HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » What model should the US ...

Tue Sep 3, 2013, 10:18 AM

 

What model should the US use to provide universal healthcare?

Beveridge, Bismarck, NHI, or a hybrid? Should private medical care be illegal, like in Canada, or should a private system be allowed like in Australia and the UK?

7 replies, 1124 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 7 replies Author Time Post
Reply What model should the US use to provide universal healthcare? (Original post)
Bunnahabhain Sep 2013 OP
pampango Sep 2013 #1
bluestate10 Sep 2013 #5
Bunnahabhain Sep 2013 #7
Art_from_Ark Sep 2013 #2
AngryAmish Sep 2013 #3
bluestate10 Sep 2013 #4
Nye Bevan Sep 2013 #6

Response to Bunnahabhain (Original post)

Tue Sep 3, 2013, 10:27 AM

1. I like the concept of the National Health Service as in the UK.

Since the right to adequate health care should be absolute, it should not be in private hands for the most part.

Private health care is not illegal in Canada thought is a small portion of total health care.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_Canada

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pampango (Reply #1)

Tue Sep 3, 2013, 10:48 AM

5. I would be ok with a National Health Service is schooling for doctors and nurses in the

system was paid for 100% and they got salaries that allowed them to live comfortable lives.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pampango (Reply #1)

Tue Sep 3, 2013, 11:39 AM

7. Private healthcare is for all intents and purposes illegal in Canada.

 

Please read the Canadian Medicare laws, specifically the definition of "core services" in the Health Act of 1984. If you read the dicta you will see they were designed specifically, and it is stated explicitly, to prevent the formation of a parallel and private system.

Here is an article in the recent evolution but please note the same reference I gave you to the 1984 Health Act. http://www.longwoods.com/content/19340

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bunnahabhain (Original post)

Tue Sep 3, 2013, 10:34 AM

2. I've grown used to the Japanese system

National health insurance ("kokumin kenkou hoken" is mandatory for everyone, except for those who qualify for the private "shakai hoken" and prefer to join that. Premiums are based on income, family size, and to a certain extent age, but it doesn't matter if one has a pre-existing condition. The insurance pays for 70% of all necessary health care costs and prescriptions, including dental, which are fairly reasonably priced. Some health care for infants and young children is free or at a greatly reduced price, as is some (maybe all) health care for the elderly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bunnahabhain (Original post)

Tue Sep 3, 2013, 10:37 AM

3. Single payer with private and public options

 

This would work very well in urban/suburban areas. Government pays $x dollars for gall bladder removal for example. You can pay more for things like better food or private room. Some people may even buy insurance if they choose but no tax deduction for this.

So there will be bare bones operations for those less well off with nicer options for those who can pay.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bunnahabhain (Original post)

Tue Sep 3, 2013, 10:45 AM

4. I prefer a private system with Insurance companies and hospitals forced to live up

to promises that they make. The ACA is a good start, with safety nets for people that can't afford health care insurance. I want to see the government provide free medical school training to med students that are going into general practice, with the condition that those newly minted GPs serve in clinics that provide care to low income and lower middle income communities. I want to see regional exchanges where like minded states can group to provide low cost insurance and health care to their citizens, New England, the upper and middle-Atlantic and the West Coast states would likely flourish in such a system.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bunnahabhain (Original post)

Tue Sep 3, 2013, 10:57 AM

6. Taxpayer funded no-frills healthcare for all.

Insurance companies could still have a role selling policies for higher levels of coverage (much as Medicare recipients can still purchase Medi-gap policies today).

No more "appeals to cover medical bills" when someone gets cancer or is involved in an accident.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread