Let me kill the myth about the NHS - it saved my life and I am forever grateful.

[TheBigotBasher]

The UK spends far less per person than the US Medicare system. Overall UK expenditure on health care is 1/3 less as a percentage spend of the GDP than the US and the UK has a higher life expectancy.

Preventative health care is provided.

Weight management clinics - check
chiropractic clinics - check
podiatry clinics (chiropodists)- check
smoking cessation (most definitely)
free flu jabs for the elderly - check

Choice in hospitals. Check.
A GP able to visit you in your home. Check
A target of 3 month wait for the most minor of operation; soon to be reduced to one.

Not bad. And if you want private health care you can get it. For example www.bupa.co.uk and their comprehensive cover is far far cheaper than that of the US because they have to compete against free at the point of use.

As for what medical procedure is decided - Doctors decide. Always. There may be arguments about particular drugs, especially new ones, but a specialist body is responsible for resolving those. (Called NICE). They decide based on clinical need.

The UK has some of the best University Hospitals in the World and some of the best medical research facilities in the World.

Despite being a "Government run system" there is competition between hospitals (patients are allowed to choose which hospital they want to go to) and hospitals, through an "internal market" compete for patients. Technology is advanced, not just up to date.

The NHS is a good example of universal health care. Not perfect, no. That however is down to individual managers and doctors, of course politicians will get the blame for that. A problem you will get in any system. There is not however a single mainstream politician who proposes scrapping the NHS. Even Margaret Thatcher increased NHS expenditure.

When Republicans say Government will always go bad, it means they will make it go bad as it is not Government that is bad, it is simply that they have no idea how to run good government. They have managed to spin their incompetence at governing into an attack on government.

As for any examples of Daily Mail scare stories they throw at you about patients being left on trolleys (these are mobile beds not supermarket trolleys), for hours, awaiting treatment. That is rare. Normally on a Saturday night when beds are full of drunks. Patients are put in a treatment assessment area while waiting. They will be seen. They will be treated. Remember these stories come from Accident & Emergency Rooms, where people have had all sorts of accidents from grazed knees to hacking off an arm.

Very serious injuries are seen immediately.

Less serious injuries are seen within 2 to 4 hours. Guaranteed. That is a much much better situation than someone not being treated AT ALL because they have no insurance.

Two years back, I started developing pains in my back I thought it was back pain. I took some pain killers, they did not work. I drank a bit too much to try and knock myself to sleep but the pain was too much. I tried a bath of radox, but that made me nearly unable to get out of the bath. Finally I understood I was in trouble. I called the ambulance and described my symptoms.

An emergency paramedic got to me in under five minutes. I was tested for chest pains.

Five minutes later an ambulance arrived. I was wheeled off to hospital.

I was x-rayed and given all kinds of scans and tests.

I was diagnosed with early pneumonia.

I was kept in for two weeks.During the first few day put on a 24 hour watch. I had to carry oxygen wherever I went.

I had who knows how many blood tests and scans in all kind of weird and wonderful machines.

I left only after the Doctor said it was safe for me to go. Which was a few days after when I thought I should have gone.

The records were at my doctors, a week after, when I went to get my prescription for my excema (maximum prescription charge if you are a full time employed £7 around $10 - free if unemployed, a pensioner or medically exempt)

The cost to me of all that treatment. Nothing. Paid for out of general taxation.

[truedelphi]

1. I have fond memories of the Canadian HS so I can only imagine

The decent things that happen in the UK.

Glad you have been helped -especially the time you were having a heart problem.

[TheBigotBasher]

3. It wasn't heart

I was under a panic and did not know. Pneumonia is very painful, I had no idea what it and thought it was my heart. (I felt it in my back - it seems stupid now but it was not then).

Yes there are problems. There are management issues. There are competence issues. That however is why you have elections.

[vadawg]

2. my opinion is that the system in the US is better if you have insurance

but the NHS is better if your uninsured, but like all systems there are flaws in both.

[TheBigotBasher]

4. The best private health care

would probably match the best private health care the US has to provide (Harley Street). The difference is insurance companies in the UK have to compete against free of charge.

[vadawg]

5. yup but i would rather have what i have now (insured) in the US than go to the NHS

but if i was uninsured here i would rather have the NHS, i hope this makes more sense.

[TheBigotBasher]

6. It makes sense

but I am not sure why.

[vadawg]

8. well ill try again, me having insurance means i have better care than the NHS would give me

but if i did not have insurance then the NHS would give me better care than i could get here, probuably the reason why if there is a public option passed i would still want to have private insurance..

[SemiCharmedQuark]

14. My aunt has insurance. WHen she was diagnosed with multiple myeloma last month, she had to wait

WEEKS before she could get her chemo because she was fighting with insurance companies.

There is none of that in Britain. If you need emergency care, you get it.

