The next time...
-
Christian Graus wrote:
I pay an extra 2% Medicare levy on top of my taxes.
Only 1.5% Quote the ATO:
Medicare is the scheme that gives Australian residents access to health care.
To help fund the scheme, resident taxpayers are subject to a Medicare levy.
Normally, we calculate your Medicare levy at the rate of 1.5% of your taxable income.
Note that the Government typically spends about 4x this on Medicare. http://www.healthconnect.gov.au/internet/wcms/publishing.nsf/Content/haf-ozhealth-index/$FILE/ozstats.rtf[^]
Peter "Until the invention of the computer, the machine gun was the device that enabled humans to make the most mistakes in the smallest amount of time."
-
I tend to believe that we're just all incredulous. If that's in part from lack of good information is open for debate, but still.
Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ "I am working on a project that will convert a FORTRAN code to corresponding C++ code.I am not aware of FORTRAN syntax" ( spotted in the C++/CLI forum )
Christian Graus wrote:
If that's in part from lack of good information is open for debate, but still.
There is no doubt that our health care system is becoming increasingly dysfunctional. What most of the international community fails to realize is that concepts such as 'universal health care' represent a complete and utter repudiation of every principle the US was founded upon and is seen by many as little more than an effort of further socialize our society. I don't think anyone believes that the efforts will end there, it will simply be what finally breaks the back of Jeffersonian democracy and we will all become happy little Marxists. If our health care system were allowed to work as the rest of the economy does, it would be fine. It could be easily fixed with just a little confidence on the part of Americans in our own principles and less fear of them.
The only conspiracies that concern me are the ones I am completely unaware of. By the time I find out about it, its probably a done deal. Nothing in the entire universe is more useless than morality without authority. A morality free of hypocrisy is no morality at all.
-
cp9876 wrote:
All I see here is bigotry and selfishness - a stubborn refusal to help those without health insurance.
Then open your eyes! None of us refuse to help Americans without health insurance. We simply believe that the federal government is not the best tool for the job. Sheesh! Why are you Australians so arrogant to think your way is the only way to do anything?
cp9876 wrote:
Of course you don't have to follow any other model, but why don't you see what you can come up with?
Why can't you just let us follow our own path without crying about it?
-
I tend to believe that we're just all incredulous. If that's in part from lack of good information is open for debate, but still.
Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ "I am working on a project that will convert a FORTRAN code to corresponding C++ code.I am not aware of FORTRAN syntax" ( spotted in the C++/CLI forum )
Christian Graus wrote:
I tend to believe that we're just all incredulous.
Is it really so difficult to understand that many Americans don't believe our federal government to be the best tool to dole out health care? Given that most of you hate our heavy-handed foreign policy, I'd think you would agree with us. I don't find it incredulous that some people drive on the left side of the road. I don't find it incredulous that some people eat dog meat. I don't find it incredulous that some people want their government to care for them from cradle to grave. They are all just different ways of getting a job done. Usually its us Americans who are accused of not being worldly or sophisticated - of not appreciating other cultures.
-
Mike Mullikin wrote:
Sheesh! Why are you Australians so arrogant to think your way is the only way to do anything?
Why does this question remind me of "Pots calling kettles black"?
-
Note that the Government typically spends about 4x this on Medicare. http://www.healthconnect.gov.au/internet/wcms/publishing.nsf/Content/haf-ozhealth-index/$FILE/ozstats.rtf[^]
Peter "Until the invention of the computer, the machine gun was the device that enabled humans to make the most mistakes in the smallest amount of time."
-
Note that the Government typically spends about 4x this on Medicare. http://www.healthconnect.gov.au/internet/wcms/publishing.nsf/Content/haf-ozhealth-index/$FILE/ozstats.rtf[^]
Peter "Until the invention of the computer, the machine gun was the device that enabled humans to make the most mistakes in the smallest amount of time."
