The 50 most developed countries in the world and Universal Healthcare.

[danielpalos]

the constitution is outdated, time to join the 21st century...you guys worship that constitution like is god's sent. There are lot of things in it than need to be updated.

The US Constitution is not outdated. It is the foundation of American Government and Society.

There is a legal process to change/update the Constitution. It’s not easy but it is possible. Unless the Constitution is Amended, it is still the valid law of the land. Sorry you don’t like thst. Too bad.

Isnt too bad ...it UA too sad, 2nd amendment results in thousands of deaths and we have a crazy clown leading the country because of a minority....the constitution needs to be reviewed.

We have a Second Amendment and should have no security problems in our free States.

 

[Leo123]

why can we afford to waste money on alleged wars on crime, drugs, and terror?

Good point, they should drop the 'war on drugs' and give each and every American their money back so they can afford to see the medical professional of their choice.

 

[danielpalos]

You're too far gone if you think that people should die in the streets because they can't afford heath care.

Food, housing, clothes, healthcare, etc... These things are not Rights. They’re Privileges esrnedcthrough emoloyment or by finding private sources willing to pay for you to have them. It is not the place of Government to provide basic staples to citizens.

That is Why we have Government; it must be considered a natural, civil right under our form of Government.

 

[Anathema]

That is Why we have Government; it must be considered a natural, civil right under our form of Government.

Not at all. If these things are so fundamental to our form of Government, why aren’t they mentioned at all in the US Constitution?

 

[Taz]

So you don’t care if people die in the streets, you’ll simply walk over them. You’re just another selfish bastard.

Actually, depending on how ripe the body is I might stop and go through the pockets before moving on. “Selfish Bastard” is a compliment where I come from.

Not even funny, please try again.

 

[Anathema]

Not even funny, please try again.

It wasn’t intended to be funny. It was a totally serious response.

 

[Kilroy2]

Wtf is a "Health care Company"? Hmm?

It's insurance, you dumbass! Insurance companies that have lobbyists that bribe state comptrollers to allow them to raise their premiums every year when often they shouldn't be.

That's how we got where we are today. 30-something years of politician bribing going unchecked.[/QUOTE]

Google is your friend and it will answer all that is and it seems to know what a heath care company is

granted it is insurance company is valid but if your looking for health care then it best to put that into a search just to narrow it down a little

The 10 Biggest Health Care Companies in the Fortune 500

 

[BuckToothMoron]

Below are the 50 most developed countries in the world ranked according to the UN Human Development index which measures development and standard of living through estimates of GDP per capita, life expectancy, and education. There are a total of 197 countries in the world today. 193 of those countries are part of the United Nations. 45 out of the 50 most developed countries in the world below provide UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE for its citizens, essentially medicare for all. The following are the five countries from the list below that do not:

01. Cyprus
02. United Arab Emirates
03. Qatar
04. Bahrain
05. United States

Cyprus is currently In the process of moving to a Universal Healthcare system which will be completed in a few years. That will leave the United States alone with three Arab countries as being the only countries, of the 50 most developed in the world, that do not have Universal HealthCare.

Why does the United States, the wealthiest country in the world and the 3rd wealthiest per captia country, still not provide Universal Healthcare for its citizens? How could anyone say that Universal HealthCare is impossible or too expensive for the United States when nearly all of the 50 most developed countries in the world provide it for its citizens?


50 MOST DEVELOPED COUNTRIES IN THE WORLD RANKED:

01 - Norway
02 - Switzerland
03 - Australia
04 - Ireland
05 - Germany
06 - Iceland
07 - San Marino
08 - Sweden
09 - Singapore
10 - Netherlands
11 - Denmark
12 Canada
13 - United States
14 - United Kingdom
15 - Monaco
16 - Vatican City
17 - Finland
18 - New Zealand
19 - Belgium
20 - Liechtenstein
21 - Japan
22 - Austria
23 - Luxembourg
24 - Israel
25 - Taiwan
26 - South Korea
27 - France
28 - Slovenia
29 - Spain
30 - Czech Republic
31 - Italy
32 - Malta
33 - Estonia
34 - Greece
35 - Cyprus
36 - Poland
37 - United Arab Emirates
38 - Andorra
39 - Lithuania
40 - Qatar
41 - Slovakia
42 - Brunei
43 - Saudi Arabia
44 - Latvia
45 - Portugal
46 - Bahrain
47 - Chile
48 - Hungary
49 - Croatia
50 - Argentina

Ok, I’ll play. You pick the system from any of these countries you want to model here in the US. Once you have identified the country we can discuss how we model it to achieve the same results. I’m waiting.....

