American Health Insurance (1 Viewer)

[ColinEssex]

There's one thing that inrigues me, American health insurance.

There was a report on the BBC news saying that 1 in 6 Americans have no health cover. We are led to believe (rightly or wrongly) that if you go to hospital in the USA the first thing they ask is if you have health cover.

So here's the questions

a) Are there any Americans here willing to confess they have no health cover?

b) How much does it cost?

c) What does it cover?

d) What happens if you go to the casualty (ER) and don't have cover, are you refused treatment? If not, what's the point of having cover if you get treated anyway.

We have the free NHS in the UK (except for dental treatment) there are many anomolies with it, but basically if you need treatment you get it for free.

It seems this is becoming a US election issue - why is that? do Americans want a different system like being treated for free like in the UK?

This isn't an anti-American bash, just trying to understand how it all works.

Col

 

[KeithG]

My brother dosen't have health ins and he recently went to the ER and was admitted for a 23 hour observation. They came to find out he had a kidney stone, his bill was around 9000 US dollars. Some ER's will deny you if you don't have ins but others will take you no matter what. I have ins through my employer and it is 70 US dollars a month.

 

[Mike375]

We have the free NHS in the UK (except for dental treatment) there are many anomolies with it, but basically if you need treatment you get it for free.

That is very kind of the doctors, nurses, medical technicians and all other staff associated with the health industry to work for no salary. Of course there generosity would not amount to much if the drug companies did not supply all the drugs for free and along with all medical instruments, beds, hospitals.

 

[pono1]

There are, if you believe what you read, roughly 40 million of the 300 million or so people in the U.S. who do not have health insurance... These 40 million are not the poorest of the poor--whose health treatment costs are paid by the government through a "program" called Medicaid. Neither are they pensioners, who are covered under another government program called Medicare. Instead, they are working people, often young, and almost always working part-time jobs or multiple part-time jobs.

This group aside, most people in the U.S. have health insurance paid by their employer (or their spouse's employer), who in turn contracts with a private insurer or two. The employers' health insurance plans typically cover most costs minus "deductables" -- amounts that must be paid by the insured (anywhere from $50 to $10,000) depending on the insurance plan and the particular treatment. Also, employers typically deduct anywhere from 0 to 100 dollars or so per employee paycheck to offset their costs for health insurance.

When you go to any E.R. in the U.S. the first question asked is this: "What's wrong with you?" If your condition is life-theatening, you are treated immediately and, once stabilized, either shuffled off to a "non-profit" hospital (if you're not already in one and you don't have health insurance) or not.

In the end, whether you have health insurance or not, you are treated. The thing is, those without health insurance could find themselves in a great deal of debt if they require a great deal of treatment. So the issue in the U.S. is this: Is it right for a person to go into deep debt simply because they get sick and don't have health insurance? If not, should the government step in and help?

"Universal health care" has been an on-again / off-again issue in the U.S. for the last forty years...

 

[GaryPanic]

We have the free NHS in the UK (except for dental treatment) there are many anomolies with it, but basically if you need treatment you get it for free.

That is very kind of the doctors, nurses, medical technicians and all other staff associated with the health industry to work for no salary. Of course there generosity would not amount to much if the drug companies did not supply all the drugs for free and along with all medical instruments, beds, hospitals.

just a pointer on this-
we do pay for treatment in the Uk but its a tax - (National insurnace - between 9-11% of your salary -- I think you pay it after 3k and upto 100K - but might be wrong on this , this tax is for healthcare and pension

and when you look at this compared to the US - the base tax rates are about equal if you deduct the NI contributions
so although the US looks like it has a lower tax regime - once you factor in bits like health care etc the end difference is not that much -
here in the UK the Tax man takes roughly 1/3 of your salary - then there is a house tax averaging at £1200 per year - otrher than that everything else is a direct tax fromth e goverment ..

hope this helps

regards

 

[Mike375]

we do pay for treatment in the Uk but its a tax -

Gary,

I know you pay because I know the doctors, nurses.....don't work for nothing.