-
TimK wrote:
Why does this question remind me of "Pots calling kettles black"?
Maybe, but in the end... both the pot and kettle are black. ;)
-
cp9876 wrote:
Note that the Government typically spends about 4x this on Medicare.
Where does the additional money come from? Are they using other tax money to pay for Medicare?
Most of medicare is funded from general tax revenue. I only posted this so that people didn't get the misconception that this system approved of by the Aussies here (myself included) comes at the low cost of a 1.5% tax.
Peter "Until the invention of the computer, the machine gun was the device that enabled humans to make the most mistakes in the smallest amount of time."
-
...a Canadian starts up about how wonderful their healthcare system is and how lousy the US system is. Canada's Expectant Moms Heading to U.S. to Deliver[^] "The Canadian healthcare system has used the United States as a safety net for years," said Michael Turner of the Cato Institute. "In fact, overall about one out of every seven Canadian physicians sends someone to the United States every year for treatment." :doh:
Mike Mullikin wrote:
...a Canadian starts up about how wonderful their healthcare system is and how lousy the US system is. Canada's Expectant Moms Heading to U.S. to Deliver[^] "The Canadian healthcare system has used the United States as a safety net for years," said Michael Turner of the Cato Institute. "In fact, overall about one out of every seven Canadian physicians sends someone to the United States every year for treatment."
I came to this thread late and do not have the patience to read through all the posts. My apologies if the following point has already been made. Canadians buy a lot of things from the US: cars, clothes, food... Likewise US residents buy a lot of things from Canada. This is known as international trade. For some goods trade goes both ways, e.g., Canadians buy US clothes and US residents buy Canadian clothes and there is a flow of tourists in both directions. For other goods, the flow may be one way. Shortages in one country (due to a bad harvest, unexpected demand or similar) may lead to short term trade to overcome the shortage. Accordingly, there is nothing in the least bit surprising about some Canadians buying US health services. It would also not be surprising if US residents wished to make use of Canadian medical services. The US obviously allows Canadians to access their health system provided the Canadians have the money to pay for it. I don't know if or on what terms Canada allows US residents to access their medical services. I would be confident that there are a lot of people in the US who would dearly love access to the Canadian system. If they are not accessing it, then I would imagine it is for one of two reasons: 1. The Canadians don't allow it, 2. The people wishing access to the Canadian system are low income people who are poorly served by the US system but don't have the funds to become "medical tourists" in Canada.
John Carson
-
cp9876 wrote:
Note that the Government typically spends about 4x this on Medicare.
Where does the additional money come from? Are they using other tax money to pay for Medicare?
Mike Mullikin wrote:
Where does the additional money come from? Are they using other tax money to pay for Medicare?
The medicare levy we pay on tax is a relatively new thing and is used to encourage higher income earners to have private insurance. The levi you pay on tax increases greatly if you earn over amount X and dont have private insurance. In my case I took out private insurance a few years ago which costs me about $50 a month but saves me several thousand in my tax. Medicare and the drug scheme have been around long before the tax levy was introduced so yes most of the funding comes from other taxes including general income tax, and massive taxes on tobacco products. The pharmacy industry here is about to go through a big change. Up till now a chemist got amount X from the government when they sold a particular product under the scheme. Big chain pharmacies (chemist warehouse is one) have bought up the smaller private businesses and used their combined buying power to get huge discounts on bulk purchases from the drug companies. The government still pays them the same amount for a particular product regardless of what they paid wholesale for it so these companies are making massive profits which allows them to under sell the competition, drive them out of business, buy their chemists licence and continue the cycle. I believe this is about to change and the pharmacies / drug companies will be forced to disclose their purchasing schemes. Dental care is not often covered by medicare. I had a root canal and crown done before I had the insurance and it cost me about $1500. With the $50 a month insurance it would have been free or very close to it
-
cp9876 wrote:
We now know that 90% of ulcers are caused by a bacteria, helicobacter pylori. Yet some of the biggest selling drugs are the proton pump inhibitors developed earlier. These are great for the drug companies as they are used 'for ever', but the correct antibiotic will cure the ulcer. Why are they even being marketed?
