There is NOT "free universal health care" in Germany

[Angela Shelley]

This information is directed at those DUers who keep calling for "free universal health care, like in Germany".


There is NOT "free universal health care" in Germany. It´s a health care system in which everyone pays his part to make sure that he and his fellow citizens are covered in case of sickness or an accident.

Germany has a "mandatory" health insurance system. You can decide between participating in a "public" or in a "private" insurance plan.

Germany´s health care system requires insurance premiums from each insured person. The premium is based on the income level, meaning that the higher your income is, the higher your monthly health insurance payment is. For employees, the insurance payment is deducted from your paycheck. Those who are self-employed make their payments directly to the insurance company.

If you receive social welfare support or are unemployed, the mandatory insurance premiums are paid for through the welfare or unemployment office.

[Dr.Phool]

1. Nobody says there is "Free Universal Healthcare"

HR 676 would be "paid for" by a small payroll tax on employers and employees. It's not "free", but it's a hell of a lot better than we have now. Publicly funded and privately administered.

[sandnsea]

4. Yes people do

All the time. Free health care for all. I don't know why they won't stop, and I don't know why others deny it's being said.

[Deja Q]

34. Seconded.

(or thirded?)

[Angela Shelley]

8. What about the "non-profit administration"

What about "funded by individuals" with "non-profit administration"?

[Yael]

14. That would be HR 676

Only the government will be the NFP, not a NFP corporation.

[Yael]

13. Unfortunately, they do say that here and often

I think a lot of people aren't grasping that what we need is to publically fund health care coverage and get it out of the for-profit, commoditization model that we have it in today. That isn't "FREE", that is a different means of funding and administering it.

I put the misnomer of "free" healthcare up with those on the (R) side of the aisle who can't seem to differentiate between Socialized medicine (where the docs work for the state and the hospitals are owned by the state) to Single-Payer where docs and hospitals remain private but only have to file with 1 entity as opposed to dozens.

HR 676 is Single Payer.

[madrchsod]

2. that`s still light years ahead of the usa

this would be an excellent plan for the usa

[Angela Shelley]

9. It´s not a "perfect system"

but the fundamental idea of "sharing the burden" is exemplary.

[sandnsea]

3. Subsidized insurance

The only candidate who has a sliding scale in their plan is Chris Dodd. I don't know why nobody will propose this, except for the fact the private insurance companies won't be able to deny care anymore.

[Angela Shelley]

5. Private insurance companies

do not deny care because the "paying customer" has a choice!

[GreenTea]

19. And what about the 50 million uninsured & the tens of millions more - UNDER-INSURED

Insurance companies huge profits being their ONLY concern, certainly not the sick, dying and helpless... The leaches being insurance companies, offering less and less while demanding more and more money for far less benefits and throwing sick people off that truly need care....using technicalities allowing them to do so....Get real....the insurance companies are the lowest form , pig shit, insects feeding off the American workers and the sick.... running neck and neck with the rest of the corporate fascist - BUSHCO, the republicans, their corporate system that we are now forced to live under, slave for and discarded in favor of profits for the few.

[Trajan]

21. EXACTLY ....

As it is now: I pay an insurance premium through payroll deduction, and my employer pays a premium as well.

But that all goes into the parasitic insurance giant who minds profits over care ...

Why not ELIMINATE that middle man, and pay directly into a fund that pays for what doctors properly request
for their patients ? ....

Those who cannot pay are NOT denied, while those who can pay do so according to their income level ....

I feel no compunction to keep unnecessary insurance companies on the public dole ....

[GreenTea]

22. Excellent and simply put....cut out the leaches, the "middle man" they are NOT needed!

The middle man - the insurance companies....using our health care dollars for another faster company jet, a bigger yacht, while the sick go unattended, their numbers growing....all because of the always rising high cost we are extorted to pay (or remain sick and die) by these unnecessary thugs, strong armed middleman, the fucking insurance companies!

[sandnsea]

20. No, the customers have no choice here

Private insurance is a monopoly and none of them have to offer coverage because there's no alternative and no real government oversight.

[Perry Logan]

6. Thanks for the information.

It's another dent in my vast ignorance.

[Angela Shelley]

7. It was my pleasure to provide this information.

Hopefully it will bring others to "re-think" their positions.

[Trajan]

10. While I appreciate the lesson you provide about Germany

It could be you are responding to a Strawman argument, in that it is rarely claimed that Universal Health Care will be 'free' ....

It is a question of HOW it is paid for, and what services will be provided ... It is obvious that those services
CANNOT be called 'free' .... No one is characterizing 'universal health care' as 'free', except our right wing opponents.

