A comparison of US and Canadian healthcare, Using babies! Options

[mipadi]

United States

• Wife with previa placenta, c-section, 9 days hospital - $50k+
• Son 3 weeks immature, 3 weeks in NICU - $140K+

Welcome to American health care. I do have insurance so with that it will be about $20K out of pocket for me. And most importantly my son is now 5 weeks old and thriving.

Canada

I'm a Canadian in Canada, father of two. I created an account specifically after reading the above comment. This isn't a horror story, or even a story of near-disaster, just what happened, but I couldn't help but notice a contrast.

In the last weeks of my wife's first pregnancy, she began experiencing some stomach pain. We went to the hospital, she was checked out with a bevy of tests, discharged, and sent home when she appeared to be doing better. Gas, we all thought. After more pain a few days later, and some discussion with the nurse over the phone, we agreed that this needed to be checked again. My wife was diagnosed with an unusual affliction that can affect pregnant women, and that it was best treated with the baby removed.

They tried to induce labour (to no effect), she was given an epidural, and eventually it was decided that this was best handled with a cesarean. The deed done, all was well. Mom and child #1 stayed in the hospital for a few days, receiving checkups and the assorted 200-point-inspections that newborns seem to need. I brought them home, life was good. A nurse came to our home within a couple of weeks to see if we needed anything. At some point my wife went in to a nursing clinic at the hospital to get help with breastfeeding.

Pregnancy #2 came along a couple of years later. As a consequence of history, there were a couple of extra appointments with the obstetrician, an extra ultrasound (I think)...and about three weeks before the due date, my wife started getting pains again. The ob's general take was "let's not mess around - let's just go with the cesarean...how 'bout this weekend?" Another surgery, another stay of a few days.

I paid for parking. I paid to get some photos of the ultrasound in a cutesy envelope, and I paid something like $10 or $15 so my wife would have a phone in the hospital room. I never saw a bill. I don't know how much all this cost. I'd never think this is all that remarkable except that I keep hearing that it is.

I don't really know what things are like in the U.S. I hear horror stories, of course, but I've learned not to trust what you're told about a foreign health care system. I don't know what it's like in the UK or France since I've never lived there.

As for what goes on in Canada...I don't suppose it comes as a surprise to most of the crowd on this particular board to be told that you are being lied to. Horribly, horribly lied to. As the debate rages on in your country, my wife and I are frequently exposed to the things you're being told about the system in my country. She laughs out loud, and my stomach turns.

This isn't a polemic. I don't know that you can really walk away with more than "I heard from some guy that it's not so bad." You folks should do what's best for you and your country, but you deserve good information and a good debate to make your choice.

[kryogenix]

I paid for parking. I paid to get some photos of the ultrasound in a cutesy envelope, and I paid something like $10 or $15 so my wife would have a phone in the hospital room. I never saw a bill. I don't know how much all this cost. I'd never think this is all that remarkable except that I keep hearing that it is.

That's terrifying. The fact that these people are so kept in the dark at the cost leaves room for abuse. Look at how things are more expensive in Canada, even though the price of the USD and loonie are relatively similar.

I'll counter your anecdotal evidence with anecdotal evidence:

US: Pay some money and get treated, making a full recovery
Canada: Wait on line and have your legs amputated in the meantime

I agree that we are in need of healthcare reform, but a Canadian style healthcare system in a country this large is not the answer.

[mipadi]

US: Pay some money and get treated, making a full recovery
Canada: Wait on line and have your legs amputated in the meantime

I can't tell if you're being sarcastic, but if you're not, then you're full of bullshit. The whole point of the post is to show that the line you're being fed in the US about Canada's health care system is do mostly to extreme lobbying and advertising by the health insurance companies. Seriously -- if Canadians (or, e.g., the British) are so unhappy with their health coverage, and they think the US system is so much better, why aren't Canadians demanding privatized health care from their government?

That's terrifying. The fact that these people are so kept in the dark at the cost leaves room for abuse.

And you don't think that a system in which a large corporation, whose one job is to minimize costs while maximizing profits for shareholders, isn't ripe for abuse?