Its not about adopting a particular countries model, its making sure Universal Healthcare is provided to all Americans regardless of that model used. America can design its own model, provided that everyone gets healthcare and the burden for paying for it is shifted to the wealthy through a higher top federal tax rate of 70% or more.

So essentially you don’t want to think about how to provide the healthcare (the hard part), you just want to complain about the problem (the easy part). Your weak and not worth my time.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Below are the 50 most developed countries in the world ranked according to the UN Human Development index which measures development and standard of living through estimates of GDP per capita, life expectancy, and education. There are a total of 197 countries in the world today. 193 of those countries are part of the United Nations. 45 out of the 50 most developed countries in the world below provide UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE for its citizens, essentially medicare for all. The following are the five countries from the list below that do not:

01. Cyprus
02. United Arab Emirates
03. Qatar
04. Bahrain
05. United States

Cyprus is currently In the process of moving to a Universal Healthcare system which will be completed in a few years. That will leave the United States alone with three Arab countries as being the only countries, of the 50 most developed in the world, that do not have Universal HealthCare.

Why does the United States, the wealthiest country in the world and the 3rd wealthiest per captia country, still not provide Universal Healthcare for its citizens? How could anyone say that Universal HealthCare is impossible or too expensive for the United States when nearly all of the 50 most developed countries in the world provide it for its citizens?


50 MOST DEVELOPED COUNTRIES IN THE WORLD RANKED:

01 - Norway
02 - Switzerland
03 - Australia
04 - Ireland
05 - Germany
06 - Iceland
07 - San Marino
08 - Sweden
09 - Singapore
10 - Netherlands
11 - Denmark
12 Canada
13 - United States
14 - United Kingdom
15 - Monaco
16 - Vatican City
17 - Finland
18 - New Zealand
19 - Belgium
20 - Liechtenstein
21 - Japan
22 - Austria
23 - Luxembourg
24 - Israel
25 - Taiwan
26 - South Korea
27 - France
28 - Slovenia
29 - Spain
30 - Czech Republic
31 - Italy
32 - Malta
33 - Estonia
34 - Greece
35 - Cyprus
36 - Poland
37 - United Arab Emirates
38 - Andorra
39 - Lithuania
40 - Qatar
41 - Slovakia
42 - Brunei
43 - Saudi Arabia
44 - Latvia
45 - Portugal
46 - Bahrain
47 - Chile
48 - Hungary
49 - Croatia
50 - Argentina

and all of them combined don't compare to the USA.................



.

 

[McRocket]

I spent years in Canada...I know single payer FAR better than most of you do. It is a terrible system.

I am all for government healthcare for those who need it.

But I am 100% against single payer.

Want to know what it is like to be a patient in a single payer system?
Go to the DMV (in America) and that is how you will be treated in single payer...not as a person, but STRICTLY as a number (unless you get 'lucky' and someone nice takes pity on you).
Single payer means customer satisfaction becomes TOTALLY irrelevant. All the employees will care about is doing what they are told by their superior. You could literally scream at them for help - and if it is not their responsibility - they will not lift a finger for you (unless they are young/new).
That is the DMV and THAT is single payer.

Leave government healthcare for those who need it and leave private healthcare for everyone else...that, IMO, is the best system.

Private healthcare in the United States is already like that. My brother in law broke his knee in a car accident and was taken to the hospital in Miami. After being discharged from the emergency room, he asked for wheel chair. He was told that he did not need one because "nothing was broken, and that he needed to MAN UP"! That's private health care for you. People are only there for a pay check. They are not actually there because their interested in caring for people. That's why the United States is 34th in life expectancy despite spending more per person on healthcare than any country in the world.

There are always jerks and incompetents in any business...you must know that.

The difference is your brother-in-law had a choice...he could go to another for-profit hospital (assuming he had the means/insurance). In single payer...he is trapped.
And, in a private hospital, he could document his treatment on his phone camera, put it online and get that jerk fired.
In a single payer hospital...he could whine till the cows come home...nothing would happen to that worker because customer service is TOTALLY IRRELEVANT in single-payer hospitals (again, unless you come across a kind person).

Single payer means customer satisfaction is IRRELEVANT...you are treated like a number. And you have no alternatives.

I know first hand with years of experience; you - I assume - do not.

