The Truth About Obamacare

[eyeball]

How does one completely ignore a doctor's advice if one is put on a wait list to see the doctor because said doctor doesn't like the patient's attitude?

One person made a comment that a doctor put a patient on a wait list because the doctor didn't like his attitude and I responded to it. So did you. More than once.

If it's true that doctors can put a patient on a wait list in Canada because of their attitude, that is something I consider important to discuss - and I will discuss it, same as you and eyeball did.

There are signs posted in my hospital that clearly let people know this is a care facility that does not tolerate disturbances from patients who are rude or abusive and that security staff will be called to have you removed if you misbehave.

[Guest Derek L]

Doctors and clinics are almost all private. They only accept payment from the provincial insurers though. They can choose to only take money from patients though. They won't be paid by the provinces then because doctors were double dipping in the past

Or a Visa........

http://www.falsecreekhealthcare.com/

[cybercoma]

Did you even read what I wrote? Doctors can charge patients directly or the provincial payer systems, but not both. It's one or the other.

[bush_cheney2004]

Did you even read what I wrote? Doctors can charge patients directly or the provincial payer systems, but not both. It's one or the other.

What about goats ? Can they take goats in payment ? Some cultures settle debts this way.

[Guest Derek L]

Did you even read what I wrote? Doctors can charge patients directly or the provincial payer systems, but not both. It's one or the other.

Yes, I know........I never said different

When my wife injured herself we went to Emergency = "Free Healthcare"

Then went to our GP = "Free Healthcare"

Then went to a Specialist several times = "Free Healthcare"

Then went to Physiotherapy = Partially subsidised and partially covered through our own extended health insurance

Then back to the GP and Specialist and told would require surgery, but would have to wait till next year = "Free Healthcare"

Then went to False Creek Healthcare center and got a date for surgery within two weeks = paid with Visa and received double Airmiles

[waldo]

You know, being the US Politics forum, perhaps we should be talking about US policies instead of constantly getting derailed by trolls that want to talk about Canadian politics in the US politics forum.

it's the standard routine! It doesn't matter that you can show them how bad their overall healthcare capability/delivery is as ranked globally or against, in particular, OECD countries. It doesn't matter that you can show them their claimed country spends more... and gets less... it doesn't matter to them, it doesn't register. So, they troll!

[waldo]

Then went to False Creek Healthcare center and got a date for surgery within two weeks = paid with Visa and received double Airmiles

although your 'wait to next year' is unclear/self-serving, in evaluating your anecdotal reference, one can surmise the public evaluation determined there was no immediacy to need.

[waldo]

but it's not ok for Americans to respond to the posts about Canada.That makes them trolls.

your continued response is to deflect/distract away from anything that negatively critiques your claimed country's healthcare system... it's a deflection/distraction routine that relies on shifting the discussion back to Canada while presuming to make relative comparisons back to the U.S.... relative comparisons that aren't... relative.

[cybercoma]

it's the standard routine! It doesn't matter that you can show them how bad their overall healthcare capability/delivery is as ranked globally or against, in particular, OECD countries. It doesn't matter that you can show them their claimed country spends more... and gets less... it doesn't matter to them, it doesn't register. So, they troll!

it's really quite sad that one of the wealthiest countries in the OECD doesn't even have close to the top health metrics Edited October 27, 2013 by cybercoma

[On Guard for Thee]

Truth about here in Canada is we've had "Obamacare" since around mid 1960's.And we're nowhere near bankrupt like the Tea Party suggests we should be. And while after even all those years it's not perfect, but all in all I bet the majority of Canadians would stand at teh border with an axe to defend it.

[Guest American Woman]

There are signs posted in my hospital that clearly let people know this is a care facility that does not tolerate disturbances from patients who are rude or abusive and that security staff will be called to have you removed if you misbehave.

So apparently it's a problem in Canada since there is a need for such signs to be posted. I wonder why? - Since they're all getting such great, already paid for, timely care (and Canadians being so polite). Puzzling, eh?

At any rate, that's hardly the same as putting someone on the bottom of a wait list because the doctor didn't like their attitude. I can't believe some of you are defending such a practice.

