Excerpt: 'The Healing of America,' by T.R. Reid »
Posted By Progressive 3 months ago in Health & FitnessThe Search for 'Better, Cheaper, and Fairer Health Care'. It's a national problem—a national scandal, really—that is undermining the physical and fiscal health of every American. We've created a health care system that leaves millions of our fellow citizens out in the cold. Beyond the issue of coverage, however, the United States also performs below other wealthy countries in matters of cost, quality, and choice.
While the president's plan has recently come under fire from Republicans and voters alike, author T.R. Reid took a tour of other countries to explore their answers to the health care conundrum and find out how the U.S. could learn from their shortcomings and successes.
Read Full Story at abcnews.go.com »
800 Views Share Story 72 Comments Report
Submitted By:
Progressive
There are only two kinds of people who are really fascinating: people who know absolutely everything, and people who know absolutely nothing. -- Oscar Wilde
I ...
Who Also Submitted:
Other Related Articles:
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentShowing 68 of 72 Comments (view all)
-
91%
Progressive3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
FTA:
Reply
Most Americans can remember when our politicians used to boast—and we used to believe—that the United States had "the finest health care system in the world." Today, any U.S. politician who dared to make that claim—it was last heard in a State of the Union address in 2002—would be hooted out of the room. Americans generally recognize now that our nation's health care system has become excessively expensive, ineffective, and unjust. Among the world's developed nations, the United States stands at or near the bottom in most important rankings of access to and quality of medical care. In 2000, when a Harvard Medical School professor working at the World Health Organization developed a complicated formula to rate the quality and fairness of national health care systems around the world, the richest nation on earth ranked thirty-seventh. That placed us just behind Dominica and Costa Rica, and just ahead of Slovenia and Cuba. France came in first.-
100%
Goppy3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I listened to a good part of this interview today ... it was really quite eye opening.
Reply
As I listened, I couldn't help but wonder why this type of educational exchange is not going on in this nation.
Instead of calm discussion of facts, we have "Glenn Beck Brownshirts" trying to drown out discussions at Town Halls.
Then, the very act of drowning out the discussion becomes the focus of all stories on this topic.
It's really quite odd ...
Just look at who has dropped this article. ....
I mean, it's simply a description of Health Care around the world ... a FACTUAL detail of what exists ... and the same old Right Wing extremists drop the article.
It's really quite stunning.
.
-
-
100%
Progressive3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
FTA:
Reply
The one area where the United States unquestionably leads the world is in spending. Even countries with considerably older populations than ours, with more need for medical attention, spend much less than we do. Japan has the oldest population in the world, and the Japanese go to the doctor more than anybody—about fourteen office visits per year, compared with five for the average American. And yet Japan spends about $3,000 per person on health care each year; we burn through $7,000 per person.-
sonofreasonComment removed: Hard Banned5 Replies
-
-
-
100%
Goppy3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Yes ... I heard that ...
Reply
I found this interview to be one of the most insightful on the topic.
Reid provided quite a bit of explanation as to the various types of Health Care around the world - and compared them with the "American" model.
I thought it was interesting that throughout the Developed World ... there was near universal passion that ... not matter what ... they did NOT want the "American Model".
What sane person would?
It was also interesting to understand how completely inefficient and wasteful our myriad system is ... compared to France, Briton, Japan, and Canada.
.
-
-
100%
Progressive3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
FTA:
Reply
As Americans voted in the 2008 election, only 18 percent told the pollsters that the U.S. health care system was working well. Even American doctors, who generally do just fine, thank you, in financial terms, are unhappy with the ridiculously cumbersome and unjust system that has built up around them. And those Americans who want change in our system— which is to say, almost all Americans—are not willing to settle for minor tinkering or small-scale adjustments. Rather, 79 percent told the pollsters they want to see either "fundamental changes" or "a complete overhaul."-
100%
Progressive3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
FTA:
Reply
...many Americans intensely dislike the idea that we might learn useful policy ideas from other countries, particularly in medicine. The leaders of the health care industry and the medical profession, not to mention the political establishment, have a single, all-purpose response they fall back on whenever somebody suggests that the United States might usefully study foreign health care systems: "But it's socialized medicine!"
