay was 'comparable' to civilian work
of the same sort for 26 years of my life in the Navy. In fact, they would
calculate the 'medical benefits' as 3,000$ a month offset at the end. They
also said the access to 3 stair steppers, 4 sets of weights, and 1 broken
stationary bicycle (shared by 300 crew and 700 marines) was equal to spa
level accomodations at another 500$ a month and equated my job to that of a
first year data entry job. When I retired, I got hired the next day by a
good company. I get dental for the whole family for 12$ a month with a
2,000$ per person annual cap, and the medical is not bad at 38.50 per month
per person. The problem with the medical is they will not cover any
'pre-existing conditions' for the first 3 years of employment and require a
physical I will not pass being 50% disabled (partly war injury related in
the gulf).

BTW, do you normally get shot at in your line of work? I've had that happen
several times. 2 speed boat attacks, a diver who tried to plant a bomb on
the sides, stuff like that.

I'm not so worried that your tax dollars pay for my health plan as it was
part of the reason why my pay was so low. What I do think is an
embrassament is that the pay is so low, a young E5 (this is middle rank,
takes years to get normally) will qualify for food stamps if he has a wife
and 2 kids and she can't get a good job because he's moving every 2-3
years. It used to be an E6 with only 2 dependants qualified and I was one
of them that served during that era.

Kurt Ullman wrote:
....
Time honored tradition. I can, with little problem, trace cronies
steering federal work to cronies from Eisenhower forward. ...

Well, don't stop there; it's clearly documented thru the Civil War years
and before...in fact, one could likely make a case that actual
corruption was far worse then than now.

--

On Aug 28, 4:24*pm, Jim Elbrecht wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 15:28:37 -0500, "HeyBub"
wrote:





Smitty Two wrote:
In article ,
"HeyBub" wrote:

In the United States, we don't want to die early from heart failure
or cancer

Really? Then why do we live on McDonalds and Cheetohs? A woman I know,
lifelong smoker, got lung cancer three years ago. Vowed to fight it
and win. Did the whole chemo thing, and was in remission for 16
months. Now it's back.

Through the whole thing, she never stopped smoking. Americans want to
die early, that's for damn sure.

Well, not wanting to die doesn't preclude wanting other things...

Fact is, once cancer or heart disease IS diagnosed, Americans live longer
than Canadians.

That is a *disputed* fact, and way to general to be of any use in
comparing the overall desirability of one system over the other.

for lack of time or desire to find my own source- here's a Wikipedia
article to get the ball rolling-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Canadian_and_American_heal...



As an aside, we're living longer and we're getting fatter. I wonder if
there's a connection...

I doubt it-- but I see a connection between living longer through
better medicine and higher costs for consumers. *It ain't cheap to
keep fixing clunkers, whether they be human or automobile.

Jim
[will there be a 'cash for grandma' program in our futures?]- Hide quoted text -

There would have been a time not too many years back when I would have
said "No way in hell!" but not any more.

Tony Hwang wrote:
Kurt Ullman wrote:
In article ,
Tony Hwang wrote:

Where I am up here in Alberta Canuck land, we don't pay anything. No
premium payment. Our system is not perfect but everyone is taken
care of. I understand U.S. spends more than us per capita on health
care.
And many are left out? That is something I don't understand.
To me health care is service for the public, not profit generating
business.
You pay. It is just that your premium is hidden in the taxes.

Hmmm,
Our tax rate is lowest in Canada and no sales tax here as well.

Well, when I was traveling to Sask servicing coal analyzers during last
trip since plant was in an outage there was significant OT; the plant
chemist who had oversight of the analyzers as part of his job
description and had gotten quite familiar over the years. Invited to
supper one evening; pay packet had arrived that day. W/ the OT, total
withheld was 50% of gross--that's pretty daggone expensive. Then afaik
all are responsible for GMT which while I no longer know what rate is,
ain't just a percent or two...

And, since this was pretty close to the US border, it was common that
when kids had anything routine such as vaccinations, earache, etc., they
simply took them to Minot or Williston as it would be so long before
there was any opportunity to have them seen in Estevan or Weyburn and
there were no services in Coronach/East Poplar where the plant was
actually located. All in all, the system didn't seem particularly
anything to wish for even then.

Why then your tax does not cover those who don't/can't have coverage?

Something about roughly half to two-thirds of the uncovered are either
undocumented or the well young that choose to spend their dollars
elsewhere. Any critical need patient will get treated simply by showing
up at the emergency room. A major reason for the high per capita cost
is that there is a large fraction of the above groups that simply use
emergency room services as their family doctor; the most expensive way
possible to get services but they mostly choose to not use conventional
services of their own volition.

It's complicated but single-payer gov't controlled isn't going to help
in any way I can see.

--

On Aug 28, 3:09*pm, "William Munny" wrote:
"terry" wrote in message

...

There's been so much debate here and on other forums about Universal
US health care (pro and con) that one gets curious about how much it
NOW costs, say, the average US family, to have 'Health Insurance'.

We guess that the cost is either fully paid by the subscriber?
Or in other cases, partly by the subscriber and partly by their
employer?
Then there are others, we gather who have no health insurance at all?
And we understand there is something called Medicaid?

Insurance cost numbers a) As little as 'a few hundred' b) Over
$12,000, per year have been mentioned?.

But what is a 'typical' (or average) USA cost?

Early 60's, self-employed. For self and wife pay $19,000 per year in HMO
membership fees + $20/$30 co-pay per MD visit, $15 for 30 day supply of
generic Rx, much more for brand name, no charge for lab work, x-rays, most
diagnostic stuff.

Only bright spot is that being self-employed, the HMO premiums are tax
deductible. But before you rant, remember that self-employed people pay
DOUBLE the rate that employees do for social security tax.

Big bucks overall but I sure as shootin' don't want the government involved
in it!!!

