The health care systems in the United States and Canada are dramatically different, with the United States having no actual healthcare plan that covers all residents and Canada having a health care system that offers health care for all. While, at first glance, the Canadian health care system might look better to those living in America, the Canadian system has drawbacks as well.
Americans often look at what they pay for healthcare costs and wonder if perhaps the grass is greener on the other side of the fence. On the surface, it appears that Canadians are getting their health care much cheaper than Americans, but if you dig a little deeper, you may see a different side of the story. While the average cost of health services in America is higher than that of Canada, you have to factor in the amount of taxes that Canadians have to pay, the results are much different. Taxes are significantly higher in Canada than they are in the United States and much of the tax money goes to the health system.
Another disadvantage of the health system in Canada is that their health program does not cover all medical services that may be needed. Many medical services require Canadians to pay extra fees and more advanced medical services, or visits to specialists may require even higher fees. Some services may not be covered at all and may require payment by the patient. Not only are there extra fees for patients to pay, but also treatments may delayed as well.
In the United States, individuals pay for their own insurance and not the insurance of someone else. Under Canada’s healthcare policy, you still have to pay the same amount of taxes, no matter how much health care you need or use each year. In essence, you may not need healthcare more than once or twice during a year, but the amount of taxes you are paying will be paying for those who needed a great deal of medical attention. Yes, it may appear cheaper, but in reality, you may just be paying someone else’s medical bills.
Before you get too excited about Canada’s health care program, it is important that you check out all the facts. At first glance, it may appear to be a cheaper way to get healthcare, but a close look will show that Americans have a pretty great plan. Americans are not paying 40%-50% in taxes each year and they get the health plan that they pay for instead of paying for their health care and their neighbors healthcare. The old adage, ‘If it seems to good to be true, it probably is’, again proves to be correct. While health care may look great in Canada and may seem to be cheaper, it ends up being one of those things that is too good to be true.

