socialized medicine

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
DangQ3

DangQ3

COMP 2012
10+ Year Member
5+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2005
Messages
77
Reaction score
0
Why is socialized medicine bad? Is it bad for health care as a whole or is it bad for medical professional?
Members don't see this ad.
 
I don't wan't to die on a waiting list.
 
I got asked a similar question in one of my interviews. I guess if you're one of those people who has Medicare benefits, it isn't so bad. It sure beats not getting any health care.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
we only spend 42 billion on medicaid per year...people don't not get healthcare because they dont have health insurance.
 
Socialized medicine is bad because the overall quality of healthcare would eventually decline. Also, something most people dont realize is that people would lose their freedom of choosing their Docs. = Bad news. :thumbdown:
 
Its bad for everyone. Anything socialized fails. When was the last time the government did anything better than the private sector? This Post office vs UPS/FedEX, The VA System, etc...

Here's how to fix the healthcare problem:

People should stop living beyond their means and realize that they might just have to give up the new LCD TV for healthcare. We live in a culture that embraces material goods to the point that people spend money they dont have aquiring possesions that they dont need. They then turn to politicians pandering to this sector of society crying for universal healthcare because its "too expensive."

In reality, most people can afford healthcare. I know people who work part time (10 hrs per week minimum) in retail shops at the mall who have excellent healthcare for less than 40 dollars a month! Some healthcare is too expensive and the answer to that is tort reform.

The answer is not to demand that mommy and daddy government pay for it. You think healthcare is expensive now? Imagine how expensive it will be when its free! Most realistic analysts calculate a figure around $200+ Billion dollars a year!

Healthcare and the insurance problem needs to be reformed, but to socialize medicine would be disastrous, there are better ways to get healthcare to more people. If people really want to universalize healthcare I think it should be a state issue, that way when it completely fails it will be limited to whichever state adopts it (California) and the rest of the country will be able to see how bad of an idea it really was.
 
You bring up a big point about tort reform. Lawyers make physicians run stupid expensive tests that may not be necessary for the patient. Lawyers think just because it "is in the book" it should be done. Unfortunately, patients aren't the "textbook" cases and need to be looked at individually.

In addition, will socialized healthcare really work when the baby boomers are getting older and the long term diseases are going to increase exponentially? How much will this cost compared to the programs we have today?

On a personal note, I have a family friend from Canada, who had to come to the United States in order to get a procedure that he was on a waiting list for in Canada. Is this the best care?
 
Jpc984 said:
You bring up a big point about tort reform. Lawyers make physicians run stupid expensive tests that may not be necessary for the patient. Lawyers think just because it "is in the book" it should be done. Unfortunately, patients aren't the "textbook" cases and need to be looked at individually.

In addition, will socialized healthcare really work when the baby boomers are getting older and the long term diseases are going to increase exponentially? How much will this cost compared to the programs we have today?

On a personal note, I have a family friend from Canada, who had to come to the United States in order to get a procedure that he was on a waiting list for in Canada. Is this the best care?
Click to expand...

Practicing defensive medicine is a terrible philosophy that unfortunately physicians are forced to do to try to minimize legal action when something may unavoidably go wrong. We live in a culture of entitlement in which patients will try to sue the pants off a physician if some unexpected complication arises. This is precisely why the number of OBs in PA is rapidly declining.

Socialized healthcare will never work, regardless of a baby boomer surge. It will be terrible now and will only get worse the longer it is implemented until it reaches a critical mass and implodes on itself.

Your friend from Canada is a great example. The media romanticizes the idea of universal healthcare such as the Canadian system but the reality is that patients are waiting in line for long periods of time and doctors are frustrated too.

If there's one thing Americans love its waiting in line!
 
I think that if the US ever went universal (note, I dont think it ever will...ie I hope we're not stupid enough to try that...) there will be a movement of some doctors to try to skirt the universal system which will produce "off system" healthcare options. This can already be seen today by physicians who refuse to take insurance. Their patients (whom they have no shortage of) pay cash and everybody wins. The doc doesnt get screwed by the insurance company and make much more money, the patient gets great care (b/c the physicians who can get away with this are usually incredibly skilled and thus in high demand) and the evil for-profit insurance company makes less money (the CEO of Aetna made $20 Million last year...not a bad salary for screwing doctors huh?)

