Why doesn't America have Universal Health Care?...?
And why do Insurance companies deny people the right to get treatments that will keep them on god's green earth? Why? Norway has the BEST health system in the world, yet America claims to be the greatest country of all, but we are seriously lacking in the health care category, along with many others. I understand that money is a huge factor, but I don't see why so many people are without health insurance, and for those that are, get denied treatments each and every day. Can someone please make this a little more clear to me?
Law & Ethics - 19 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
We aren't lacking in the healthcare industry.
2 :
Norway does have an excellent system. But they are taxed at about 60 or 70% of their wages. Look at the other social programs the US has been running. Do you want all your medical needs now at the hands of the lowest bidder?
3 :
The American people, don't believe their health and welfare to be a priority. The seem complacent in handing over their hard earned money for substandard care, all in the name of making an insurance company a whole lot of money.
4 :
we lead in health care.i don't want the government doing anything for me.
5 :
Insurance and pharmaceutical company lobbyists.
6 :
Because Republicans are afraid of helping out those who can't pay their own medical bills. They think everyone on welfare is a government leech.
7 :
The government screws up everything it gets its hands in. Just look at the public school system. It used to be the envy of the world. But as the government got its hands into it, it started going downhill. Now, despite being one of, if not THE, best funded in the world, it's laughable.
8 :
because Norway isn't trying to treat 300 million people. No one is refused basic health care. Hospitals aren't allowed to refuse to treat you for that reason.
9 :
the american system is designed more so that you make your own money, and spend your own money how you want. systems like norways have it set up so The Man takes more of your money, but gives you access to everything for free. the problem with the USA is that its not very equal, and poor people cant afford anything, while the rich people afford everything.
10 :
In the US health care is not seen as a service worth giving to everyone like police, firefighters, or the military. We see health care as a 2nd Tier priority that one must achieve personally based capitalism. 1st tier priorities like police and firefighters are seen a necessities that everyone should receive in a socialized way. But not health care. That is why the World Health Organization ranks the US as 37th for quality. But you have to remember, that means that people with money here get the best service (1st in the world) and people with no money get no service (last in the world). That is how capitalism works.
11 :
You probably already know this, but you pay into health insurance every month. Everyone with insurance does. When something goes wrong, that treasury is tapped to pay the expenses, following certain guidelines that only get more complicated over time. Insurance companies are their to help, but make no mistake, they are for-profit industries whose priority is to make money, not to pay for your medical bills. Rising medical costs have caused insurance industries to clamp down on what they will pay for, how much, and what they charge for monthly rates. Most denials are the result of risky surgery that they feel might not be effective. One of the problems with people requiring medical attention is the more attention they need, the more expensive it typically is to keep them alive. The more you try and keep people healthy, the more you spend, the cost increases exponentially the larger the blanket you throw out. Norway is a smaller country that has adjusted well to having a 60-70% tax rate. If you did that in the US, the lower class would get a lot larger, unless if they were exempt from the taxes; but what kind of system is that, where only the people that succeed are penalized with taxes. Such systems don't encourage growth, I'd rather sit back and work a menial job than work hard and get most of my earnings taken away.
12 :
only in america....... the reason is because we as americans feel like if you cant make money on it its wrong to treat a person for illness, it was possible they would charge us for air. did you know that if you feed a homeless person a certain amount of food it against the law. thats because the govt wants to control what ever we do , if its not taxable its against the law.......and thats sad. thats why america is sinking now , too money hungry.
13 :
Why are people in such a hurry to chuck away the system that has made the United States the most successful country under the sun and that is that we don't live on the government, we make and spend our own money and have as small and unobtrusive a government presence as possible. The cost of 300+ million citizens on socialized health care would be enormous, a better option would be to assure that all have access to reasonable priced health care.
14 :
First of all, lets look at the un-insured. More than 11 million are illegal aliens. More than 13 million "choose" to not be insured as in they pay cash. 12 million are between jobs and will be insured in 6-12 months. That means only 6-7 million people are not insured at all and won't be in the next 6-12 months. Do you really want to let the government to run health care for this country? They've screwed up everything else and also you won't have any choice in your own healthcare options. By the way, those numbers are from the CATO institue and the 6-7 million uninsured people represent only 2 percent of the population.