-
-
100%
Progressive3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
FTA:
Reply
The contention is that the United States, with its commitment to free markets and low taxes, could never rely on big-government socialism the way other countries do. Americans have learned in school that the private sector can handle things better and more efficiently than government ever could. In U.S. policy debates, the term "socialized medicine" has been a powerful political weapon—even though nobody can quite define what it means. The term was popularized by a public relations firm working for the American Medical Association in 1947 to disparage President Truman's proposal for a national health care system. It was a label, at the dawn of the cold war, meant to suggest that anybody advocating universal access to health care must be a communist. And the phrase has retained its political power for six decades. -
100%
Progressive3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
FTA:
Reply
...many foreign countries provide universal health care of high quality at reasonable cost using private doctors, private hospitals, and private insurance plans. Some countries offering universal coverage have a smaller government role than the United States does. Americans switch to government-run Medicare when they turn sixty-five; in Germany and Switzerland, seniors stick with their private insurers no matter how old they are. Even where government plays a large role, doctors' offices are operated as private businesses. -
100%
Progressive3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
FTA:
Reply
Many countries have privately owned hospitals, some run by charities, some for profit; Japan has more for-profit hospitals than the United States. In short, the universal health care systems in developed countries around the world are not nearly as "socialized" as the health insurance industry and the American Medical Association want you to think. -
100%
Progressive3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
FTA:
Reply
The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs is one of the world's purest models of socialized medicine at work. In the Medicare system, covering about 44 million elderly or disabled Americans, the federal government makes the rules and pays the bills. And yet both of these "socialized" health care systems are enormously popular with the people who use them and consistently rate high in surveys of patient satisfaction. That's why President Obama has consistently promised to save both government-run systems, no matter what other changes he makes in health care. -
91%
Progressive3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
FTA:
Reply
The real problem with those foreign health care systems is that they're foreign. That offends the mind-set—sometimes referred to as American exceptionalism—that says our strong, wealthy, and enormously productive country is sui generis and doesn't need to borrow any ideas from the rest of the world. Anybody who dares to say that other countries do something better than we do is likely to be labeled unpatriotic or anti-American. -
91%
Progressive3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
FTA:
Reply
The real patriot, the person who genuinely loves his country, or college, or company, is the person who recognizes its problems and tries to fix them. Often, the best way to solve a problem is to study what other colleges, companies, or countries have done. And the fact is, Americans often do look overseas for good ideas. We have borrowed numerous foreign innovations that have become staples of American daily life: public broadcasting, text messaging, pizza, sushi, yoga, reality TV, The Office, and even American Idol. -
100%
Mikunited3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
American "Medicare"is to the over 65's what The UK's NHS is for all.We do have Conservative politicians,that want the NHS to be less expensive and allow more "room" for insurance based schemes.These do tend to be people with seven figure sums in the bank,portfolios of shares and bonds worth many hundreds of thousands and salaries above $250,000.
Reply
When the public is asked by polling companies,whether they would like to go to a private insurance based healthcare system,or stick with the NHS,the vote for the NHS is never beneath 66% and often above 75%.Of course this doesn't mean the NHS is problem free,or people don't want further improvement.
When the NHS came into being 60+years ago,many doctors were ardently opposed to it,as where right wing and right of center politicians,thinkers and press.The most common fear was that doctors would be badly paid and health professionals in general would be held in lower esteem.The right also thought the level of care would drop alarmingly.There was some of the same nonsense being thrown around then,that is being thrown about Stateside now,though not as extreme in it's nature.
The NHS started with the "Beverage report",Beverage was a liberal politician and intellectual,his report was really a feasibility study,The then Labor Government that asked for the report,were happy with his findings.They were an unashamed socialist government and not only did they put the NHS into practice,They made it far more comprehensive than Beverage ever intended.It is the true crown jewels of the UK -
100%
thoughtforsale3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I think, it´s a good strategy to collect information about other health care systems first and to take the best of them. Not everything fits for every country. The US seem to be expecting a solution with an accent on individual responsibility. This has to be brought together with a granted fullfilment of the basic needs. I follow the debate with great interest and would like to see that America lately arrives at installing an adequate insurance system!