These docs will set up their own clinics and hopitals and provide great healthcare for people who will pay cash. As the system gets worse, more docs will be drawn away from the universal system and the only docs left will be the really bad ones.

Free market system always wins because it incentivises good practice and quality products.

We need to reform the healthcare system and keep it privatized.
 
DredPiratRobrts-

If you have any free time pick up "The Cure- How Capitalism Can Save American Healthcare" by David Gratzer.

You'll love it- as i did
 
health care reform is definitely necessary, but where do you begin? You have the uninsured dragging down hospitals and closing emergency rooms. You have the physicians who prescribe unnecessary and costly tests/procedures. And you have the private insurance companies that try to cut costs and making it complicated to get the necessary procedures done as well as reimbursing physicians and hospitals. There are plenty of other problems too, so where do you begin? Everybody is covering their own butt and protecting their self interest, physicians included, and the result is declining quality of care. I'm not saying we should or shouldn't socialize medicine, it's just I can't see any significant improvements to the current system any time soon. It seems from Michael Moore's documentary on health care that socialized medicine works in Canada and England and even Cuba! But one man's depiction doesn't represent real life I guess. I definitely see you guy's arguments against socialized medicine the way medicare is today. Ahh...such a complicated issue to even think about. Hopefully some positive changes will be done by the time we enter the work force.
 
Uhh...yeah...especially that guy's depiction...

Spin much, hype-master?

Where to begin? Too many problems to answer? No so much.

There are answers, you just have to know where to look. The aforementioned book is a great place to start.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Haven't read the book mentioned earlier, however I've studied the topic a bit and will chime in. I think that socialized medicine is a step in the right direction. It would allow steps to reduce drug costs, and it would give everyone access to medical care both are needed. Also if properly structured physicans could still schedule emergency surgeries for patients who are willing "able" to pay out of pocket. A two tiered system essentially, but better than what we currently have.
 
DangQ3 said:
Why is socialized medicine bad? Is it bad for health care as a whole or is it bad for medical professional?
Click to expand...

It is bad because that means that everyone would have healthcare.

It is bad because it would threaten physician incomes.

It is also a drag on the economy, just look at Canada and England!
 
walrustooth said:
It is bad because that means that everyone would have healthcare.

It is bad because it would threaten physician incomes.

It is also a drag on the economy, just look at Canada and England!
Click to expand...


It wont be bad b/c "everyone would have healthcare." It would be bad b/c everyone would have terrible healthcare.

It would be more than just a "drag" on the economy. It would further cripple the already limping US economy.

If you lobby for socialized medicine you really need to re-evaluate your grasp of economics.
 
saylorsdad said:
walrustooth said:
It is bad because that means that everyone would have healthcare.
quote]

How would this be bad? I thought we were all in this to help people?
Click to expand...

It is bad because how else am I going to pay for that huge Mercedes?

Help people? You can help someone by holding open a door or being polite. The only way I'm going to be polite is if it conincides with 1) monetary reward or 2) an accolade and I prefer both, thank you. The only person I'm going to help is myself to a big@ass beach house and surround myself with hoes (and other gardening equipment).

.....i'm being sarcastic. On a serious note, I am 100% compassionate a feel strongly that we should have some kind of system that takes care of everyone. I don't know what the answer is but I hope one day we can have some sort of system that takes care of everyone.

What scares me is that even if you pay you premiums, an insurance company may be able to deny you based on some obscure reason. Hopefully, one day we'll implement something effective.

Funny thing is we already have socialized medicine, called Medicare and it works great.
Click to expand...
 
DredPiratRobrts said:
It wont be bad b/c "everyone would have healthcare." It would be bad b/c everyone would have terrible healthcare.

It would be more than just a "drag" on the economy. It would further cripple the already limping US economy.