15 :
The American Healthcare system is on the same level as most Third World Countries (WHO ranked Cuba and Mexico above the US). Most of it has to do with the Insurance Industry. They have powerful lobbiests with the ear of the Federal Government, and deep pockets that will pay. Also the US is a very latigious society. We sue over every little thing. This causes malpractice insurance to sky rockette (Illinois has the highest malpractice insurance rate), causing doctors to rais the cost of their services, which in turn causes the Health Insurance companies to pay out more to service their policy holders, and thus raising the cost of insurance to an alarming rate.
16 :
Americans spend more money on health care than any country in the world. You have the best health professionals money can buy. The only problem is too many Americans can't afford to buy it. Health care is free and universal if you are a member of congress....so get yourself elected. Nothing may change as long as the rule makers get theirs free. Make everyone pay, including members of congress. Maybe they are too far removed from reality. Or ... make it free and universal ?
17 :
You do realize that a large portion of those who are without health care are not citizens of the United States but other nations people who are here illegally right, we also foot the bill for free health care for those non-citizens at taxpayers expense. If our health care is so bad how come we have tons of people from other nations coming here to get the latest procedure or to get the more complicated procedures? How come we lead the world in research and development? How come other nations send people to train in our system? If you say our insurance companies are bad I would agree but our health care (professionals and procedures) are excellent. We need to make sure all the middle class citizens have affordable health care, the poor already get free health care and the rich can afford the very the best, end of story.
18 :
Because people want universal health care but when it comes down to it they won't vote for it because they fear it will raise taxes and that doctors, nurses, and insurance companies won't make as much money. SO MONEY IS YOUR ANSWER! It sucks watch the show SICKO it will help you understand the reasons for our healthcare issues. I am going to guess that half the people whining about health care are also not voting for Hillary Clinton. BIG MISTAKE (she is all for changing health care and most people are all about hating her)
19 :
The government started the ball rolling in WWII when they unconstitutionally interfered with private industry and instituted wage and price controls. In order to retain and attract the best workers, businessmen decided to add "benefits" to their jobs, and health insurance was one even though there was NO real "need" for such a perk back then. Stupidly, health insurance became connected in peoples' minds with employment and this became expected. The majority of people WITH health insurance in the US get it via their place of employment; next is probably the government programs out there, but it could be a tie with some other category. Unfortunately the idiotic government did not do its job and they allow all manner of special perks for the insurers and we have DOMINATION of the field by a handful of HUGE companies which are corrupt: "While growing into a colossus, UnitedHealth has repeatedly failed to perform its basic job of paying medical bills. UnitedHealth, which covers 70 million Americans, has been sanctioned in nine states for paying claims slowly; shortchanging doctors, hospitals, or patients; or poorly handling complaints and appeals. One Nebraska woman complained to state regulators that UnitedHealth's computers had incorrectly rejected claims related to her son's surgery six times. At one point, UnitedHealth owed Dr. George Schroedinger, an orthopedic surgeon, $600,000. He and his clinic sued UnitedHealth of the Midwest in 2004. Deciding for the clinic, U.S. District Judge Stephen Limbaugh of Missouri declared that the company's claims processing systems were "flawed in many ways, denying, reducing, and improperly processing claims on a regular basis. And despite innumerable requests, United was unwilling to remedy the underlying errors in its systems" (Star-Tribune Dec. 12, 2007). Payment troubles continued after the verdict, and Dr. Schroedinger filed a second lawsuit. "These people can never get it right, which says to me that they just plain lie," he said in an interview. Failure to pay isn't the only complaint. The insurer also gives incorrect information on which physicians are in its network, creating enormous problems for physicians' staff. The AMA said that no other insurer has prompted as many complaints as UnitedHealth about abusive and unfair payment practices. AMA officials have met with UnitedHealth executives 16 times since 2000, with little to show for it. "They have always got a new plan to fix it," said Dr. William G. Plested III, past president of the AMA. But "nothing ever happens." It seems to us that this case is just the tip of the insurance iceberg. More and more stories are appearing daily in the news media about how insurance company are instructing employees their jobs are to deny claims and/or delay payments. With such a high percentage of medical premiums and other costs going to the legal profession, to maintain compliance with endless government rules/regulations and being hoarded by