[vadawg]

17. yeah right, you do realise that there are waiting lists in the NHS,

here you fight with insurance companies and in the UK you fight with the Beaurecrats.. personally as i have said i have had nothing but good experiences with the US system and would rather have the coverage i have now than the NHS, but if i had no coverage then i would prefer the NHS.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

20. Not true. My MIL has cancer and her treatment has been top notch

Yes, if you have a non life-threatening situation (my husband often has bad ear wax buildup) you must wait to see the doctors, but for emergencies there is no waiting.

[vadawg]

24. okay so why then do they even list the waiting times for diseases eg cancers

and i see that there is still a taget maximum waitning time of 18weeks or so until treatment is started, to deny that there are waiting times is to deny what the NHS says itself...

[laughingliberal]

30. To deny that insurance companies can hang you up for just as long just means you haven't seen

how much fun American medicine can be when you wind up with an expensive disease.

[TheBigotBasher]

56. That is not for cancer.

You will be seen within a month

http://www.performance.doh.gov.uk/cancerwaits/

[vadawg]

59. yup but the treatment might not begin until the longer target, much better than it used to be

but it dosent change my opinion that i prefer the coverage i have now than what the NHS provides, not sure why this statement is so controversial... im sure you would prefer coverage that BUPA could provide than the NHS..

[TheBigotBasher]

22. Not for cancer treatment.

Not for any emergency operation. No minor operation has a wait of more than 3 months. It was political dynamite that under the last tory government (13 years ago) they allowed waits for minor operations to extend to 12 months.

There are NO waiting lists for priority operations.

[vadawg]

26. well according to the new law there can stil be an 18 week wait

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5hxxqz2rs-H5LPEHod8KnnI6cSt1w

[SemiCharmedQuark]

32. An 18 week wait MAX followed by punishment of the NHS if they fail to comply

My aunt is on the phone every day arguing with her Insurance company. What does she do if they decide not to pay? There is no guarantee there. There is no safety net.

My MIL has never waited weeks like that for treatment. It's a limit, not the average.

[vadawg]

37. And you dont think people have to argue with the NHS for treatments

you do realise that both systems have problems, but as i said i would rather have what i have now than the NHS, if i was uninsured then i would rather have the NHS, neither system is perfect but i much prefer the US system for me

[SemiCharmedQuark]

38. NHS does not have to turn a profit. As such, they do not have the extra incentive to screw you.

I have to ask, what experience have you had with NHS?

[TheBigotBasher]

54. No people do not have to argue for treatment.

Maybe for some "life saving" brand new experimental unproven drug, which a pharmaceutical company manages to kick up a fuss about - but those are very rare cases, which would not be covered by almost all US insurance packages.

The only other exception is organ transplants, because if a lack of people donating. That however is a world-wide problem.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

111. will you move with Limbaugh if US finally gets health care for all?

cause he only cares about himself as well.

As long as he has good access HE's happy. Frack the rest of us who do not have access.

[TheBigotBasher]

40. If those standards are not met

the NHS must pay for you to get private treatment.

The NHS is making sure that you are seen as soon as possible, at a time that is convenient for you. To do this, the NHS Constitution states that no one should wait more than 18 weeks for consultant-led NHS treatment. This means that your treatment should start no more than 18 weeks from the day that your GP refers you, unless you choose to wait longer or there's a good medical reason for delay.
As a result, hospital waiting times are now the shortest since NHS records began. Being treated within 18 weeks of GP referral is a significant achievement considering that people often waited 18 months or more for an operation during the 1990s.
How it works

The 18-week waiting time clock starts from the moment the hospital receives your referral from your GP, you book your first appointment, or as soon as you have booked an appointment through the Choose and Book system. Booking your hospital appointment through Choose and Book will not let you jump the queue, but it enables you to book your first hospital appointment while you're still at the GP surgery.
The clock stops when you start your treatment. This might mean being admitted to hospital for an operation or treatment, but it could mean starting treatment that doesn’t require you to stay in hospital (such as physiotherapy), or being fitted with a medical device, such as a leg brace. It could also mean starting an agreed period of time to monitor your condition to see whether you need further treatment.

Choosing hospitals

Waiting times may vary between hospitals. You may decide to wait longer than 18 weeks for personal reasons, or because you prefer a particular hospital. Your decision may depend on your GP's recommendation, the urgency to start treatment, or whether a particular hospital specialises in a particular treatment. If you want to be seen sooner, take the following steps:
Exercise your right to choose which hospital your GP refers you to by comparing hospitals across England on this website. You can also compare hospitals by the treatments that they offer. If you want to know how long the waiting list is in your area for a hip replacement, select the operation from the A-Z list, then select Compare hospitals.
Choose hospitals other than your local one if the waiting time is shorter elsewhere.
Keep all your appointments, or let the hospital or clinic know as early as possible if you can’t attend or you need to rearrange your appointment.
Think about how you might improve your lifestyle, for example, stopping smoking or losing weight, so that you'll be fit for treatment.
Alongside the usual surgical and medical specialties, the 18-week rule also covers referrals for dental consultant-led treatment, such as:
oral surgery,
orthodontics,
oral medicine, and
dental and maxillofacial radiology.
As described above, 18 weeks is measured from your referral to hospital until the start of your treatment. This will include all appointments and tests. These tests might include X-rays, scans, hearing tests or heart tests.