Back in the early 90's I was also self-employed and having difficulty
getting insurance on my wife and I because of pre-existing conditions
with my wife. I was paying over $1600 per month for $2500 deductable
major medical only. When Clinton started the healthcare overhaul push
I was elated and hoping it would finally give me some relief. Then I
read the details of the plan they were proposing, realized that it was
opening a door for government control and promptly contacted all of my
Senate and Congressional representatives and demanded they vote it
down. Now that damn snake has reared its ugly head again and this
time we should cut its damn head off.

HeyBub wrote:
Smitty Two wrote:
In article ,
"HeyBub" wrote:

In the United States, we don't want to die early from heart failure
or cancer
Really? Then why do we live on McDonalds and Cheetohs? A woman I know,
lifelong smoker, got lung cancer three years ago. Vowed to fight it
and win. Did the whole chemo thing, and was in remission for 16
months. Now it's back.

Through the whole thing, she never stopped smoking. Americans want to
die early, that's for damn sure.

Well, not wanting to die doesn't preclude wanting other things...

Fact is, once cancer or heart disease IS diagnosed, Americans live longer
than Canadians.

As an aside, we're living longer and we're getting fatter. I wonder if
there's a connection...



Living longer than what? US is way down the list for life expenctancy
for indust. countries.

terry wrote:
There's been so much debate here and on other forums about Universal
US health care (pro and con) that one gets curious about how much it
NOW costs, say, the average US family, to have 'Health Insurance'.

We guess that the cost is either fully paid by the subscriber?
Or in other cases, partly by the subscriber and partly by their
employer?
Then there are others, we gather who have no health insurance at all?
And we understand there is something called Medicaid?

Insurance cost numbers a) As little as 'a few hundred' b) Over
$12,000, per year have been mentioned?.

But what is a 'typical' (or average) USA cost?

Self-employed; 64/62, $870/mo w/ a so-so dental.

Of course, that doesn't count the Medicare premiums, 2.9% (total) of
earned wages w/ no cap.

--

On Aug 28, 5:11*pm, "
wrote:
HeyBub wrote:
Smitty Two wrote:
In article ,
"HeyBub" wrote:

In the United States, we don't want to die early from heart failure
or cancer
Really? Then why do we live on McDonalds and Cheetohs? A woman I know,
lifelong smoker, got lung cancer three years ago. Vowed to fight it
and win. Did the whole chemo thing, and was in remission for 16
months. Now it's back.

Through the whole thing, she never stopped smoking. Americans want to
die early, that's for damn sure.

Well, not wanting to die doesn't preclude wanting other things...

Fact is, once cancer or heart disease IS diagnosed, Americans live longer
than Canadians.

As an aside, we're living longer and we're getting fatter. I wonder if
there's a connection...

Living longer than what? *US is way down the list for life expenctancy
for indust. countries.- Hide quoted text -

You do realize that life expectancy is not just based on those who die
of natural causes don't you? We kill ourselves off faster than any
country in the world in our cars, with our guns, and just sheer
stupidity.

On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 16:17:30 -0700 (PDT), BobR
wrote:

You do realize that life expectancy is not just based on those who die
of natural causes don't you? We kill ourselves off faster than any
country in the world in our cars, with our guns, and just sheer
stupidity.

Maybe my "gun" has a malfunction. It has never killed anybody.

About 1/4 as much as if the government handled it all.

--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

In article ,
"cshenk" wrote:

BTW, do you normally get shot at in your line of work?

Not unless I **** off the boss, who keeps a fully loaded pump action 12
gauge behind the "modesty panel" of his desk.

But don't get me started on the whole "hero" thing, with the servicemen,
cops, and firemen. They chose their jobs. As far as I'm concerned
they're no more of a hero than the guy who empties their wastebaskets
and cleans their toilets for minimum wage.

dpb wrote:
Tony Hwang wrote:
Kurt Ullman wrote:
In article ,
Tony Hwang wrote:

Where I am up here in Alberta Canuck land, we don't pay anything. No
premium payment. Our system is not perfect but everyone is taken
care of. I understand U.S. spends more than us per capita on health
care.
And many are left out? That is something I don't understand.
To me health care is service for the public, not profit generating
business.
You pay. It is just that your premium is hidden in the taxes.

Hmmm,
Our tax rate is lowest in Canada and no sales tax here as well.

Well, when I was traveling to Sask servicing coal analyzers during last
trip since plant was in an outage there was significant OT; the plant
chemist who had oversight of the analyzers as part of his job
description and had gotten quite familiar over the years. Invited to
supper one evening; pay packet had arrived that day. W/ the OT, total
withheld was 50% of gross--that's pretty daggone expensive. Then afaik
all are responsible for GMT which while I no longer know what rate is,
ain't just a percent or two...

And, since this was pretty close to the US border, it was common that
when kids had anything routine such as vaccinations, earache, etc., they
simply took them to Minot or Williston as it would be so long before
there was any opportunity to have them seen in Estevan or Weyburn and
there were no services in Coronach/East Poplar where the plant was
actually located. All in all, the system didn't seem particularly
anything to wish for even then.

Why then your tax does not cover those who don't/can't have coverage?

Something about roughly half to two-thirds of the uncovered are either
undocumented or the well young that choose to spend their dollars
elsewhere. Any critical need patient will get treated simply by showing
up at the emergency room. A major reason for the high per capita cost
is that there is a large fraction of the above groups that simply use
emergency room services as their family doctor; the most expensive way
possible to get services but they mostly choose to not use conventional
services of their own volition.

It's complicated but single-payer gov't controlled isn't going to help
in any way I can see.

--
Hi,
Here true emergency is always taken care of. Too many people swarm
emergency rooms. I saw an old lady came to emergency ward for med.
refill. Here there is private clinics as well for rich folks who ca
afford quick service. It's not all public service. Actually origin of
Canadian health care service is Saskatchewan.

wrote:
Tony Hwang wrote:
terry wrote:
There's been so much debate here and on other forums about Universal
US health care (pro and con) that one gets curious about how much it
NOW costs, say, the average US family, to have 'Health Insurance'.