the insurance companies and executives — is it any wonder medical costs are increasing so dramatically? It's time to take a closer look at the medical insurance companies. UnitedHealth Group is not the first medical insurance company to rob patients, hospitals and clinics to pay obscene salaries to their executives. It's a modern day robbing patients to pay pimps. Michael Arnold Glueck, M.D., comments on medical-legal issues and is a visiting fellow in economics and citizenship at the International Trade Education Foundation of the Washington International Trade Council. Robert J. Cihak, M.D., is a senior fellow and board member of the Discovery Institute and a past president of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons." http://www.newsmax.com/medicine_men/medical_insurance/2008/01/03/61543.html That's only part of the article. We also have the testimony of a doc for hire who has developed her conscience: http://www.thenationalcoalition.org/DrPeenotestimony.html Furthermore: "the vast majority of health insurance policies are through for-profit stock companies. They are in the process of “shedding lives†as some term it when “undesirable†customers are lost through various means, including raising premiums and co-pays and decreasing benefits (Britt, “Health insurers getting bigger cut of medical dollars,†15 October 2004, investors.com). That same Investors Business Daily article from 2004 noted the example of Anthem, another insurance company. They said the top five executives (not just the CEO) received an average of an 817 percent increase in compensation between 2000 and 2003. The CEO, for example, had his compensation go from $2.5 million to $25 million during that time period. About $21 million of that was in stock payouts, the article noted. A 2006 article, “U.S. Health Insurance: More Market Domination, More CEO Compensation†(hcrenewal.blogspot.com) notes that in 56 percent of 294 metropolitan areas one insurer “controls more than half the business in health maintenance organization and preferred provider networks underwriting." In addition to having the most enrollees, they also are the biggest purchasers of health care and set the price and coverage terms. “’The results is double-digit premium increases from 2001 and 2004—peaking with a 13.9 percent jump in 2003—soaring well above inflation and wages increases.’" Where is all that money going? The article quotes a Wall Street Journal article looking at the compensation of the CEO of UnitedHealth Group. His salary and bonus is $8 million annually. He has benefits such as the use of a private jet. He has stock-option fortunes worth $1.6 billion." --Save America, Save the World by Cassandra Nathan pp. 127-128 It's become very difficult if you lack insurance to get consistent, good quality health care. It's NOT impossible, but it's absolutely positively not the norm and it takes a lot of work. Where the free market operates, in a pocket, it's great: Read: http://www.azcentral.com/community/gilbert/articles/0217er17.html A doctor owned and run hospital that sees everyone gets care, no matter what happens to the bottom line. http://www.simplecare.com/ a doctor-driven group where reasonable rates are charged. Note you can go to a walk-in clinic at Wal-Mart or CVS or the like in many cities and get many of the most typical reasons for seeing a doc addressed for under $100. The price of LASIK has DROPPED dramatically over a decade. Plastic surgery is CHEAP. Compare a major procedure like a tummy tuck with the bill an uninsured patient will get for a medically necessary appendectomy WITHOUT complications. So it's clear that we do NOT want to give yet more control to the incompetent government. Besides the fact that UHC EVERYWHERE results in RATIONED CARE and BANKRUPTCY of the system, where we try it here with smaller populations, it happens. Medicare is supposed to be "universal" for the 65+ crowd. Here's the truth: In the US, Medicare is going bankrupt. In 1998, Medicare premiums were $43.80 and in 2008 will be $96.40--up 120%. "Medigap" insurance is common because of the 20% co-pay required for service. Medicare HMOs are common because they reduce that burden without an extra charge in many cases. HOWEVER, many procedures which used to have no or a low co-pay NOW cost the full 20% for the HMO Medicare patient. ALSO the prescription coverage they tended to offer has been REDUCED in many cases to conform to the insane "donut hole" coverage of the feds. Doctors are leaving Medicare because of the low and slow pay AND because the crazy government wants to "balance" their Ponzi scheme on the backs of doctors. "That dark cloud lurking over the shoulder of every Massachusetts physician is Medicare. If Congress does not act, doctors' payments from Medicare will be cut by about 5 percent annually, beginning next year through 2012, creating a financial hailstorm that would wreak havoc with already strained practices. Cumulatively, the proposed cuts represent a 31 percent reduction in Medicare reimbursement. If the cuts are adjusted for practice-cost inflation, the American Medical Association says Medicare payment rates to physicians in 2013 would be less than half of what they were in 1991." http://www.massmed.