2 hours in the emergency room cost me......

[tlens]

You know every time this topic comes up, some of the Canadians always seem to take offense and can't imagine why we wouldn't want UHC. I just want to say that I'm not at all dissing your system. I know that it works for you and that most Canadians are happy with it. But the US is very different culturally. Many of us see many inherent problems with implementing a UHC HERE. It has nothing to do with how well it works in Canada or the UK. It has everything to do with our culture.

Agreed.

And it's not free here. It's how we choose to fund it. I'll take the way we fund it. It works for us. It's not burdensome. It's not something we think about. It's kinda like when you have your employer take your pension directly off your paycheck, you never really "see" that money so you really don't miss it. (Poor comparison but it will suffice).

 

[tlens]

That was me, it's my figure from the UK and it also includes a state pension (universal also).

You pay 8%? Is that included in your income tax figure or over and above that?

 

[cteddiesgirl]

It really depends on the policy. Some policies (usually the cheapest ones) are bare bones and short of a catostrophic illness, don't cover much of anything. Others will cover you for everything under the sun with little to no out of pocket expenses. Most are somewhere in between those two extremes.

I had an outpatient procedure done over the winter. I have insurance through my employer. The cost was about $13,000. I paid $15 to have some precriptions filled. That was it.

On the other hand, my DH had to have three MRI's done. Cost about $12,000. We had to pay $1200 of that. DH is on his employers insurance and they don't cover as much. $1200 still beats $12,000 though, so I'm not complaining.

I'm aware that insurance policies differ. This is my problem with our system. No one can afford to get the same care. I can't. Even though I can go to the emergency room if I have a major problem and get treated, it doesn't mean that I can afford to pay for it. In fact, the local hospital hasn't seen a dime of my money in about 5 years. I simply don't have the money to pay them.
I haven't taken a trip anywhere in years and I don't go out to eat or go out for entertainment except on rare special occasions. And those are usually paid for by someone else.

And because I can't afford insurance that will pay for preventative checkups, I can't get them. I can only go see a doctor when there is a major problem. And that's only to save my life.

I guess it would be better if I and all the poor people just died instead?

Where did the 8% taxes for heathcare come from in Canada? i've never heard that figure. I can't IMAGINE paying 8% of my income in healthcare tax. That figure would be staggering to me. I think the Ontario premium is $200.00 and it's not like we pay cash for it, it's a addition on the income tax form.

I pay income taxes of about 26%. (Base rate is 17%...increases with income) I pay 1% of my income for Employment insurance (I lose my job or have a baby, I still have some income coming in).

We pay in Ontario a 8% Provincial sales tax. (PST)
We pay in Canada a 5% Good and Services tax.

Unlike many US states, we don't pay taxes on most groceries. We don't pay PST on children's clothing, shoes under $30.00, bicycles, helmets, car seats etc.

I pay property taxes.

American's pay taxes on those things as well.

I pay nothing for drugs through our employers (a virtual requirement in Canada...to provide drug/dental coverage for employees). Since my dh is diabetic and has heart problems, his medications cost us almost $800.00/month. We pay nothing. I never have to worry about an employer not giving one of us a job due to diabetes or heart problems. They are not allowed to ask.

Sorry but I'll take my system, with all it's warts anyday of the week.

Show me where? I even looked at what you quoted and I said the word premium.

Nope I don't plan for surgery every year. It went up to 7.5% this past premium. Before that it was even less.

How can anything be less when I will be paying for DH, myself and then others who won't be paying.

Lets say for arguements sake it takes $2K/person to do UHC. There are 300 million Americans. That is 3 billion a year. Now take out all of the non-tax payers and we are down to about 1/2 (just a rough guess). That means each taxpayer owes $4K. How many can pay that and only pay 8%?

