>SNIP>
>>Quality of all care. You're talking about coverage, I'm speaking of care. There is a difference. I can get any treatment, test, specialist exam etc at anytime I choose. That is not true in other countries where single-payer systems are in place.
>
>Jake,
>
>I didn't read beyond here. But you're mixing apples and oranges (yet) again...
>
>Let's first agree that your statement is perfectly correct and accurate if you have the money to do what you want.
>But then let's look at it from the point-of-view of someone who is enrolled in a HMO or PPO, which I understand to be the majority of people who are insured.
>Suddenly you CANNOT go "get any treatment, test, specialist exam etc at anytime I choose" and if you do then it's on your own dime. All this at a cost of thousands of dollars per year for insurance per family.
>So while the "American system" does support your statement, it is actually applicable to a very small minority of the folks in America.
>
>Our single-payor system is getting BETTER as regards wait times. More and more provincial system are being changed to be either provide the critical care pronto or ship the people to where they can get the required treatment. I wonder how many of your HMOs would do it that way?
>
>You and many other Americans have been sold a bill of goods as regards how lousy a single-payor system is. It ain't perfect, but bankruptcy court is not going to be seeing me because my hospital bill cannot be paid.
>
Jim, you get very close to the major problem with US Health System: it is really the best if you have money (or btw if you don't have it at all) but it is not sustainable/available for middle-class. Everyone would be happy to get universal health care if it means getting the best service for everyone, but the truth is that giving it to everyone means dilution in quality of service at least because of obvious cost considerations, and nobody wants the latter (i.e. dilution) to him/herself. Basically, country may provide (for some time only, in historical sense) the best service for rich, poor and old; but it cannot do it for everybody. I guess that your system has future-cost problems too.