When the government took over health care!

Vigon, the doctors have long had a union here...called the American Medical Association.

Onto Nationalized Healthcare! See, it only gets better when you have it right GB? The workers get organized, everyone gets "free" and "comprehensive" care. It's a win-win-win, right? How about some cold water on the topic:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2161869/Top-doctors-chilling-claim-The-NHS-kills-130-000-elderly-patients-year.html?ITO=1490

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/may/23/nhs-failings-causing-diabetes-deaths

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/jan/02/nhs-accused-disabled-patient-deaths

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2126379/Sentenced-death-old-The-NHS-denies-life-saving-treatment-elderly-mans-chilling-story-reveals.html

Death panels, that's such sill rhetoric right? Wait a minute, there are steering committees that decide who gets treatment and who doesn't. What do you mean there aren't enough drugs for everyone? Get the point yet?

You better get a REAL picture of nationalized healthcare, not just the glossy no-cost coverpage that the government wants you to see. This is just the GB NHS version, but look at others and you'll see the same thing: Canada- Couple with quintuplets has to go to a local Montana hosipital to deliver them because their entire provence doesn't have enough incubators due to equipment quotas. In Prague (personal friend example), you have to give a "gift" to the surgeon to do your surgery at all, then wait in the queue for months and hope that you don't get bumped for more important cases. That's right, you have to bribe your surgeon to do your surgery in their nationalized healthcare program. You don't want to stay in the hospitals either, they have rampant infections too as the workers don't finish the cleaning because the shift ends and no one picks up where they leave off. The gaps cause major infections problems. It doesn't get better folks.

Next it'll be air traffic controllers. Boil them all.

Well an interesting twist, take a good look at the future of a national healthcare system in a state near you.

This is what happens when you have nationalized health care that is run by the government and public employee unions. If anyone thinks that socialized medicine is a good idea I invite them to go live in a country that has it for a while and find out what it is really like. In the UK where they have socialized medicine they still have private hospitals. This is because anyone that can afford it will not go anywhere near that national health system and will instead go to private providers because the care in their NHS is poor and it takes forever to get treatment. In countries with socialized medicine you can wait months to see a specialist or for anything other than emergency surgery. The resources are very limited and this means that getting care can involve a long wait. Is this hat people really want here?!?! Don't people wonder why virtually every rich, famous, or politically powerful person in the world comes to the US for treatment if they have a serious medical problem. Why is it that so many people from Canada with serious medical issues cross the border to the US for treatment?!?! People need to wake up and realize that government control of health care will lead to de facto rationing due to limited resources. The priorities on who will get treated are the ones that are the most ill and the ones that are most likely to be helped by treatment. Those with only minor problems will end up waiting to be treated and those who are deemed by the system to be beyond help will get no treatment at all.

I just wish I had a pension, period, and in my profession, we couldn't legally go on strike.

You've never heard of the AMA?

JS in SD

how exactly is our system superior, specifically? We know that we do somethings better, but so do they. The UK has much better infection control than the US for example. I have used the systems in the UK and in France. Have you used a forgien countries medical system?

Casandra, you have no idea what you are talking about. The AMA represents less than 25% of physicians in this country. This is because WE feel they are not aggressive enough in Tort Reform ( malpractice legislation) in this country. The best of the best are now going into finance and law becuase that is where "the money" is. WE "practice" becuase WE want to do the right thing, not just for $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.

Seems like many people commenting here either don't know what the AMA is or don't know what a union is.

JD in SD is right. And we currently have healthcare run by the federal government. It's called the Veterans Administration. It's a beurocratic nightmare, and the government does dictate what procedures you are able to have, and what medication is more cost effective over another, even if the more expensive one is the better choice for your medical condition, or what your medical diagnosis is. There are plenty of veterans, who, if they have the choice in the form of private insurance, will opt for care in the private sector. On May 22, there was an article on MSN entitled "Veteran fights VA to keep PTSD Diagnosis", the article cites instances in which a veterans diagnosis of PTSD was changed to a different diagnosis which is stripping some of their disability benefis, in some cases without seeing a Physician prior to the new diagnosis being made. Our health care system does need fixing, for the patient, and also the people and institutions that provide our care. However, has the government taken over any industry from the private sector and made it more cost effective, streamlined or efficient? To allow the government to take over healthcare is giving much of the decision making process in medicine up to the discretion of the government. They may not be foreign concepts to us such as "death panels", but instead, restrictions as to what diagnosis is "correct" in terms of cost efficiency, or which medication you may be prescribed.

Our system can be demonstrated to be inferior. Take a look at wikipedia's life expectancy figures here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancy

In every country with a socialist healthcare system, which is every modern country in the world except ours, life expectancy is 3-6 years more than ours.