If you lobby for socialized medicine you really need to re-evaluate your grasp of economics.
Click to expand...

glad somebody picked up on my sarcasm....and speaking of nations with socialized medicine and a poor economy; London is overtaking New York as the financial capital of the world. Actually, for different reasons but still they have a strong, vibrant, growing economy despite NHS.

If you don't lobby for socialized medicine you really need to re-evalute your grasp of ethics. I don't need to read Wealth of Nations, quote Milton Friedman or be QUALIFIED just to give an opinion.....and thanks for the directives bubby.
 
walrustooth said:
London is overtaking New York as the financial capital of the world. Actually, for different reasons...
Click to expand...

Yeah, exactally.

walrustooth said:
If you don't lobby for socialized medicine you really need to re-evalute your grasp of ethics. I don't need to read Wealth of Nations, quote Milton Friedman or be QUALIFIED just to give an opinion.....and thanks for the directives bubby.
Click to expand...

Ethics? Is it ethical to provide a terrible system of universal healthcare at a crippling tax rate? Is wealth redistribution ethical? Why should someone who is succesful be taxed at a 40% tax rate or greater when they use the same resources as others?

Its not ethical to require everyone* to pay into a system that provides substandard care.

*and by everyone I of course mean that the "wealthy" (and yes, doctors are considered wealthy by the IRS and US Govt...if you make $200,000 or more you're in the top 3% of national household incomes) will foot the vast uneven majority of the bill.

Wow, that smacks of fairness.

I'm all for helping people and extending the arm of healthcare to as many people as possible. I'm compassionate and truly do care about my fellow man, but I also believe that the answer does not lie in a socialized system. Just b/c I disagree with legislative redistribution of wealth and a socialized "universal" system I'm somehow "unethical" and lack compassion.

Maybe you need to consult new sources for your "ethics" sounds like you're pulling lessons from Marx.
 
Socialized medicine = government monopoly = no competition = poor quality crap, no limit on cost i.e. your TAXES (I love the libs who think universal healthcare is free:laugh:), no leverage to bargain wages, benefits, etc. for healthcare workers.

Competition works for a reason!

Besides these practical points, I object to socialized medicine purely on principle. Healthcare is NOT a right. Just because it is expensive doesn't magically make it a right and I shouldn't have to work to pay for YOUR medicine. Period.

I need to eat and drink to live don't I? Well by golly, then I should also have the right to walk into my local Kroger or Giant and take whatever the hell I want off the shelf without paying for it! I bet if milk was $10.99/gallon the Dems would try to make this a reality too.

If you disagree please, by all means point me to the part of the Constitution which states that I am responsible for taking care of YOU, I am very interested to know...
 
all smoke and mirrors used to distract the public from the fact that this is all about PHYSICIAN INCOME. So you go ahead with unoriginal thoughts and brainwashing about how anything that challenges the current system is communist and bemoan NHS and all the other systems. Whip of stories of five year wait-lists for cancer surgery delays and how a national health care system will derail the entire economy.

so what is your opinion about the new "for profit" medical school? Is that a good idea? It certainly departs form the current nfp schools we have today

Its okay to be honest and admit the fact that this issue is about SECURING THE BIG $$$.

You still have not challenged me on the concept that Medicare is essentially socialized medicine and so is Tri-Care which covers federal gov employees and retirees.
 
gclax30 said:
Socialized medicine = government monopoly = no competition = poor quality crap, no limit on cost i.e. your TAXES (I love the libs who think universal healthcare is free:laugh:), no leverage to bargain wages, benefits, etc. for healthcare workers.

Competition works for a reason!

Besides these practical points, I object to socialized medicine purely on principle. Healthcare is NOT a right. Just because it is expensive doesn't magically make it a right and I shouldn't have to work to pay for YOUR medicine. Period.

I need to eat and drink to live don't I? Well by golly, then I should also have the right to walk into my local Kroger or Giant and take whatever the hell I want off the shelf without paying for it! I bet if milk was $10.99/gallon the Dems would try to make this a reality too.

If you disagree please, by all means point me to the part of the Constitution which states that I am responsible for taking care of YOU, I am very interested to know...
Click to expand...

the World Health Organization among other international bodies are currently in the process of lobbying to make HEALTHCARE a basic human right. Dude, this isn't the wild west anymore and your slippery slope of raiding Krogers in a bit much. Actually, if you have food stamps you can raid Krogers and grab milk, bread, meat....
 