We guess that the cost is either fully paid by the subscriber?
Or in other cases, partly by the subscriber and partly by their
employer?
Then there are others, we gather who have no health insurance at all?
And we understand there is something called Medicaid?

Insurance cost numbers a) As little as 'a few hundred' b) Over
$12,000, per year have been mentioned?.

But what is a 'typical' (or average) USA cost?
Hi,
Where I am up here in Alberta Canuck land, we don't pay anything. No
premium payment. Our system is not perfect but everyone is taken care
of. I understand U.S. spends more than us per capita on health care.
And many are left out? That is something I don't understand.
To me health care is service for the public, not profit generating
business.

Do they have "death lists" for granny and gramps? ) What the poor,
ignorant Americans don't realize is that granny and gramps, when they go
to the nursing home, get great care - well, sort of - until Medicare or
their own money runs out. Then they go to the "hopeless" list,
entertained with Bingo games, unidentifiable food, and not much prospect
of rehabilitation. Rehab meaning to increase their function to the max.
possible for their medical condition - like walking to the dining room,
not back to running marathons. The PR is fantastic - granny gets hosed
down at least twice a week in a multi-stall shower room, gets her face
washed and lipstick slathered on daily, and kept in diapers if she isn't
up to running to the toilet without assistance. This is quite fine with
those Americans who favor corporate profit and began voting like
corporate board members when they bought their first share of stock.
Granny is out of the f------ way and her estate might turn a few bucks
when she is gone.


Most dumb *******s don't know that if GOOD CARE was rendered, granny
might be able to walk around living quarters, use a toilet, not suffer
from untreated conditions that might require "risky" treatment or
surgery. Load her with pills every time a new side effect comes along,
give her some magical antidepressants and cholesterol drugs so she will
think she is "happy" and actually receiving treatment that is best for
her. There are hours and hours and hours of paperwork done by nurses,
physicians, pharmacists, dieticians, activity directors, physical
therapists, all making treatment plans that are garbage, and then
writing volumes about how the "plan" ain't working.

When I last worked in a nursing home, I remember a plate of food being
served - cold - that had three unidentifiable items on it. It looked
like samples of stool for some poor human with a rare disease of the GI
system. Family Values? Christian Coalition? Compassionate
Conservatives? What insufferable, hypocritical b.s.
Hi,
The saying goes, live fast die young!

In article , Oren wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 16:17:30 -0700 (PDT), BobR
wrote:

You do realize that life expectancy is not just based on those who die
of natural causes don't you? We kill ourselves off faster than any
country in the world in our cars, with our guns, and just sheer
stupidity.

Maybe my "gun" has a malfunction. It has never killed anybody.

One less person than Ted Kennedy's car...

In ,
terry wrote:
There's been so much debate here and on other forums about Universal
US health care (pro and con) that one gets curious about how much it
NOW costs, say, the average US family, to have 'Health Insurance'.

A family plan with lower deductibe costs employer and employee combined
about $10K annually maybe a year or two ago, inflating about 10% annually.

We guess that the cost is either fully paid by the subscriber?
Or in other cases, partly by the subscriber and partly by their
employer?

When there is a subscriber, one or the other of these is true (unless
the employer picks up the full tab, as is often the case for most members
of the more politically powerful unions).

Then there are others, we gather who have no health insurance at all?
And we understand there is something called Medicaid?

Medicaid is available to the "truly poor", and not to most who merely
cannot afford private health insurance.

Insurance cost numbers a) As little as 'a few hundred' b) Over
$12,000, per year have been mentioned?.

"A few hundred" is probably typical or highish-typical among employees
with employer-sponsored health insurance that the employee has to chip
into. Some employees pay nothing (usually if members of motre politically
powerful unions), some pay 100% (several hundred to close to $1K per
month), most pay in-between.

$12K sounds to me about average or very slightly high-side for employer
and employee combined to pay for health insurance for an employee and the
employee's family.

But what is a 'typical' (or average) USA cost?

- Don Klipstein )

In article , Doug Miller wrote:
In ,
Smitty Two wrote:

According to the National Coalition on Health Care, $13,000.

http://www.nchc.org/facts/cost.shtml

"The average employer-sponsored premium for a family of four costs close
to $13,000 a year, and the employee foots about 30 percent of this cost."

--x--x--x--x--

Based on personal observation, government employees of almost any type
have excellent health insurance policies paid by the employer, with
funds graciously provided by my taxes. Those policies cover vision and
dental as well as regular insurance, and include the employee's family.

Private companies often cover only 50% of the cost of the premium, and
if the employee wants insurance for the rug rats or the spouse, the
entire premium comes from his or her own pocket.

The entire premium is coming out of the individual's pocket anyway, even in
employer-sponsored plans. Every dollar the employer spends on purchasing
health insurance is a dollar that is unavailable for spending on salaries or
wages.

It is likewise a convenient fiction that the employer pays half of the FICA
premium. Nope. The employee pays all of it -- half in direct payroll
deduction, and half in the form of a reduced salary.

What the employer pays for FICA or health insurance premiums is
non-taxable employee compensation/benefit. The gubmint effectively
subsidizes health insurance by allowing employers to pay premiums with the
money spent there deducted from the company's income tax and not
contributing to the employee's taxable income.

Furthermore, USA now has special tax-reducing savings accounts for money
restricted to spending on the specific industries of healthcare and
education. How have the prices of products/services of these industries
compared to the Consumer Price Index? How have industries outside these
two fared in comparison to these two in USA?

- Don Klipstein )

"Doug Miller" wrote in message
...
In article
,
Smitty Two wrote:
In article ,
(Doug Miller) wrote:

In article
,
Smitty
Two wrote:

According to the National Coalition on Health Care, $13,000.

http://www.nchc.org/facts/cost.shtml

"The average employer-sponsored premium for a family of four costs
close
to $13,000 a year, and the employee foots about 30 percent of this
cost."

