Healthcare Minorities rule
By minorties I do not mean black, hispanic or any of what are generally called minorties.
According to the government figures, 17% of americans do not have healthcare coverage. So, think about that for a moment, we, through our elected officials, are moving toward a trillion dollar increase in heathcare costs to offer coverage to that 17% of our population.
68% of those not covered are working where 99% (in large corporations) and 59% (in small companies) are offered coverage but have declined to join. Even if we say the percentage of workers offered but not electing coverage is 50% that means we are really going into debt for less than 9% of our population. Am I the only one who sees this or am I so out in left field that I do not understand what is being offered, the real cost and who is going to be covered?
I haven't really studied the healthcare bill as thouroughly as I should because I have a strong predjudice against government provided healthcare. This stems from two experiences and one observation.
My first experience was in Italy when I visited someone who had just had a baby. I went to the wrong hospital which was government run as in many Euroean countries. It was ghastly! People in the halls, many with what looked like very serious injuries, people lined up who were given a few pills and sent on their way. It was dirty with trash lying around in corners and overflowing from the trash cans. I could not believe what I was seeing. When I could not find my friend's wife I kept asking and discovered there was a private hospital nearby. I went there and the hospoital was just like what we have here in the U.S. Private and semi-private rooms with nurses attending. It was clean and orderly. My friens told me that anyone who could afford it used the private hospital because the government run hospital was so bad.
My second experience is ongoing. When I was covered by regular corporate healthcare the doctors and hospitals listened to my symptoms, asked additional questions and after a few applicable tests, offered a diagnosis and treatment. Now that I am on Medicare, the doctors do not seem that interested in working out a sensible diagnosis through questions and answers and quite frankly are somewhat patronizing to me. They jump into many broad and unecessary tests for everything they can justify through Medicare. Sure it might make me feel good that when I go with any symptoms I get a CAT scan, an MRI, an EKG, a Stress Test and every other acronym test available and am found to be relatively sound. And at least for the last two visits the tests eventually concluded that what I suggested might be the problem was indeed the problem. Somebody is paying for this. Oh, yeah - it's me and you.
Now the observation, and I admit this is a second hand based upon a report from about five years ago and some answers provided by friends and associates in Minnesota, Montana and North Dakota. The observation is that most of the hospitale within driving distance of our northern border is hosting Canadian patients for other than casual treatment. This is because the treatment and care is better than what is available at most hospitals in Canada.
I have been told that drugs are available at lower cost because of goverment sponsored plans for producing them but I have not checked this so I am repeating something that may not be true. This may be the case with the hospital stays as well because I did not check the accuracy of the report.
The observation is not the real target of this post. What is the target is that we as a country are going into debt that we cannot imagine for nine percent of our population.
But then it is popular and sure sounds better than to say, "I am against healthcare".
According to the government figures, 17% of americans do not have healthcare coverage. So, think about that for a moment, we, through our elected officials, are moving toward a trillion dollar increase in heathcare costs to offer coverage to that 17% of our population.
68% of those not covered are working where 99% (in large corporations) and 59% (in small companies) are offered coverage but have declined to join. Even if we say the percentage of workers offered but not electing coverage is 50% that means we are really going into debt for less than 9% of our population. Am I the only one who sees this or am I so out in left field that I do not understand what is being offered, the real cost and who is going to be covered?
I haven't really studied the healthcare bill as thouroughly as I should because I have a strong predjudice against government provided healthcare. This stems from two experiences and one observation.
My first experience was in Italy when I visited someone who had just had a baby. I went to the wrong hospital which was government run as in many Euroean countries. It was ghastly! People in the halls, many with what looked like very serious injuries, people lined up who were given a few pills and sent on their way. It was dirty with trash lying around in corners and overflowing from the trash cans. I could not believe what I was seeing. When I could not find my friend's wife I kept asking and discovered there was a private hospital nearby. I went there and the hospoital was just like what we have here in the U.S. Private and semi-private rooms with nurses attending. It was clean and orderly. My friens told me that anyone who could afford it used the private hospital because the government run hospital was so bad.
My second experience is ongoing. When I was covered by regular corporate healthcare the doctors and hospitals listened to my symptoms, asked additional questions and after a few applicable tests, offered a diagnosis and treatment. Now that I am on Medicare, the doctors do not seem that interested in working out a sensible diagnosis through questions and answers and quite frankly are somewhat patronizing to me. They jump into many broad and unecessary tests for everything they can justify through Medicare. Sure it might make me feel good that when I go with any symptoms I get a CAT scan, an MRI, an EKG, a Stress Test and every other acronym test available and am found to be relatively sound. And at least for the last two visits the tests eventually concluded that what I suggested might be the problem was indeed the problem. Somebody is paying for this. Oh, yeah - it's me and you.
Now the observation, and I admit this is a second hand based upon a report from about five years ago and some answers provided by friends and associates in Minnesota, Montana and North Dakota. The observation is that most of the hospitale within driving distance of our northern border is hosting Canadian patients for other than casual treatment. This is because the treatment and care is better than what is available at most hospitals in Canada.
I have been told that drugs are available at lower cost because of goverment sponsored plans for producing them but I have not checked this so I am repeating something that may not be true. This may be the case with the hospital stays as well because I did not check the accuracy of the report.
The observation is not the real target of this post. What is the target is that we as a country are going into debt that we cannot imagine for nine percent of our population.
But then it is popular and sure sounds better than to say, "I am against healthcare".