You may have seen this video on Corrente. But if you haven't seen it yet, catch it. The people who made this video wanted to interview Canadians who had complaints about their system -- but no complainers could be found. I dated a Canadian girl once -- she too was hearing-impaired -- and I have (as I've mentioned in previous posts) witnessed their health care system first-hand. Very impressive.
My favorite line in this video: "Trying to achieve health care reform incrementally is like trying to jump across a chasm in two steps."
Support for the Canadian-style single-payer plan, HR 676 (which is not the Obama-favored plan) is growing. Here's a columnist in St. Louis Today:
For those folks who want a simple bill and a simple plan, I recommend John Conyers’ HR 676.But there's a problem: Backtracking Dems. From The Hill:
Actually, that would be the reform I prefer. I support single-payer, government-run health care. I don’t think anyone needs to get rich by denying health insurance claims or canceling policies after an illness.
Of the 12 serving House members who co-sponsored Rep. John Conyers’s (D-Mich.) single-payer bill (H.R. 676) in the last Congress but not in this Congress, four have indicated they will vote no on a single-payer bill to be offered by Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.).What caused the switch? Perhaps loyalty to the president -- in which case, Barack Obama instantly becomes the person most responsible for deep-sixing true health care reform.
The four members are Reps. Joe Baca (D-Calif.), Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-Texas), David Scott (D-Ga.), and Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.).
“It’s a whole new ballgame,” said Baca spokesman Mike Trujillo. “[Baca] supports a public option and not a single-payer system at this time.”
In an interview with The Hill, Scott said, “I support a public option. It’s an excellent compromise and the best vehicle to garner enough votes to pass….Single-payer isn’t going to get the votes. A public option is the best shot we have to lower costs and provide coverage to most Americans.”...
...Reps. Andre Carson (D-Ind.), Linda Sanchez (D-Calif.), Loretta Sanchez (D-Calif.), Betty Sutton (D-Ohio), and James Moran (D-Va.), all previous co-sponsors of a single-payer bill, but not co-sponsors this year, did not comment for this article.
Or -- and this is a theory I've mooted in the past -- the sticking point may be the sorry state of our overall financial system. The insurance industry buys half of all corporate bonds. Without those bonds, corporations will not muster up capital to expand. No bonds, no expansion, no jobs, no recovery. The insurance industry also owns a lot of that highly-iffy commercial real estate paper.
18 comments:
We noted years ago that the Healthcare industry went into the Real Estate business rather than the insurance business.
The two arguments against single payer, putting all those insurance company clerks out on the street and who will buy corporate bonds?
With the money saved from lowered health care costs, Joe and Jane Sixpack could invest for their retirement instead of relying on Social Security payments.
As to unemployment, if the suits at Big Insurance could employees would be out on the street in a heart beat and the pencil pushing sent to India as soon as technology allows. Also, the people that make that argument, were they as concerned about all the auto workers laid off when parts manufacture went to the Third World? I doubt it.
The health insurance cabal could provide supplemental policies, the kind that when they welsh on paying for a procedure you won't die.
I'm not sure Joe or Jane Sixpack will do that.
Please understand that I am not offering "potential financial meltdown" as an excuse to hold off on single-payer. Rather, I'm wondering if "meltdown" is the secret reason why Obama and the congressfolk have turned against single-payer.
If so, I wish they would discuss the matter openly.
I wonder if the insurance industry is really kept alive as a "make work" scheme -- as is NASA. If so, it may be best to put people to work rebuilding the infrastructure or building electric cars. As for the bonds -- well, the gummint has already picked up the tab for so much else, what's another shrimp on the barbie?
I'm just curious about what Canadians would do if this "third-world country" got single-payer health care like theirs and they needed a procedure done that they had to come to the US for? Where would they go then? I much prefer our "third-world country" to any on this Gods green earth...thankyouverymuch! :)
Lonni
Joseph,
What you are saying about the insurance companies role in the big picture of our total economic structure may well be the best theory I have heard for the lack of any reform in health care over the past few decades. However, a functioning and responsible government can plan and execute a step by step re-organization if not all at once but over a period of time. The problem with American Government is the same as the problem with the American Economy, that is, greed and retention of power at any cost and the hell with consequences at least until the consequences are looking them in the eyes.