[kryogenix]

I can't tell if you're being sarcastic, but if you're not, then you're full of bullshit. The whole point of the post is to show that the line you're being fed in the US about Canada's health care system is do mostly to extreme lobbying and advertising by the health insurance companies. Seriously -- if Canadians are so unhappy with their health coverage, and they think the US system is so much better, why aren't Canadians demanding privatized health care from their government?

Because Canadians don't care because other people are paying for the goods and services? I dunno, ask the Canadians. From the Canadians I know, they said that the Canadian healthcare system isn't as great as some in the American left would want you to think, but they are still thankful for it because they aren't super wealthy and get more out of the system than what they are paying.

Yes, I know my statement was bullshit, but so was yours. You can't just cherry pick two cases and call it a valid comparison.

And you don't think that a system in which a large corporation, whose one job is to minimize costs while maximizing profits for shareholders, isn't ripe for abuse?

Anything can be abused, but I have the option of not paying for their goods and services if I find them abusive. I can't opt out of certain taxes if I don't take advantage of the services they provide.

[sixfive]

no just kidding

Canadians (or, e.g., the British) are so unhappy with their health coverage, and they think the US system is so much better, why aren't Canadians demanding privatized health care from their government?

Plenty of Canadians cross the border for more immediate American health care.

[mipadi]

Yes, I know my statement was bullshit, but so was yours. You can't just cherry pick two cases and call it a valid comparison.

These aren't really "isolated" cases, though; they're examples of fairly typical health care costs. Okay, both people didn't have "flawless" pregnancies, but few medical procedures go off without a hitch.

I don't mean to play the age card here, but I'm pretty sure you're still young enough to be covered under your parents' health insurance (correct me if I'm wrong); if not, I seem to recall you're still at college, which means you can probably get medical care on campus for next to nothing. I have to pay for all my health care costs now, and I was also without health insurance for about 6 months, which means I couldn't even afford to go to the dentist. Even going to have something simple like a bad cold treated is rather expensive (in the US) if you don't have health insurance. I had a friend who was working as a teaching for a Teach for America-like organization; she wasn't given health insurance as part of her job, so when she got a cold last winter, she had to search around for a free clinic just to get treated. I argue that in a nation as wealthy as the US, it's morally reprehensible to refuse medical care for citizens; it's morally reprehensible to put the interests of health care providers ahead of the interests of people. Given the fact that we spend roughly as much as the rest of the world on our defense budget, I think we could trim that a bit and provide health coverage for our citizens.

Anything can be abused, but I have the option of not paying for their goods and services if I find them abusive. I can't opt out of certain taxes if I don't take advantage of the services they provide.

So you're suggesting that, for the rest of your life, you never, ever plan to go to a doctor, dentist, or ophthalmologist?

Secondly, you already do pay for a lot of services that you don't use and maybe never will: welfare, airplanes (I rarely fly, and the government heavily subsidizes airlines), food stamps, and so on. Part of living in a civilized society is helping out other humans, even if you see no immediate benefit. The "it's all about me" attitude in America is, frankly, selfish and appalling.

[kryogenix]

I don't mean to play the age card here, but I'm pretty sure you're still young enough to be covered under your parents' health insurance (correct me if I'm wrong); if not, I seem to recall you're still at college, which means you can probably get medical care on campus for next to nothing.

Yup, I'll be ineligible next year. My older sister was without insurance for the past several months, but she just passed her board exams so hopefully she'll have her own coverage soon.

I argue that in a nation as wealthy as the US, it's morally reprehensible to refuse medical care for citizens; it's morally reprehensible to put the interests of health care providers ahead of the interests of people.

I have a different view. I believe that healthcare is made up of goods and services. Healthcare is NOT a right.

If you were to consider healthcare a right, you would either have to force people to pay for it, or force people to provide it for free. It is morally reprehensible to confiscate people's wealth, even if that wealth is used for a good cause. It is morally reprehensible to force those in the medical field to perform services with no compensation. That's called slavery.

So you're suggesting that, for the rest of your life, you never, ever plan to go to a doctor, dentist, or ophthalmologist?

I don't get where you're coming from here.

Secondly, you already do pay for a lot of services that you don't use and maybe never will: welfare, airplanes (I rarely fly, and the government heavily subsidizes airlines), food stamps, and so on.