However, your posting should be directed to Col

 

[Brianwarnock]

Yes what Col should have said is that it is free at the point of delivery.
Can I ask the Americans if people are refused health insurance? what do they do then?

One of my wife's drugs costs £42 per day, 365 days per year, she has other drugs regular clinic visits and blood transfusions every 6/7 weeks, would she be refused continuation of insurance. I should add all her drugs and treatment are free to her.

Brian

 

[GaryPanic]

we do pay for treatment in the Uk but its a tax -

Gary,

I know you pay because I know the doctors, nurses.....don't work for nothing.

However, your posting should be directed to Col

dup.....(lol)

 

[Mike375]

I should add all her drugs and treatment are free to her.

More bullshit

You or your wife are either paying via tax or welfare payments are lower than they could be.

Perhaps you (or Col) would like the the gov't to supply you a car and house as then they would be free to you Why stop there....food should be included.

 

[GaryPanic]

I should add all her drugs and treatment are free to her.

More bullshit

You or your wife are either paying via tax or welfare payments are lower than they could be.

Perhaps you (or Col) would like the the gov't to supply you a car and house as then they would be free to you Why stop there....food should be included.

depends how you look at it

if it was insurance then its the premiums of the masses (?) to pay the claims of the few, however with people living older the cost to a insurance company would be pretty hairyand the cover would be limited in its duration or scope - 104 weeks etc
so the goverement steps in and subs the whole system,and collects via tax etc at no profit - however the goverement (any goverement) is a mass of black holes where money just disapears (?).
excess layers of admin etc..

 

[Mike375]

Gary,

The best system was the one Australia had until after 23 years in opposition, the Labor party arrived in 1972.

The system we had prior to Labor arriving was one where private health insurance was used from a visit to the GP through to whatever. For those without insurance a means test was used. The net result was that virtually all working people had health insurance and as such a community rating could be used.

Medical specialists would perform procedures on public patients for no charge to the patient or hospital. In exchange they had the use of the hospital for private patients.

Jump foward to today and health insurance is much more expensive (as a percentage of income) and we have a two tier health system. For people who are not insured the waiting list can be into years. The more highly regarded specialists do not get involved with public patients. Their dollars are far larger in the private part of our system.

and collects via tax etc at no profit Gary, there might be no declared profit but there is a huge profit....for starters, all the salaries etc and etc and etc.

 

[pono1]

Can I ask the Americans if people are refused health insurance? what do they do then?
Brian

Emigrate to Canada?

 

[Rich]

Emigrate to Canada?

Are they allowed?

 

[Mike375]

I would go for the "Rich System"....

 

[Brianwarnock]

I should add all her drugs and treatment are free to her.

More bullshit

You or your wife are either paying via tax or welfare payments are lower than they could be.

Perhaps you (or Col) would like the the gov't to supply you a car and house as then they would be free to you Why stop there....food should be included.

Why do you have to be so aggresive as well as stupid?

My wife pays no NI and no income tax, but obviously all the stealth taxes, these she would pay even if the epitome of health, so I say again her treatment is free to her.

Brian

 

[Mike375]

Brian

It appears that you are unable to grasp the simple fact that your taxes (of any kind) would be less if all tax payer funded health issues ceased.

Why do you see my previous posting as aggresive? You are the one who is being aggresive.

Mike

 

[Rich]

Brian

It appears that you are unable to grasp the simple fact that your taxes (of any kind) would be less if all tax payer funded health issues ceased.

Mike

You idiot, the saving gained in tax would be offset by healthcare insurance

 

[Mike375]

You idiot, the saving gained in tax would be offset by healthcare insurance

Thank you for clarifying that the health services are not free. I knew that at some stage at least one Englishman would grasp this simple fact.

 

[Brianwarnock]

I've never said they were free, just free at the point of delivery,if you pay minimal tax, which pays for all sorts of things like stupid wars, then yes I think my wife can consider her treatment as free.

Brian

 

[Rich]

Thank you for clarifying that the health services are not free. I knew that at some stage at least one Englishman would grasp this simple fact.

Actually for those who are unable to work it is free, try again