Having recently been treated for that I can debunk that "problem" completely. The acid inhibitors (and proton pump inhibitors are just one kind of acid production suppressant), are an essential part of the treatment for helicobacter pylori, as it is necessary to reduce the acid level to improve the effectiveness of the antibiotics required. Even so, the antibiotic dosage needed is astounding. The main use for the proton pump inhibitors is not for the treatment of stomach ulcers at all, but rather for the treatment of gastric reflux disease, in which helicobacter plays no role. As for being over prescribed, that is a possibility, but seems a bit dubious. My health insurance provider monitors prescriptions rather rigorously, and will object if it thinks something is unjustified or inappropriate. The chances that the federal government would ever manage to have such individual focus is nil. It is in the health insurers profitability interest to minimize cost and abuse, even though their profits are capped in most states. Change this to a federal bureaucracy and you will replace the motivation for cost containment and efficiency with incompetence, bribery, corruption and political influence.
Rob Graham wrote:
I can debunk that "problem" completely
The problem is not using the PPIs as an adjunct to the antibiotic therapy, you clearly have an enlightened gastroenterologist. The problem is that many doctors still use them for long-term symptomatic relief instead of attacking the cause of the problem. There is no other explanation for their continued high sales.
Rob Graham wrote:
As for being over prescribed, that is a possibility, but seems a bit dubious.
Prescribing drugs is the simple thing for the health system to do, attacking the cause of the problem (for example, possibly lifestyle issues) is not rewarded.
Peter "Until the invention of the computer, the machine gun was the device that enabled humans to make the most mistakes in the smallest amount of time."
-
Mike Mullikin wrote:
Where does the additional money come from? Are they using other tax money to pay for Medicare?
The medicare levy we pay on tax is a relatively new thing and is used to encourage higher income earners to have private insurance. The levi you pay on tax increases greatly if you earn over amount X and dont have private insurance. In my case I took out private insurance a few years ago which costs me about $50 a month but saves me several thousand in my tax. Medicare and the drug scheme have been around long before the tax levy was introduced so yes most of the funding comes from other taxes including general income tax, and massive taxes on tobacco products. The pharmacy industry here is about to go through a big change. Up till now a chemist got amount X from the government when they sold a particular product under the scheme. Big chain pharmacies (chemist warehouse is one) have bought up the smaller private businesses and used their combined buying power to get huge discounts on bulk purchases from the drug companies. The government still pays them the same amount for a particular product regardless of what they paid wholesale for it so these companies are making massive profits which allows them to under sell the competition, drive them out of business, buy their chemists licence and continue the cycle. I believe this is about to change and the pharmacies / drug companies will be forced to disclose their purchasing schemes. Dental care is not often covered by medicare. I had a root canal and crown done before I had the insurance and it cost me about $1500. With the $50 a month insurance it would have been free or very close to it
Josh Gray wrote:
With the $50 a month insurance it would have been free or very close to it
Dream on .. from years of experience on top level health insurance, I typically get back 50% for major dental work, and the yearly limits are pretty strict so make sure you don't have two root canals or crowns in a year. And - if your dentist ever refers you to an endodontist (e.g. if after 10 years your root canal gets infected), see your bank manager first!
Peter "Until the invention of the computer, the machine gun was the device that enabled humans to make the most mistakes in the smallest amount of time."
-
Le Centriste wrote:
they say that the overall system is lousy
Yet take advantage of it when needed. :|
Le Centriste wrote:
Be careful with this figure. It does not mean that 1 out of 7 Canadians go to the U.S. for healthcare.
My reading comprehension skills are fine. ;)
Mike Mullikin wrote:
Yet take advantage of it when needed.