All of which are things I hope come to an end in the near future.

Part of living in a civilized society is helping out other humans, even if you see no immediate benefit. The "it's all about me" attitude in America is, frankly, selfish and appalling.

Yeah, except I like to do this through charity, not through a corrupt system that forces you to give up half of your income.

[sixfive]

Yeah, except I like to do this through charity, not through a corrupt system that forces you to give up half of your income.

I agree with this statement completely. I also find it appalling that the government should take so much money from people who work and give it to people who don't give a damn about a job or America. They're just leeching and being lazy and jobless.

Mipadi, should we socialize health care, would it be an increase in tax to our income? Would we just force doctors to accept a lesser income? What would happen? Why not fix a lot of other bullshit government spending and abuse and just use the saved money instead of taking more from taxpayers? For instance, if a mexican comes across the border and pops a baby out it's an American citizen and gets taken care of in a hospital for free. I understand not letting a baby just die, but it's completely unnecessary and not our obligation to take care of these illegals.

Also, (just putting this out there) if the government were to increase taxes and attribute some of that revenue to health care, what if a user tax were implemented and this was attached to it?

[brooklyneast05]

i don't have anything to add other than i think you guys should keep debating so i can figure out what the hell i think. i can't find anything to read that doesn't come off completely biased. i can't figure out if i like the Canadian system or not because everything either says it's the devil and people wait 3 years to get care or i hear it's the greatest thing ever. neither of which seem believable to me.

I argue that in a nation as wealthy as the US, it's morally reprehensible to refuse medical care for citizens; it's morally reprehensible to put the interests of health care providers ahead of the interests of people. Given the fact that we spend roughly as much as the rest of the world on our defense budget, I think we could trim that a bit and provide health coverage for our citizens.


Part of living in a civilized society is helping out other humans, even if you see no immediate benefit. The "it's all about me" attitude in America is, frankly, selfish and appalling.

i agree with this

It is morally reprehensible to confiscate people's wealth, even if that wealth is used for a good cause. It is morally reprehensible to force those in the medical field to perform services with no compensation. That's called slavery.

but then i agree with this too

[sixfive]

Don't worry Obama will take care of this, but we won't see results for another couple years. He'll get to it soon, he's still on his honeymoon.

[NoSex]

we have the most expensive (most inefficient) healthcare system in the world.
we are the only industrialized country in the world without universal healthcare.
we have equitable healthcare quality, in comparison to the rest of the industrialized world.
however, unlike the rest of the world, we have severe issues in coverage and affordability. despite the fact that our healthcare is exceedingly expensive, we cannot seem to find a way to cover all of our citizens fully (or at all) and, at the same time, make that coverage affordable. only in america does cancer not only mean health ruin, but also financial ruin.

but this is a larger issue than just mere individual ruin; it is drastically hurting our economy @ large. take for example the bail-out of general motors. consider the economic strains which led to this - one large contributor: the increasing healthcare costs. a mayo clinic loses money in treating uninsured americans. a mayo clinic that serves millions of americans. what happens when they can't afford to heal those that can even pay for the services?

if the common decency of communal care and compassion can't persuade you into supporting a single payer system, at least consider the fact that the private healthcare industry is effectively crippling important sectors of our economy. cheaper healthcare means more money for the consumer to use, to stimulate other sectors of a ever dwindling economy. we see record high profits in healthcare, but increasing costs, less coverage, and worse care. to put it simply, healthcare in america is broken and only getting worse.

[kryogenix]

if the common decency of communal care and compassion can't persuade you into supporting a single payer system, at least consider the fact that the private healthcare industry is effectively crippling important sectors of our economy. cheaper healthcare means more money for the consumer to use, to stimulate other sectors of a ever dwindling economy.

Let's tale that last part and reword it.

Big government is effectively crippling important sectors of our economy. lower taxes means more money for the consumer to use, to stimulate other sectors of an ever dwindling economy.

If a corporation in competition can't become more efficient, what makes you think a government funded program will?

Government involvement in healthcare is the problem, not the solution.

[brooklyneast05]

is this how you feel about it james

http://www.forbes.com/2008/01/08/health-re...0108health.html

[kryogenix]

Yeah, that's pretty much how I feel. Couldn't say it better myself.