Jpc984 said:
On a personal note, I have a family friend from Canada, who had to come to the United States in order to get a procedure that he was on a waiting list for in Canada. Is this the best care?
Click to expand...


I totally agree with you. Also, Americans are too impatient (and not to mention undeserving) to deal with some of the consequences of socialized medicine. This is exemplified by the waiting list that people in Canada must be put on in order to have simple tests like CT scans and MRI's, not to mention surgeries. If I understand correctly this waiting list is very long and often takes 6 months for simple diagnostic tests that here in the US you would receive the results for in a week or less. I don't have the right answer, but I think that socialized medicine definitely is the wrong answer.:thumbdown:thumbdown:thumbdown:
 
If you disagree please, by all means point me to the part of the Constitution which states that I am responsible for taking care of YOU, I am very interested to know...[/quote]
I do diagree...its state and fed legislation that says we have a duty, not the Constitution......the Con. is a living document not like some banana republic that changes every year....shall i list the hundreds of laws congress and senate has enacted, the Great Society by Johnson, the New Deal by Roosevelt....hell even income tax when 1917? ......redistribution of wealth is not a new idea

and before calling me a communist please know that i was enlisted for 8 years, as an infantry medic
 
I do respect your position....it is just that I am tired of reading and hearing of the same position over and over. We have a problem, I am not saying socialzed medicine in the solution. However, when I read responses like your I feel like your just a puppet echoing the sentiments of Dad, JAMA or fellow med students.

I voted for Bush in 2000 and have really come around to thinking differently about politics in general.

DredPiratRobrts said:
Yeah, exactally.



Ethics? Is it ethical to provide a terrible system of universal healthcare at a crippling tax rate? Is wealth redistribution ethical? Why should someone who is succesful be taxed at a 40% tax rate or greater when they use the same resources as others?

Its not ethical to require everyone* to pay into a system that provides substandard care.

*and by everyone I of course mean that the "wealthy" (and yes, doctors are considered wealthy by the IRS and US Govt...if you make $200,000 or more you're in the top 3% of national household incomes) will foot the vast uneven majority of the bill.

Wow, that smacks of fairness.

I'm all for helping people and extending the arm of healthcare to as many people as possible. I'm compassionate and truly do care about my fellow man, but I also believe that the answer does not lie in a socialized system. Just b/c I disagree with legislative redistribution of wealth and a socialized "universal" system I'm somehow "unethical" and lack compassion.

Maybe you need to consult new sources for your "ethics" sounds like you're pulling lessons from Marx.
Click to expand...
 
walrustooth said:
and before calling me a communist please know that i was enlisted for 8 years, as an infantry medic
Click to expand...

I'm not calling you a communist (if anything I would say socialist...), just that your points of view (in above posts) do smack of socialism.
How does military service exclude you from being labeled as a socialist?

Thanks very much for your years of service, but it has nothing to do with what you're saying.

You're not saying socialized medicine is the solution? Most of your posts above would suggest you feel otherwise....
 
saylorsdad said:
A two tiered system essentially, but better than what we currently have.
Click to expand...

Have you seen how this is working in Britain right now in regards to the two-tiered dentistry system? Essentially, dentists aren't bound by the government to serve as contracted state employees; simply put, they can decide at any time they don't want to work for the government anymore and open up a cash-only practice at any time. If ever the US went with a two-tiered system, this would be the most likely way it would happen; physicians have done an awful job at protecting themselves the past couple of decades, but hopefully they'd never let themselves become forced contracually to work for Uncle Sam.

Anyway, due to the dentists' ability to leave the government at any time, many of them are doing just that; opening up shop elsewhere out of frustration with the system. So now you have less dentists for the hoardes of average Brits who want their teeth looked at. There's been big news stories lately about how patients are ripping their teeth out at home because they can't wait anymore.