The same way the American's took advantage of the Canadian system before we overhauled it and introduced photo ID cards.
"sh*thead ... f*** off and die" "Keep my words on your sig. I stand by them. (Which, incidently, doesn't make me a sociopath - it's personal.)" (Fred_Smith - animal lover)
-
Mike Mullikin wrote:
...a Canadian starts up about how wonderful their healthcare system is and how lousy the US system is. Canada's Expectant Moms Heading to U.S. to Deliver[^] "The Canadian healthcare system has used the United States as a safety net for years," said Michael Turner of the Cato Institute. "In fact, overall about one out of every seven Canadian physicians sends someone to the United States every year for treatment."
I came to this thread late and do not have the patience to read through all the posts. My apologies if the following point has already been made. Canadians buy a lot of things from the US: cars, clothes, food... Likewise US residents buy a lot of things from Canada. This is known as international trade. For some goods trade goes both ways, e.g., Canadians buy US clothes and US residents buy Canadian clothes and there is a flow of tourists in both directions. For other goods, the flow may be one way. Shortages in one country (due to a bad harvest, unexpected demand or similar) may lead to short term trade to overcome the shortage. Accordingly, there is nothing in the least bit surprising about some Canadians buying US health services. It would also not be surprising if US residents wished to make use of Canadian medical services. The US obviously allows Canadians to access their health system provided the Canadians have the money to pay for it. I don't know if or on what terms Canada allows US residents to access their medical services. I would be confident that there are a lot of people in the US who would dearly love access to the Canadian system. If they are not accessing it, then I would imagine it is for one of two reasons: 1. The Canadians don't allow it, 2. The people wishing access to the Canadian system are low income people who are poorly served by the US system but don't have the funds to become "medical tourists" in Canada.
John Carson
John Carson wrote:
Accordingly, there is nothing in the least bit surprising about some Canadians buying US health services. It would also not be surprising if US residents wished to make use of Canadian medical services. The US obviously allows Canadians to access their health system provided the Canadians have the money to pay for it. I don't know if or on what terms Canada allows US residents to access their medical services. I would be confident that there are a lot of people in the US who would dearly love access to the Canadian system. If they are not accessing it, then I would imagine it is for one of two reasons: 1. The Canadians don't allow it, 2. The people wishing access to the Canadian system are low income people who are poorly served by the US system but don't have the funds to become "medical tourists" in Canada.
Yes, this is exactly right. Americans were coming across the Canadian border and taking advantage of the Canadian (free) health care system for a long time. Eventually, it became so burdensome to the Canadian system that we had to introduce photo ID cards to stop the fraud as it was costing far too much money for the Canadian system to sustain. Americans still do it (using forged ID cards) which just costs Canada more tax-payer money. Conversely, when the Canadians travel to the U.S. for health care, we pay thereby injecting money into their system. I fail to see where this right-wing health care rant is leading; save for the fact that it's just another conservative gripe of some kind. Furthermore, 1 in 7 physicians sending a pregnant woman to the U.S. hardly amounts to any significant number of Canadians using U.S. health care.
"sh*thead ... f*** off and die" "Keep my words on your sig. I stand by them. (Which, incidently, doesn't make me a sociopath - it's personal.)" (Fred_Smith - animal lover)
-
Christian Graus wrote:
I tend to believe that we're just all incredulous.
Is it really so difficult to understand that many Americans don't believe our federal government to be the best tool to dole out health care? Given that most of you hate our heavy-handed foreign policy, I'd think you would agree with us. I don't find it incredulous that some people drive on the left side of the road. I don't find it incredulous that some people eat dog meat. I don't find it incredulous that some people want their government to care for them from cradle to grave. They are all just different ways of getting a job done. Usually its us Americans who are accused of not being worldly or sophisticated - of not appreciating other cultures.
