Universal health care

[anvi]

"Yes" to universal coverage, "no" to single-payer.  Bismarck systems are what appeal to me.

[anvi]

I was under the impressions American hospitals were legally obligated to treat people and the bill was to be dealt with afterwards.

Under the 1980's EMTALA law, American hospitals are only legally obligated to treat people who are in immanent danger of death or who are in active labor.  They can, and do, turn people away without care if those conditions don't apply.  So, people with no insurance but long-term chronic illnesses that could be treated in the progress of their development can go for long periods of time without treatment until those illnesses are past the point of treatment.  In any case, if those receiving emergency care under EMTALA are not able to or don't pay their bills, the costs get passed onto other consumers and taxpayers. 

[anvi]

Of the viable systems out there now (and yes, these are somewhat artificial classifications), my rankings of best to worst are:

Bismarck
Beveridge
National Health Insurance model
U.S. System
Out-of-Pocket Systems

[anvi]

In the '50's, a lot of the major health insurance plans like Blue Cross were non-profit organizations, and that gave them tax-exempt status and enabled them to charge low premiums.  Other commercial plans during this decade began to be offered through employers where unions negotiated good work contracts.

There are different degrees to which government regulates health care.  In some systems, government owns the hospitals and many of the care facilities as well as pays the medical bills, while in others, like Bismarck systems, providers are private, and what the government does is annually negotiated medical price caps and require insurance companies to be non-profit orgainizations.  

The Canadian economy is not broke.  In fact, one of the benefits of having alternative health care systems to the U.S. is that they cost the countries in which they exist far, far less than ours costs us, and have superior medical outcomes in many important areas to boot.  

There are good reasons that people favor and oppose different health care and insurance systems.  But, in the U.S., when people throw around labels like "socialized medicine" and such, they often don't inform themselves very much about the systems they are criticizing.

[anvi]

The Canadian economy is not broke.  In fact, one of the benefits of having alternative health care systems to the U.S. is that they cost the countries in which they exist far, far less than ours costs us, and have superior medical outcomes in many important areas to boot.  

Err, our economy is certainly not broken, but our medical outcomes aren't the best. Wait times and expanding costs are a major issue in Canada.

Health care costs are rising in every system given the growing populations and improvements in medical technology.  But wait times in Canada are surely a problem.  I've generally found Bismarck systems much more efficient in that respect.

[anvi]

Free healthcare would bankrupt the economy lol. The best way to is to do what we did in the fifties with programs like Blue Cross and drive down costs and force everyone to be insured through market means. The Free Market is key period. Free Healthcare is a fail.

Blue Cross was a non-profit company in the '50's.  If you're suggesting that insurance companies should be non-profit organizations, I'm with you!  That's precisely what Bismarck systems do!  Why anyone actually wants the board members of their health insurance companies to spend their time thinking about how to satisfy investors instead of thinking about how to finance their customers' medical bills is beyond me.

But, no one is talking about "free" healthcare.  Where did you get the idea that healthcare was "free" anywhere?  In the systems I assume you're primarily opposing, healthcare is paid for primarily with tax revenues.  So, the argument is about whether people should pay for health care through private sector premiums or through taxes; it's not about "free" healthcare.  

I'm also always amused by this continuous charge that single-payer or national insurance health care systems bankrupt the countries they exist in.  Canada spends about 11.5% of its GDP on health care, Cuba 10%. the U.K. about 9.5% and Taiwan...wait for it...6.5%.  The U.S. system's health care expenditures now claim about 18% of our GDP.  Remind me again which country's health care system is going to make them bankrupt first?      

[anvi]

Free healthcare would bankrupt the economy lol. The best way to is to do what we did in the fifties with programs like Blue Cross and drive down costs and force everyone to be insured through market means. The Free Market is key period. Free Healthcare is a fail.

I'm also always amused by this continuous charge that single-payer or national insurance health care systems bankrupt the countries they exist in.  Canada spends about 11.5% of its GDP on health care, Cuba 10%. the U.K. about 9.5% and Taiwan...wait for it...6.5%.  The U.S. system's health care expenditures now claim about 18% of our GDP.  Remind me again which country's health care system is going to make them bankrupt first?      

Proof?. Im open to all theories and beliefs on every subject weres the proof for this?.

Sure thing!  It's not hard to find; here is only the tip of the iceberg of evidence.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_health_expenditure_(PPP)_per_capita

http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SH.XPD.TOTL.ZS

http://www.investopedia.com/financial-edge/0212/countries-with-the-highest-healthcare-spending.aspx#axzz2DX8W0I9i

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/2011/11/why-does-healthcare-cost-so-much.html

http://conversableeconomist.blogspot.ca/2012/05/why-does-us-spend-more-on-health-care.html

[anvi]

So people with good genes should subsidize those with bad genes?  More relevantly, people with good health habits should subsidize those with bad habits?

Good genes and good health habits are no guarantors against health emergencies.  Besides, anyone who just buys private insurance but doesn't need to make any claims is subsidizing the costs of others in that private pool while at the same time covering their own risk.  That's how insurance works.