1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

    Any content, information, or advice found on social media platforms and the wider Internet, including forums such as AP, should NOT be acted upon unless checked against a reliable, authoritative source, and re-checked, particularly where personal health is at stake. Seek professional advice/confirmation before acting on such at all times.

Trump under fire:

Discussion in 'The Lounge' started by miked, Jul 23, 2020.

  1. Jeff Farkas

    Jeff Farkas Well-Known Member

    There are lots of things that add to costs of health care. What we need in the US is tort reform to cut down on the size of verdicts in legal cases. Right now they're driving the cost of medical malpractice ins up and that adds to the overall cost of health care
  2. Terrywoodenpic

    Terrywoodenpic Well-Known Member

    Over all you are already paying more than you need for an health service that ony partially covers your national needs. every part of your health system takes out far more than it puts in. You could use any of the European health service models and save money. And have a far better universal service for everyone, and save money.
    Your extra 3.6 trillion is a fiction... it is based on your present system.

    When the UK health service was formed Doctors like my father became contractors to it . The cottage hospitals that they owned were bought by the state.
    They stopped being medical retailers, and became full time doctors. People said it could not be done... but it was a gigantic success.
    It was paid for largely by national insurance contributions backed up by general taxation.
    Even today it costs a fraction of the American system.

    Unlike individual doctors its purchasing power matched that of the Drugs industry and it could buy on the world market, keeping costs down.

    What is not to like.
    steveandthedogs likes this.
  3. GeoffR

    GeoffR Well-Known Member

    That would do it!
    Jeff Farkas likes this.
  4. Jeff Farkas

    Jeff Farkas Well-Known Member

    Well.. I don't like it and II know it's not going to become law in the US
  5. Jeff Farkas

    Jeff Farkas Well-Known Member

    It's a start. There are lots of costs that need to be looked into and cut.
  6. Terrywoodenpic

    Terrywoodenpic Well-Known Member

    That is a very arse about face way of looking at it.
    It would seem that the more obvious cost saving would be to cut down on medical malpractice.

    And at the same time revise what is and what is not medical malpractice. just because a procedure turns out badly for a patient does not mean any malpractice occurred. Often it is misfortune or there was nothing that could have changed the situation.

    But America has a very strongly developed blame culture. that needs sorting out.
    Danno likes this.
  7. Terrywoodenpic

    Terrywoodenpic Well-Known Member

    And so.... why don't you like it?
    Is it to do with self interest?
    Or vested interests?

    Or are you scared that someone might just get something for nothing...
    If it gives you and your fellow Americans a better service for far less money why would you care.?
  8. GeoffR

    GeoffR Well-Known Member

    There are things to like about hospitals in the USA, but the cost of using them isn't one of those things. Not having to justify the cost of providing the most appropriate care does free practitioners to do the best job they can. The reverse of what we have, here the user has no concern about the cost and gets the most they can. Somewhere in between would be ideal.
    Jeff Farkas likes this.
  9. Jeff Farkas

    Jeff Farkas Well-Known Member

    Overall we are a very litigious nation and people sue at the drop of hat. Add in the number of lawyers in the US there's always someone looking to make a buck. Better Dr's might help but I doubt it. As long as people sue we need to cut the settlement amounts.
  10. Jeff Farkas

    Jeff Farkas Well-Known Member

    First off I don't want to be taxed to death. Second, I know it's not going into law. I have no self interest in this. What I don't like is gov or anyone telling me what to do and many others feel the way I do.
  11. Footloose

    Footloose Well-Known Member

    I would hazard a guess that some of the countries that later on introduced healthcare systems similar to that used in the UK, looked carefully at how ours operated and overcame some of the failings they discovered.

    It's possible that the UK government could have later on looked at the improvements those other countries made and then modified the UK's, but did the smugness of being the 'first', get in the way or delay/prevent these improvements being implemented? There are better systems around and possibly things over here moved slower than they might have done, because of the economic ups and downs the UK also had to contend with?

    Some of the other posters on this thread have (more or less) said that people in the US (probably those who CAN afford to pay) don't like/want to pay for something they are not using, regardless of the likelihood that an NHS-type system, could well end up costing them less because most medical insurance companies need to show a profit to their shareholders?