GP waiting times


While the NHS is making it easier for you to get a hospital appointment more quickly, it's also giving you more opportunity to see a GP at a time that's convenient to you. Nearly two-thirds of GP surgeries now offer extended opening hours so that you can book appointments before or after work. Each area is also establishing new GP-led health centres offering walk-in and bookable GP appointments from 8am to 8pm, seven days a week. You'll be able to use the service regardless of which local GP surgery you're registered with. Most areas will have a GP-led health centre this year.

Out of hours

If your GP surgery is closed, the NHS offers out-of-hours services in your area. These include:
NHS Direct telephone helpline on 0845 4647.
GP out-of-hour services.
Local pharmacies.
Walk-in centres.
Minor injuries units.
In case of medical emergencies, dial 999.
You can find any local service on this website, by typing in your postcode or location in the search box of our Find and choose services tool (above right). Your search result provides information on opening hours and out-of-hours services.

Organ donation

The lack of organs suitable for donation in the UK means that patients often wait a long time for a transplant operation. This means you can't be guaranteed an organ transplant within the 18-week waiting time limit. The NHS Blood and Transplant website has information on some transplant waiting times, such as kidney, liver, heart and lung transplants.

[laughingliberal]

28. Hell, here your insurance company can tie you up for a couple of months or more if they so choose

I've had them hang me out for a couple of weeks just to get auth on an Rx they thought was too expensive. We all know the delaying tactics: claiming they didn't get the paperwork from your doctor, it's being reviewed, then we didn't get the right forms, and on and on and on.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

34. That is correct. Insurance Cos have an incentive to not treat you. NHS does not.

[laughingliberal]

39. Absolutely, I've dealt with it as a nurse trying to get help for patients who have 'coverage'

and I've dealt with it fighting with my own insurance companies over the years. They can get really nasty about it if you're getting expensive for them.

[dflprincess]

35. And in the U.S. if you don't have the cash or insurance you will wait until you die

If you're that impressed with having a for profit middle man control access to care, I'm guessing you've never had an insurance policy that required "preapproval" for anything other than than routine screenings or preventative tests.

Several years ago, and I had good insurance at the time, I had to wait over two months for a screening test & I was having a couple symptoms that didn't look so good. Mainly because I was younger than what is considered the normal age for the test unless a person is considered high risk which I am not. My doctor wasted quite a bit of time trying to convince an insurance company stooge that abnormal bleeding is a bad sign and should be checked. As it turned out, all was well, but if it hadn't been, the insurance company would have wasted two months while I waited for access to the "best health care in the world".

[Lydia Leftcoast]

97. And when I had "good" insurance back in Oregon

I sometimes had to wait for two or three months to get in for a routine gynecological exam.

Right now, it takes me six weeks to get an appointment for an eye exam.

Whoopee.

[TheBigotBasher]

101. At an optician?

There is no waiting to see an optician in the UK. They are in almost every shopping centre going. You have to try and avoid them.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

106. No, I get my eye exams from a clinic because there are both

glaucoma and cataracts in my family.

I would be fine with an optician's exam just for fitting glasses, but not for figuring out if I'm getting either of those conditions.

[pattmarty]

94. For fucks sake, you have to wait here. Very rarely can you call...........

.........a doctor to get into the office immediately. You have to wait for an operation, unless it is life threatening. I am 62 yo now and throughout my life I have had excellent insurance, lousy insurance and no insurance. I never heard of anyone going bankrupt in England, Canada or any other Country that has single payer because of medical expenses. You like your insurance because it must be EXCELLENT and you don't know any better. I don't see our "system" getting shittier if we had everyone on Medicare. Jesusfuckingchrist, it's just more efficient.

[bvar22]

102. "like your insurance because it must be EXCELLENT"....

or never really had to USE it.

Many people who believe they have "excellent" insurance have never really had to "use it".

[pattmarty]

114. Yep.

[laughingliberal]

21. Yeah, that's the counter to that whole 'waiting in line for care' crap

People with insurance here can get pretty decent care in a fairly timely manner for routing types of problems. But, for serious illnesses, you can very well wind up waiting and fighting with your insurance company for weeks or months if they are digging their heels in. Their first line of defense for their profits is outright denial. The second, if they can't outright deny, is delay as long as they can. People just don't get it. They also don't seem to be getting that this delaying thing will continue after HCR passes.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

25. Yep-it seems the options are: you wait for routine care (UK) or you wait for emergency care (US)

Right there I know what I'd prefer. That's not even taking into account the fact that routine care is so expensive in the United States. My gardasil shot was 160 dollars per shot (3 shot series).

[laughingliberal]

18. I get what you're saying but I would like to just say this

People who manage to gain access here (unless they very wealthy and are on a VIP unit somewhere) get pretty much the same treatment without regard to status.

