"we need a government option to 'keep insurance companies honest' and to make sure they don't deny anyone coverage"

@dikdoktor - If I understand your coverage it is primarily major medical, right? Primarily being the key word. Our original health insurance was basically for major medical purposes where people payed the routine things. When it became more the costs went through the roof.

Our social security disability insurance is the really dysfunctional program and how they treat the disabled is flat wrong.

Take care Steve~~Glad you are feeling better and things are looking up.

@ProvokingThought - Thanks man. I really have a difficult time understanding all of this.  In Canada, it's doesn't matter who you are - you're sick, you see a doctor or go to the Emergency ward. It's that simple.  A wino off of the street can walk into a clinic or hospital, call a doctor just the same as a guy that's a CEO for  a major company and be looked after.

We have a very good system here that covers everyone. Somehow, our government has this set up so that only about 1% of the income to Health Care goes to administration costs.  I've read that as much as 30% is spent in the States. That's where a difference can be made, well in my mind anyways.  LIke I said, I try to follow as much of this as I can, Canadians are proud to be friends with the States.

It might take a few years but I hope the 2072 pages of Health Reform comes to a beneficial outcome for everyone soon.

Really, who is being dishonest here?  The insurance companies?  Trust me, I'm not a huge fan of insurance companies...but when it comes down to the health care debate, it's the government I see spreading misinformation and acting deceitfully.

@dikdoktor - so would you say the criticism of canadian system is exaggeration?

Good post as usual.

Most of the world is filled with "sheep" then. It is a boogeyman argument. 

@Paul_Partisan - But your argument is based on false parameters Paul. The poor are eligible for free healthcare now. In the real sense of the word free-not paying up front and waiting for a tax credit. In fact, If you are familiar with the tax code, once you hit a minimum ceiling based on a perentage of your income the cost of your total medical care is deductible . Off the top of my head I think it is 7%.

So even when health costs get above the 7% ceiling they are deductible. The poor can get medicaid. Insurance rates balloon once there is more coverage. And I would cite you still ingore the figues that private insurance HAS to be higher because the hospitals and doctors demand it be higher. Why? Because the government programs cause them to operate below operating cost. The money has two other main sources to come from..private pay (uninsured) and insurance. Medicaid is reimbursing around 70%. medicare around 87% (being genourous on both). Insurance rates at 130%. Obviously you need a greater percentage of insurance patients than medicare/medicaid patients.

The government has painted this picture which the gullible swallow hook line and sinker without weighing the realities of the cost of just running medical facilities.  In reality what will happen in low income areas will most likely be consolidation of facilities and fewer emergency rooms.

Again we can point to not only government losing 60 billion dollars of my money to fraud in medicare alone, but also its higher denial ratio. While there is a lot of complexity to the industry itself (16% of the economy) there is also things that are very clear about cost drivers and why the rates are as they are. The idea that we base models off a system that is full of waste and fraud and reimburses people below cost is not exactly that of a group of people that has any concern about healthcare.

The other false argument is the numbers game they are playing with the uninsured. Most feel the uninsured in this country is somewhere between 12-15 million people. The rest are either eligible for a program  already in place, here on less than legal terms or have chosen not to put out for it. All of them still get medical care when they are sick according to charlie rangel, they just dont have coverage. The 48 million is a hyped number in that it reflects something that is not.

However , a trillion dollars later what is the net effect of the bill-96% will be insured. 4% of 300 Million =12 million people. Two ways of looking at it. The same (or another group) of people of 12 million people remin uninsured. The other people are signed up for the programs they qualify for.

So on the end we still hae over 10 million people uninsured and if you believe the cost of the program will be a trillion to operate you have never stuided the history of government program estimates.  THis idea of the government is good and the private sector is a worse solution. If it was, why are there all the government contractors there are?

Thaks for your input and I agree there are a lot of sheep ...being bred by our public school system.

@bukeshow - thanks

@mejicojohn - I am sure many of our officials would like to implement your solutiuon to those who are closely examining their claims vs. the realities.