[NoSex]

Big government is effectively crippling important sectors of our economy. lower taxes means more money for the consumer to use, to stimulate other sectors of an ever dwindling economy.

what sector of our economy is being crippled by government? please cite specific examples. also, lower taxes for the consumer can stimulate the economy, of course. however, raising taxes for the upper crust of society, that small %2 that has a vast majority of this country's wealth, will not destroy us. lastly, what the f*ck are you talking about? i thought we were discussing healthcare. aren't i right? isn't the private industry hurting the economy?

If a corporation in competition can't become more efficient, what makes you think a government funded program will?

because a single payer can manage in a more inexpensive manner. because a single payer, non-profit system doesn't need vacation bonuses like a mother f*cker. because a single payer actually has an incentive to lower costs... and make people healthier. the private industry does best when people are sick; a public system does best when people are healthy.

Government involvement in healthcare is the problem, not the solution.

so i guess the government forced healthcare ceos to take piles & piles of money for bonuses this year... last year, every year. man, the government is an evil prick! i can't believe the government keeps forcing the private industry to deny coverage! what a f*cker!

p.s. you're a tool.

[heyo-captain-jac...]

I'm going to compare this to the microprocessor industry, because comparing things to computer parts always makes things easier for me to word.

AMD and Intel, last time I checked, market share was approximately 47/52. Plenty of competition between the two companies.
It's this competition that keeps microprocessor technology advancing. Without AMD and Intel still neck and neck to make the fastest processors, we would all still be using Pentium Pros. But with the two manufacturers head to head to make the best of the best, we see shit like the i7 and the Phenom II 955.

Compare AMD and Intel to some major healthcare corporations. Compare the CPUs to quality of healthcare.

I'm no expert in economics, so I don't know if this translates the same way, but from what I've seen from nearly every company working with high technology, this is how everything goes. It's the same with Sony and Nintendo for game consoles, the same with ATI and Nvidia for videocards, it's the same with Corsair and OCZ for power supplies, it's even the same for Apple and Microsoft for operating systems.

[sixfive]

^wat

isn't the private industry hurting the economy?

No. I hear the private industry guarantees job security, allows their employees to be lazy, and does not employ a rather large amount of Americans giving them disposable income and giving the government taxes. I hear the government properly uses these taxes and doesn't use it for bullshit like arrows for kids for camps. I hear that's proper allocation of taxpayer money.

Also I hear what the government has been doing since Obama stepped into power is working! Good thing he just spent an assload of money and put is more in debt. Well, there's a simple solution to this problem. We just won't pay China back! No problemo guys.

Also what's with this state's rights thing? I hear that's unconstitutional and the federal government was always meant to be more powerful and a big powerful government has always worked!

[sixfive]

Also:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

[NoSex]

I'm going to compare this to the microprocessor industry, because comparing things to computer parts always makes things easier for me to word.

i'm going to argue that this is a false analogy. really, as will be any comparison to so-called competitive markets. for one, healthcare is a market unlike any other. it simply does not resemble any form of traditional economic model, for this... these forms of comparison often fail. lastly, a profit motive is something that some find dubious in the case of healing the sick & keeping people healthy. the problem is that the private industry actually makes more money from people 1) being sick, 2) not getting the care they need. this is why, for example, the healthcare industry spends billions of dollars hiring people to dig up information that would deny their customers coverage.

if i were to make a comparison... amd and intel don't higher tech nerds to make sure your shit doesn't work the way it's supposed to.

No. I hear the private industry guarantees job security, allows their employees to be lazy, and does not employ a rather large amount of Americans giving them disposable income and giving the government taxes.

is general motors job security? what about the steel industry workers? no, i'm fairly postive the most secure jobs you can get... are government positions. nonetheless, i'm speaking very specifically about the way the healthcare industry is choking other sectors of the economy. it's something i don't believe can be easily denied. not to mention, the cost alone is by far more threatening to the consumer than say, income taxes... and, while those taxes are being decreased on obama's tax plan, the costs of healthcare are rising five times faster than our wages[1].