Seeing a doctor is a lot easier if you have insurance but, as for your care in the hospital, we don't even know, most of the time, who has a pay source and who does not. Let me explain. An indigent with no health insurance who comes in through the ER and actually is diagnosed and admitted with a problem is getting the same attention dependent on the acuity of his condition. Just wanted to clear that up on behalf of the nurses who go to work every day and try to treat all with dignity and care.

[TheBigotBasher]

64. You have to pay to see a doctor in the US

even if you are insured. There is no fee to see a doctor in the UK. You can see your Doctor within 48 hours - also guaranteed.

[amyrose2712]

96. Yes, from experience treatment in ER is the same insurance or not....

I give the highest amount of respect to ER nurses. But beyond that it is 2 different worlds. I have lived in both. And yes you can get care in the ER, however it can cause financial ruin.

[Crunchy Frog]

92. I would rather have NHS.

My doctor was getting ready to prescribe me an antidepressant that might have been the one thing that could work for me, and then found out that my insurance doesn't cover it. It's too expensive to pay for out of pocket. I would have gotten it under the NHS.

If I need to have alot of appointments I will get eaten up by copays, which doesn't happen under NHS. If I was in an emergency and someone worked on me (without my knowledge) who was out of network, I would be liable for probably thousands of dollars of expenses.

Those are things I can think of just off the top of my head.

[Joe the Liberal]

9. No it's not, the US system sucks PERIOD, even if you have insurance it sucks.....

it doesn't even begin to compare to the NHS.

[vadawg]

10. i would disagree with you, i have found the US system to be good, perhaps as i have good insurance

thats the whole point im making, that if you have coverage then the service is good, without it the system sucks...

[Joe the Liberal]

13. If you have good insurance that doesn't drop your coverage.....

and actually does what it's supposed to and actually pays out the money to cover things when the time comes then yes the service is good. Although when your "covered" under these other insurance campanies who just want to take the money in premiums and never give anything in return then there's a problem.

[vadawg]

15. and as i said i have had nothing but good experiences with the US system

and have found i have much better care than the NHS would provide...

[laughingliberal]

33. Lucky you. But I would caution this just mean you, likely, have not hit your insurance company's hot

button, yet. They can keep people jumping through hoops for significant lengths of time if faced with a patient whose treatments are going to get very expensive. It gets to be a 2nd job fighting with them while you hope your cancer isn't spreading too fast. Woo hoo! USA!

[The Magistrate]

36. Describe, Sir, Some Of Your Experiences, Please....

"Enquiring minds want to know!"

[vadawg]

41. births of children, checkups of same, specialised care of same

spouse with multiple eye surgeries, specialised care, multiple injuries treated for myself, hospitalisation for other issues, trauma treatment for myself. All have been excellent and i have no complaints on the treatment...

[The Magistrate]

42. All Under The Same Policy, Sir? from Your Employer?

[vadawg]

43. spread over three different employers.... over the years

and always ive been happy with the service...

[The Magistrate]

44. Private Or Government, Sir?

Spouse, as described, would seem likely to fall afoul of pre-existing condition restrictions.

[vadawg]

49. both private and government

[The Magistrate]

52. In What Order, Sir?

[vadawg]

55. not sure what you are asking, but we have had various companies through our private sector jobs

and government jobs.

[The Magistrate]

58. Sooner Or Later, Sir, You Will Need To Get Specific

At least, if you wish to carry your point as a matter of experience rather than ideology.

[vadawg]

60. well if you would drop the sir crap and explain what it is you actually are asking that might help

ill lay it our simply, given the choice i would rather have the medical care i have now than what i would get on the NHS, not sure whats so hard to understand about that...

[The Magistrate]

63. You Have Stated A Preference, Sir

You have not provided any reason to think that preference is based on experience. Actual answers to the questions set might illuminate the matter somewhat.

[vadawg]

66. simple, i much prefer the service i get in the US system than i have seen in the NHS

i am happy to pay for the service i get here, and if we had a NHS here then i would want a BUPA policy here.

[The Magistrate]

67. So You Have Been Ill In England, Sir?

[vadawg]

68. yes n/t

[The Magistrate]

69. When, Sir, And With What? Travelling For Business, Or Pleasure?

[vadawg]

74. tell you what you put your medical history online and then i will think about putting mine

just know i have seen the NHS and the US system and i prefer the System i am currently in. Now others will have differing opinions but thats what we all have is opinions on what we think is best for us and our familys.

[The Magistrate]

77. My Several Heart Attacks Are Public Record Here, Sir

Nothing to hide about them, or about the slowly simmering leukemia.

If you are going to claim you are making statements based on experience, you have to provide some details of the experience, so people can follow your route to your conclusions.

[vadawg]

79. well i wish you well, but im not going to put that kind of info out there

but i have been treated in the UK and in the US and several other countries, one of the downfalls of being in the military is you pick up injuries on a daily basis...

[go west young man]

88. My scenario is a unique one and relates to both countries as well as Canada.

I am an Englishman and a former US marine who lives in Georgia and spent 3 years living in Canada.