Reply -
100%
Progressive3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Regardless of how health-care reform eventually shakes out, one industry will likely reap a windfall: health insurance companies, reports the Los Angeles Times. All the leading overhaul proposals would require all citizens to have health insurance, which would guarantee tens of millions of new customers. "It's a bonanza," said a former insurance executive now tracking the legislation for a consulting group. Despite any public grumbling, industry leaders actually have one word in mind: "Hallelujah!" he added.
Reply
"The insurers are going to do quite well," said a health policy analyst. "They are going to have this very stable pool, people getting subsidies to help them buy coverage and they'll be paid the full costs of the benefits." The insurers' likely success is attributable to multi-million-dollar pit-bull lobbying, say observers. The one proposal that might have dented profits—a public insurance option—appears to be fading in the wake of an all-out lobbying onslaught.
http://www.newser.com/story/67592/health-care-refo... -
-
0%
beavith13 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
the man is writing a first person editorial
Reply
expensive? Ok. i'll buy that. ineffective? orly? unjust?
i'm sorry. i never noticed medical care under life liberty or the pursuit of happiness or under any of the amendments.
if we were in any way intellectually honest, we'd be amending the constitution-
100%
Progressive3 months ago
-
89%
skyking2p3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Thanks progressive for the article. Why republicans want there health insurance to increase 100% over the next 7 years is beyond my puny brains ability to understand. Why they didn't want to cover millions of uninsured children. I thought they were the party of family values. Maybe they only mean there families.
Reply
What is so great about our present private health insurance companies that they must be protected at all cost? Maybe a little competition would do them good.
-
-
67%
riverat3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Not only will insurance increase if no program is instituted but coverage will be reduced and more people dropped. The most galling thing is we will have another bailout of the big insurance companies. How many were included in the last bailout?
Reply -
-
100%
Progressive3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
True, AIG is a car insurer, but the point is the insurance industry continues to privatize profit while socializing debt--which applies to the US in that we are the ONLY industrialized country that continues to support a profit motivated healthcare system.
Reply -
-
-
100%
Progressive3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"How many were included in the last bailout?"
Reply
I don't know how many there were, but the largest government bailout of a private company in U.S. history went to insurer AIG.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Internationa... -
100%
Progressive3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Obama Considers Bypassing Republicans on Health Care:
Reply
http://news.yahoo.com/s/bloomberg/20090824/pl_bloo... -
0%
Albmore3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
4day sale- I have to agree somewhat with your last line and YES there are things in OUR system that are good. How many foriegners come to the US to get treatment that they could not get in their lands? I would say that the quality of the woprk done in America is higher than that of europe and Japan. There are also diffferent classes in Europe that the American media does not wish to tell eberyone about. Private insurance has alot more advantages over the social medical care that is provided.
Reply-
100%
Progressive3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"How many foriegners come to the US to get treatment that they could not get in their lands?"
Reply
Only wealthy foreigners can afford to come to the US for treatment.
As for your contention that the quality of our healthcare is superior to that of Europe and Japan, I reiterate FTA:
In 2000, when a Harvard Medical School professor working at the World Health Organization developed a complicated formula to rate the QUALITY and fairness of national health care systems around the world, the richest nation on earth ranked 37th.
...and as an American who has lived in three different European countries, I can tell you the "classes" there are not nearly as "different" as the ever widening gap between America's rich and poor.
-
-
100%
DEMONSLAYAR3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Dear America, Please be advised. Before Richard Nixon and Reagan did their deregulation thingy, 99.9999999% of American hospitals where "NOT FOR PROFIT". The right wing claimed that privatization would make health care more efficient. Instead it handed our health to wall street to decide. Talk about a death panel. Insurance companies have been raping us for almost 40 years. AIG was a $1,400 per share stock not long ago. that is your money, millions of shares worth $1,400 dollars. This is so simple that a republican can understand . as usual lmao at u
Reply -
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.