US Economy Who Is Really At Fault

Throughout American history it has always been easy to blame our presidents for everything that could possibly go wrong in America and for that matter around the world. The reason we blame our presidents is because we believe one man has total control of the nation. We somehow think our presidents have the ability to look into the future and make new laws that will prevent new catastrophes from ever occurring. We forget unless the president has total control of everything our Congress does, he cannot make any new laws. The one area the President has the most power in is conducting foreign policy and even here when it comes to treaties and war he has his limitations.In today’s election climate everything known to man has been blamed on one man, President Bush. Senator Obama has said Bush is at fault for invading Iraq and consequentially fighting a loosing war that has made America less safe. Senator Obama has blamed President Bush for mishandling everything in New Orleans during hurricane Katrina. Senator Obama has blamed President Bush for the downturn in the American economy. And now Senator Obama is trying to scare the American people into believing Senator McCain is some kind of clone of President Bush.Here are some facts:Every Ally and our American Congress believed Hussein had to be replaced and voted to forcibly remove his regime. Obama had the luxury of not being in the Senate at the time and did not have to vote. Considering his record of voting over 90% in concurrence with his party we have to wonder if he would have voted yes like most of his party or went against the popular decision at the time and voted no. During his Democratic Primaries, at the time he was belittling Sen Clinton for her vote on the war, he was quoted as saying:”I think what people might point to is our different assessments of the war in Iraq,” Obama said at the time, “although I’m always careful to say that I was not in the Senate, so perhaps the reason I thought it was such a bad idea was that I didn’t have the benefit of U.S. intelligence.”Was the war mishandled, probably so. Just like President Lincoln had to find his General Grant, President Bush had to find his General Patraeus. What makes Senator Obama think he is smarter than the generals we train to fight our wars, now I know, it must be all of the intense military training and experience he has had fighting in past wars.Has the war ended in Iraq, no. Are we winning in Iraq, yes. Will Al Qaeda try to make another comeback with spectacular attacks in Iraq in order to sway our Nov elections, probably. Will Obama use it to say, “See I was right. The war is lost, we must reduce our forces and leave the fighting to the Iraqis.” The answers is yes he will.After hurricane Katrina Senator Obama and the media blamed everything that went wrong in New Orleans on President Bush. In Senator Obama’s world the President has total control of every governor and mayor in America. At the time, Obama seemed to think all state and local decisions were made at the federal level by the President. He somehow thought the President personally ran every department of the government and all decisions including where to stage buses that would be used for evacuations. With the last two hurricanes Obama has refused to congratulate President Bush on how well these disasters have been handled or admit that with different governors and mayors we sometimes have a completely different outcome to similar disasters.Senator Obama has now began to use a line from President Reagan’s first presidential campaign. Obama is asking, “Are you better off now than you were eight years ago?” For the first six years most Americans would answer yes. Since the 2006 election the economy started a slow decent and with the sharp increases in the price of energy over the last year and the housing market bubble bursting, most Americans have experienced hard times making ends meet. Until oil hit $140 a barrel and gas prices went over $4.00 a gallon the unemployment rate was under 6%. With the cost of fuel effecting everything the results have been;a) industry has cut backb) consumers cannot afford to spend money on nonessential products andc) the unemployment rate went over 6%.During this time the Congress has been controlled by Democrats Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. Starting in 2007 the president asked Congress to open up America to more drilling and free ourselves from foreign oil. Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and most in Congress said no. They said we know where the oil is and we have given 68 million acres, drill there. The experts told Congress there is not enough oil in these leases to make it worth drilling for, let us drill off the coast in the same area Cuba and China are getting ready to drill. Congress is still saying no. As their position became more unpopular Democrats started to rebel against their leaders. Nancy Pelosi told them, “that’s OK let me take the blame for not allowing a vote on drilling. I will be re-elected you will get re-elected and we still will not allow drilling.” After Senator Obama started to drop in the polls over his position on oil, he now embraces “limited drilling” and Pelosi says she will allow some bills to come before the House. Now they are working on a bill in the Senate but neither will have a chance before the Congress adjourns.The effects of this Democrat controlled and led “Do Nothing Congress” are now being seen in our economy. For two years they have made a lot of promises but stood by and watched as our economy began its decent into dangerous territory. For two years they criticized and blamed the President for everything, yet they have not sent one Bill to the President that addresses the real issue, the cost of energy. As the speculators bail out of the oil market, due to investigations of market manipulation and cutbacks in demand for oil, the price of oil has fallen below $96 a barrel. With the recent hurricane Ike greed has resurfaced in the form of gasoline price gouging and Congress, Pelosi and Reid remain silent. The refineries were undamaged but gasoline in the Southeast and along the East coast have sky rocketed overnight. The media and some governors say its due to companies speculating there will be gas shortages later on. Meanwhile these companies are seeing higher and higher profits from these price increases and the consumer is getting hosed. President Bush has warned price gouging will be prosecuted and placed getting the refineries back on line a top priority.The question Senator Obama should be asking is will Americans be better off with a Pelosi, Reid, Obama government rather than with a McCain/Palin government. In November the American voter will answer this question and this “Do Nothing Congress” may be in for a big surprise. Two years of doing nothing but trying to run and win another election has worn very thin with the American public.