--x--x--x--x--

Based on personal observation, government employees of almost any type
have excellent health insurance policies paid by the employer, with
funds graciously provided by my taxes. Those policies cover vision and
dental as well as regular insurance, and include the employee's family.

Private companies often cover only 50% of the cost of the premium, and
if the employee wants insurance for the rug rats or the spouse, the
entire premium comes from his or her own pocket.

The entire premium is coming out of the individual's pocket anyway, even
in
employer-sponsored plans. Every dollar the employer spends on purchasing
health insurance is a dollar that is unavailable for spending on
salaries or
wages.

It is likewise a convenient fiction that the employer pays half of the
FICA
premium. Nope. The employee pays all of it -- half in direct payroll
deduction, and half in the form of a reduced salary.

Well, if we're segueing into "convenient fictions," here's another one:
Governments have to pay high salaries and provide luxury-class benefits
in order to attract qualified workers away from private industry.

Well, they have to do *something*.

In
truth, the pay and benefit scales are often double what industry pays
for comparable skill sets.

Maybe in your state; not in mine, and, I suspect, not in most.

And that's not even remotely close to true in the Federal civil service,
*especially* in management positions. The salary of a cabinet secretary is
something like $160K -- try finding a CEO who will work for that.

For scientists and engineers, Federal salaries are significantly lower
than
corresponding private-sector salaries. The principal attractions of
Federal
employment are stability, benefits, and the fact that the Federal civil
service in general, and Defense in particular, hand much more
responsibility
to capable people at a much younger age than they'd ever see in the
private
sector -- it's good for your career.

The city, county, and state here are all
going broke, and it's due in large measure to absolutely obscene wages.

That's because you live in the People's Republic of Kalifornia. Don't make
the
mistake of supposing that the rest of the nation has the same insane
public
policies. Most state legislatures are wiser than yours.

Not in Maine.. We like to follow California's lead...Here the State is the
largest employer and the pay and benifits are unbelievable...6 digit pay for
governor appointees for do nothing jobs like Nuclear advisor...We have no
nuke power plants , ect..Agencies like DHHS missplacing a hundred MILLION
dollars and nothing is done about it...The Dems have run this state into the
ground for over 35 years..A true hackarama.....No time limits or fraud
investigation for welfare either.....The State is in the hole BIG time....We
also have publicly funded health care (Dirigo) that is hemorraging money
like a stuck pig....We owe the hospitals , nursing homes and doctors , ect.
over 800 MILLION dollars.....A true Liberal Utopia....

Tony Hwang wrote:
....
... Actually origin of
Canadian health care service is Saskatchewan.

Well, it didn't seem to be working very well since they mostly went to
the States...

--

In ,
Smitty Two wrote:
In article ,
(Doug Miller) wrote:

In article
, Smitty
Two wrote:

According to the National Coalition on Health Care, $13,000.

http://www.nchc.org/facts/cost.shtml

"The average employer-sponsored premium for a family of four costs close
to $13,000 a year, and the employee foots about 30 percent of this cost."

--x--x--x--x--

Based on personal observation, government employees of almost any type
have excellent health insurance policies paid by the employer, with
funds graciously provided by my taxes. Those policies cover vision and
dental as well as regular insurance, and include the employee's family.

Private companies often cover only 50% of the cost of the premium, and
if the employee wants insurance for the rug rats or the spouse, the
entire premium comes from his or her own pocket.

The entire premium is coming out of the individual's pocket anyway, even in
employer-sponsored plans. Every dollar the employer spends on purchasing
health insurance is a dollar that is unavailable for spending on salaries or
wages.

It is likewise a convenient fiction that the employer pays half of the FICA
premium. Nope. The employee pays all of it -- half in direct payroll
deduction, and half in the form of a reduced salary.

Well, if we're segueing into "convenient fictions," here's another one:
Governments have to pay high salaries and provide luxury-class benefits
in order to attract qualified workers away from private industry. In
truth, the pay and benefit scales are often double what industry pays
for comparable skill sets. The city, county, and state here are all
going broke, and it's due in large measure to absolutely obscene wages.

Though I would like to bitch about salaries of municipal and state
department heads and members of various legislatures and governmental and
quasi-governmental boards, it appears to me that the top few executives
and most VPs (not just CEO) of most of the Fortune 1000 companies and a
majority of specialist MDs make much more still.

I doubt that Fortune 500 companies have to compensate their CEOs tens of
megabucks annually and their VPs and other top executives megabucks
annually for skill sets that run the companies into the ground and/or
require multigigabuck taxpayer bailouts. Most foreign large companies,
unlike most USA ones, pay much less than this for executives whose
companies succeed, and less still for executives of companies who don't.

- Don Klipstein )

"Tony Hwang" wrote in message
...
terry wrote:
There's been so much debate here and on other forums about Universal
US health care (pro and con) that one gets curious about how much it
NOW costs, say, the average US family, to have 'Health Insurance'.

We guess that the cost is either fully paid by the subscriber?
Or in other cases, partly by the subscriber and partly by their
employer?
Then there are others, we gather who have no health insurance at all?
And we understand there is something called Medicaid?

Insurance cost numbers a) As little as 'a few hundred' b) Over
$12,000, per year have been mentioned?.

But what is a 'typical' (or average) USA cost?
Hi,
Where I am up here in Alberta Canuck land, we don't pay anything. No
premium payment. Our system is not perfect but everyone is taken care of.
I understand U.S. spends more than us per capita on health care.
And many are left out? That is something I don't understand.
To me health care is service for the public, not profit generating
business.

Yea it's pretty easy to cut defense spending to the point you Canucks can
only put 3 navy ships to sea and the military is so small it is irrelevant
for your socialists programs when you live next to the police station (US of
A) and rely TOTALLY on it for protection...Pathatic if you ask me....What
was the last major medical breakthrough in a socialist healthcare country ,
besides the abortion pill ??? How many in the USA ??? Like the military you
rely on US to do it for you..then copy the procedure , pills ect. and ration
it out...Like the Pig Flue , it will be the USA that beats it... Not Cuba or
Canada..... Nuff said...