[waldo]

At any rate, that's hardly the same as putting someone on the bottom of a wait list because the doctor didn't like their attitude. I can't believe some of you are defending such a practice.

Because the confirmation bias is so strong that even a joke about Shady's attitude is taken as evidence of being correct?

truly pathetic. She knew it was a joke... but as is her way... she proceeded to treat it as a delineating criteria point on healthcare provision. Of course, as was pointed out, it's simply a deflecting distraction to avoid addressing how pre-existing conditions are treated by U.S. insurance companies (pre ACA).

[Argus]

And our system is brainless. Hopefully each will correct for its inadequacies.

Our system - and please understand that I am not a big fan of our system - covers 100% of the population with no limits whatever on coverage amounts. Yes, there are waits, sometimes unconscionable waits for certain specialized services, but on the whole, it's not a bad system. It's just not as good as the systems in Europe.

The American system is a mishmash of public private which is tremendously expensive compared to anything else in the world, yet does not produce better health results. It has far higher administration costs, leaves a very large number of people unprotected, and another even larger amount of people under-protected. It's a system which will, in many cases, stop paying for your cancer care or heart care after you've gone over a certain dollar amount of medical usage. Private health insurers, evidence has shown, will do everything they possibly can to kick you out and not pay for your treatment, using every underhanded, unethical trick in the book. If they could get away with invisible ink on the contracts they'd do so. By any conservative viewpoint it's grossly inefficient and overpriced given the overall results it delivers.

The problem is, like in Canada, it has become a political discussion, not a cost effectiveness discussion. Thus your support for the status quo pre ACC is based not on any real assessment of failings of the US health care system but simply because Republicans take that position.

Edited October 27, 2013 by Argus

[Argus]

True, and the larger point is that Obamacare (ACA) may have an impact on organ and tissue donation

That is not a larger point, that is a completely unsubstantiated suggestion apparently designed to sidetrack the discussion.

[Argus]

Obamacare does things we wouldn't and don't do in Canada. Our system allows for provinces to make our health care decisions. Each province decides what type of coverage to provide. For instance, some provinces cover prescription drugs. Some don't. Some cover eye examinations, some don't. Etc, etc. Obamacare uses a one size fits all approach instead of allowing state control their health insurance decisions.

In point of fact our fractured system is one of its main weaknesses. The fact 12 separate governments have to agree on any changes makes changes almost impossible. It's also far too easy for politicians to blame each other when we have one level of government providing the services and another providing most of hte funding. Furthermore, negotiated agreements with equipment and drug providers would allow for greater discounts if we had one massive purchaser rather than twelve. I realize the historical reasons for why health care is under the provinces, but it would make much more sense to centralize it under the federal government. Not only would this be more cost effective but we'd have just one party to blame for things which weren't working.

Obamacare targets everyone, those with health insurance and without. So he essentially lied when he said, "if you like your plan, you can keep it." Hundreds of thousands of people are finding out that that's simply not true.

It is and it isn't. If you have an adequate plan you can keep it. What the government is trying to do is get away with the kinds of plans where you have a low dollar limit on your coverage. You know, the kind where if you suffer a medical disaster the insurance company sends you a letter while you're in the middle of treatment saying you've used up your coverage and are on your own now.

Edited October 27, 2013 by Argus

[Argus]

I do not know a single person in my family, circle of friends or little town in the boonies I've lived in for 45 years who's experience with the medical system has differed from mine. I've not heard of a single case of bankruptcy either.

I have a friend who lives about an hour south of here in a rural area. When she goes to the hospital she usually only waits a few minutes. The last time I went to a hospital ER after pulling a muscle in my back it was 3 in the morning and they said the wait would be about six hours minimum. I went home and went to a clinic in the morning instead. You can easily wait ten hours, and its worse across the river in Gatineau, much worse.

[Argus]

Yes, most of my family and many of my friends live in cities and towns across Canada and not a one of them report anything like what you're imagining.

Not a single one.