Answer - Only singles making $50K+ and married making 100K+. Given the number of married who make $100K+ is a small percentage (less than 20%) of the total working families that means that we have a shortfall. Who pays it. Of course the single making over $50K and the married with over $100K. They would be paying far more than 8%. In this senario, if DH and I make over $100K we would be paying more not less.

This post here. Sorry. It's a UK person.

You're right - my healthcare costs me 8% of my income. But that does include my state pension. And of course it covers me in my entirety, with no excess to pay. It also covers everyone else.

sandy2330: Umm...Well known fact. Healthcare premiums go down with larger group insurance.
And you may not plan a surgery every year, but you're still paying the premiums every year. Right?

 

[Kath2003]

You pay 8%? Is that included in your income tax figure or over and above that?

I worked out my income in September. 8% is National Insurance. That pays for my healthcare and my pension. It's a type of income tax, yes. You pay it as long as you're working. If you quit working to have a baby or be a SAHM or whatever, you quit paying. I don't make $50K.

 

[tlens]

One further point, Canadian would have less to complain about with healthcare waits if people didn't use it for such frivilous thing sometimes. That's my biggest beef with our system. Since they don't pay out of pocket when they go, they go for almost anything which puts an unfair burden on the system.

I think a modest $5.00 fee for a visit would deter alot of this frivilousness. (AKKKKK Heresy!!!! ) LOL

 

[tw1nsmom]

Show me where? I even looked at what you quoted and I said the word premium.

Nope I don't plan for surgery every year. It went up to 7.5% this past premium. Before that it was even less.

How can anything be less when I will be paying for DH, myself and then others who won't be paying.

Lets say for arguements sake it takes $2K/person to do UHC. There are 300 million Americans. That is 3 billion a year. Now take out all of the non-tax payers and we are down to about 1/2 (just a rough guess). That means each taxpayer owes $4K. How many can pay that and only pay 8%?

Answer - Only singles making $50K+ and married making 100K+. Given the number of married who make $100K+ is a small percentage (less than 20%) of the total working families that means that we have a shortfall. Who pays it. Of course the single making over $50K and the married with over $100K. They would be paying far more than 8%. In this senario, if DH and I make over $100K we would be paying more not less.

You're just not getting it. You are not paying what you think you're paying for insurance. We currently pay, for our family (I'm not including our employee) $9,000 a year in insurance premiums. Something in that range is being paid for your family as well in the current system. You pay one portion and your employer pays the other portion as a benefit. Benefits have a cash value that effectively comes out of your pocket by not showing up in your paycheck.

 

[cteddiesgirl]

You know every time this topic comes up, some of the Canadians always seem to take offense and can't imagine why we wouldn't want UHC. I just want to say that I'm not at all dissing your system. I know that it works for you and that most Canadians are happy with it. But the US is very different culturally. Many of us see many inherent problems with implementing a UHC HERE. It has nothing to do with how well it works in Canada or the UK. It has everything to do with our culture.

Yeah. Our culture is about pissing on all the little people. Except when it comes to people of other countries. We give so much to them yet can't take care of our own.

One further point, Canadian would have less to complain about with healthcare waits if people didn't use it for such frivilous thing sometimes. That's my biggest beef with our system. Since they don't pay out of pocket when they go, they go for almost anything which puts an unfair burden on the system.

I think a modest $5.00 fee for a visit would deter alot of this frivilousness. (AKKKKK Heresy!!!! ) LOL

I would agree to a very modest amount per visit. Unfortunately, so many people in the US just don't give a crap about the health of their fellow Americans.

I really need to have a general checkup, to see a heart specialist, to see my OB/GYN and figure out several problems I'm having. Unfortunately, I can't do that and can only wait until it's a life or death situation to go to the emergency room. Then I have to pretty much stiff the hospital, which I hate doing, because I can't even afford a payment plan.

 

[sandy2330]

Umm...Well known fact. Healthcare premiums go down with larger group insurance.
And you may not plan a surgery every year, but you're still paying the premiums every year. Right?

Please show me where it is a well know fact. Nobody agrees on what the costs will really be.