In , Kurt
Ullman wrote:

In article ,
Tony Hwang wrote:

Where I am up here in Alberta Canuck land, we don't pay anything. No
premium payment. Our system is not perfect but everyone is taken care
of. I understand U.S. spends more than us per capita on health care.
And many are left out? That is something I don't understand.
To me health care is service for the public, not profit generating
business.
You pay. It is just that your premium is hidden in the taxes.

And what Canada pays from taxes to cover everyone there is no higher
percentage of GDP that USA pays from taxes (and government borrowing, to
be paid plus intrerest by taxpayers in the future) to cover only:

Medicare and Medicaid, sCHIPs, military and veterans, the few poor
and low income workers actually benefiting from county programs, and
employer contributions to health insurance premiums of gubmint workers in
healthcare-related agencies.

Canada gubmint spends no higher percentage of GDP than USA does to cover
what USA gubmint does not: The vast majority of private sector workers,
a significant chunk of the unemployed, as well as gubmint employees
outside healthcare-related agencies such as police officers and public
school teachers and court employees.

- Don Klipstein )

In article , Stormin Mormon wrote:

About 1/4 as much as if the government handled it all.

Then why does USA gubmint spend as high a percentage of GDP on health
coverage as is spent by gubmints of other western nations who do handle it
all?

- Don Klipstein )

In article , HeyBub wrote:
Tony Hwang wrote:
terry wrote:
There's been so much debate here and on other forums about Universal
US health care (pro and con) that one gets curious about how much it
NOW costs, say, the average US family, to have 'Health Insurance'.

We guess that the cost is either fully paid by the subscriber?
Or in other cases, partly by the subscriber and partly by their
employer?
Then there are others, we gather who have no health insurance at all?
And we understand there is something called Medicaid?

Insurance cost numbers a) As little as 'a few hundred' b) Over
$12,000, per year have been mentioned?.

But what is a 'typical' (or average) USA cost?
Hi,
Where I am up here in Alberta Canuck land, we don't pay anything. No
premium payment. Our system is not perfect but everyone is taken care
of. I understand U.S. spends more than us per capita on health care.
And many are left out? That is something I don't understand.
To me health care is service for the public, not profit generating
business.

If it works for you, keep doing it.

In the United States, we don't want to die early from heart failure or
cancer and we don't want to wait eleven months for an abortion.

USA gubmint won't pay for an abortion at any time, 11 months or sooner.

Meanwhile, I know quire a few people in Canada, and none of them
consider it advantageous in terms of healthcare, even for heart disease or
cancer, to move south of their border. I even heard them telling me so.

- Don Klipstein )

In article , HeyBub wrote:
Smitty Two wrote:
In article ,
"HeyBub" wrote:

In the United States, we don't want to die early from heart failure
or cancer

Really? Then why do we live on McDonalds and Cheetohs? A woman I know,
lifelong smoker, got lung cancer three years ago. Vowed to fight it
and win. Did the whole chemo thing, and was in remission for 16
months. Now it's back.

Through the whole thing, she never stopped smoking. Americans want to
die early, that's for damn sure.

Well, not wanting to die doesn't preclude wanting other things...

Fact is, once cancer or heart disease IS diagnosed, Americans live longer
than Canadians.

By how much? Got a cite?

As an aside, we're living longer and we're getting fatter. I wonder if
there's a connection...

At whose expense? Living longer while getting fatter and more sedentary
means big ticket costs for surgeries, tests and for that matter
prescription drugs (which in USA have so much protectionism that an
illegal re-import of USA-made FDA-approved drugs costs less after 2 border
crossings than the same drugs cost legally after no border crossings).

I think that what USA has needs to be rebuilt up and down, left/right
and from its fringes inward and from its core outward, preferably copying
whichever other Western nation is doing it best, with maximum giving-in to
lobbyists of those whose oxen stand to be gored by this being negative.

(Though I would prefer to have a mechanism where those with less healthy
lifestyles as indicated by lifestyle-improvable indicators of health
such as body fat content, triglycerides, HDL cholesterol, blood pressure,
resting pulse rate and alcohol-related liver enzyme level pay more than
those with healthier lifestyles.)

- Don Klipstein )

In article , benick wrote:

"Tony Hwang" wrote in message
...
terry wrote:
There's been so much debate here and on other forums about Universal
US health care (pro and con) that one gets curious about how much it
NOW costs, say, the average US family, to have 'Health Insurance'.

We guess that the cost is either fully paid by the subscriber?
Or in other cases, partly by the subscriber and partly by their
employer?
Then there are others, we gather who have no health insurance at all?
And we understand there is something called Medicaid?

Insurance cost numbers a) As little as 'a few hundred' b) Over
$12,000, per year have been mentioned?.

But what is a 'typical' (or average) USA cost?
Hi,
Where I am up here in Alberta Canuck land, we don't pay anything. No
premium payment. Our system is not perfect but everyone is taken care of.
I understand U.S. spends more than us per capita on health care.
And many are left out? That is something I don't understand.
To me health care is service for the public, not profit generating
business.

Yea it's pretty easy to cut defense spending to the point you Canucks can
only put 3 navy ships to sea and the military is so small it is irrelevant
for your socialists programs when you live next to the police station (US of
A) and rely TOTALLY on it for protection...Pathatic if you ask me....

Make that 33 ships as of 2008. Not too bad for a country with 1/10 of
USA's population.

What was the last major medical breakthrough in a socialist healthcare
country, besides the abortion pill ??? How many in the USA ???

Like in USA prescription drugs having so much protectionism as to cost
more legally than illegal re-imports of USA-made FDA-approved drugs that
made two border crossings?

