homercles337
Diamond Member
- Dec 29, 2004
- 6,340
- 3
- 71
Originally posted by: alchemize
Socialized medicine is basically a giant HMO run by the government.
Spoken like someone who wants to keep his job that has *no* benefit to society.
Originally posted by: alchemize
Socialized medicine is basically a giant HMO run by the government.
I just read something claiming the profit & overhead of private insurers in America is about 13%, compared to Medicare at about 1.5%. If I can figure out where I read that, I'll post the link. I know I ran across it while doing some digging for another thread.Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: alchemize
Just as a personal exercise, I decided to see what percentage insurance company profit represented of total healthcare spending. Based on that, if we recouped all of that money, how much could we save on healthcare.
I took the top 6 payers in the US and took their 2006 net income (in millions):
United 4159
WellPoint 3094
Aetna 1701
Cigna 1155
Coventry 560
Hum 487
Total 11156
So let's assume they dominate 1/2 the healthcare insurance market (it's probably much higher, but let's be conservative). So I roughly doubled the number - call it 20 $billion.
2005 Healthcare costs were estimated to be roughly $2 trillion. Probably low for 2006, but again being conservative.
That gives us a whopping 1.12% decrease in expenses.
They are also spectacularly inefficient. Their overhead costs are huge compared to socialized systems, I think it was somewhere over 25% which is nearly twice what people pay in other systems... and THAT is a lot of money.
Originally posted by: homercles337
Originally posted by: alchemize
Socialized medicine is basically a giant HMO run by the government.
Spoken like someone who wants to keep his job that has *no* benefit to society.
Originally posted by: Skoorb
I've often touted the short MRI waits in the US. If I called on Monday morning for an appointment with a specialist over a fairly benign pain in my knee, I could have an apt the following week and an MRI the next day. Contrast with, if I was in Canada I'd have a hard time ever getting an MRI for such a problem in the first place, and if I did it would at least be MONTHS.
In this case, I can get the most advanced non-surgical exploratory procedure done on a mild problem on my knee in a week or two contrasted with somebody with a serious issue in Canada waiting months.
I hope that the altruistic people in the US who are more than willing to throw away their superior healthcare so that the poor can get yet more of what they've not earned makes them feel better when their kid can't get the treatment he needs in a timely fashion.
Originally posted by: Bowfinger
I just read something claiming the profit & overhead of private insurers in America is about 13%, compared to Medicare at about 1.5%. If I can figure out where I read that, I'll post the link. I know I ran across it while doing some digging for another thread.Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: alchemize
Just as a personal exercise, I decided to see what percentage insurance company profit represented of total healthcare spending. Based on that, if we recouped all of that money, how much could we save on healthcare.
I took the top 6 payers in the US and took their 2006 net income (in millions):
United 4159
WellPoint 3094
Aetna 1701
Cigna 1155
Coventry 560
Hum 487
Total 11156
So let's assume they dominate 1/2 the healthcare insurance market (it's probably much higher, but let's be conservative). So I roughly doubled the number - call it 20 $billion.
2005 Healthcare costs were estimated to be roughly $2 trillion. Probably low for 2006, but again being conservative.
That gives us a whopping 1.12% decrease in expenses.
They are also spectacularly inefficient. Their overhead costs are huge compared to socialized systems, I think it was somewhere over 25% which is nearly twice what people pay in other systems... and THAT is a lot of money.
i was gonna say that...Originally posted by: senseamp
You don't think this happens in America?
Originally posted by: alchemize
Originally posted by: ayabe
Compare this to the thousands or perhaps millions of people in this country who go bankrupt or forgo food to buy medicine.
FYI insurance companies deny claims for life and death procedures all the time.
:roll: I've been in in the insurance industry for over 10 years now and never once seen or heard of a single "life or death procedure" denied. This might have happened in the unregulated insurance markets of the 80's and 90's, but it just doesn't happen anymore. Your comment is completely untrue and I'd like to see you back it up with anything beyond a "Michael Moore anecdote".
Originally posted by: ayabe
Compare this to the thousands or perhaps millions of people in this country who go bankrupt or forgo food to buy medicine.
FYI insurance companies deny claims for life and death procedures all the time.
Originally posted by: alchemize
Originally posted by: ayabe
Compare this to the thousands or perhaps millions of people in this country who go bankrupt or forgo food to buy medicine.
FYI insurance companies deny claims for life and death procedures all the time.
:roll: I've been in in the insurance industry for over 10 years now and never once seen or heard of a single "life or death procedure" denied. This might have happened in the unregulated insurance markets of the 80's and 90's, but it just doesn't happen anymore. Your comment is completely untrue and I'd like to see you back it up with anything beyond a "Michael Moore anecdote".
