I have a Canadian friend that died waiting! Uh oh, seems your anecdote cancels out with mine.
I also have a Canadian grandmother that spent three weeks in the ICU. Not because she needed to, but because at the time they didn’t need to room and because they didn’t see the need to move her to a different floor to new nurses. Anyone know what three weeks in an ICU would typically cost in the US.
That same grandmother was then denied a by-pass operation! Not because of availability mind you, or because she was old, or because of cost, but rather because a team of medical professionals discussed her case and decided that she wouldn’t be better off. They concluded that she’d never go along with the post-op physio required after cracker her chest open, and would likely be bed-ridden the rest of her life. Instead they treated medically and through changes to her diet. Scary thing from that is that in the US she could have pushed for second and third opinions until she found someone willing to perform the operation.
The funny thing about UHC is that it’s just not that different from the US system. In fact, it’s remarkably similar to having an employer based group policy. So much so that for Canadians that move to the US the only noticeable difference is the amount of paperwork. Oh, and that awesome threatening letter the hospital sends as a formality just in case your insurance doesn’t pay.
I live in Dearborn. I am across the river from Windsor and have many friends and relatives from Canada. They bitch about health care like anybody else, but I never had one say they would prefer our system.
In America, if you get a catastrophic illness , you can face medical bills that could break you and perhaps bankrupt your family. 62 percent of bankruptcies have a health component involved . Of those ,80 percent have what we oddly refer to as health insurance.
This is the bit that blows my tiny mind right here.
You have a system where, if you are struck down with a rare cancer that requires expensive treatment and you don’t have insurance…you will not get that treatment…you will die.
Is that a fair assessment? and if so, I simply cannot get my head around it.
Not really, you’re being a bit generous with your example. If you don’t have insurance, you are personally responsible for full payment of any and all medical treatment for any and all medical issues, from rare cancer to pregnancy to a broken leg. Most people get insurance through their employer, which is a real kick in the teeth for the unemployed, or folks who have bad jobs that don’t offer insurance. Insurance outside of your employer tends to be very expensive, treatments tend to be very expensive.
I know a family that picked up and moved from Pennsylvania to Australia when the husband got laid off. They had triplets, and the insurance would have bankrupted them in no time. I suppose after going bankrupt and losing their house they may have qualified for Medicaid, yippee.
Since in other countries, you don’t have to declare bankruptcy when you get sick, it is not difficult to discern the difference.
What kind of society should tolerate that?
For middle class workers the net result is the same. $8000 either comes out of your income as taxes, or gets paid to an insurance company.
After that, you go to the doctor, and get pretty much the same treatment. Time to book a doctor has been pretty similar. Time waiting in an ER is pretty similar.
The differences are at the fringes. If you’re rich in Canada you have fewer options, except for flying/driving to the US. If you are poor in the US you have fewer options.
Health care in Canada is remarkably similar to having a group plan in the US. I guess in the US you can choose to give $1200 to one of two companies that each provide the same thing. Then you have your little list of in house facilities, and list of things covered at 100%.
That’s about it. That’s what cracks me up during these debates. Right now I’m in the US and I’d like to get an echocardiogram. It will cost me up around $1200-1600, and because I have a HRA account that essentially comes out of my pocket. So I delay getting that done because it doesn’t seem that necessary. If I was in Canada it would be deemed “less necessary” so I’d be at the back of the line and wait to get one. Net result is pretty much the same.
Just to start, when you’re saying $8000, you’re talking about the cost of health insurance? For who? An individual? Average cost of family insurance in the US is significantly above that.
Second, in terms of health care spending, on a per capita basis, the US spends twice as much as other nations. Huge difference.
Third, Canada is one system and does have a wait time issue. Look at Taiwan and Germany if you want to see UHC done with less wait time issues.
Fourth, how many bankruptcies in Canada due to health expenses were there last year?
In every measurable way, from health outcomes to expenditures, the US system is worse.
Uh, what U.S. hospital (aside from the rare charities) will give you ongoing chemo treatment for cancer if you have no money or insurance to pay?
Nataline Sarskiyan, in fact, had insurance, plus doctors who said a liver transplant would have saved her life. Her insurance denied her, and as a result she died. Because no one would give her a transplant without money.
This is what makes Canada and England superior to the US. That wouldn’t have happened there.
I think you misread my post. If you have no insurance, you are personally responsible for any and all medical costs. If you have no (or not enough) money, you don’t get treated, or you get treated on an emergency basis* and go bankrupt.
Emergency Rooms will treat people for things like a broken bone or heart attack, but you’re on the hook for the expense. They will also only treat you until you’re stable and safe to leave the hospital, no ongoing treatment.
Good job that there are plenty of reasonably priced insurance options that people can afford and that cover all your expenses and mean you don’t have to worry about being bankrupt by illness.
Phew! Good that the free market is providing that for you, I was worried for while there.
I guess I’m not posting angry enough, Novelty, because I think our system sucks. What I meant to get across was that it’s not just expensive to treat rare cancers, every type of medical care becomes a problem when you don’t have insurance or money to spare. Not only are you personally responsible for all of the costs, our costs are generally much higher than in UHC countries.
I did a few comparisons when we first moved to the US and were living on a single income. That year our effective tax rate was around 14%, while a friend in Canada with a similar income had a tax around around 28%. The difference, 14%, was about $8000.
Yup, there are differences.
In Canada, the top three reasons for bankruptcy are loss of job, divorce, and medical expenses. In the US it’s medical, job loss, debt, divorce. I haven’t found the specific percentage or total number, but it happens, it’s more than zero.
You had a 14% effective tax rate on ~60K income? That’s quite an accomplishment. Are you talking on average for expenses?
You have a cite for your $8000 figure? It’s actually about $7800 per person spent on health care in the US. So, if you are covering the costs by yourself, you’re about half off.
You’re comparing two different things. Canada calculates medical bankruptcies as bankruptcies caused by decreased earning and inability to pay other debts, due to medical conditions. US bankruptcies attributed to medical costs are due to an inability to pay medical and hospital bills.