I don't see how it would be much better if something like this was implemented for medicine in the US. I don't have the right answer for how to fix healthcare, and I don't think anyone in this thread does. If there was such a hard and fast answer for what was "right," it wouldn't be such a big debate right now.

walrustooth said:
all smoke and mirrors used to distract the public from the fact that this is all about PHYSICIAN INCOME.
Click to expand...

I'll agree with that; humans in general are often severely motivated by their lust for wealth. Anyone who denies that a sizeable percentage of inspiration by physicians to keep the system from becoming more universal is due to making sure they continue to make good money is either naive or lying to themselves.
 
Many people here including myself have served in the military, USMC infantry for me.

I personally know of physicans that take public health insurance as the majority of their patients. They are doing quite well financially. Other doctors often make remarks that they need to take more cash and private insurance patients, still they take the public health insurance patients. Why? after asking them their remarks are, service to patients, and the government pays. Yes read the last sentence if you didn't before, private insurance companies often deny payment for a previously authorized surgery. The government doesn't do this, they pay their bills. So who would I rather work for? I think I'll take those who pay rather than those who do not.

Oh yeah our economy is crap right now due to the war in iraq, not health insurance. Look at the numbers.
 
DredPiratRobrts said:
I'm not calling you a communist (if anything I would say socialist...), just that your points of view (in above posts) do smack of socialism.
How does military service exclude you from being labeled as a socialist?

Thanks very much for your years of service, but it has nothing to do with what you're saying.

You're not saying socialized medicine is the solution? Most of your posts above would suggest you feel otherwise....
Click to expand...

Some of our biggest socialists in office served in the military. Look at John Kerry. True, socialism hurts, but I think what's worse than that is globalism. That's sure to kill all of us.
 
LeemerDO said:
Some of our biggest socialists in office served in the military. Look at John Kerry. True, socialism hurts, but I think what's worse than that is globalism. That's sure to kill all of us.
Click to expand...

Ha, agreed. Personally, I would prefer neither socialism nor globalism. It's great how this cycle works...the US is becoming more socialist and parts of Europe (France) are watching Reaganomics work for them.
 
After reading this thread, I am so glad that you people are applying to DO schools, as there is no way that you guys are smart enough to be real doctors.
 
limpkitty said:
After reading this thread, I am so glad that you people are applying to DO schools, as there is no way that you guys are smart enough to be real doctors.
Click to expand...

Ahahaha, pwned. Enjoy the infraction.
 
limpkitty said:
After reading this thread, I am so glad that you people are applying to DO schools, as there is no way that you guys are smart enough to be real doctors.
Click to expand...

well, I'm waiting for your solution....what's your profound solution limppussy or whatever your name is.

At least we making our opinions known, unlike you.
 
Lets get away from calling people socialists, and communists. People have asked a legitimate question, and raised an important issue that is being asked around the nation in medical school interviews. How do we respond to a person from an admissions committiee when they ask how we feel? Will you call them communist for bringing the issue up? What if they support the issue, will you call them a communist and storm out of the room?

Now what if we look at the big picture, we pay taxes fact of life. What if we could make the existing system cover everyone would that be bad? Also if we could develop an existing system that cost x dollars a month that most people already pay for insurance would that be bad? My answer is no to both questions it would not be bad. Call me a socialist if I support a program that my insurance dollars that I already pay "yes I do pay for my insurance" will get me more coverage.
 
yes I think the improvements listed would indeed be an improvement.

Getting enough support to pass these bills is another beast all together. Remember the majority are in the middle class so if you improve upon healthcare you need to include them so you can get more support.
 
walrustooth said:
If you disagree please, by all means point me to the part of the Constitution which states that I am responsible for taking care of YOU, I am very interested to know...
Click to expand...

I do diagree...its state and fed legislation that says we have a duty, not the Constitution......the Con. is a living document not like some banana republic that changes every year....shall i list the hundreds of laws congress and senate has enacted, the Great Society by Johnson, the New Deal by Roosevelt....hell even income tax when 1917? ......redistribution of wealth is not a new idea

and before calling me a communist please know that i was enlisted for 8 years, as an infantry medic[/QUOTE]

All laws are supposed to be based on the rights given to the government by the constitution, and with the exception of the income tax, none of the above laws are actually justified by it. The "living breathing document" applies to the right to ammend the consitution, which is not the same as ignoring it. The 10th amendment states that ALL rights not EXPLICITLY given to the federal government go to the states or the people. Thus, we might argue that a state would have a legal leg for wealth redistribution, but the feds just invented the right for themselves.