Picked up by News Channel 9

Original Site State_of_Americle

In over 30 years, since November 1976, the US dollar and Canadian dollar have not been par until now. As the Canadian economy has been progressing over the years, the US economy seems to have fallen behind with all its turmoil. The war in Iraq has not helped the US economic situation but rather offset the deficit, and in a move to avoid the forecasted economic recession due to the credit crunch, the feds cut interests rates by 0.5 points to 4.75 percent.
The move to cut interest rates to ease the mortgage industry has weakened the US dollar against foreign currency including the Euro, and giving the push for the Canadian dollar to hit parity with the US dollar. One US dollar now buys one Canadian dollar. But the Canadian dollar’s gain isn’t only linked to the US federal interest rate cut, but can also be seen as the Canadian economy has been booming in an upward gain from 2006 with a low inflation rate, and a red hot oil industry.
This rapid progression of the Canadian dollar against the US comes as a shock to some Canadians, who measured the Canadian dollar value at .62 USD only four years ago in 2002, and now hitting par seems too good to be true.
As Jeff Rubin, chief economist and strategist at CIBC World Markets, stated, “the Canadian economy that once used to be the sleepy little resource backwater of the North American economy is certainly turning the tables on its big brother in a hurry.”
So what does all this have to do with Canadian and American dealings with each other? Well, for starts there will be an increase in American exports as buying from the American markets will become cheaper for Canadians. Although, vice versa Canadian exports to America will also decrease, as it will simply cost more for Americans to buy Canadian manufactured goods.
The Canadian tourism industry will also suffer, as more American visitors will decline as the dollar parity discourages Americans from shopping in Canada, since the one time savings of up to 40%, due to the dollar value, will no longer be available to Americans.
Although, Canadians will suffer in sales, they will gain in purchasing from American based businesses, and buying cars from the American side is becoming more attractive to some Canadians. As car prices in Canada are much higher than in America, a lot of Canadian shoppers will find drastic savings by traveling south of the border to buy a car. The difference in prices may not be the greatest for all cars, but gaps in some categories such as luxury sports cars, will save a Canadian buyer almost $14,000 on average.
But the high loony will put pressure on Canadian companies that are dependent on exporting to the US, who is also Canada’s largest trading partner. Already, in 2006 there were almost 100,000 job losses in southeastern Ontario, due to the rising Canadian dollar against the US dollar.
Even with such a massive job loss, the Canadian economy is still doing well, as the manufacturing sector loss a total of 289, 000 jobs since 2002, the Canadian economy has created over one million jobs in resources, construction, services, health care, education and financial industries, leaving the national jobless rate at 30-year low.
In contrast the Canadian dollar seems to be stronger over the American for the time being, but only time will tell the future of the American dollar vs. the Canadian. If asked to predict, there is always uncertainty, but given factors such as future interest rate cuts by the Americans, could possibly even lower the US dollar compared to the Canadian, and this could become reality in the next 6-12 months.

Whenever an election is approaching, politicians talk about America’s “looming health care crisis” as if they actually plan to do something about it if and when they are elected. Experts who study the cost of health care say it is one of the most serious problems the country faces in terms of cost and quality of care.

Who Provides Health Insurance?

The Government

Federal, state and local governments insure 39 million workers (including military), 39 million Medicare recipients (a number destined to increase as the first baby-boomers turn 65), and 41 million on Medicaid. Of course, governments do not generate any revenue themselves. It all comes from one place: taxpayers. With an average of 7 health insurance and pharmaceutical lobbyists for each Congressman, it’s easy to understand why legislators drag their feet when it comes to improving health care for their constituents. (Anyway, they all get free health insurance for life. They’re probably saying “What’s the big deal?”)

Employers

Employers offer health insurance to 120 million Americans. Those who choose to accept the insurance have hundreds of dollars a month deducted from their paychecks as their share of the premium their employers pay to health insurance providers. In 2005, the average worker paid over $2700 for his or her share of group insurance provided through an employer. That doesn’t include annual deductibles and co-pays for visits to doctors, prescriptions, hospital stays, surgeries, and so forth. The National Coalition on Health Care reports that employee’s insurance premiums increased by 73% from 2000-2005. Compare that to a cumulative inflation rate over the same period of 14%, and a cumulative wage boost of 15%. Obviously, that 1% difference doesn’t come anywhere near meeting the 73% premium increase.