On a related subject, don't hold your breath for any appologies from anyone in politics (politicians only appologize when they are caught with their pants down)or any prominant entertainers ( they only appologize when it gets them more publicity) or anyone in any form of media (most are in the business of mouthing the talking points handed to them by their bosses or book publishers or whatever raises their ratings) or anyone who is anyone in the business community (none of them wanted reform and change anyway and if Obama turns out to be their best shill, what do they have to oppologize about?). That leaves the public at large who voted for Obama. They might feel cheated or betrayed but they aren't so concerned about appologizing to anyone, if anything, they might feel so dejected and turned off that they just go back to not voting and not caring (Hillary/ Obama/Democrat/Republican, they are all the same).
Oh, and for all those anti Hillary blogs.... what I have been reading lately ( in comment sections ) is that if Obama gives up on the public option, it will be the last straw and he (Obama) will in effect split the Democratic Party and that they will turn to third parties instead (appologies to PUMA's has not been offered as a possible remedy).
As for me, I don't fit in any of the above categories. I am thinking about just getting the hell out of Dodge before all hell freezes over.
beeta
And what procedure would that be Lonni? Don't hold us in suspense. While you're at it convince us that it's a procedure that insurers wouldn't consider "experimental."
I don't think the insurance industry's predominance in the percentage of holdings of various kinds of financial instruments is a factor.
They hold those predominant positions because they have the most money to invest-- money which the industry obtains from everybody else. That doesn't mean they perform a similarly predominant role in the purchase of NEWLY floated stocks or bonds (which is what startup entrepeneurs or expanding businesses need). There is a robust secondary market we call 'the stock/bond market' wherein old issues of stocks and bonds, for which the companies issuing them were paid and spent/invested the money long ago. This market functions mostly to provide liquidity to such investments, so that those buying them can readily sell them at predictable prices if they need to.
And that function is by far the vast majority of the market trading. NOT absorbing new issues, which are always a tiny fraction of the total such issues still extant in the world (all that have ever been issued, and not subsequently retired).
In fact, an insurance company needs investment grade instruments, so the insurance industry would never buy startup penny stocks, pink sheet companies, or NASDAQ initial offerings, nor bonds issued from any but the blue-chip top credit rated companies (where no job growth occurs, and where any capital investments are likely to be placed overseas).
These days, the more established companies do not so much issue new stock as aggressively buy and then retire stock (in an effort to work the supply/demand curve to boost the stock price to the inurement of the management's stock options).
And the most needy companies chose to take on large-scale new equity partners which are usually not domestically based, but the fewer and fewer parties with sizable liquid capital, such as sovereign wealth funds, Kuwaiti oil billionaire types, maybe a Warren Buffet here and there (the exception). That is, they do not go to the market to gain subscription to the amount of stocks required to be issued (because such a sizable rush of new issues to the market here would crash the stock price).
XI
"I am thinking about just getting the hell out of Dodge before all hell freezes over."
So am I. But where to go?
Joseph, I've been a lurker for a long, long time, and I'm also a Canadian, so I hope you'll forgive me for delurking and responding to "Lonni"
Lonni, the video was a reflection of individual Canadian opinions in response to the onslaught of American Political and media slandering of the Canadian Health system. The respondants did no more than respond to the slander, and if I recall correctly, they did not call Americans third world, they called the lack of health care third world. Can you deny that?
Secondly, By and large, most Canadians do not go to America to get procedures done. There are some, for sure, and our health system covers some of the costs (not all) and that is the risk of our folks coming south. It's a big bonanza for your health corporations, so do you honestly think that if indeed you got single payer, your system would refuse to treat paying customers from other countries? And BTW, the door swings both ways. Our specialized hospitals do not turn Americans away although they do charge them (unless they qualify under special funds like the Herbie fund, in which case Canadian people pay for the no resident treatment through mega donations).
Lonni, I believe the point of the article was that justification of your current system by tearing down your closest neighbour and biggest trading partner was not a good idea because, while we Canadians are a tolerant lot, we take so much then we bite back to counter the terrible misinformation that is being perpetrated upon the American public.
If you wish to remain in the situation that exists today, so be it, but honestly, as long as your medical system is for profit, they will never turn a patient, who has money or insurance, away, regardless of country of origin. And that will not change should your populace decide to adopt a single payer or public option. Your country and mine are very dependent upon Corporate bucks - mine is just a bit more regulated than yours. As long as there is money to be made, these guys don't give a darn where that money is coming from. Hope I've responded in a civil and lucid manner.