Roosevelt oversaw the worst depression in history.
Johnson and Subsequently Carter oversaw the second worst.
Not exactly perfect role models.
 
Jpc984 said:
You bring up a big point about tort reform. Lawyers make physicians run stupid expensive tests that may not be necessary for the patient. Lawyers think just because it "is in the book" it should be done. Unfortunately, patients aren't the "textbook" cases and need to be looked at individually.
Click to expand...



Many states already have some type of tort reform already and guess what? It hasn't done jack sh^t at reducing health care costs, so try again. Please explain to me how tort reform would save money when insurance companies could just keep charging the same amount for insurance premiums and could pay out less in lawsuits because of tort reform. Tort reform helps out the insurance companies the most, not physicians or patients.


Jpc984 said:
I don't wan't to die on a waiting list.
Click to expand...


Really? Then move to Japan.

Why is it that when people point to socialized medicine and wait lists they only talk about England and Canada? Why do you all ignore the fact that places with socialized medicine like Japan have virtually the same amount of waiting times as people do in the US for health care? Don't believe me? See page 3 of a report by the OECD.

http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/5/27/26781192.pdf


Japanese only spend 6.6% of their GDP on health care (as opposed to 15% like US), have universal coverage, and receive prompt treatment like we do here in the US, and pay about the same in income tax as Americans, which is why the Japanese system of health care is one of the best in the world. There are MANY MANY countries with some form of socialized medicine, some with better forms of socialized medicine than others. If you are going to use the typical wait list scare tactic you better be sure it holds true for every country with socialized care.
 
We must look at the underlying reasons why Japan's socialized medical system works. This is not a one dimensional problem nor solution. Japan's citizens, overall, have better diets and general health than American's do. Which translates into the data you see. However, I think you point out another reason why healthcare in America is failing, which has not been talked about at all - horrible nutrition, lack of excercise, quick fix diets, gastric bypass surgery, genetic excuses, etc... all plague too many of our ever fatter, less healthy, disease ridden citizens. Obviously, the private sector has failed miserably at maintaining balance for the sake of our nutrional health. So, if anything is destroying our system, it is our increasing inability to just take care of ourselves. Dump money into reinventing the American diet, I say - more does not mean better (costco, big gulps,... on and on and on). We cannot possibly support a system, private or socialized, where our overall lack of health and population are BOTH exponentially increasing!
 
Talk about how americans live unhealthy lifestyles sounds good and is attractive at face value, but doesn't hold up so well on closer inspection.

Japan has higher smoking rates than we do, most people work more and have very high levels of stress, and its mental illness rates are much higher. Every country has their own specific health problems. So yes, Japan can and should be compared to America; we can learn a great deal from one another.

Another thing; I don't get why people bitch about physician's salaries. The amount of money that doctors take home is a small amount of total expenditures and pales in comparison to that of executives in the health insurance and pharmaceutical corporations. Yes, doctors make more in this country than others, but they also work more, work harder, and are, generally, better trained and more educated. In short, they deserve high pay.

For the record, however, none of the democratic presidential candidates proposals (and this includes Dennis Kuchinich who wants to take us to a singer-payer, medicare-for-all system) entails reduced payments for doctors. The same cannot be said for the Republicans who'd rather line the pockets of the corporations.
 
witioni said:
We must look at the underlying reasons why Japan's socialized medical system works. This is not a one dimensional problem nor solution. Japan's citizens, overall, have better diets and general health than American's do. Which translates into the data you see. However, I think you point out another reason why healthcare in America is failing, which has not been talked about at all - horrible nutrition, lack of excercise, quick fix diets, gastric bypass surgery, genetic excuses, etc... all plague too many of our ever fatter, less healthy, disease ridden citizens. Obviously, the private sector has failed miserably at maintaining balance for the sake of our nutrional health. So, if anything is destroying our system, it is our increasing inability to just take care of ourselves. Dump money into reinventing the American diet, I say - more does not mean better (costco, big gulps,... on and on and on). We cannot possibly support a system, private or socialized, where our overall lack of health and population are BOTH exponentially increasing!
Click to expand...