Mike, in context, I was responding to what Stan had to say about other countries trying to assault the US by changing your health system ( I suspect Stan looks for Reds under the bed every night, too ), and I also said that if we're incredulous, it's probably due to distorted press on the topic. So, I don't think my comment has anything to do with my not respecting your right to do things differently, or to have your own culture.
Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ "I am working on a project that will convert a FORTRAN code to corresponding C++ code.I am not aware of FORTRAN syntax" ( spotted in the C++/CLI forum )
-
John Carson wrote:
Accordingly, there is nothing in the least bit surprising about some Canadians buying US health services. It would also not be surprising if US residents wished to make use of Canadian medical services. The US obviously allows Canadians to access their health system provided the Canadians have the money to pay for it. I don't know if or on what terms Canada allows US residents to access their medical services. I would be confident that there are a lot of people in the US who would dearly love access to the Canadian system. If they are not accessing it, then I would imagine it is for one of two reasons: 1. The Canadians don't allow it, 2. The people wishing access to the Canadian system are low income people who are poorly served by the US system but don't have the funds to become "medical tourists" in Canada.
Yes, this is exactly right. Americans were coming across the Canadian border and taking advantage of the Canadian (free) health care system for a long time. Eventually, it became so burdensome to the Canadian system that we had to introduce photo ID cards to stop the fraud as it was costing far too much money for the Canadian system to sustain. Americans still do it (using forged ID cards) which just costs Canada more tax-payer money. Conversely, when the Canadians travel to the U.S. for health care, we pay thereby injecting money into their system. I fail to see where this right-wing health care rant is leading; save for the fact that it's just another conservative gripe of some kind. Furthermore, 1 in 7 physicians sending a pregnant woman to the U.S. hardly amounts to any significant number of Canadians using U.S. health care.
"sh*thead ... f*** off and die" "Keep my words on your sig. I stand by them. (Which, incidently, doesn't make me a sociopath - it's personal.)" (Fred_Smith - animal lover)
If you people would actually read the words of my post and the article itself and stop making up things you'd see that I am not: a. Complaining about the use of private US healthcare by Canadians as a burden to anyone. b. Making any comparisons to the US system. c. Promoting the US system in anyway. I'm simply reminding Canadians (who love to do all 3 when the roles are reversed) that their system is not 100% perfect. Sheesh!
-
Josh Gray wrote:
With the $50 a month insurance it would have been free or very close to it
Dream on .. from years of experience on top level health insurance, I typically get back 50% for major dental work, and the yearly limits are pretty strict so make sure you don't have two root canals or crowns in a year. And - if your dentist ever refers you to an endodontist (e.g. if after 10 years your root canal gets infected), see your bank manager first!
Peter "Until the invention of the computer, the machine gun was the device that enabled humans to make the most mistakes in the smallest amount of time."
cp9876 wrote:
Dream on .. from years of experience on top level health insurance, I typically get back 50% for major dental work, and the yearly limits are pretty strict
I've never needed to test it and its been a long time since I read the policy but I remeber choosing this particular plan for its dental cover.
cp9876 wrote:
so make sure you don't have two root canals or crowns in a year
Fingers crossed Ill never need anouther!
cp9876 wrote:
And - if your dentist ever refers you to an endodontist (e.g. if after 10 years your root canal gets infected), see your bank manager first!
If I need to have major work done again on a tooth I might consider an implant. They seem to have a better long term outcome to root canal but they dont come cheap
-
Mike Gaskey wrote:
Sounds great eh?
Well, you can vouch for the email coming from Canadians, at least.
Mike Gaskey wrote:
I am personally in the 55% tax bracket.
Bloody hell. I complain often about paying 48%, or whatever our top bracket now is, but I'm now paying 40% or so ( they moved the brackets at last ).
Mike Gaskey wrote:
We have waiting lists out the ying yang some as much as 2 years down the road.