Tell me this, please...what is wrong with full government healthcare for those who cannot afford it and private, for profit healthcare (that the government stays COMPLETELY out of, including insurance) for those who can afford it?

 

[abu afak]

and all of them combined don't compare to the USA.................

.

Moronic/empty claim/reply with NO rebuttal/NO meat compared to the data-rich post you 'replied' to You dumb Trolling Asshole


Number of the Week: U.S. Spends 141% More on Health Care - Real Time Economics - WSJ
By Mark Whitehouse // Wall St Journal
April 9, 2011 - Wall St Journal

141%: How much more the U.S. spends on health care, per person, than the average OECD nation

At a time when politicians in Washington are battling over — among other things — the future of the U.S. health-care system, it’s instructive to see just how well that system operates. According to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, we’re doing a terrible job.

A new report finds that the U.S. spends far More on health care than any of the other 29 OECD nations, and gets Less health for its money. Annual public and private health-care spending in the U.S. stands at $7,538 per person, 2.41 times the OECD average and 51% more than the second-biggest spender, Norway. Meanwhile, average U.S. life expectancy is 77.9 years, Less than the OECD average of 79.4.
[..........]
Interestingly, the type of system doesn’t seem to matter much. Countries with state-run systems do about as well on average as countries with private systems. Among the things that do matter: Consumers need to have some skin in the game, through mechanisms such as co-payments; care needs to be well-coordinated among doctors’ offices, hospitals and nursing homes; providers of care need incentives to do a better job, such as pay for performance; and the price and quality of services should be better monitored and easier to see.

Many of those features are included in the health-care law the U.S. passed last year, though much has yet to be implemented."...."

​

`

 

[danielpalos]

That is Why we have Government; it must be considered a natural, civil right under our form of Government.

Not at all. If these things are so fundamental to our form of Government, why aren’t they mentioned at all in the US Constitution?

There is no immigration clause or wall building clause in our federal Constitution.

Our welfare clause is General not common.

Natural rights are acknowledged in State Constitutions and available in federal venues via Due Process.

 

[Flash]

A country is not very "developed" if it is so oppressive it forces a person to pay somebody else health care bills.

 

[Dragonlady]

I spent years in Canada...I know single payer FAR better than most of you do. It is a terrible system.

I am all for government healthcare for those who need it.

But I am 100% against single payer.

Want to know what it is like to be a patient in a single payer system?
Go to the DMV (in America) and that is how you will be treated in single payer...not as a person, but STRICTLY as a number (unless you get 'lucky' and someone nice takes pity on you).
Single payer means customer satisfaction becomes TOTALLY irrelevant. All the employees will care about is doing what they are told by their superior. You could literally scream at them for help - and if it is not their responsibility - they will not lift a finger for you (unless they are young/new).
That is the DMV and THAT is single payer.

Leave government healthcare for those who need it and leave private healthcare for everyone else...that, IMO, is the best system.

Private healthcare in the United States is already like that. My brother in law broke his knee in a car accident and was taken to the hospital in Miami. After being discharged from the emergency room, he asked for wheel chair. He was told that he did not need one because "nothing was broken, and that he needed to MAN UP"! That's private health care for you. People are only there for a pay check. They are not actually there because their interested in caring for people. That's why the United States is 34th in life expectancy despite spending more per person on healthcare than any country in the world.

There are always jerks and incompetents in any business...you must know that.

The difference is your brother-in-law had a choice...he could go to another for-profit hospital (assuming he had the means/insurance). In single payer...he is trapped.
And, in a private hospital, he could document his treatment on his phone camera, put it online and get that jerk fired.
In a single payer hospital...he could whine till the cows come home...nothing would happen to that worker because customer service is TOTALLY IRRELEVANT in single-payer hospitals (again, unless you come across a kind person).

Single payer means customer satisfaction is IRRELEVANT...you are treated like a number. And you have no alternatives.

I know first hand with years of experience; you - I assume - do not.

Tell me this, please...what is wrong with full government healthcare for those who cannot afford it and private, for profit healthcare (that the government stays COMPLETELY out of, including insurance) for those who can afford it?

I am a Canadian living in Canada, and I have never been treated "like a number" at any time. McRocket sounds like he used emergency rooms to provide "heath care". Yes you are treated like a number in the emergency room of a big city of hospital, because that's what you are. You are a faceless person who passes through their facility, never to be seen again.

 

[danielpalos]

A country is not very "developed" if it is so oppressive it forces a person to pay somebody else health care bills.

Congress has the Power to Tax, to solve the problems of our Republic.