Please do a better job with reading what I type. If I have not surgeries then I pay 7.5% and I would pay more a year under the UHC plan. If I have a surgery then I might pay less (premium + OOP) under the UHC plan, but that is the except not the normal year. So I am still ahead if I have to pay less for many years and a little more on a surgery type year.

You seem so mad. What do you do for a living? How old are you? How do you have money for the internet but not to pay the hospital? You could not even send in $10/month?

 

[tw1nsmom]

So, you are saying that the funds that are currently going to Medicare and Medicaid to supply medical attention for a fraction of the population, the elderly and indigent, would be enough to cover the entire population of the US with only a "slight increase" in taxes?

No, that's not what's being said. If you took what was being spent on Medicare/Medicade and added it to what was already being spent on healthcare by corporations and individuals and put that same amount (likely no added burden) into universal coverage, we would have incredible coverage for everyone.

When you add up all that we spend on healthcare in this country we outspend almost every other industrialized nation. However, when it comes to quality of care we only rank 37th.

 

[sandy2330]

You're just not getting it. You are not paying what you think you're paying for insurance. We currently pay, for our family (I'm not including our employee) $9,000 a year in insurance premiums. Something in that range is being paid for your family as well in the current system. You pay one portion and your employer pays the other portion as a benefit. Benefits have a cash value that effectively comes out of your pocket by not showing up in your paycheck.

I do get it and I will PM you when I get two more posts. I tried to pm you but it said I needed to post more.

 

[Chicago526]

I'm aware that insurance policies differ. This is my problem with our system. No one can afford to get the same care. I can't. Even though I can go to the emergency room if I have a major problem and get treated, it doesn't mean that I can afford to pay for it. In fact, the local hospital hasn't seen a dime of my money in about 5 years. I simply don't have the money to pay them.
I haven't taken a trip anywhere in years and I don't go out to eat or go out for entertainment except on rare special occasions. And those are usually paid for by someone else.

And because I can't afford insurance that will pay for preventative checkups, I can't get them. I can only go see a doctor when there is a major problem. And that's only to save my life.

I guess it would be better if I and all the poor people just died instead?

Actually I'm for making sure all American have health insurance, I was just answering a question from (I think) a UK poster that was asking about US insurance policies. Maybe I quoted the the wrong post.

 

[chobie]

You know every time this topic comes up, some of the Canadians always seem to take offense and can't imagine why we wouldn't want UHC. I just want to say that I'm not at all dissing your system. I know that it works for you and that most Canadians are happy with it. But the US is very different culturally. Many of us see many inherent problems with implementing a UHC HERE. It has nothing to do with how well it works in Canada or the UK. It has everything to do with our culture.

Every time this subject comes up Canadians take offense to the exaggerations and down right lies people say about their system. They can say over and over again that they don't wait to see doctors, that they're taken care of just fine, that they like their system etc, etc

But then some US poster will talk about their aunt, who has a friend, who knows someone in Canada that died from having to wait to be seen by doctor and that is all the anti-UHC people hear.

 

[hildasmuriel]

I worked out my income in September. 8% is National Insurance. That pays for my healthcare and my pension. It's a type of income tax, yes. You pay it as long as you're working. If you quit working to have a baby or be a SAHM or whatever, you quit paying. I don't make $50K.

Don't forget Kath that National Insurance covers a whole lot more than your NHS and pension. It will also pay your Statutory Maternity Pay if you have maternity leave, if you go long term sick it pays Incapacity Benefit once your SSP runs out, Job Seekers Allowance should you lose your job through no fault of your own,Widows Allowance and Widowed Mother's Allowance if you should leave a widow (erm...you know what I mean) and a range of other State benefits. Not bad for just 8% of your pay.