Of course better diets etc. play into the reason why Japanese are healthier, but so does the fact that they have a much better and much more efficient system of health care than the United States. Everything from poor diets and exercise to the ****ty health care system in the US play a role in Americans' health. But you can't sit there and honestly say with a straight face that the reason Japan comparatively spends almost 9% less in GDP income than we do on health care is only because of a better diet. That is a ridiculous claim for which I would love to see hard data support from a quality source.

Tell me, what is the #1 leading cause of preventable death in the world? No, it isn't obesity. It is still smoking. And in this regards Americans actually do quite well. In Japan something like 60% of all adult males smoke while in America it is something only like 25% for men (if I remember correctly off the top of my head). So why is it that Japanese males have better overall health than American males if they smoke a hell of a lot more? Lifestyle certainly plays a role in health, no one is denying that, but if you are going to pin the vast majority of this nation's health care problems on lifestyle choices alone you are gravely mistaken and overlooking the fact that the American health care system is one of the most inefficient, wasteful, and poorly run health care systems in the world. And a lot of it has to do with bureaucratic insurance company BS.
 
Well, speaking as someone who lived in Japan, I can say better doctors and a better health care system plays a very small part for why the Japanese are healthier overall, but fewer cases and overall visits could play AT LEAST a part if not more in why their system is not overburdened. I am only posing this out of curiousity, which is supposed to be the cornerstone of our profession, and not to deny how terribly inefficient we are here. Do you know off hand how many patients and types of cases on average Japan deals with compared to America? If their system were flooded with increasing health problems and an expanding population (theirs is shrinking) would they start running into problems too? On a side note, for the earlier statment, it's a misconception and cultural stereotype that the Japanese suffer from more psychological diseases than we do. I have seen statistics and surprisingly Japan's level of disorders is of comparable levels to the United States or any other industrialized nation. It's kind of like the notion that suicides are more common in winter when in fact spring and summer are the most common seasons for suicides to occur. Besides, look at all the prozac we pop. Which goes to show how superficial psychological medicine in America still remains. On the other hand, I have also seen the cancer/heartrelated-disease rates for both countries and America blows Japan out of the water (to use the phrase lightly). And both of these ailments are expensive and long term problems. SO yes, I can pose my notion as a possible legitimate reason amongst a few (lack of coverage, lack of doctors, increased population, worse health) for why health care in America is bogged down and could still remain despite a more efficient system. I am only adding this as another issue to address in reforming healthcare in America, along with the payment system. I raise these points because the main problems, even with a more efficient system, will always be farther down the line. Where do we go if our population increases, our overall health gets worse, and we have fewer and fewer doctors to compensate with the demand? Sure everyone will have coverage but will everyone be able to see a doctor when they need to? I'm not saying we should stick with this system when it sucks, but at least address the issues that will come up with any alternative system, because there will ALWAYS be issues and to speak of anything with only positives sounds naive to me. So, will a socialized system hold up with demand? What other problems might come up with a socialized system? Will there still be inequalities of health care because I'm sure some hospitals will be better than others. Will people start flooding those hospitals? Would it be fair to say they can't? This is a debate isn't it? We are supposed to talk about socialized medicine. Not just about whether we can do it? OF COURSE we can do it but how will we make it work? I would like to think we will become the leaders of healthcare in America someday and how are we ever going to come up solutions if we don't take in all considerations. I don't know about you guys but I would like to create a system that doesn't just mirror another country's system, but vastly improves upon it.
 
novawildcat said:
Of course better diets etc. play into the reason why Japanese are healthier, but so does the fact that they have a much better and much more efficient system of health care than the United States. Everything from poor diets and exercise to the ****ty health care system in the US play a role in Americans' health. But you can't sit there and honestly say with a straight face that the reason Japan comparatively spends almost 9% less in GDP income than we do on health care is only because of a better diet. That is a ridiculous claim for which I would love to see hard data support from a quality source.