Like the military you rely on US to do it for you..then copy the
procedure , pills ect. and ration it out...

Not as badly as happens to all to many USA residents!

Like the Pig Flue , it will be the USA that beats it... Not Cuba or
Canada..... Nuff said...

I expect USA to not fare better than other industrialized democracies
this coming flu season!

- Don Klipstein )

Don Klipstein wrote:
In article , Stormin Mormon
wrote:

About 1/4 as much as if the government handled it all.

Then why does USA gubmint spend as high a percentage of GDP on health
coverage as is spent by gubmints of other western nations who do
handle it all?


It's not the U.S. government that's paying, it's the individual.

We pay more a higher percentage of GDP because we CAN.

Once diagnosed with a chronic disease like cancer or heart failure, the five
year survival rate in the U.S. is greater, sometimes far greater, than
elsewhere. For example, the five year survival rate for men diagnosed with
prostate cancer is better than 95%. In the UK, it is 56% (and in the high
80s in Canada).

But it comes at a cost - a cost we as individuals are willing to pay but
which some governments are not.

Doug Miller wrote:
In article , Tony Hwang wrote:

Where I am up here in Alberta Canuck land, we don't pay anything.

Absolute nonsense. Did you think health care was free, that the doctors and
nurses work gratis and all the medicine and equipment and facilities just
magically appear at no cost to anyone?

No premium payment.

"No premium" is not the same as "no payment". You're paying for it.

You figure out how.
Huh?
When I needed Eprex 3 times(1 cc shots by myself) a week it did not
cost me a dime. Still taking anti rejection pills(may be rest of my
life), Immuran and Rapamune every day. Nothing comes out of my pocket.
I just phone in and go pick up the refill.

wrote:
HeyBub wrote:
Smitty Two wrote:
In article ,
"HeyBub" wrote:

In the United States, we don't want to die early from heart failure
or cancer
Really? Then why do we live on McDonalds and Cheetohs? A woman I
know, lifelong smoker, got lung cancer three years ago. Vowed to
fight it and win. Did the whole chemo thing, and was in remission
for 16 months. Now it's back.

Through the whole thing, she never stopped smoking. Americans want
to die early, that's for damn sure.

Well, not wanting to die doesn't preclude wanting other things...

Fact is, once cancer or heart disease IS diagnosed, Americans live
longer than Canadians.

As an aside, we're living longer and we're getting fatter. I wonder
if there's a connection...



Living longer than what? US is way down the list for life expenctancy
for indust. countries.

Living longer than we used to.

Washington Post, Aug 19, 2009
"U.S. life expectancy has risen to a new high, standing at nearly 78 years,
the government reported Wednesday. "
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...081904131.html

According to the article, the U.S. is 30th in the world in life expectancy.
The best is Japan at 83 years. Of course Japan doesn't have fatal gang wars,
justifiable homicides like self-defense, executions, and many of the causes
of death we have (they do have an astonishing number of traffic fatalities).

"terry" wrote in message
...
There's been so much debate here and on other forums about Universal
US health care (pro and con) that one gets curious about how much it
NOW costs, say, the average US family, to have 'Health Insurance'.

We guess that the cost is either fully paid by the subscriber?
Or in other cases, partly by the subscriber and partly by their
employer?
Then there are others, we gather who have no health insurance at all?
And we understand there is something called Medicaid?

Insurance cost numbers a) As little as 'a few hundred' b) Over
$12,000, per year have been mentioned?.

But what is a 'typical' (or average) USA cost?

I don't know the avg. but we pay 1,000 bucks a year (33.00 bi-weekly) for
the wife and myself..Blue Cross/Blue Shield , 1,000.00 deductable , 500.00
heathcare credit for tests and preventive care BEFORE deductable , 10,000
total out of pocket expense , includes eye , dental , perscriptions and 4
dollar perscriptions and OTC drugs...Insurance provided by Walmart where
SWMBO is employed full time....I am self employed....

Doug Miller wrote:
In article , Oren
wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 16:17:30 -0700 (PDT), BobR
wrote:

You do realize that life expectancy is not just based on those who
die of natural causes don't you? We kill ourselves off faster than
any country in the world in our cars, with our guns, and just sheer
stupidity.

Maybe my "gun" has a malfunction. It has never killed anybody.

One less person than Ted Kennedy's car...

He will always be remembered.

pic
http://americandigest.org/ussteddy.jpg

wrote in message
m...
Kurt Ullman wrote:
In article ,
Tony Hwang wrote:

Where I am up here in Alberta Canuck land, we don't pay anything. No
premium payment. Our system is not perfect but everyone is taken care
of. I understand U.S. spends more than us per capita on health care.
And many are left out? That is something I don't understand.
To me health care is service for the public, not profit generating
business.
You pay. It is just that your premium is hidden in the taxes.

In the US, the cost is "hidden" in everything purchased or paid for in tax
dollars. Wonder what would happen to small business if Workers Comp
suddenly disappeared, and just plain one-for-all universal coverage
replaced it? Is it possible highly profitable businesses, small or large,
would pay more than those less profitable? No more ambulance chasers or
insurance adjustors....ohmygosh, watch out for the horrible "bureaucrats"
from the gov.; they might shoot you rather than video-tape you, with your
bad back, up on the roof throwing bundles of shingles around )

Workers Comp. would be FINE if they would eliminate the fraud and fake
lawsuites...Strange how many that get kicked off welfare due to time limits
, marriage , kids over 18 , ect. end up on Workers Comp then SSI
Disability..It is a scam run right out in the open here in the Liberal State
of Maine.....The Republicans TRIED to ammend the healthcare bill with Tort
Reform....The Dems wouldn't allow it...We will STILL have the ambulance
chasers like John Edwards running around and suing for fake injuries....You
mean "bureaucrats" like the ones who CAN'T even run the Cash for Clunkers
Program or any other Government Program for that matter...See the SS adm. or
the VA...God help us....