In the UK I was treated for a sore tooth instantly upon returning after having been out of the country for 6 years. In Canada I had a cyst removed for free with a wait of less than an hour after I disclosed I needed treatment. The doctor took it out right then and there. I was in Canada illegally and no questions were asked. He just went ahead and performed the quick removal.

In the US I had a slight hernia. I was working at a hospital and had an insurance plan. I had paid in for 3 years. The doctor in my HMO misdiagnosed me twice so I went to another doctor. He wasn't included in my HMO. They refused to pay even though their guy had misdiagnosed me twice. I paid $2500 out of my own pocket and suffered a lot of pain.

I had dental surgery. My allowed amout of surgery was $1500 or less. I paid an additional $1000 out of pocket.

My wife and I had a baby. The cost was $15,000. We had insurance. It paid $9,000. In the UK we would have paid nothing.

We have a friend who had a baby which she brought home from the hospital after 1 day so as to avoid the high costs. Her baby whose name was "Rose" had a lung defect which wasn't caught and she died. Had she been in a hospital she would have probably lived. Russia keeps all newborns in hospital for the first two weeks for monitoring. American's run home with em fast to avoid the cost of a night in a hospital. Hence the high infant mortality rate.

My uncle who is 54 was dropped by his US insurance company and now can't get reinsured because he has had two heart attacks.

The system is broken. It just hasn't broken for you yet. Yet.

[juajen]

112. You would have been covered by the military in that case, either in military clinics or

hospitals. I know I'm coming late to this thread, but read through it and had to comment anyway. The Magistrate, who is beloved on DU, is too polite, but, I say bullshit!

[TheBigotBasher]

16. Just look at the cost of top insurance packages in the UK

because they have to compete against free and look what they offer.

Private rooms, immediate doctors, no "co-pays".

I doubt that you could buy as good an insurance package in the US for the combined cost you would pay for the NHS and private insurance.

[vadawg]

19. mayby, mayby not, but i would much rather have what i have now than the NHS

i guess it comes down to a personal choice... :)

[TheBigotBasher]

29. When I needed it

I was in hospital - with traffic cleared out of my way as if I was a President within 15 minutes of a call. Within 5 minutes, I had a paramedic with full medical equipment at my door.

It would take half hour to drive to my hospital in traffic. The ambulance can cut through it.

I paid nothing for that - except what I already paid in tax.

[vadawg]

31. :) so technically you did pay for it in your taxes :)

i too have had experiences with life or death situations, both do well when you are at deaths door, but i would still rather have the care that i have now than the NHS,

[TheBigotBasher]

46. Of course you pay in taxes.

I doubt hospitals in first World Countries are that different for life or death cases, but the choice in the UK is not NHS or nothing, you have the NHS and a thrIving private insurance market that costs far less than the US.

[The Magistrate]

50. What Portion Of Tax Revenues Goes To the Service, Sir?

It would be interesting to contrast that with premium costs here.

[vadawg]

53. yo uknow that the sir thing gets really annoying, im not sure if thats why you do it

or if you dont realise that its not really respectful. im sure the premiums here cost more but personally i would rather pay the extra and have the service i have here, its down to personal choices.

[The Magistrate]

61. What Other People Think Of Me, Sir, Is None Of My Damn Business

Pricing is an odd art. Anyone with much experience of it will be aware of instances where people prefer to be over-charged, made to pay more than an item or service is really worth, and much more than it be sold for at a reasonable profit. One reason is people tend to equate price with real value, and thus think they are getting something of greater value if they pay much more. This is frequently not true.

[vadawg]

70. and yet some people can see what they are paying for is worth it

and would happily pay the extra to get the service that they think is better, i guess it all comes down to oones own opinions and experiences...

[The Magistrate]

71. That Belief, Sir, Is What Marketting Runs On

And systematically inculcates as a habit of mind.

[vadawg]

72. and yet we have the reality that paying for a service can be worth it regardless of what you say

and the most important thing is whether you as the customer feel that you are getting value for money, not what someone else thinks....

[The Magistrate]

73. The Most Important Thing, Sir

Is leading the customer to feel he or she is getting value for the money, which feeling generally has very little to do with what actually is supplied or performed....

[vadawg]

75. and yet you still pay money for stuff even with this knowledge, well more fool you

im surprised that you havent realised that everything you buy is being overpaid for...

[The Magistrate]

81. Ah, My Dear Sir, You Make The Sound Of Lawful Prey Reaching For Its Wallet....

"They are the most accomplished merchants in all the universes --- so accomplished, indeed, that they sell only trash. There is a deep necessity in this, for they must occupy all their cunning in perfecting their methods of selling, and so have not an instant to spare in considering the worth of what they sell."

[vadawg]

82. ah the ability to say nothing but make it sound like you are making love to a sheep

a rare talent indeed, and yet you happily give over your money for the same products....

[The Magistrate]

83. The Unguarded Word, Sir, Is The Window To The Soul....

A little surprised to see you peg yourself as a 'furry', but as the man said, "It's a weird world, and the longer I'm in it the weirder it gets."