Tell me, what is the #1 leading cause of preventable death in the world? No, it isn't obesity. It is still smoking. And in this regards Americans actually do quite well. In Japan something like 60% of all adult males smoke while in America it is something only like 25% for men (if I remember correctly off the top of my head). So why is it that Japanese males have better overall health than American males if they smoke a hell of a lot more? Lifestyle certainly plays a role in health, no one is denying that, but if you are going to pin the vast majority of this nation's health care problems on lifestyle choices alone you are gravely mistaken and overlooking the fact that the American health care system is one of the most inefficient, wasteful, and poorly run health care systems in the world. And a lot of it has to do with bureaucratic insurance company BS.
Click to expand...

you need to look and consider the lag time it takes to develop illness from smoking, such as lung cancer. Men in the US started smoking more after the war (when they were given rations of cigs) brought them home, etc. Smoking rates have declined, but the amount of time it takes to build the illness is longer from onset. Look at the curve for cig consumption start dates and lung cancer in women, it is similiar to men and creeping up. It has happened later though, because women in general started smoking later in the US. Likewise, in other nations where consumption in large masses began at a later date than in the US, expect it to one day reach that peak.
 
DredPiratRobrts said:
In reality, most people can afford healthcare. I know people who work part time (10 hrs per week minimum) in retail shops at the mall who have excellent healthcare for less than 40 dollars a month!

Healthcare and the insurance problem needs to be reformed, but to socialize medicine would be disastrous, there are better ways to get healthcare to more people. If people really want to universalize healthcare I think it should be a state issue, that way when it completely fails it will be limited to whichever state adopts it (California) and the rest of the country will be able to see how bad of an idea it really was.
Click to expand...

No way Jose!

Take a student working in a mall for $9 bucks an hour (before taxes). That's $7/hr take home. Subtract $40 (approximate estimate) for health insurance.

Now, ADD the $250 or $500 annual deductible.

ADD the $15 copay to Primary Care Doc

$25 to a Specialist

Prescription copay $10 or $15

And don't forget that some practices aren't 100% coverered (x-rays, CT scans, Sonograms, UltraSounds). Usually at the UCR and the patient pays a copay surcharge ON TOP of the annual deductible.
 
What would physicians’ salaries look like under a socialized medical system in the United States? From what I understand, a doctor is literally a government employee under a socialized medical system. Doctors are paid just like any other government employee, on salary. According to Payscale.com Canadian neurosurgeons in Toronto are averaging an annual salary of $138,000 to $165,000 with bonuses ranging from $5,000 to $20,000. This doesn’t seem right?</SPAN>
 
wallypredoc said:
What would physicians’ salaries look like under a socialized medical system in the United States? From what I understand, a doctor is literally a government employee under a socialized medical system. Doctors are paid just like any other government employee, on salary. According to Payscale.com Canadian neurosurgeons in Toronto are averaging an annual salary of $138,000 to $165,000 with bonuses ranging from $5,000 to $20,000. This doesn’t seem right?</SPAN>
Click to expand...
I wonder about the methodology that payscale.com uses to calculate that average. Some people on these boards from cananda have said that specialists make less than they do here, but not by much.

But Cananda's system is not socialized, the doctors are not governmental employees, and nobody in this country is seriously proposing a socialized system. People on the left are proposing a single-payer system
 
In every other first world country, doctors make about half of what they make in the U.S.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Next unread thread

Similar threads

H
Socialized Medicine
2
Replies
56
Views
5K
doctalaughs
D
9
  • Locked
  • Poll
Survey of intergenerational opinions on socialized medicine/single payer/'medicare for all'
2 3 4
Replies
151
Views
10K
gyngyn
gyngyn
C
Technology social media help!
Replies
0
Views
2K
coast22
C
P
Salaries in Medicine
Replies
41
Views
8K
dpmd
dpmd
wut?
Racial bias in medicine is frightening.
2
Replies
52
Views
4K
siliso
S
Top