    You also have other services in the US, such as drug stores/pharmacies etc, which are making much bigger profits from what they sell, than is the case in countries that have health services which operate in a similar manner to that of the NHS.
  12. GeoffR

    GeoffR Well-Known Member

    In both the USA and the UK there is an expectation that somebody must be to blame and they, or their insurer, should pay. If we all acknowledged that there are risks to living and sometimes there is/was nothing that could have affected the outcome of a situation we might be able to reduce the cost of insurance and thus the cost of health care etc. As long as people want to blame somebody everybody has to pay. As was said earlier, nothing is free.
  13. John King

    John King Well-Known Member

    It occurred to me that as the USA does not have anything like the NHS, so how do those who fall ill with the virus, and do not have any medical insurance get treated in hospital? They must get some treatment surely or that would put the whole population at risk - never mind Trumpington's seemingly attitude of ignoring the the victims.
  14. Jeff Farkas

    Jeff Farkas Well-Known Member

    In the US no one can be turned away from a hospital that needs treatment. It's in the law.
  15. Terrywoodenpic

    Terrywoodenpic Well-Known Member

    Why not Limit what they can sue about. and put a realistic value on their loss?

    Our doctors pay insurance too out of their Salary. but it is done on a service wide basis, My son in law pays many thousands of £ a year for it, and he is a GP.
    On the other hand I do not think he has ever been successfully sued by a patient. Many things simply can not be sued for here, and that can include procedures by Private doctors and hospitals. The tariff is usually decided by the Judge following a standard set of standards.
    Mostly patients sign away liability for medical procedures, but if gross misconduct or serious errors occur then sue you can.
  16. Jeff Farkas

    Jeff Farkas Well-Known Member

    The bottom line is the US needs a much better system to administer health care and make sure people who need it get it. No one should have to go without it. Too many have to go without dental care, for example, and there aren't enough charities to cope with the need.

    In principle I have nothing against a single payer and it would be a good thing but to get there from what we have in the US will take a long time and a lot of hard work. What I would want is a step by step process that we can use/take to get there. The all at one time approach is just not going to get passed our Congress.

    Political realities sometimes override the needs of the people. We often vote against our own best interests.
  17. Terrywoodenpic

    Terrywoodenpic Well-Known Member

    However that only covers emergency procedures and the like, and money is still recoverable and where possible paid upfront.

    Here, everything is covered by the health service with out time or cash limit. we pay for it by taxation and national insurance, we have to pay for nothing else in Hospital. We pay a standard per item fee for prescriptions, not the cost of the medication. ( in hospital all medication is free)

    From what I see, taxation is mostly higher in the USA than here.
    The Government does not tell me what to do. It simply offers me Health services when I need them. It does not even want me to hand over my American express card at the hospital check in.

    Americans who live and work over here seem to love the service, if they are Tax payers it is free for them too. If they have private health cover they can have that as well. no one is forcing anyone. Though if it is something serious they would be well advised to use the health service. They generally have the specialist skills and facilities that private hospitals do not.
  18. AGW

    AGW Well-Known Member

    We have not paid for prescriptions for years....

  19. Jim Hughes

    Jim Hughes New Member

    I'm in the U.S. The original post, about a video from the Lincoln Project, highlights the growing feeling that many Republicans are now ready to put Trump over the side and concentrate on holding the Senate.

    Trump at this point is totally focused on getting re-elected, and anything he does or says should be seen in that light. I think in normal year he'd be quite capable of launching some crazy military action to push up his poll numbers; but the virus situation actually makes that very difficult, as I'm sure the military leaders have made clear to him.
    Jeff Farkas likes this.
  20. Derek W

    Derek W Well-Known Member

    Reading this thread just brings sadness to me

    My uncle moved the the US when he was 20, he eventually became a US citizen, had set up his own architects business and was earning good money

    My uncle however had dwarfism and had to have multiple surgeries over the years on his back etc. and had multiple drugs he needed to take.

    Roll on to 2012 and my uncle is now 65, he calls me here in the UK and ends up in tears as his health care costs are spiralling, 70% of his total monthly income and climbing, and he doesn't know how he is going to afford those costs going forward.

    One of the things he said in that phone call to me was that he wished that they had something resembling the NHS in the states.

    Two days later I get a call from another relative to say my uncle had committed suicide, he had shot himself.
    Terrywoodenpic likes this.

Share This Page