[vadawg]

84. not a furry, but i do like and appreciate sheep, a noble animal

and a lot can be learned when spent in their company...

[The Magistrate]

85. Doubtless You Can Learn Much From A Passel Of Sheep, Sir....

[nxylas]

91. A non-scientific survey for you

Just out of interest, I put my US dollar salary figure into a UK take-home pay calculator (http://www.thesalarycalculator.co.uk/salary.php) to see how the figure compared to my take home pay when I lived in the US. I didn't take exchange rates into consideration, it was just a straight dollar-to-the-pound conversion, as it was the actual figure I was interested in, not the relative value. The take-home figure in the UK, minus tax, actually came to slightly more than my US pay once all my insurance premiums etc. had been deducted. It was only about £/$10 more, but enough to lay to rest all the Freeper scaremongering about how, because of the NHS, British people all have to give 101% of their salary to the taxman.

[The Magistrate]

100. That Sounds About Right, Sir

The idea abroad in this land that money extracted by the government is a horrid loss, while money extracted by a private concern is a positive good, is one of the most foolish illusions our political life labors under. When an essential good is provided by a private firm, its exactations on the public differ in no wise from taxes levied by the government. In effect, the private firm simply collects and keeps a tax....

[vadawg]

51. not disagreeing, just saying that i would rather have what i have now than the NHS

if i was in the UK i would rather have BUPA, but if i had nothing then i would go with the NHS...

[TheBigotBasher]

65. In the UK you would have BUPA and the NHS.

It is not either or. BUPA provides a luxury service (private hotel style rooms). Again for much much less than the US for basic insurance packages.

[vadawg]

76. yup, and i know for a fact my wife would want BUPA in a heartbeat

[Maru Kitteh]

90. Your right-wing political ideology is so sacred to you that you would forgo better service for less

money in the name of what? Free-dumb?

[Maru Kitteh]

113. I admit that I expected no truthful answer from you. I commend you for exercising honorable silence

before lies.

[Doremus]

27. On the whole, I have no problem with the service I am given vis a vis my health insurance.

The problems I have are:

1. The cost of said health insurance is our largest single monthly obligation: $1K. In addition to this, we pay $25 co-pay per office visit, $350 annual deductible and 20% co-pay on most treatments.

That adds up to over $15K annually out-of-pocket, which is nearly 40% of our GAI. In addition to this king's ransom, we ALSO pay full federal, state and local income taxes, which, BY THEMSELVES, more than likely approximate the taxes paid by our UK friends.

2. The fact that said health insurance is no guarantee that we won't someday be bankrupted by medical bills, as 70% of those who file for bankruptcy annually will attest to.


You must have cheap or free health insurance. Bully for you.

[Go2Peace]

47. Enough bullshit. Go to the damn WHO site where they have the stats. We are **16th**

in outcome.

Our longevity is lower, we pay almost twice as much, and we have many primary indicators that are falling.

Its great that some have a good experience. But you are living in lala land if you listen to the propaganda. Might as well get our your anti global warming book as well, it's the same BS.

http://www.who.int/research/en/

[vadawg]

57. no its someone with firsthand experience saying that they are happy with the service they get

same as if i said i am happy with the service my local county provides in trash removal and its better than the service the next county over provides... as i said i would rather pay more and get the standard i get now than go with the NHS, not sure what is so controversial with that...

[Go2Peace]

89. Ah yes, New Orleans is flooding but I live on a hill so nothing is wrong

with the situation. Same logic.

Glad you have yours. Really.

[TheBigotBasher]

11. Indeed.

I had nothing to pay at all. No "co=pays". No ambulance charge. No charge for x-rays or scans.

All it cost me was the time off work because I am a freelance employee.

[dflprincess]

45. And you can be a freelance employee because you don't have to tie

yourself to an employer for health insurance.

Another benefit of the NHS.

One of my coworkers had to tear home for England last year because his 88 year old mother was ill and not expected to live. Fortunately, she did pull through and when he got back to work all he could do was rave about the wonderful care his mom had received. He decided he'd been in the States too long because he had begun to buy into what he hears about the NHS from Americans (and because, up until this year, our employee provided decent insurance, now they've gone to a craptacular "Consumer Driven Plan"). Things that impressed him were: 1) no mention of costs and the doctor made the decisions with the family. No calling a third party to see if anything was covered 2) his mum was assigned an aide who stayed with her through the night 3) home health care as well as some help around the house was provided so his mother could return to her home.

And now he and his wife have decided that when they retire they will move to the U.K.

[TheBigotBasher]

48. It is not the best of times to be freelance at the moment

but I never have to worry about health care.

