I actually think that it would be more difficult with a smaller population. You would think the per capita would need to be much greater since the cost is borne across much smaller numbers but the base cost to provide the infrastructure etc. wouldn't be proportionally spread out. Yet we (USA) actually spends much more per capita: http://www.jhsph.edu/publichealthnew...hspending.html


I do know that the USA is way down the list in most measures of health care performance statistics, especially preventative measures, among developed nations.

Originally Posted by Keedy

I say that alot of people don't care about their health and are a big drain on the system. Therefore, the people who practice preventive medicine should get some kind of reward.
I see tons of obese people who think only of their next meal and never get off their doff to exercise or help better themselves.
Maybe a tax break or something equal that would inspire more people to take better care of themselves.
My best friend, at the age of 69 was way out of shape and had the worst eating habits. He got tired after just very little physical activity. He was at least 40 pounds over-weight.
It got so bad he wrecked his knees. The doctor suggested he lose alot of weight before he had both knees replaced.
He changed his eating habits and started a work-out regimen that included an exercise machine and bicycle riding.
What a difference...he had both knees done and now he is a different man. He maintained his new lifestyle habits and he is energetic and full of enthusiasm. He never tires easy like before.
In closing, people respond to incentives and to reward people who do not drain the system might be something to look into.
Keedy

Exactly..preventative measures. Why does everybody always envision health care as after they develop some illness instead of thinking before.
Anybody who was ever in the armed forces will tell you how important preventive maintenance is worth.

Originally Posted by Villages Kahuna

Actually, there are some interesting facts about all of Scandanavia. A survey done last year, primarily among Swedes, Danes and Norwegians, showed that they were consistently happy with their way of life and their governments. A surprising section of the survey was a series of questions regarding where else in the world they would like to live and why. And where in the world they absolutely would not want to live.

On that last set of questions, the Scandanavians were almost unanimous in their opinion that they definitely would not want to live in the U.S. They felt that they enjoyed a better standard of living, better healthcare, better education, a more stable economy and were generally happier with their lives than any Americans that they knew. They had a uniformly high regard for the performance of their elected government. A high percentage of the survey respondents had visited the U.S. and had formed their opinions first-hand.

It was an eye-opener for those of us who think we have it pretty good here in the old homeland. Yes, the Swedes pay higher taxes than we do. But they believe they're getting their moneys worth, seemingly borne out by many of the country comparison statistics. It seems to beg the question of how satisfied we are with our elected officials and the governance they provide?

Oh how I wish that my memory wouldn't fail me, but I have forgotten where, many years ago, I watched a documentary on TV that showed a different view of Sweden buy it's citizens. One segment, on the health care system, showed the lobby of a medical building where Doctor's names were listed on a large wall. They were broken down by specialty and had buttons next to each name, where you pressed the button of the Doctor you wanted and a slip of paper with an appointment printed on it with the date and time. There were no primary care providers so you had to get different appointments for different ailments. The program noted that the Swedes, while liking the fact that their care was free from birth to death, disliked how the system was run and managed, the government deciding what was necessary or timely to treat.

Buy the way, the program also told how a huge portion of the populace worked in the "gray" market because of the confiscatory tax rates. It was how most Swedes got spendable income untaxed to enjoy life with.

Like you said, they love their country. They had all the benefits of a caretaker society and the "under the counter" cash to enjoy everything else. It also doesn't hurt that Sweden has legal prostitution, legal drug use and who knows what else keeping the populace happy there. Why would they give all that up to come to the US and loose it all. Never mind that at the time of the program the tax rate in Sweden was 50 to 60%. Free is free, right?

Been trying to go at this objectively but reading today, as a guy who has medicaire, that the proposal has 400 Billion in cuts in medicaire and 600 Billion in tax increases, makes me just get a bit self involved !

Where did you get the statistical info. that the majority of bankruptcies filed are the result of medical bills? That is just one cause. Be careful about stating something that is an opinion as a fact. It really sheds doubt on your credibility.

Originally Posted by funnygirl

Where did you get the statistical info. that the majority of bankruptcies filed are the result of medical bills? That is just one cause. Be careful about stating something that is an opinion as a fact. It really sheds doubt on your credibility.

Obviously, people file for bankruptcy because they can no longer pay their bills. Most common reason that they can't pay their bills is because of job loss.Because most of these homes needed two incomes to pay all their bills, just one income of the two is all it would take to default on payments. I have talked to many real estate people and they say the majority of young people bit off more then they can chew.
How does medical bills fit into the equation? If you take a poll on the reason older people lose their homes....medical bills naturally will go up a few notches. But most older working people are entrenched into their jobs and have reached a point where money and benefits are probably at a point where bankruptcy is more scarce.
Now, real old people still have safeguards in place to help them from filing for bankruptcy.....like reverse mortgages.
All that I have just written is my own opinion based on real world experiences and I have the option of being wrong.
Keedy

Hey, GreyGoose,
Why dont you do another poll...
Ask how many on the forum are quite comfy with guaranteed health care coverage... how many are under 65 and getting and keeping health care coverage is a major part of their budget and how many have worked their behinds off all of their life but can't move to The Villages because of health care coverage. If your comfortable and not in pain it's likely you'll be in favor of maintaining the status quo.

Yea, maybe TV will have to lower the age requirement so they won't run out of people.