Of course, the employers’ share of premiums is increasing too. In fact, the NCHC web site relates this troubling information: “Health insurance expenses are the fastest-growing cost component for employers. Unless something changes dramatically, health insurance costs will overtake profits by 2008.” Since the whole point of being in business is to make a profit, employers have some choices: (1) pass part of the additional premium on to employees; (2) pay new employees less and give smaller raises to others; (3) charge more for their products and services, and/or (4) stop offering employees health insurance all together.

Even if you get your insurance through an employer, you have to be very careful that you read and understand the fine print. Don’t see a doctor without prior authorization. Don’t see one out of the “network” without expecting to pay a good portion of the doctor’s fee yourself. Do you need to go to a hospital? Let’s hope you’re conscious and thinking straight, because you may need to call the health insurance company from the car or the ambulance to get their OK. We’ve all heard the horror stories of people who rushed someone to the “wrong” hospital in an emergency and were denied coverage by the insurance company because it didn’t have “an agreement” with that particular hospital.

What about “the uninsured”?

You might be thinking there must be “some program” to help the uninsured. The fact is that if you have an income, you don’t qualify for a “program.” Even if you’re a single mom making only minimum wage, you can’t qualify for Medicaid. People without insurance who do see a doctor often can’t fill their prescriptions, or they take less than the amount prescribed. When they get sick, they simply hope to get better, and often the condition spirals into something more serious and more expensive to treat. That’s where the emergency room comes in. The costs for the slightest problem are mind-boggling-over a thousand dollars to stitch up a cut, for instance. The hospital will try to collect. If you can’t pay, your credit rating could be affected.

In October of 2006, over 46 million Americans had no health insurance. Eighty percent of these are working people and their dependents. Some work for an employer who offers no insurance plan, or they make so little they cannot afford to buy into the program. Many are self-employed, and feel they simply cannot afford the unreasonably high premiums for individual insurance, or they have pre-existing conditions and the only policies they can get exclude those.

What You Can Do

1. Make a Choice.

The health insurance crisis is a real and growing problem. You can choose to believe that the government or your employer will cover increasing costs or not hit you too hard for your share of the premium, or you can choose to go uninsured and hope that you and your family will stay well. It is not an issue where you can take an ostrich attitude and put your head in the sand. You need to make a choice.

2. Set Up an Emergency Account

Many uninsured workers have made the choice to take control of the problem themselves by setting up their own medical savings accounts. Instead of paying $600-$1200 a month in individual-policy insurance premiums, they choose to deposit the money in an interest-bearing account, CD, or other “sure money” account. The funds are their own, whether they are needed or not.

3. Find a Way to Fund It

If you decide to set up a medical savings account, you’ll want to deposit as much money as you can as quickly as possible so it can go to work for you making interest. Even if you work for an outside employer and have group health insurance, that extra money in your medical savings account will give you the security of knowing that you’ll be able to meet deductibles, co-pays, and other expenses your policy deems “not covered.” Many have discovered that a great way to do this is to open a home-based business. You can work your own hours and be your own boss as you accumulate your medical-savings nest egg. You just may find that you can also open another account-one you might label “things we’ve always wanted” or “savings for trips.” A home-based business may very well be your personal answer to the health care crisis.

Online Health Care Degrees encompasses studies in the management, treatment and prevention of illness, or the rise thereof, in the community. Health care professions include the medical sciences, pharmaceutical, dental, nursing laboratory/ clinical science as well as allied health care professions (these are clinical healthcare professions distinct from those aforementioned e.g. professions such as radiology, abortion, midwifery, massage etc). Allied Health care professionals work in a health care team to make the health care system function.

Modern health care

Health care careers are on the rise. The baby-boomer generation from the 40’s through the 60’s (some 80 million+ individuals in North America alone) are now getting older, and the added requirement to provide health care for a booming population has caused the health care profession to skyrocket into one of the largest and most vital of service industries. Such is the importance of health care to the world today (with health related issues increasing in numbers with old age) that many health care qualifications today require less than a year to achieve- as compared to a few decades ago when health care education took years to complete.