[laughingliberal]

62. They are so far ahead of us in total care

An aide to stay through the night? Only if you can afford $20 an hour or more and pay privately, here in the states. No insurance in this country would cover that. And Home Health? The first thing we cut from Medicare when we start cutting. The very thing that would lower costs by keeping people out of the hospital or from being readmitted we cut. Why? They don't have a powerful lobby like the hospitals. What I wouldn't have given to have been able to work for a system that treated whole people. And to have a system like that for my care.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

104. In Portland, I knew an English woman whose mother still lived back

in England. Apparently the local officials in her mother's town were doing everything they could to keep older people in their homes as long as possible. They even asked her if she needed help with house cleaning or gardening, because clearly, hiring someone to do housekeeping for the borderline frail elderly a few hours a week is cheaper than keeping them in a nursing home, not to mention the fact that remaining in their communities is mentally healthier for the elderly.

[kestrel91316]

23. The only time healthcare doesn't suck in the US is when you are wealthy enough

to self-insure: that is, you have the cash to pay for everything so you don't have to buy insurance and then fight them tooth and nail to get them to cover your care like they are supposed to.

[madmom]

87. I have insurance and it ain't better. i can't go to the doctor because I can't afford the co-pay, ..

how is that better? Even if I do manage to see a doctor if I am sick, I then can't afford the meds I might need. So no I really don't think it's better in the US with insurance.

[JDPriestly]

98. I have lived in England, France, Germany, Austria and the U.S.

The systems in France, Germany and Austria cannot be beat. The U.S. system is the worst. The medical care is good. The access is absolutely horrible.

The French medical system saved my life. I did not have to pay anything if I recall correctly. (My husband dealt with most of that.)

My problem was an extremely complicated pregnancy that seriously endangered my life and that of my child.

[Joe the Liberal]

7. "But..but....but the black peoplz and minortys will free load off da socalizm....

an da deth panelz will come and git meh in muh sleepz and the gubmint burocratz will get bitween me and muh doctorz!!!1!!!11"

[Lydia Leftcoast]

99. That's really the heart of the matter, isn't it?

If you get into an argument with a conservative about publicly-funded health care, it always comes down to resentment of poor and dark-skinned people. Why, the idea that they should have equal rights to good medical care! Rich people shouldn't have to wait in line with those nasty poor people!
Conservatives tend to be either wealthy or firm believers in the Horatio Alger fairy tale ("I work hard, so I'd be rich if them liberals and government bureaucrats weren't taking 100% of my earnings and giving it away to so that welfare mothers on crack could buy Cadillacs for their pimp boyfriends.") :sarcasm:

So here's how publicly funded systems work:

The order and quality of your treatment is made on medical grounds only. It doesn't matter if you're rich, poor, employed, free-lancing, unemployed, or whatever. Even tourists will get emergency care. (I know people who received emergency care in England, Scotland, Sweden, Norway, and Germany.)

(Remember when Natasha Richardson suffered her fatal injury while skiing in Canada? The right-wingers made a big deal about her being transported back to the States after a few days. "If Canadian medical care is so great, why did her family take her back to New York?" Well, the answer, dear pinheads, is that Canada provides only emergency and urgent care to tourists, not follow-up care. Not being a legal resident of Canada, just a tourist on a skiing vacation, Richardson was not eligible for follow-up care after being stabilized.)

There are no exclusions or rescissions, no disquailfications for pre-existing conditions. (I personally know an American who has to remain in Japan because while he was there teaching English, he was diagnosed with a heart condition that needs ongoing monitoring. He would be uninsurable in the U.S.)

There are no deductibles, although some countries (Germany, Japan) have modest co-pays. In Japan, you can apply for a refund from the government if your co-pays exceed a certain amount per year.

So here's how our system works:

You'll get seen in the emergency room in the order of the severity of your ailment, but the emergency room will be crowded with people who have minor ailments and can't afford a regular doctor. If you are uninsured, expect a whopping bill.

If you have a non-emergency condition, you may decide to just live with it if you don't have insurance or if your insurance company refuses to cover it or if you haven't met your deductible.

You will have a choice of either paying through the nose for insurance (it may be more than your rent or mortgage) OR accepting a high deductible that you will NEVER meet OR, if you really hit the jackpot, you will pay both high premiums AND a high deductible.

Your doctor will have to either hire a staff to take care of insurance paperwork or outsource the job to a company set up for the express purpose of taking care of this paperwork.

Your doctor will spend several hours per month arguing with insurance companies about refusal to pay or insistence on billing a procedure at a lower level.

What a country!

[Juche]

12. Congrats

What is becoming really amusing is that 10 years ago many people in the US assumed we had the world's best health care. Not only are millions waking up to that not being remotely true, but it is becoming more and more apparent that even latin american countries (countries that are middle income and that just emerged from dictatorships into democracy in the last few decades vs the US which is high income and has a 200 year democratic history) have universal systems that are more stable and reliable than our health care system.

Costa Rica, Brazil, Chile, Mexico, etc. all have or are developing UHC systems that are more affordable, more reliable and more sustainable than the US system.

It is sad how divided from reality the right wing in the US is becoming. While they scream about 'the best health care in the world' and lie by saying Europeans and Canadians flock to the US (which is a lie, statistics don't remotely bear this out) the reality is countries like Brazil are starting to run laps around us.