 

[tlens]

Don't forget Kath that National Insurance covers a whole lot more than your NHS and pension. It will also pay your Statutory Maternity Pay if you have maternity leave, if you go long term sick it pays Incapacity Benefit once your SSP runs out, Job Seekers Allowance should you lose your job through no fault of your own,Widows Allowance and Widowed Mother's Allowance if you should leave a widow (erm...you know what I mean) and a range of other State benefits. Not bad for just 8% of your pay.

How long is UK maternity? (just curious).

 

[chobie]

Don't forget Kath that National Insurance covers a whole lot more than your NHS and pension. It will also pay your Statutory Maternity Pay if you have maternity leave, if you go long term sick it pays Incapacity Benefit once your SSP runs out, Job Seekers Allowance should you lose your job through no fault of your own,Widows Allowance and Widowed Mother's Allowance if you should leave a widow (erm...you know what I mean) and a range of other State benefits. Not bad for just 8% of your pay.

And you can sleep at night knowing that someone who makes less money than you and who therefore pays less into the system, gets the same quality of care as you do? Don't you think they should punished for having a lower paying job and be made to suffer medically?

 

[Kath2003]

Don't forget Kath that National Insurance covers a whole lot more than your NHS and pension. It will also pay your Statutory Maternity Pay if you have maternity leave, if you go long term sick it pays Incapacity Benefit once your SSP runs out, Job Seekers Allowance should you lose your job through no fault of your own,Widows Allowance and Widowed Mother's Allowance if you should leave a widow (erm...you know what I mean) and a range of other State benefits. Not bad for just 8% of your pay.

That's true, and the UK is very different to the US in that every single mother is entitled to take 39 weeks paid maternity leave, during which time she's allowed a minimum of $240/week if she worked at least 20 hours a week prior to having the child. You can stay off work for a further 13 weeks but don't receive Statutory Maternity Pay during this time, but your job is secure for 52 weeks.

Dads can also get Statutory Paternity leave of at least $240/week for two weeks when the mother gives birth, although most employers offer full pay.

 

[Kath2003]

And you can sleep at night knowing that someone who makes less money than you and who therefore pays less into the system, gets the same quality of care as you do? Don't you think they should punished for having a lower paying job and be made to suffer medically?

Well sometimes we do think they should all stay away from our little pile of gold, but then we realise what it may be like to fall upon hard times so somehow we struggle through the day...

Honestly? I believe it saves money for everyone, in the long run. The government do not make it easy for people on welfare. It's best for everyone if they get a job. Besides, I don't know whether you've heard but we actually need people to do those lower-paid jobs....

 

[chobie]

Well sometimes we do think they should all stay away from our little pile of gold, but then we realise what it may be like to fall upon hard times so somehow we struggle through the day...

Honestly? I believe it saves money for everyone, in the long run. The government do not make it easy for people on welfare. It's best for everyone if they get a job. Besides, I don't know whether you've heard but we actually need people to do those lower-paid jobs....

We tend to forget that we need people working the lower paid jobs and that not everyone can or will be able to move up.

 

[tlens]

We get 52 weeks at a MAXIMUM of $413.00 a week. You get 55% of your income up to $39,000 (you stop paying the 1% premium after this amount). So if you make more than that like I did, your take home is much less than 55%. If you can make it for a full year on that income (we saved so I could) then it's great but I do know alot of women who go back after 6-8 months because they can't afford it. MY employer topped me up for 17 weeks so that made a big difference.

 

[NEVERENOUGHWDW]

WOW is this .
Wouldn't it be nice if we went back to the original post?

The OP spent 2 hours in the E.R. yada, yada, yada.

The bottom line to me is simple they go to the E.R. without insurance and have a WDW fund. Who in their right mind would allow themselves to be uninsured (if they could help it)?
I asked the OP how was vacation to WDW or anywhere more important and more of a priority than protecting their health?

What would OP do if they were given the diagnosis of AIDS, CANCER etc.?

I understand many people in the United States cannot pay for insurance but if you have a vacation fund and not health care ones priorities are really out of order as far as I'm concerned.