Online Health care education

Mature students and professionals wishing to undertake education and training in any of the fields in health care today have a host of options when it comes to learning online while juggling their families and jobs. There are over 5000 degrees, associate degrees and certifications (accredited) for allied health care professions now available online from some of the 2000 institutions that offer health care education online. Allied health care is also the most popular field of education pursued online as well, with many professionals using such courses to attain CME credits or to diversify their practice portfolios.

Web 2.0 and podcast for online healthcare

Online healthcare education is now being delivered using the following means;

Web 2.0 basically means the modern internet, where students can interact with the information and other people, i.e. through blogs, webcasts, web-desktop and social networking sites (like facebook).

Podcasts are basically a way of broadcasting/ distributing information to multiple users through the means of video/ audio files and electronic copies of documents or slides which are usable on mp3/mp3-video players (not necessarily iPods as the term may suggest).

The Podcasts and Web2.0 based (blogs or RSS feeds) methods can be use to record audio-visual lectures or digital instructions of any kind and can be distributed both manually and automatically to a cell phone, PC, MP3 Player or laptop with as little hassle as possible; these lectures will allow students the luxury to go to work, attend to personal details of even relax and take time off, while still being able to progress in their coursework easily.

References

Podcasting and web 2.0 implications for healthcare. Lecture by Dr. Rodney B Murray

Resource Area:

DISCLAIMER: Above is a GENERAL OVERVIEW and may or may not reflect specific practices, courses and/or services associated with ANY ONE particular school(s) that is or is not advertised on SchoolsGalore.com.

Copyright 2009 – All rights reserved by Media Positive Communications, Inc.

Notice: Publishers are free to use this article on an ezine or website, provided the article is reprinted in its entirety, including copyright and disclaimer, and ALL links remain intact and active.

The future of health insurance likely lies in personal spending accounts rather than traditional copayment plans, business leaders said Wednesday at a health care summit hosted by the Charlotte Chamber.Though still making up a small percentage of medical insurance plans, health savings accounts and health reimbursement accounts are gaining in popularity as Charlotte-area businesses of all sizes look to cut costs.Health savings accounts allow people to save money in an account designated solely for health care expenses. Employers often pay into the accounts as part of a benefits package, but all money in the accounts is owned by the individual.Health reimbursement accounts are a similar type of health care plan but are owned by the employer. Businesses set aside a certain amount of money per year to pay employees back for medical expenses.Participation in these programs is growing quickly.About 8 million people nationwide are enrolled in health savings account programs, up 31 percent since last year and a seven-fold increase since 2005, according to the America’s Health Insurance Plans association. In January, North Carolina had about 123,000 people enrolled in the plans, about 3percent of the nearly 4 million residents covered by private insurance.Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina saw the number of Mecklenburg County residents enrolled in either savings or reimbursement accounts grow 49 percent in the past year – to 95,388.Unlike traditional copay plans, where employees pay a fixed amount and company-sponsored insurance picks up the rest, these plans give employees a finite amount of money for health care. This encourages them to spend more wisely – saving big firms a lot of money. For small companies, these plans are a way to provide some form of health insurance. Contributions are tax-deductible for employers.“The day of HMOs that you might have had in the 1990s has been driven out by rising health care costs,” said Roger Rollman, Southeastern regional spokesman for UnitedHealthcare.But the accounts aren’t pitched as something that just helps companies cut costs, said Cameron Hayes, employee benefit consultant at Benefit Controls of the Carolinas.He recently helped move Cash Cycle Solutions, a Charlotte-based billing and processing company, to a health reimbursement account plan from a traditional preferred provider organization plan.“It wasn’t purely about how can the employer save money,” he said during Wednesday’s panel discussion on health care costs. “It was about how to get the employee more engaged in the process.”Hayes said Cash Cycle Solutions has seen a drop in number of days employees call in sick in the two years since the switch, presumably because their program stresses preventive care.Still, the shift in responsibility from employers to employees has raised red flags. The plans are known in the industry as “consumer-driven,” meaning that individuals decide when and where to get care.“They require that individuals be a lot more tuned in to what they’re spending than they would be,” said Jennifer Troyer, economics professor at UNC Charlotte and moderator of the summit discussions on health care costs. “It’s difficult to be a good consumer in the medical market. Seldom do we go into the doctor’s office and say, ‘How much is this going to cost me today?’”There is a chance that national health care reform that President Obama has promoted could eliminate these kinds of health coverage. But Austin Pittman, chief growth officer at UnitedHealthcare of the Carolinas, said he doesn’t see that happening.And Suzanne Johnson, an employee benefits specialist at Strategic Employee Benefit Services in Charlotte, said she expects such plans to keep catching on, particularly among Fortune 500 companies. She said 80 out of 400 firms in her portfolio now have either health savings accounts or health reimbursement accounts.