Precisely my point. We have waiting list problems too, but they are lessened by people on good incomes ( like me ) electing to pay for health insurance and to use the private system.
Mike Gaskey wrote:
Many Canadians do not have a family Doctor.
Whch makes them retards, surely ?
Mike Gaskey wrote:
I can spend what money I have left after taxes on booze, cigarettes, junk food and anything else that could kill me but I am not allowed by law to spend my money on getting an operation I need because that would be jumping the queue.
Again, this is my core complaint about the Canadian system, they seem hell bent on being 'not the US', when they should just do what works. Comments on cost are irrelevant, health care should cost *something*, otherwise it gets clogged with hypocondriacs with nothing to stop them from going. And, of course I pay for Medicare, it's 2% on top of my tax bill. I didn't think the health fairies come to countries with publich health care.
Mike Gaskey wrote:
Oh did I mention that immigrants are covered automatically at tax payer expense having never contributed a dollar to the system and pay no premiums?
To immigrate into most countries, you need a job, I know Nish needed to prove he was working while in Canada. Which, by definition, means he contributed to the system. AND a visit to the doctor was costing him $200 or something as he'd not been there long enough to get free care. Makes the rest of this smell like BS as well.
Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ "I am working on a project that will convert a FORTRAN code to corresponding C++ code.I am not aware of FORTRAN syntax" ( spotted in the C++/CLI forum )
Christian Graus wrote:
To immigrate into most countries, you need a job, I know Nish needed to prove he was working while in Canada. Which, by definition, means he contributed to the system.
Depends. A Mexican or American citizen can wenter legally, apply for asylum and stay without a job until the request is resolved, at least according to yesterday's news. That news highlighted Mexican nationals, previously in the US illegally, who have become worried about getting caught here and sent back. Instead of going back to Mexico they're driving across to Windsor and doing just that.
Christian Graus wrote:
Bloody hell. I complain often about paying 48%, or whatever our top bracket now is, but I'm now paying 40% or so ( they moved the brackets at last ).
I pay a much smaller percentage, suspect our incomes are roughly the same. And no I don't want to pay more to provide heathcare for someone else. Before you light up, I also contribute fairly heavily to charity. That would stop were I at 40% or more.
Mike The NYT - my leftist brochure. Calling an illegal alien an “undocumented immigrant” is like calling a drug dealer an “unlicensed pharmacist”. God doesn't believe in atheists, therefore they don't exist.
-
Rob Graham wrote:
I can debunk that "problem" completely
The problem is not using the PPIs as an adjunct to the antibiotic therapy, you clearly have an enlightened gastroenterologist. The problem is that many doctors still use them for long-term symptomatic relief instead of attacking the cause of the problem. There is no other explanation for their continued high sales.
Rob Graham wrote:
As for being over prescribed, that is a possibility, but seems a bit dubious.
Prescribing drugs is the simple thing for the health system to do, attacking the cause of the problem (for example, possibly lifestyle issues) is not rewarded.
Peter "Until the invention of the computer, the machine gun was the device that enabled humans to make the most mistakes in the smallest amount of time."
cp9876 wrote:
The problem is not using the PPIs as an adjunct to the antibiotic therapy, you clearly have an enlightened gastroenterologist.
Actually, the pharmacuetical he prescribed came pre-packaged with the combined semi-daily dosages of the PPI,and two antibiotics on the same blister pack card; so I have to conclude that the evil drug manufacturer is [gasp] actually pushing this. I thikn the sustained popularity comes from the use to treat GERD (acid reflux or persistent heartburn), something that is likely to be a long term regimen.
cp9876 wrote:
ttacking the cause of the problem (for example, possibly lifestyle issues) is not rewarded.
Nice thought, but I see no practical way to do this. The market place could healp by giving insurance price discounts to those who lead a healthier lifestyle (verification is a problem), but it is unlikely that this could happen. It certainly would never happen with a single payer tax supported system, since that actually rewards the opposite.