 

[danielpalos]

I spent years in Canada...I know single payer FAR better than most of you do. It is a terrible system.

I am all for government healthcare for those who need it.

But I am 100% against single payer.

Want to know what it is like to be a patient in a single payer system?
Go to the DMV (in America) and that is how you will be treated in single payer...not as a person, but STRICTLY as a number (unless you get 'lucky' and someone nice takes pity on you).
Single payer means customer satisfaction becomes TOTALLY irrelevant. All the employees will care about is doing what they are told by their superior. You could literally scream at them for help - and if it is not their responsibility - they will not lift a finger for you (unless they are young/new).
That is the DMV and THAT is single payer.

Leave government healthcare for those who need it and leave private healthcare for everyone else...that, IMO, is the best system.

Private healthcare in the United States is already like that. My brother in law broke his knee in a car accident and was taken to the hospital in Miami. After being discharged from the emergency room, he asked for wheel chair. He was told that he did not need one because "nothing was broken, and that he needed to MAN UP"! That's private health care for you. People are only there for a pay check. They are not actually there because their interested in caring for people. That's why the United States is 34th in life expectancy despite spending more per person on healthcare than any country in the world.

There are always jerks and incompetents in any business...you must know that.

The difference is your brother-in-law had a choice...he could go to another for-profit hospital (assuming he had the means/insurance). In single payer...he is trapped.
And, in a private hospital, he could document his treatment on his phone camera, put it online and get that jerk fired.
In a single payer hospital...he could whine till the cows come home...nothing would happen to that worker because customer service is TOTALLY IRRELEVANT in single-payer hospitals (again, unless you come across a kind person).

Single payer means customer satisfaction is IRRELEVANT...you are treated like a number. And you have no alternatives.

I know first hand with years of experience; you - I assume - do not.

Tell me this, please...what is wrong with full government healthcare for those who cannot afford it and private, for profit healthcare (that the government stays COMPLETELY out of, including insurance) for those who can afford it?

I am a Canadian living in Canada, and I have never been treated "like a number" at any time. McRocket sounds like he used emergency rooms to provide "heath care". Yes you are treated like a number in the emergency room of a big city of hospital, because that's what you are. You are a faceless person who passes through their facility, never to be seen again.

Better technology for triage makes more sense in those cases.

 

[Dragonlady]

I spent years in Canada...I know single payer FAR better than most of you do. It is a terrible system.

I am all for government healthcare for those who need it.

But I am 100% against single payer.

Want to know what it is like to be a patient in a single payer system?
Go to the DMV (in America) and that is how you will be treated in single payer...not as a person, but STRICTLY as a number (unless you get 'lucky' and someone nice takes pity on you).
Single payer means customer satisfaction becomes TOTALLY irrelevant. All the employees will care about is doing what they are told by their superior. You could literally scream at them for help - and if it is not their responsibility - they will not lift a finger for you (unless they are young/new).
That is the DMV and THAT is single payer.

Leave government healthcare for those who need it and leave private healthcare for everyone else...that, IMO, is the best system.

Private healthcare in the United States is already like that. My brother in law broke his knee in a car accident and was taken to the hospital in Miami. After being discharged from the emergency room, he asked for wheel chair. He was told that he did not need one because "nothing was broken, and that he needed to MAN UP"! That's private health care for you. People are only there for a pay check. They are not actually there because their interested in caring for people. That's why the United States is 34th in life expectancy despite spending more per person on healthcare than any country in the world.

There are always jerks and incompetents in any business...you must know that.

The difference is your brother-in-law had a choice...he could go to another for-profit hospital (assuming he had the means/insurance). In single payer...he is trapped.
And, in a private hospital, he could document his treatment on his phone camera, put it online and get that jerk fired.
In a single payer hospital...he could whine till the cows come home...nothing would happen to that worker because customer service is TOTALLY IRRELEVANT in single-payer hospitals (again, unless you come across a kind person).

Single payer means customer satisfaction is IRRELEVANT...you are treated like a number. And you have no alternatives.

I know first hand with years of experience; you - I assume - do not.

Tell me this, please...what is wrong with full government healthcare for those who cannot afford it and private, for profit healthcare (that the government stays COMPLETELY out of, including insurance) for those who can afford it?

I am a Canadian living in Canada, and I have never been treated "like a number" at any time. McRocket sounds like he used emergency rooms to provide "heath care". Yes you are treated like a number in the emergency room of a big city of hospital, because that's what you are. You are a faceless person who passes through their facility, never to be seen again.