EasyToInsureME.com offers clients the easiest way to buy individual health insurance. Free services include instant online health insurance quotes, custom proposals for each client, free phone consultation, and 10-minute application by phone. Our services are free because we are paid by the health insurance company not by our clients.

Analyses are solely the work of the authors and have not been edited or endorsed by GLG.ImplicationsHealth care  has taken front row status with the Obama administration’s  push for immediate reform. The rhetoric has been cranked up to whip the public into a frenzy so they too will echo the same desires.  Big numbers have been delivered in a dizzying array of unnecessary complexity to seem like the problem is running away from us and change is needed before the train derails.  The players in medicine are a multitude but ultimately, consumers, providers, the insurance industry and coporate America are in a need of some alliance.  Physicians must be at the forefront of this change-although they have been fairly absent.  The degree of cost savings is hard to predict in such a complex system.  President Obama apparently received a commitment to a 1.5% reduction from the major players all of which denied making the commitment immediately after it was announced.  A sign that reducing expenditure is easier said than doneAnalysisMedicine is in trouble or so we are told.  The numbers of uninsured, 46 million, is always trumpeted as a reason for health care reform.  The rising expense being a close second.  But numbers can be misleading.    In the 1970 and 1980s we saw costs grow around 10% per year.  Since the 1990s costs have actually slowed considerably and were 6.1% in 2007.  The immediacy of the crisis has been exaggerated.  The number 46 million is also interesting.  In this number are included individuals who have the money for basic health care insurance but are not interested in paying for it such as young people just entering the workforce.  These number around 5 million individuals.  It also includes individuals here illegally; a number now thought to be closer to 20-25 million instead of the much touted 12 million.  This brings the total number of truly uninsured down to 15-20 million individuals.  So effectively about 95% percent of the population is insured.  For this “crisis”, we are willing to throw out our current system to usher in a  new government run system.Universal health care systems the world over are universally complete failures.  While they manage to provide care for the entire populace, a laudable goal, they instantly create a two tiered system.  One for the masses and one for the very affluent.  The affluent universally seek care outside their system or pay to have better care provided to them within their system.  Cost containment is also an aspect of these systems that is touted as beneficial.  The cost of cost containment is decreased access, decreased quality and rationing.  Stagnation in the advancement of medical care becomes an issue in these systems.  As an example, Great Britain has the worst breast cancer survival rate in all of Europe.  It is around 40% mainly because they save money by limiting the drugs they use for treatment.  Most of the drugs they are using are outdated and less effective.  While this accomplishes savings and everyone has access to them, patients suffer greater mortality and morbidity.  Does this truly match our goals for health care reform?The other fallacy is prevention will save money in a universal system.  Most studies show that actually prevention is less utilized in a system where health care is free.  This should not be much of surprise since when everything is free, it actually holds little value to the individual. Again this is borne out in preventable, lifestyle diseases like smoking, drug abuse, and sexually transmitted diseases.  These are actually more prevalent and less likely to be treated in individuals who have free access to government health care.  In fact some organizations that have been treating drug addiction for years, recognized long ago that if you charge everyone for treatment, even a nominal fee, the success of the treatment becomes much more likely.All too often we have looked to systems such as Geisinger Health System in Pennsylvania health insurance and touted these systems as a solution for the entire country.  This phenomena is not new.  During the Clinton administration’s push for reform, it was countries such as the Netherlands and their system that was the all the craze.  The real problem with these sytems is their population base and size.  Western Pennsylvania health insurance is not Los Angeles.  Will this system actually work in a culturally and economically diverse area?  Cultures and socio-ecenomic class bring very different variables to the health care table. This article actually figures that by cutting expenditure, you will see increased monetary re imbursement for physicians.  I am not sure how that is possible.  It appears their assumption is savings will be directed back toward providers.  I fear that will never be the case since government does not work that way.  We have already seen the flight of primary physicians to “boutique” or cash only practices.  Anymore reductions in physician compensation will only drive providers away from both government and third party payors.  Any mandate by government to force physicians to take government insured patients will drive the best and the brightest away from medicine.  All this will further erode quality and access. Physicians need to drive the message that government reform is not actually in the public’s best interest from both an access and quality point of view.  It will be interesting to see how companies like General Electric(NYSE:GE), Microsoft(NASDAQ:MSFT), Google(NASDAQ:GOOG) and IBM(NYSE:IBM)’s  investment in health care solutions play out in this arena.  A better partnership bewteen doctors and industry might provide another solution-maybe even a better one.  Physicians can bring the medical perspecitve to these companies and all its inherent complexities.  These large companies can bring their years of experience streamlining processes and innovating solutions for complex problems.  The hallmark of American advancement has been reward driven ingenuity.  It should be no different for health care.  In fact if cost containment is the goal, then government is not the answer.  The SCHIP program, as an exmaple, has been grossly mismanaged in many areas.  It was found in New Jersey, that families making over 280,000 dollars/year had their children enrolled in this program. While health care for all and cost reduction are important issues.  One needs to look carefully at the numbers being touted before jumping to conclusions.  We also need to make hard decisions about what the true goals are for health care reform: access for all versus quality versus cost containment.  Accomplsihing all at once is not possible.  And are Americans really ready to give up their current access to most physicians, for long lines to a few government employed physicians?  Are Americans willing to accept the rationing of their health care such as no dialysis after a certain age like they do in some countries?  Are they willing to wait months or even a year for heart bypass and potentially die waiting?  If they are then call Europe or Canada and ask how they did it.  If not then be careful what you ask for, you might just get it.