Also what's with this state's rights thing? I hear that's unconstitutional and the federal government was always meant to be more powerful and a big powerful government has always worked!

i'm a federalist. i don't think delegating powers to smaller bodies is a way to fix our problems. to me, that's cowardly.

[kryogenix]

what sector of our economy is being crippled by government? please cite specific examples. also, lower taxes for the consumer can stimulate the economy, of course. however, raising taxes for the upper crust of society, that small %2 that has a vast majority of this country's wealth, will not destroy us. lastly, what the f*ck are you talking about? i thought we were discussing healthcare. aren't i right? isn't the private industry hurting the economy?

Government is crippling EVERY sector of the economy. Taxes, minimum wage, bullshit regulations etc.

Tax that 2% enough, and they'll leave/dodge taxes. Then you'll have no one paying the bulk of taxes.

I'm talking about the expansion of government power, which is exactly what government run healthcare is.

because a single payer can manage in a more inexpensive manner. because a single payer, non-profit system doesn't need vacation bonuses like a mother f*cker. because a single payer actually has an incentive to lower costs... and make people healthier. [b]the private industry does best when people are sick; a public system does best when people are healthy.

LOL what a joke. Have you ever been to public school, the DMV, the post office?

There is no incentive to make people healthier, as the government will be making money whether the people are being healed, or dying waiting for their medicine because it's being rationed.

so i guess the government forced healthcare ceos to take piles & piles of money for bonuses this year... last year, every year. man, the government is an evil prick! i can't believe the government keeps forcing the private industry to deny coverage! what a f*cker!

p.s. you're a tool.

The government IS an evil prick. Unjust war, unjust taxes, making a mockery of the Constitution, buying votes with taxpayer money, etc. The CEOs can do whatever the f*ck they want with their profits, they EARNED those profits. They aren't demanding money at gunpoint like the government is.

P.S. cry more

[sixfive]

is general motors job security? what about the steel industry workers? no, i'm fairly postive the most secure jobs you can get... are government positions. nonetheless, i'm speaking very specifically about the way the healthcare industry is choking other sectors of the economy. it's something i don't believe can be easily denied. not to mention, the cost alone is by far more threatening to the consumer than say, income taxes... and, while those taxes are being decreased on obama's tax plan, the costs of healthcare are rising five times faster than our wages[1].

My mistake, the I hear private industry guarantees job security was internet sarcasm. I know it doesn't :]

[NoSex]

Government is crippling EVERY sector of the economy. Taxes, minimum wage, bullshit regulations etc.

if government is crippling the economy, why are there still record high profits?

Tax that 2% enough, and they'll leave/dodge taxes. Then you'll have no one paying the bulk of taxes.

than we can arrest that 2%. you know, enforce the law. fundamentally, and rather obviously, that 2% owes their wealth to the infrastructure of society. without civilization, they wouldn't have the same wealth. because of this, they have an obligation, as we all do, to contribute a percentage of our earnings (in order to support the common wealth and development of civilization). those who are wealthiest have a greater debt to society.

otherwise, we live contrary to the concept of civilization. civilization is participatory, communal, and a form of unification. we come together because we are stronger as many. FROM MANY COME ONE.

otherwise, you merely support civilization as a system of labor exploitation and slavery. you would do yourself a service by reading howard zinn's a peoples history of the united states. you must realize that all of history is a story of those what have power, imposing that power on others, unfairly, with little regard for humanity - only giving the masses enough "freedom" so as to pacify them, so as to prevent violent revolution. history is long, but we're still just a bunch of wage slaves.

LOL what a joke. Have you ever been to public school, the DMV, the post office?

there are different ways to increase quality care in a single-payer system. for one, the efficiency i was describing was purely in the sense of cost - universal healthcare would be much cheaper than our private industry. the government could definitely reduce costs, creating a more fiscally efficient system. secondly, what we have seen around the world is that all other systems of equitable (sometimes greater) quality than the us system. so, it isn't a joke, it's a reality. germany, for example, has less wait time than america. and, france has greater quality care. there are different ways to increase quality of care, and it isn''t like delivering mail or taking a driving test (and i've gotten better government service than private service, definitely, so whatever). for example, you give a doctor more money the LESS his patients visit him, not the other way around. this creates a new paradigm in healthcare services, increases efficiency, and actual incentive for healing people.