HT
Lonnie, as a Canadian I have never heard of a Canadian going to the US because the care was better there. The main reason Canadians use American health care is if we get sick or have an accident while visiting your country - and we get back to Canada just as quick as we can! Who wants to pay those exorbitant prices when we get HC paid for?
I'd like to know what these procedures are myself. They must be quite rare and exotic.
I'll say this: When my Canadian ladyfriend had a gallstone problem, we hopped a plane to Vancouver pronto. She didn't want to fly in pain -- but she would not have wanted the work done in America, even if price were not an issue.
The big secret why Obama and his krewe are against single payer is all the campaign donations would dry up.
If someone asks me who I donated to I truthfully tell them Obama, Pelosi, Reid, Baucus, and every other back stabbing Democrat that takes big insurance bucks. Part of that 30% "administrative" cost built into my premium is what the insurance suits give to congress to make sure Single Payer never happens.
Yes, some "Canadians" like Celine Dion or very rich families will go to the US to get the best care money can buy, but most ordinary Canadians would run back to Canada to get healthcare here. For old Canadians who spend their winters in Florida, getting sick there is their nightmare.
Even if our system is not perfect and the cost have been increasing, no Canadian, unless they are millionaires, would wish to exchange their healthcare system for the one in the US.
The US has the best health care in the world if you're very rich and can afford to get the VIP treatment at the Mayo Clinic.
Lonni also conveniently forgets to mention the numerous Americans who are forced to go to Mexico for dental care and prescription medications, or the growing numbers of Americans going to third-world countries (primarily India) for operations they can't afford in the U.S. and also for elder care, which is cheaper and, apparently, more compassionate over there.
Google "medical tourism" and you'll find a wealth of information about Americans going overseas but almost no mention of anyone coming here for healthcare.
Anecdotally, when I lived overseas the place everyone wanted to go to for serious procedures was Germany, not the U.S. Germany was seen as the Holy Grail of medical care. Don't know if that still holds, but an American friend of mine had her first child--who was premature--in a German hospital and said the standard of care there was almost awe-inspiring.)
Jeralyn at Talk Left was another one who drank deeply of the Kool-Aid, going from Obama skeptic to full-blown idol worship right after the primaries, and evincing furious disdain for anyone who criticized the Lightbringer on her threads. At one point she even declared that anyone who spoke ill of The One would be banned from posting. Fortunately, BTD -- who was, in his own words, a "tepid" Obama supporter -- maintained his dignity and allowed the disgruntled to post on his threads as long as they kept it civil and on topic. At this point, the "disgruntled" are so numerous and so vocal that they overwhelm Obama supporters and it's almost like pre-primary days over there.
I think I posted that comment to the wrong thread -- I meant it for the Apology list. Oops.
I'm a Canadian and our Health Care system is great! Could it be better? Sure, just like any organisation or infrastructure could be better. But that doesn't mean what we have now is bad. Far from it. It's just that we will always push to improve our services.
Also, our clinics rock. You don't need an appointment. Just go during open hours. And it's literally next door, usually where drug stores are located.
I didn't even know what Health Insurance was until I once thought about going to the States and getting my passport. I couldn't believe my ears. To me, it seemed like a throwback to the dark ages to have to get Health Insurance, and the cost!!! OMG!!! It's ridiculous. Americans won't know how good single payer is until they have access to it. If Americans had single payer, they would all love it. Even those that oppose it most today.
Yes, most Canadians love their healthcare system, and are very proud of it. The Canadian media loves to crow about how cruel and uncivilized the American system is in comparison. Sure, they occasionally complain about wait times, but always secure in the knowledge that've got things way better than those barbarian Americans down south.
The reality is that really, they don't know any better. I lived in Canada until I was 30 and have lived in the U.S. for more than a decade. I have good insurance here, and can say with complete confidence that my care here is infinitely better than what I had in Canada.
For every anecdote describing awesome care someone received in Canada I can provide an anecdote of a friend or relative who waited an excruciatingly long time for care or was denied care altogether. The truth is that rationing is inevitable; without it the cost of universal care is prohibitive.
Of course, some type of healthcare for everyone is better than some people having none. People who have good insurance now need to realize that their quality of care would deteriorate dramatically under single payer.
Post a Comment