"Don Klipstein" wrote in message
...
In article , benick wrote:

"Tony Hwang" wrote in message
...
terry wrote:
There's been so much debate here and on other forums about Universal
US health care (pro and con) that one gets curious about how much it
NOW costs, say, the average US family, to have 'Health Insurance'.

We guess that the cost is either fully paid by the subscriber?
Or in other cases, partly by the subscriber and partly by their
employer?
Then there are others, we gather who have no health insurance at all?
And we understand there is something called Medicaid?

Insurance cost numbers a) As little as 'a few hundred' b) Over
$12,000, per year have been mentioned?.

But what is a 'typical' (or average) USA cost?
Hi,
Where I am up here in Alberta Canuck land, we don't pay anything. No
premium payment. Our system is not perfect but everyone is taken care
of.
I understand U.S. spends more than us per capita on health care.
And many are left out? That is something I don't understand.
To me health care is service for the public, not profit generating
business.

Yea it's pretty easy to cut defense spending to the point you Canucks can
only put 3 navy ships to sea and the military is so small it is irrelevant
for your socialists programs when you live next to the police station (US
of
A) and rely TOTALLY on it for protection...Pathatic if you ask me....

Make that 33 ships as of 2008. Not too bad for a country with 1/10 of
USA's population.

What was the last major medical breakthrough in a socialist healthcare
country, besides the abortion pill ??? How many in the USA ???

Like in USA prescription drugs having so much protectionism as to cost
more legally than illegal re-imports of USA-made FDA-approved drugs that
made two border crossings?

Like the military you rely on US to do it for you..then copy the
procedure , pills ect. and ration it out...

Not as badly as happens to all to many USA residents!

Like the Pig Flue , it will be the USA that beats it... Not Cuba or
Canada..... Nuff said...

I expect USA to not fare better than other industrialized democracies
this coming flu season!

- Don Klipstein )

Theyt may "have" 33 ships BUT they could only afford to put 3 ships to sea
to help NATO with the piracy of Somilia....
If a cure can be found for the Pig Flue it will originate in the USA not
Cuba or Canada.I should have been clearer for you Canadiens....How much has
Defense Spending been cut to pay for your Socialized rationed medical care
?? By 2/3? IIRC....

On Aug 28, 6:31*pm, Oren wrote:
On Fri, 28 Aug 2009 16:17:30 -0700 (PDT), BobR

wrote:
You do realize that life expectancy is not just based on those who die
of natural causes don't you? *We kill ourselves off faster than any
country in the world in our cars, with our guns, and just sheer
stupidity.

Maybe my "gun" has a malfunction. It has never killed anybody.

Maybe if you learn to read with just a little comprehension you would
be able to understand that I said "WITH OUR GUNS". That doesn't say
or even imply that the GUN had anything to do with cause.

HeyBub wrote:
Don Klipstein wrote:
In article , Stormin Mormon
wrote:

About 1/4 as much as if the government handled it all.
Then why does USA gubmint spend as high a percentage of GDP on health
coverage as is spent by gubmints of other western nations who do
handle it all?


It's not the U.S. government that's paying, it's the individual.

We pay more a higher percentage of GDP because we CAN.

Once diagnosed with a chronic disease like cancer or heart failure, the five
year survival rate in the U.S. is greater, sometimes far greater, than

Because in the US we are fatter and sicker younger.

elsewhere. For example, the five year survival rate for men diagnosed with
prostate cancer is better than 95%. In the UK, it is 56% (and in the high
80s in Canada).

That's ridiculous. 56% in UK? Where did you get that number?

But it comes at a cost - a cost we as individuals are willing to pay but
which some governments are not.

On Aug 28, 9:51*pm, Tony Hwang wrote:
Doug Miller wrote:
In article , Tony Hwang wrote:

Where I am up here in Alberta Canuck land, we don't pay anything.

Absolute nonsense. Did you think health care was free, that the doctors and
nurses work gratis and all the medicine and equipment and facilities just
magically appear at no cost to anyone?

No premium payment.

"No premium" is not the same as "no payment". You're paying for it.

You figure out how.

Huh?
When I needed *Eprex 3 times(1 cc shots by myself) a week it did not
cost me a dime. Still taking anti rejection pills(may be rest of my
life), Immuran and Rapamune every day. Nothing comes out of my pocket.
I just phone in and go pick up the refill.

How great for you but don't be so ignorant as to believe that someone
is not paying for it somewhere.

benick wrote:

"Don Klipstein" wrote in message
...
In article , benick wrote:

"Tony Hwang" wrote in message
...
terry wrote:
There's been so much debate here and on other forums about Universal
US health care (pro and con) that one gets curious about how much it
NOW costs, say, the average US family, to have 'Health Insurance'.

We guess that the cost is either fully paid by the subscriber?
Or in other cases, partly by the subscriber and partly by their
employer?
Then there are others, we gather who have no health insurance at all?
And we understand there is something called Medicaid?

Insurance cost numbers a) As little as 'a few hundred' b) Over
$12,000, per year have been mentioned?.

But what is a 'typical' (or average) USA cost?
Hi,
Where I am up here in Alberta Canuck land, we don't pay anything. No
premium payment. Our system is not perfect but everyone is taken
care of.
I understand U.S. spends more than us per capita on health care.
And many are left out? That is something I don't understand.
To me health care is service for the public, not profit generating
business.

Yea it's pretty easy to cut defense spending to the point you Canucks
can
only put 3 navy ships to sea and the military is so small it is
irrelevant
for your socialists programs when you live next to the police station
(US of
A) and rely TOTALLY on it for protection...Pathatic if you ask me....

Make that 33 ships as of 2008. Not too bad for a country with 1/10 of
USA's population.

What was the last major medical breakthrough in a socialist healthcare
country, besides the abortion pill ??? How many in the USA ???

Like in USA prescription drugs having so much protectionism as to cost
more legally than illegal re-imports of USA-made FDA-approved drugs that
made two border crossings?