This is the REAL cost of our healthcare system. You are going to live 3-6 years less than your peers in other countries despite the fact that you pay 50% more for your healthcare.

Is socialism that bad if you live a better and longer life through it and pay less?

@Byron: Yes, Europe has socialized medicine, but they are broke. And how do you know that their privatized medicine does not play a role in their longer life expectancy? That has to be figured into the equation, it's a factor that you cannot ignore or discount.

For those of you who think the AMA is a union - it's not! It's more of a lobbying group and a fairly ineffective one at that with many physicians opting not to join.

For those of you who think the AMA is a union - it's not! It's more of a lobbying group and a fairly ineffective one at that with many physicians opting not to join.

Those dummies say also because we have a national Army we are socialist.

If ACA is implemented we will have socialized medicine , we will have real Doctors Unions and the same problems than Europe. This is more of the Obama plan increase his union base.

redvirginia,

The only thing that the ACA changes from our current situation is that people will have to buy health-care insurance in some form or pay a tax penalty for failing to do so. It has virtually nothing to do with doctors' salaries or pension plans. Even the so-called Medicare cuts, are really caps on INCREASED spending.

ACA does NOT take for-profit health-care out of the American system. It just demands that all have some form of access.

@WhatIsGoingOnHere! Yes, Europe has socialized medicine, but they are broke.

I would put it to you that the United States does not have socialized medicine, and is equally broke, and unwilling to pay the amount necessary to fund the services they want.

Having lived in the UK previously and in Canada presently, I would never give up socialized medicine for a profit-driven system.

Anyone can come up with anecdotes proclaiming any system better or worse, but the fact remains that all legally resident Canadians have medical coverage up to the standards within their province's health care plan, but millions of Americans do not have any coverage at all.

There are no such thing as 'death panels' in government-run health care systems - the service required is either covered under the plan, or it is not, and this can be determined by reading. It's not like when American insurance companies recently had the power to simply rescind coverage - they were the true death panels.

Baloney, there are plenty of people who are doing incredibly well. The real problem is that those at the top want it all.

CEOs got a big raise; how about you?

Coming out of a bruising recession, the average CEO got
a 24% pay raise. The average worker? Just 3.3%. What does the widening pay gap
mean for investors?

http://money.msn.com/investment-advice/ceos-got-a-big-raise-how-about-you-brush.aspx

They want everyone else to work for free.

Another headline from today

In recession-ravaged Britain, Queen Elizabeth II gets a raise - to $56 million a year

I guess Queens are far more deserving than doctors.

@Drman: In the US, the majority of physicians are not government employees that belong to unions therefore we do not pay for their pensions and benefits.

Instead, consider the politicians who are federal, state, county, or municipal employees who do have government benefits and receive lavish salaries and pensions in addition to healthplans that are considered "cadillac" healthplans.

Maybe these are the people who should be shown that they are not in charge but the taxpayer is.

I wish we the people could vote on what type of salary, health benefits, cost of living raises and pensions they receive.

WhatIsGoingOnHere!,

If you honestly believe that the US taxpayer and health-care customer are not paying for our doctors' pension and retirement plans (as well as luxury cars and luxury housing), you do not understand commerce. The doctors are not paying for their retirement, they have wrapped that into part of what you are charged for an office visit, a medical procedure, or hospital stay.

And regarding popular voting on OTHER peoples' wages and benefits (public employees or not); that really is a communist concept.

@Bill: In communist countries the citizens are neither able to elect or have a say as to what their elected officials compensation should be. I for one would like to have a voice as to what my congessmans or senators salary and benefit package consist of since they are supposed to be held accountable to the taxpayers.

The majority of physicians in the US are not employed by the government, nor belong to an employee union, such as a postal worker, who is employed by the government, and does belong to a union. Private physicians do not have a pension funded by the taxpayers such as a postal worker does. Of course their pension is funded by the income they earn which comes from charges from an office visit, medical procedure, or a hospital stay, that is how they earn their income, how else would they save for retirement? What you propose is that everyone who has a pension from income they earn is funded by the private sector, true, but not all of us have unions backing us up.

Paying 14.5% of their income throughout their working life to pay for that amount that doesn't kick in until 68 isn't real generous.

$105K retirement is not real generous either considering what doctors across the big pond get. Of course it is a hell of a lot more than I get, but I am not a doctor either.

Yes $105k is lots of money in midwest or small cities. Travel to London or anywhere around and see how expensive everything is, our prices on housing, food, gas, clothing, electronics, etc are much less than what you pay anywhere in Europe. 20% Tax on everything you buy, as well. Bad thing is after years of education, and work to become doc, get only 20k more than a garbage man or other federal workers.

Larry,

This is exactly where Social Security and Medicare are heading in the United States. Currently at a combined rate of 15.3 for the self-employed, but capped at $132K.