The CEOs can do whatever the f*ck they want with their profits, they EARNED those profits. They aren't demanding money at gunpoint like the government is.

can the ceos buy the government out? can they lobby politicians to vote in a corporation's interest?

what is your deal with taxes? you realize we need them to function as a civilization? you realize you use public services constantly? and benefit from taxation?

[kryogenix]

if government is crippling the economy, why are there still record high profits?

Because government policy makes it harder for smaller companies to compete, so there is less pressure to lower prices.

than we can arrest that 2%. you know, enforce the law.

It's against the law to move out of the country? I know if I was in a citizen in a country that was taking away the majority of my wealth every year, I'd want out.

fundamentally, and rather obviously, that 2% owes their wealth to the infrastructure of society. without civilization, they wouldn't have the same wealth. because of this, they have an obligation, as we all do, to contribute a percentage of our earnings (in order to support the common wealth and development of civilization). those who are wealthiest have a greater debt to society.

No, they don't owe a f*cking dime. Party A provides a good or service for Party B, who pays for and consumes the goods or services. Both sides were compensated in the transaction. There is no obligation for companies to society, and no obligations for society to companies. As long as both sides make voluntary transactions, both sides have already been fairly compensated.

otherwise, we live contrary to the concept of civilization. civilization is participatory, communal, and a form of unification. we come together because we are stronger as many. FROM MANY COME ONE.

I fail to see why this entails taking wealth from the most productive members of society by force and giving it to the least productive.

otherwise, you merely support civilization as a system of labor exploitation and slavery. you would do yourself a service by reading howard zinn's a peoples history of the united states. you must realize that all of history is a story of those what have power, imposing that power on others, unfairly, with little regard for humanity - only giving the masses enough "freedom" so as to pacify them, so as to prevent violent revolution. history is long, but we're still just a bunch of wage slaves.

You mean it's not labor exploitation and slavery for the government to let people work and take away more than half of what they earn? Perhaps not slavery (yet), but serfs during the middle ages kept more of their money than people in America.

there are different ways to increase quality care in a single-payer system. for one, the efficiency i was describing was purely in the sense of cost - universal healthcare would be much cheaper than our private industry. the government could definitely reduce costs, creating a more fiscally efficient system.

The government COULD reduce costs. But they don't. They never do. Republican or democrat, they squander our money on stupid shit. The last thing we need is yet another monolithic government run program.

secondly, what we have seen around the world is that all other systems of equitable (sometimes greater) quality than the us system. so, it isn't a joke, it's a reality. germany, for example, has less wait time than america. and, france has greater quality care. there are different ways to increase quality of care, and it isn''t like delivering mail or taking a driving test (and i've gotten better government service than private service, definitely, so whatever).

What about healthcare in China?

for example, you give a doctor more money the LESS his patients visit him, not the other way around. this creates a new paradigm in healthcare services, increases efficiency, and actual incentive for healing people.

A doctor in this situation could make his offices smelled like shit, play obnoxious music in the waiting room, and have horrible service so that patients would avoid him, and he would be paid higher than a doctor that people actually liked to visit.

can the ceos buy the government out? can they lobby politicians to vote in a corporation's interest?

I love how both the CEOs and the government are the bad guys here, yet you place government on a pedestal and only admonish the CEOs.

Government enables and even encourages unfair corporate practices.

what is your deal with taxes? you realize we need them to function as a civilization? you realize you use public services constantly? and benefit from taxation?

We functioned as a civilization prior to the 16th amendment. We can have a functioning society without it.

[illriginal]

Nationalizing health care is the worse thing you can do. The only way to balance it is by opening a much larger job market in the health industry... which takes years if not decades. It is a very very delicate system and you cannot RUSH this type of health plan into a nation that already has health care issues to begin with.


And I refuse to be forced to get health care or pay someone else's doctor bill. This is America, we have our freedom and rights to do whatever we want with ourselves just so long as it stays within the boundaries of the law.

[sixfive]

i can't tell which of your posts are troll posts and which aren't sometimes. this one actually looks legit. if it is, i approve, if not, touche