Not that I have anything against Brazil, just that they were a military dictatorship a few decades ago and have 1/5th the per capita income we do, but they still have UHC.

[Hello_Kitty]

78. I got great care under the socialized medical system in the US Navy.

How's this for "socialist"? They MADE me see the doctor! Every year I'd be ordered to report to medical for my annual physical and dental twice a year for my check up and cleaning. Flu shots were mandatory and they wouldn't let me separate until they yanked all my wisdom teeth.

[vadawg]

80. rofl what a going away present, some day im going to have to touch base with the VA

not something i really want to do, but its going to happen eventually...

[Cleita]

86. K&R

[midnight]

93. I agree with your statement:

When Republicans say Government will always go bad, it means they will make it go bad as it is not Government that is bad, it is simply that they have no idea how to run good government.

However, don't you find the Republicans who love their govt. subsidized insurance, but don't want it for the tax payer. So it is alright that the tax payer foot the bill, but not alright it we have the same rights?

[Tsiyu]

95. Isn't is amazing

to hear Repuke GOVERNMENT officials try to convince us that GOVERNMENT IS BAD!!!!!!

Well, Mr. or Mrs Repuke GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE:

If you don't believe in the GOVERNMENT you work for, get the hell out! And let us elect GOVERNMENT officials who believe in GOVERNMENT rather than running same into the mud to prove your point.


What a concept...


and thanks to The Bigot Basher for this excellent thread :hi:

[bvar22]

103. To fully realize how BAD the current HCR is....

..simply compare it to what is taken for granted in every other civilized country in The World!

The Democratic Party with its huge majorities in Congress and the White House are insisting that Americans WILL simply have to settle for FAR LESS!

After all.
Thats the "Uniquely American Solution"!
Thanks, Democrats.
Thanks, Mr "Hope & Change".

[Mimosa]

110. .simply compare it to what is taken for granted in every other civilized country in The World!

I had to finish your sentence up top, BVar.

Why the heck can't we have YOU, Laughing Liberal and Hello Kitty in the Senate? Then something might be done to help the people, not the corporations.

[puebloknot]

105. My, how sane. We need to get your show on the road in America!

The only problem is you need an educated audience, so venues will have to be picked very carefully. We have not, as yet, developed a vaccine to protect such as you from Teabagitis, so there will be a need to avoid our right-wing crazies and try to awaken our sleeping "progressives"!

Thanks for this. We need to hear it over on this side of the pond!

As an American army brat, I got great care in various quonset huts and non-glamorous facilities as I was growing up. I didn't realize I was underprivileged and forced to accept government-run health care.

[penndragon69]

107. I recently had to lay on a "trolley"

for almost 5 hours in the emergency room before i got
any treatment or was admitted to the hospital. Almost a week
and a half later i went home. I suffered complications from
the extended wait in the public viewing area, i was exposed to other
viruses that hit me hard. I was a CHEMO patient and my white cells had all
been destroyed in the last treatment. After i finally got treated and into a room
things went well until my release.

But to have to wait 5 hours before getting any help is a crime in America.

Give me the NHS any day over the crap pile we have today!

[emsimon33]

108. As a tourist in London, I had what could have been a serious eye problem

I had a hole in my macula (the back of my eye) which I had to wait almost three months for the surgery (great health insurance at the time but a $5000 deductible, but that was the back up on my surgeon in the U.S.) I was visiting a friend in London when I began to have trouble with the eye. My surgeon in the US said to get to the emergency room as soon as possible at the Moorfield Eye Clinic in London and they would FAX my records.

It was 10 pm in London by the time I arrived. I went right in with only a few minutes wait time although my problem was not critical. They ran the same tests on the same equipment that I had had run twice in the US (and paid for out of pocket as I had not yet met my deductible). As they ran the tests in the UK, I kept thinking of the $2,000 plus more that the tests would cost me.

It tuned out that my eye was OK. When I asked where I should pay, I was told that the service was free.

I can't help but think of how stingy we are in this country with non-residence or those without insurance.

I can not speak highly enough for the UK system. My friend who worked in London for three years said the same. In fact, now back in the US and an executive with a major corporation, she says that the health care system in the UK is still far superior to what we have here, even if you have the best health insurance available!

We are being so punked in this country about the health care that we receive.

[Paper Roses]

109. I've been on all sides of this fence. If you have good insurance,

our system is good. If you have lousy insurance coverage, it is lousy. If you have no insurance, our system stinks.

Too many have no or lousy insurance, therefore, it stinks.

I'd far rather have to wait a few days to see a Doc, or spend a few hours on a gurney, than be in the situation the US is in right now.

Don't have a good policy? Suffer or die.
No excuse for our government not to provide a way for all of us to be able to access healthcare evenly.

We come to the aid of everyone in the world, we fight unjust wars, we stick our noses in everyone else's business yet me leave out citizens to the risk of financial ruin or death because we won't find a way to take care of our own citizens.

It disgusts me.