Like the military you rely on US to do it for you..then copy the
procedure , pills ect. and ration it out...

Not as badly as happens to all to many USA residents!

Like the Pig Flue , it will be the USA that beats it... Not Cuba or
Canada..... Nuff said...

I expect USA to not fare better than other industrialized democracies
this coming flu season!

- Don Klipstein )

Theyt may "have" 33 ships BUT they could only afford to put 3 ships to
sea to help NATO with the piracy of Somilia....
If a cure can be found for the Pig Flue it will originate in the USA not
Cuba or Canada.I should have been clearer for you Canadiens....How much
has Defense Spending been cut to pay for your Socialized rationed
medical care ?? By 2/3? IIRC....
Hmmm,
Defend from what? Aliens? Canada does not have many enemies like U.S.
Can you travel all over the world proudly showing stars and stripes on
you? I CAN and do with my maple leaf all the time. We're welcome every
where. Your defense dollar is all gobbled up by private military
industrial complex like Black water making a few crooks mega rich in
the name of your country.
Eisenhower warned about it when he was leaving White House and it became
a reality since the days when Cheney was SOD. Got whole lot worse with
Dubya in White House. I feel sorry for an American like you. Know the truth.

Flipping channels tonight there was a discussion on PBS about US
health costs.

Some of the info was 'interesting'. Apparently there are many versions
of what for want of a better term we will temporarily call "Government
funded" health care. Ranging from where government owns and runs all
the hospitals right across to privately funded where by the governemnt
makes sure that service is provided. One instance mentioned was the UK
where 60% of the doctors are private being paid standard fees by the
government and 40% are salaried, working directly for the
government.

So will immediately point out that DOES NOT automatically mean the
government funding means that it RUNS the medical system. What it does
do in various models, in many 'western' countries is; a) Fund health
care b) Make sure it covers EVERYONE c) Imposes rules and conditions
by means of legislation on private providers, hospitals and the
insurance companies, who in some countries provide some medical
services or 'extras' such as additional payment for a private hospital
room.

During the PBS item it was mentioned that the starting point was 'How
do we cover everyone'; then go on from there with 'How much will cost'
and 'How do we make sure it's working successfully'. The result being
a healthier and more productive population. At a lower cost than
private insurance with bottom line profit incentive, plans.
..
Of one ranking of some 50 industrialized nations, the USA ranks 23rd
and also it's medical system does not cover all.

Of the PBS item didn't make many notes but a few numbers stuck in
mind.
In the USA due to the multiplicity of plans etc. administration costs
20% or more.
In (I think it was Canada?) administration costs 4%.
In Switzerland legislation says that if an insurance company does not
pay (agreed fee) coverage within 5 days the insured customer receives
next months total coverage 'free'.
Generally customers (patients) are treated according to need and
medical staff make the decisions as to type and amount of care needed.

Reason for posing the original question was because many are amazed
why the US public is not asking 'WHY NOT universal coverage. At a
reasonable cost'.

Here in Canada on my income (now mainly pension) of around $59,000
per year my total 'income' taxes are approx. $11,000 per year (single
widower in mid 70s). Almost equally divided between province and
federal. Since I also pay sales taxes on some of the remaining income
(of say around 48,000) but not on food and certain other items; if and
when I spend, it that's probably another approx. $4000. So one can
argue that one spends about 25% to 27% (depending on income bracket)
of total income to allow my government to run the country. And that
includes universal health care for everyone.

Came back from one of those 14 hour fasting blood tests today
(Friday); no charge, very little waiting (less than five minutes I
only got part way through one magazine article) and the decision when/
where to go was entirely mine. Occasionally someone will mention that
if you go for blood test on certain day of the week you may run into
people who have had transplants and that happens to be the day of the
week when there is certain clinic.

I decided to go to one of the hospitals where parking and distance to
walk into the blood lab is most suitable. There are at moment at least
three locations within this small city where on can go for blood
collection. On Oct. 2nd a new blood collection location will open in a
brand new building several miles closer to home.

The samples will go the central lab run by the Health Care
Corporation; and early next week my family doctor (GP) will get the
info and will phone me whether to make any changes to my medication,
and if necessary she will send a revised prescription to the
pharmacist I deal with. I have a Blue Cross insurance scheme that
covers most of cost; although in some countries the drugs are funded
completely by the government plan.

During the last 18 years have had two prostrate ops. couple of bouts
with heart fibrillation and prior to that maybe one health threatening
condition (probably meningitis?) that was attended to promptly. Yes
there are delays, I did have to wait a long time for an EKG but that
was in part because it was a follow and I was visiting relatives in
middle east. While in the middle east btw I had, as a non resident
(visitor) a simple INR blood test. It cost about $30 for the test and
analysis which we then transmitted back to my doctor here at home. In
Canada the blood test cost is part of the system. Well I have to use
gasoline to get there!

Other members of the family; now all grown up with families of their
own have also need health care from time to time also therapy after
being rear-ended, a softball face injury, child birth etc. And my late
wife received excellent cancer care etc.

Few years ago, about the time Florida was worrying about 'chads'
India managed to run a very good and promptly announced election,
using computers.
Even though many of the population were not literate! And Indians
number, what is it, about half a billion souls? Understand they used
symbols; so one voted for the donkey or the elephant etc.!
Cheers.

"William Munny" wrote in message
...
"terry" wrote in message
...
There's been so much debate here and on other forums about Universal
US health care (pro and con) that one gets curious about how much it
NOW costs, say, the average US family, to have 'Health Insurance'.

$0. Can't afford insurance (self-employed) and I only go to the doctor if
red stuff is spilling out. In the past 10 years I've spent $2,300 on medical
and dental combined (I get my teeth cleaned twice a year). I'm in my late
50s and my "medical" expenses consist of a good diet and a $10/month gym
membership which I use at least 27 days a month. Oh, and I didn't have
children, so I'm not subject to most of the "female" issues which plague
other women my age.