The Ontario government posts average wait times for hospital ERs. That web site has been posted a few times during these types of discussion, and the waits are usually between 7-11 hours on average. From discussions with the numerous Quebecers I work with their waits are considerably longer. Those with young children won't even go there, they cross into Ottawa instead.

Edited October 27, 2013 by Argus

[Argus]

Still, and with respect to a single payer system, the patient-doctor relationship may be differently influenced when both doctor and patient know that there are fewer choices and options when the GP is the gatekeeper to "free" health care.

He's not. Whether you have a GP or not you can always go to a clinic and see a doctor for a recommendation to a specialist. Wait times at the clinics I've been to have never been more than thirty minutes or so, though I understand they can be much higher in Gatineau.

[Argus]

Really? Ever wonder why the U.S. is "talked about" so much in the Federal Politics and other forums? This topic actually is impacted by a Canadian IT contractor (CGI Federal), now demoted for bungling the ACA portal. So let it rain Canada up in here.

There were something like 40 IT contracters involved, and they still haven't been able to point to a single point of decision at HHS. Ie, no one was in charge.

One of the issues, as I've heard, is that in order to verify data the system has to contract numerous other systems, among them US government systems like those from Social Security. The problem is not all those other computer systems had been properly prepared for tens of thousands of new requests coming in a relatively short time frame, so froze up. Well, if the ACC system isn't getting an answer/confirmation from SCC then it can't do anything, right?

The testing period was also pushed back repeatedly because of continuing change request made by the government, in part because there seems to have been no central liason or decision maker who could make multiple chage requests at the same time. Instead they just kept coming.

[Shady]

Truth about here in Canada is we've had "Obamacare" since around mid 1960's.And we're nowhere near bankrupt like the Tea Party suggests we should be. And while after even all those years it's not perfect, but all in all I bet the majority of Canadians would stand at teh border with an axe to defend it.

No, we haven't had anything similar to Obamacare. You obviously have absolutely no idea what the legislation in question actually consists of.

[waldo]

No, we haven't had anything similar to Obamacare. You obviously have absolutely no idea what the legislation in question actually consists of.

and you do? Still waiting for you to actually speak to the plan itself... you know, get off your incessant nattering over the website... which will get fixed. It's quite telling that you're so focused on website problems while giving an absolute pass to the GOP for shutting down the U.S. government for over two weeks!

[Wilber]

No, we haven't had anything similar to Obamacare. You obviously have absolutely no idea what the legislation in question actually consists of.

Ah, Shady. If all we did was wish failure on everything that didn't fit our ideology, or was suggested by the wrong group or person, we would still be in the Middle Ages, or worse. I hope the ACA goes ahead and I hope it is successful, not because of ideology or who invented it but because we might learn something that we might use to improve our system. Of course we will have our own ideologues, zealots and plain old anti Americans who will do their best to prevent it, but just maybe.

[Shady]

and you do? Still waiting for you to actually speak to the plan itself... you know, get off your incessant nattering over the website... which will get fixed. It's quite telling that you're so focused on website problems while giving an absolute pass to the GOP for shutting down the U.S. government for over two weeks!

Yes, shutting down 17% of the federal government for a whole two weeks, for very important reasons. Namely debt, and Obamacare.

[dre]

Yes, shutting down 17% of the federal government for a whole two weeks, for very important reasons. Namely debt, and Obamacare.

The government shutdown wont save Americans a dime. In fact it will cost them money.

What WOULD save Americans some money is if congressmen and senators from both parties just resigned or killed themselves... since they dont do anything usefull anyways, and serve no practical purpose.

[Shady]

Ah, Shady. If all we did was wish failure on everything that didn't fit our ideology, or was suggested by the wrong group or person, we would still be in the Middle Ages, or worse. I hope the ACA goes ahead and I hope it is successful, not because of ideology or who invented it but because we might learn something that we might use to improve our system. Of course we will have our own ideologues, zealots and plain old anti Americans who will do their best to prevent it, but just maybe.

It's a terribly designed program, with horrible budget, economic and health care implications. No, I can't wish for that to succeed any more then I could wish for legislation that increases poverty to succeed. Bad law is bad law.