By now, it is doubtful that there is anyone left in America who is unaware that President Barack Obama is in the process of putting through a new stimulus package to boost the economy.  Unclear to most, however, is how this new package will impact the economy and how it will affect the average American.  There is an estimated $100 billion dollars in the new stimulus package which is earmarked specifically for health care.  President Obama has long promised to fix the nation’s broken health care system.  And now he has committed to implementing new regulations which will monitor the health insurance industry.The $100 billion which has been earmarked for health care will largely go toward providing benefits for the unemployed.  The ultimate goal is to improve the nation’s health care system.  The spending is also expected to provide a boost to the economy.Of the money designated for health care, $87 billion of it will go to increase the federal share for Medicaid, the state and federal health care plan for the poor, which will help to take some of the pressure off the states to pay their share.  $25 billion will be put into COBRA over the next 10 years.  This program helps people to carry their insurance benefits after losing their jobs.  $17.9 billion will go into the health information technology industry to help the transition from paper filing and medical records to a completely computer based system.  Under this part of the plan, any provider who has 30% or more of their patients on Medicaid will receive a bonus of 85% of their costs.  Therefore the plan will be encouraging doctors to take on Medicaid patients.  Overall, it is nice to see that if we approve this stimulus package, that some of our citizens will be getting the help and benefits that they need while also boosting the economy.  Lets face it, we all would like to see the overall economy improve, however, for each one of us it is important that our overall situation improve as well.  It is nice to see that the plan will be working to help out those families who have faced or will be facing unemployment, after all, they are the ones who will need the help the most.The professionals at www.GoHealthInsurance.com can supply you with multiple health insurance quotes free of charge in a matter of just a few minutes. If you are searching for Georgia health insurance, they can locate the best carrier for your needs, including Aetna, Unicare, Blue Cross Blue Shield and dozens more.