Rick,

The first thing that I would do is move out of London. Presumably doctors are smarter than the average person. Why would they live in a city that no longer wants or values them and punishes them with fees, taxes and higher prices. By the way, in the US a self-employed doctor in one of our larger cities will receive the same Social Security check as the garbage man, as SSI payroll tax collection is capped at $132k. Many municipal garbage collectors make that that much through overtime.

Doctor's being highly paid deserve a pretty good pension if they're paying that much of their income into the fund their entire working life. I wonder how much they'd get if the money they paid in was kept in a separate fund that invested the money in government bonds? Especially when you consider how many will never live to see 68.

The pension plans are nothing but a enormous pile of money, often invested in the stock market and run by pension plan managers. Those managers move around the enormous pile of money, buying stocks at a low price, selling them for a high price, to make their 8 to 10% per year return. If anyone thinks no one else but the pension funds benefit from the pension fund's ability to manipulate prices of stocks, bonds, and securities, then they are just plain naive.

As more and more union members double and trip dip into the pension fund, that requires more and more money paid in, so the enormous pile of money, and it's ability to manipulate the stock market, isn't lost.

However, the public glorifies athletes and entertainers because these useless characters make a lot of money.

I think you have this wrong. The public glorifies athletes and entertainers because they generate lots of money.

doctors are a dime a dozen. i don't see lebron james walking down the block, nor michael jordan, or derek jeter. in fact, i never have. but i did just pass by a few doctor's offices on my way to work this morning. supply and demand. athletes are compensated for being in extreme short supply. doc's? not.

@scrion.

OK great... next time you are sick, need surgery or someone you love is dying...... call Lebron James.

I believe they can retire as early as 60 with a lower pension. It is only if they want the maximum pension that they would have to work until age 68.

Well scir91on, I sure hope you're healthy. God forbid you wake up in an emergency room with one of those dime a dozen docs trying to save your worthless ass.

@scir91onYouTube: The next time you need a Dr. for your little complaints, call Michael Jordan. He should be able to diagnose your medical condition and write you a prescription for what ails you. I bet you run to the Dr. everytime you sneeze.

He should be able to diagnose your medical condition and write you a prescription for what ails you.

To be fair, a lot of doctors that go to medical school can't even do this correctly.

I am sure some docs are fine at 68, but I am not sure a 68 year old doctor would be my first pick. Just let them retire, and considering all the education and work that went into becoming a doctor, $105k retirement does not seem particularly generous to me.

@Terry: Actually, a Dr. at 68 knows more than a younger Dr. and has more experience, and it is required that a Dr. complete continuing medical education yearly to keep up to date on medical advances, new drugs, new treatments, etc. And it costs a lot more than $100K to go to medical school.

When I was a lot younger I cared about athletes, football, basketball, and all that. As I have gotten older and my priorities changed. I don't care if another football gets thrown until the sun burns out in several billion years. It's just entertainment, and it does not entertain me any longer. However, it is supply and demand, and if athletes can command high salaries, then more power to them. Just doesn't matter to me.

P.S. Discounting the employee portion of the social security tax from 6.2% to 4.2% is and was a bad idea. The Social Security trust fund was already in a bad shape, the discount can only make it worse. And once a discount is in place, it is almost impossible politically to return it to 6.2%. Poor decision.

It's not free. For heaven's sake, pay attention to the story. The doctors have been putting in 8.5% for years and years and years, and now the fund has been mismanaged and is running low, so the govt wants the doctors to put in 14% and retire even later.

It seems like mismanagement of money by the government is a universal law.

@James West: You should have facts before you accuse doctors of being greedy, most are small businessmen not huge corporaions, and a good percentage of hospitals in the US are not for profit organizations. Blanket slogans and nursery rhymes don't cut it. Stop spewing rhetoric that is factless and baseless, you sound like one of the OWS who wants everything for free free free.

Many have emigrated to the US. My endocrinologist is an example. He is one of the famous "brain drain" Britons who moved to the US when socialism took over in England. Doctors and other professionals fled the high taxes and socialist big government that has ruined Great Britain. They came here to make a better life for themselves and their families. Now they are seeing the same destructive forces at work here that caused the sun to set on the British Empire.

@TorpedoYou: You can't blame everything on Wall street. Reckess spending, generous pension plans and benefits are part of the problem. Germany dug itself out of its economic difficulties by implementing austerity measures, if you spend too much you go broke.

@Tom: On the other hand, if health care providers are forced into a socialized healthcare system, what protection do we (they) have against the government? How will this affect reimbursements and/or salary? Most physicians in the US are small business owners and the majority of the ones I know are against Obamacare, this is being forced on everyone not just the patients and it's going to affect us all if it is upheld. I think people are just thinking "great, free health care" and not about the bigger picture.