Better technology for triage makes more sense in those cases.

There is triage in the emergency rooms, and they do a good job, but it's health care at it's most impersonal. It's usually a patch job until you can see you PCP. And it's hardly a good snapshot of our health care system overall. The biggest problem we have is a shortage of PCP's. I didn't have a lot of choice of doctors when I moved here because few physicians are taking patients. The standard medical question I hear in town is "Do you know anyone who's taking new patients".

American hospitals and clinics hold job fairs in Canada for our doctors and nurses. Canadian tax payers invest hundreds of thousands of dollars in education for these people, and American hospitals swoop in and lure them south with more pay. Most stay in Canada, but enough do go to the US, that it impacts staffing here.

Americans hate paying for education for other people's children, but they have no compunctions about using Canadian taxpayers to staff their hospitals, because of the quality of eduation and training we have, and the fact that American's paid nothing to get these people ready for work.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Pay more and get less. That will catch on in the rest of the world.

 

[danielpalos]

I spent years in Canada...I know single payer FAR better than most of you do. It is a terrible system.

I am all for government healthcare for those who need it.

But I am 100% against single payer.

Want to know what it is like to be a patient in a single payer system?
Go to the DMV (in America) and that is how you will be treated in single payer...not as a person, but STRICTLY as a number (unless you get 'lucky' and someone nice takes pity on you).
Single payer means customer satisfaction becomes TOTALLY irrelevant. All the employees will care about is doing what they are told by their superior. You could literally scream at them for help - and if it is not their responsibility - they will not lift a finger for you (unless they are young/new).
That is the DMV and THAT is single payer.

Leave government healthcare for those who need it and leave private healthcare for everyone else...that, IMO, is the best system.

Private healthcare in the United States is already like that. My brother in law broke his knee in a car accident and was taken to the hospital in Miami. After being discharged from the emergency room, he asked for wheel chair. He was told that he did not need one because "nothing was broken, and that he needed to MAN UP"! That's private health care for you. People are only there for a pay check. They are not actually there because their interested in caring for people. That's why the United States is 34th in life expectancy despite spending more per person on healthcare than any country in the world.

There are always jerks and incompetents in any business...you must know that.

The difference is your brother-in-law had a choice...he could go to another for-profit hospital (assuming he had the means/insurance). In single payer...he is trapped.
And, in a private hospital, he could document his treatment on his phone camera, put it online and get that jerk fired.
In a single payer hospital...he could whine till the cows come home...nothing would happen to that worker because customer service is TOTALLY IRRELEVANT in single-payer hospitals (again, unless you come across a kind person).

Single payer means customer satisfaction is IRRELEVANT...you are treated like a number. And you have no alternatives.

I know first hand with years of experience; you - I assume - do not.

Tell me this, please...what is wrong with full government healthcare for those who cannot afford it and private, for profit healthcare (that the government stays COMPLETELY out of, including insurance) for those who can afford it?

I am a Canadian living in Canada, and I have never been treated "like a number" at any time. McRocket sounds like he used emergency rooms to provide "heath care". Yes you are treated like a number in the emergency room of a big city of hospital, because that's what you are. You are a faceless person who passes through their facility, never to be seen again.

Better technology for triage makes more sense in those cases.

There is triage in the emergency rooms, and they do a good job, but it's health care at it's most impersonal. It's usually a patch job until you can see you PCP. And it's hardly a good snapshot of our health care system overall. The biggest problem we have is a shortage of PCP's. I didn't have a lot of choice of doctors when I moved here because few physicians are taking patients. The standard medical question I hear in town is "Do you know anyone who's taking new patients".

American hospitals and clinics hold job fairs in Canada for our doctors and nurses. Canadian tax payers invest hundreds of thousands of dollars in education for these people, and American hospitals swoop in and lure them south with more pay. Most stay in Canada, but enough do go to the US, that it impacts staffing here.

Americans hate paying for education for other people's children, but they have no compunctions about using Canadian taxpayers to staff their hospitals, because of the quality of eduation and training we have, and the fact that American's paid nothing to get these people ready for work.

triage technology could be "as good as security technology" for some issues.

 

[Olde Europe]

Pay more and get less. That will catch on in the rest of the world.

Yes, but paying double (per capita) is a small price to pay when, in turn, you can be assured Those People* are getting it, hard and fast.

*) Referring to Those who unwisely decided to be both un-rich, and un-healthy, not to mention ill-colored.