U.S. President Barack Obama has vowed to reform the country’s costly health care system, which he has called the biggest threat to the nation’s economy.In a public health clinic in Washington, D.C., Delcy Suarez flexes her elbow, showing a nurse how she hurt her arm in a recent fall. Suarez works as a nanny, a job that pays just enough for food and rent, but does not provide health insurance. She often lives in pain because she cannot afford a doctor. “Like this time I fell in the street. All my body was on top of my arm,” said 58-year-old Suarez. “I didn’t have individual health insurance. I spent the whole night thinking, where am I going to go? Crying, and I didn’t know.” A friend finally persuaded her to go to the hospital emergency room, where an X-ray revealed a fractured arm. The cost of the brief visit? More than a thousand dollars. There is no way Suarez can pay the bill.Hidden costsUnder federal law, hospitals have to treat all emergency cases regardless of insurance. But they cannot afford to give free care. So they pass the cost of treating patients like Suarez on to those who can pay, thus raising overall health care fees.Ron Pollack, the executive director of the health care advocacy group Families USA, said that is a major reason why the U.S. health system is so expensive.”There is a hidden cost shift so that the person or the family that has individual health insurance and needs care winds up paying more money for the services that are provided,” Pollack said.As a result, the insurance premiums, or fees, rise. At a recent national health care forum in Washington, President Barack Obama raised the alarm about these skyrocketing costs.He noted that in the last eight years, premiums have grown four times faster than wages, and an additional nine million Americans have joined the ranks of the uninsured. “The cost of health care now causes a bankruptcy in America every 30 seconds.  By the end of the year, it could cause 1.5 million Americans to lose their homes,” the president warned.World’s most expensive health careThe U.S. has the highest health care costs in the world, yet it is the only Western country that does not provide medical coverage to all of its residents. Across the United States more than $2.5 trillion will be spent on health care this year, about 17.6 percent of the Gross Domestic Product. That is $8,160 per U.S. resident.Pollack said a lot of that does not even go toward care. “There are very high administrative-related costs associated with our health insurance system to pay for agents’ fees, advertising and marketing, and profits,” he said.The rising price of medical technology and prescription drugs also are factors. Pollack said inefficient treatments further add to the costs. “A lot of the care that people get actually provides them with little improvement in their health care, and some actually even harms their health care,” Pollack said.Fee-for-servicePhysicians in the U.S. are paid for each service they provide. The more procedures or tests they conduct, the more they are paid. Sara Collins, an economist and assistant vice president of the Commonwealth Fund, a private foundation that supports research in health issues, said the U.S. could save money if it changed this system.”There’s really no consideration about the quality of those services provided, or an overall look at what happens to people when they’re in the hospital and paying on the basis of outcomes,” Collins said.Cutting CostsPresident Obama has made slashing health costs a major part of his economic policy. He has proposed a $630 billion reserve fund over the next decade to start reforming the system. Experts agree the overhaul will probably cost closer to $1 trillion.Collins says Mr. Obama’s plan to invest in electronic health records to prevent duplicative care will help bridge the gap.”Accelerating the spread and use of health information technology could save up to about $261 billion over a 10 year period,” she said. The government also has renewed and expanded a program to insure 11 million children, an investment in preventive care that should help families avoid more costly emergency room visits.There is a general consensus in Washington that the health system is broken, but agreeing on the cure will be difficult. Despite that, leaders from Mr. Obama’s Democratic Party hope to rally enough support to pass a reform bill in the next few months.