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=vs_mar05_top&TEMPLATE=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm&CONTENTID=11037 Medicaid is supposed to be universal for the poor. Even lower rates of reimbursement and fewer docs that will take it and again RATIONED care: Oregon's at least honest about the FACT that ALL government health care IS RATIONED care: "But the real-life story of 18-year-old Brandy Stroeder may come to embody a harsher truth: namely, that even as we perfect more and more advanced medical procedures, not everyone is going to have access to them. And, as Americans struggle to come up with an equitable health care system, that even the best-intentioned system can seem heartless when forced to balance the good of thousands against an individual's suffering. The story began last fall when doctors told Brandy, who lives with her single mother in a weather-beaten farmhouse about an hour south of Portland, Ore., that she was likely to die within a year unless she got a simultaneous lung-liver transplant, an operation that has been performed fewer than a dozen times in the United States. Under Oregon's unique Medicaid system, which openly rations healthcare in order to provide basic care to as broad a population as possible, Brandy was eligible for a liver transplant or a lung transplant, but not both. In January, and again after a review in May, the state-run health plan said no. There wasn't enough data to show the $250,000 procedure was worthwhile, the health plan's administrators said, and the plan didn't cover experiments. But Brandy wouldn't take no for an answer. A tough, determined young woman who had managed to work part-time at a photo studio, baby-sit her boss's children, coach the high school football team and maintain a 3.2 grade point average between numerous and prolonged bouts in the hospital, Brandy wasn't about to give up her life without a fight. She sued the state of Oregon, charging that it was making a flawed moral choice in refusing to save her life. Since then her caustic, articulate criticisms of the Oregon system have given a vivid sense of the obstacles any universal healthcare plan for the nation would face. "They'll pay for an alcoholic to get a liver transplant because they've been drinking all their life," she says, sitting with her mother at a rickety picnic table under a cherry tree by her front door. "They'll pay for a heroin addict to get cured, to help someone kick the cigarette habit. Those are things people do to themselves. If you put it to a vote the people would say pay for some girl's operation instead of some alcoholic's liver transplant or some crack head's needles. I just think it isn't very fair.'" http://archive.salon.com/health/feature/2000/07/07/brandy/ Texas has also been the boldest in supporting the growing-in-popularity "futile care theory": "Texas, however, has become ground zero for futile-care theory thanks to a draconian state law passed in 1999 — of dubious constitutionality, some believe — that explicitly permits a hospital ethics committee to refuse wanted life-sustaining care. Under the Texas Health and Safety Code, if the physician disagrees with a patient's decision to receive treatment, he or she can take it to the hospital ethics committee. A committee hearing is then scheduled, all interested parties explain their positions, and the members deliberate in private. If the committee decides to refuse treatment, the patient and family receive a written notice. At that point, the patient/family has a mere ten days to find another hospital willing to provide the care, after which, according to the statute, "the physician and health care facility are not obligated to provide life-sustaining treatment." Since the patients threatened with death by ethics committee are often the most expensive to care for, it will often be difficult for families to find other institutions willing to accept a transfer. But the futility deck may be especially stacked against Houston patients. Many city hospitals participate in the "Houston City-Wide Guidelines on Medical Futility," raising the suspicion that participating hospitals will not contradict each other's futility decrees. If so, this would mean that patients seeking refuge from forced treatment termination will have to be transported to distant cities, as has already occurred in a few futile-care cases, perhaps even out of state. Illustrating the level of hardball some hospitals play against patients and families, the Clarke family's lawyer Jerri Ward told me that St. Luke's agreed to pay the $14,806 transportation costs to transfer Clarke to a hospital in Illinois — more than 1,000 miles away — if the decision to transfer is made on Thursday (4/27). If the family doesn't decide until Friday, the hospital will pay only one-half of the cost of transportation. Thereafter, it would pay nothing." http://www.nationalreview.com/smithw/smith200604271406.asp Before people despair, there IS a sensible plan that would correct the vast majority of these problems: What's the plan then? There IS one, but politicians don't seem to want to listen to this one (I've been emailing pols for a while now since I found the plan AND I fear too many on YA don't bother to check it out, but THIS is sensible): There IS a sensible plan that does NOT force patients on it with fear of fines; does NOT impose the costs on employers; does NOT raise our taxes; and DOES resolve another abuse of the taxpayer in its funding, provides for preventative care (moral and economical), and would prevent bankruptcies (more than half are caused by medical bills and most of those folks have insurance). Check it out: http://www.booklocker.com/books/3068.html