Most importantly to me, mine aren't in that group.Originally posted by: Hacp
Originally posted by: Skoorb
I've often touted the short MRI waits in the US. If I called on Monday morning for an appointment with a specialist over a fairly benign pain in my knee, I could have an apt the following week and an MRI the next day. Contrast with, if I was in Canada I'd have a hard time ever getting an MRI for such a problem in the first place, and if I did it would at least be MONTHS.
In this case, I can get the most advanced non-surgical exploratory procedure done on a mild problem on my knee in a week or two contrasted with somebody with a serious issue in Canada waiting months.
I hope that the altruistic people in the US who are more than willing to throw away their superior healthcare so that the poor can get yet more of what they've not earned makes them feel better when their kid can't get the treatment he needs in a timely fashion.
On the other hand, millions of children are without health insurance in the United States.
For the love of God, what do you think you'd be paying in Canada? You know, I make precisely twice what my younger brother in Canada makes and we pay EXACTLY the same amount out of our paychecks in terms of percentage for taxes, social security (or their version in Canada), medical, etc.The current system is not working. I am healthy, never been sick or filed a claim yet every year, the cost is going up and up. I am paying about $150 a month just for very basic care for myself from work. My cost is 40% and my employer's cost is 60%. So total cost for healthcare is over $300 just for me.
OR, it allows him a unique perspetive beyond that you've garnered by watching that michael moore bouncing around the ocean off the shores of Cuba.He admited his problem in the first sentence. He worked for the insurance industry so obviously he doesnt possess enough humanity to actually realize it. That or lack of adequate medical care has left him undiagnosed as deaf, dumb, and blind
She got lucky. It's a known fact that wait time in Canada for MRis averages in the months--check out the stats online. No, I can't be bothered to find them.My Mom, who has been having neck pains was scheduled for an MRI with in a week of the Doctor requesting it, and she her problem is NOT critical.
It's simply ridiculous to use life expectancy as an example of questionable health care. And child mortality, but this has been addressed already in other threads.just check objective parameters like life expentancy, child mortality and you will see that the American bragging rights of MRI scanners / population means absolutely nothing ...
Originally posted by: Skoorb
It's simply ridiculous to use life expectancy as an example of questionable health care. And child mortality, but this has been addressed already in other threads.just check objective parameters like life expentancy, child mortality and you will see that the American bragging rights of MRI scanners / population means absolutely nothing ...
Originally posted by: Skoorb
It's simply ridiculous to use life expectancy as an example of questionable health care. And child mortality, but this has been addressed already in other threads.just check objective parameters like life expentancy, child mortality and you will see that the American bragging rights of MRI scanners / population means absolutely nothing ...
Originally posted by: Hacp
Originally posted by: Skoorb
I've often touted the short MRI waits in the US. If I called on Monday morning for an appointment with a specialist over a fairly benign pain in my knee, I could have an apt the following week and an MRI the next day. Contrast with, if I was in Canada I'd have a hard time ever getting an MRI for such a problem in the first place, and if I did it would at least be MONTHS.
In this case, I can get the most advanced non-surgical exploratory procedure done on a mild problem on my knee in a week or two contrasted with somebody with a serious issue in Canada waiting months.
I hope that the altruistic people in the US who are more than willing to throw away their superior healthcare so that the poor can get yet more of what they've not earned makes them feel better when their kid can't get the treatment he needs in a timely fashion.
On the other hand, millions of children are without health insurance in the United States.
Originally posted by: SirStev0
Originally posted by: Skoorb
It's simply ridiculous to use life expectancy as an example of questionable health care. And child mortality, but this has been addressed already in other threads.just check objective parameters like life expentancy, child mortality and you will see that the American bragging rights of MRI scanners / population means absolutely nothing ...
The World Health Organization seems to disagree with you... but hey... what do they know?
BTW I am pretty sure Infant mortality is one of the best ways to judge a health system...
Originally posted by: bobdelt
Originally posted by: Hacp
Originally posted by: Skoorb
I've often touted the short MRI waits in the US. If I called on Monday morning for an appointment with a specialist over a fairly benign pain in my knee, I could have an apt the following week and an MRI the next day. Contrast with, if I was in Canada I'd have a hard time ever getting an MRI for such a problem in the first place, and if I did it would at least be MONTHS.
In this case, I can get the most advanced non-surgical exploratory procedure done on a mild problem on my knee in a week or two contrasted with somebody with a serious issue in Canada waiting months.
I hope that the altruistic people in the US who are more than willing to throw away their superior healthcare so that the poor can get yet more of what they've not earned makes them feel better when their kid can't get the treatment he needs in a timely fashion.
On the other hand, millions of children are without health insurance in the United States.
Almost all kids dont need it either.