A reasonable weekly deduction from income from ALL earners seems acceptable in my view .....

[Angela Shelley]

11. Any candidates who come close to sharing your view?

Or is this "a fantasy"?

[Trajan]

18. Another fallacy ....

While it would be nice if a candidate dealt specifically with this problem in the way I would prefer, this doesnt
in itself deny the propriety of the solution .... If all the candidates are LAX in their approach to resolving
issues, this issues themselves do not change, nor would the proper solutions change, just because a candidate
ignores them.

SO when you ask : "Any candidates who come close to sharing your view? or is the "a fantasy"", you present two
options; a or b .... I would posit that this would constitute a bifurcation fallacy, in that it denies options
c and beyond c .... I would also ask; what does it matter if a candidate shares my view ? .... the premise of
the thread is the 'Germany does NOT have free health care' ..... It is not whether candidates share my view, or
whether I fantasize about candidates sharing my view OR fantasize about having free universal health care ...

The solution SHOULD be applied, whether a candidate agrees or not ....

[proud2BlibKansan]

12. It is still better than what we have here in the USA

We have 46 million Americans without health insurance. How many Germans have no health insurance?

[Angela Shelley]

15. Those who are not insured

are an absolute "exception to the rule", because

1) EVERY employee is insured
2) EVERY social welfare recipient is insured
3) EVERY retiree is insured
4) EVERY unemployed person is insured
5) MOST EVERY self-employed person is insured

Those who are not insured are

1) Illegal immigrants
2) Self-employed people who choose not to pay into the system, (risk friendly folks)

[GreenTea]

29. The unemployed, the self-employed & most employees of small businesses get little or no tax subsidy.

If they have health insurance at all, they must first pay taxes and then purchase the insurance with what is left over. At the same time most of the tens of millions of people who have no health insurance pay higher tax rates to fund the $60 billion annual tax break for those who have employer-provided insurance.

The claim that public authorities cannot provide “affordable health care” is false, and widely known to be so. Private insurance keeps 11.7 cents per dollar it collects, versus 3.6 cents for Medicare and 6.8 cents for Medicaid. (The overhead on Canada’s universal coverage plan is 1.3 cents per dollar collected.)

The primary reason health care costs are rising is that most spending on health care is done with someone else's money rather than the patient's. As a result patients avoid making tough choices between health care and other goods and services. The most wasteful kind of health insurance is insurance for small medical bills. These are the expenses over which patients exercise the most discretion and for which opportunities for waste and abuse are greatest. Moreover, by the time an insurance company gets through processing a twenty-five-dollar physician fee, the cost will be fifty dollars—thus doubling the cost of medical care.

The added expense of private insurance is largely due to the need to provide profits to shareholders and big salaries to CEOs and management, and also due to the profusion of administrative staff needed to adjudicate (and often deny) claims and oversee the different plans offered by each company. This also affects doctors and hospitals, who also hire large staffs to deal with the hundreds of insurance companies and thousands of plans their patients have. Roughly 30 percent of healthcare workers in the US today are administrative staff that perform such functions.

In the United States we have moved in the opposite direction. Every dollar in premiums spent by employers for third-party health insurance receives a generous tax subsidy. Every dollar employees try to save is taxed.

Your views are so pro insurance company's it's sickening & pathetic to me. The insurance companies are indeed leaches, the middleman unnecessary & unwanted by the caring, needy & aware!!

[kurth]

16. The French model works best

Not perfect, but it works very well.

Shit, even the Taiwanese model is better than what we have.

[Angela Shelley]

17. I´ll order 8 of the French models please

as long as they are covered with chocolate and individually packaged.

[Brigid]

23. Exactly.

There is no such thing as "free universal health care" -- not in Germany, not anywhere. In more civilized countries, a single-payer system of some sort or another is set up. We need to get serious about this issue in this country. Having 47 million uninsured, with everybody else's insurance dependent on the generosity (?) of en employer, is nothing short of obscene.

And don't sit there thinking you're safe if you have health insurance. When was the last time you looked -- really looked -- at what your policy actually covers. What about those deductibles and co-payments? What about catastrophic illnesses? What about "pre-existing conditions" and "pre-approval" of many procedures? Our system is completely broken, and only the stubbornness of the health insurance and pharmaceutical industries, along with the AMA, is stopping us. The right has us terrified of so-called "socialized medicine," and is all too eager to feed us horror stories about people waiting forever for routine procedures and even emergency care, but Michael Moore actually checked out what other countries are doing and found out different. The real horror stories to be found in "Sicko" are stories of our so-called system, not those in other countries.

[Angela Shelley]

25. There are a few exceptions

to this rule.

There are countries which are so wealthy from the sales of oil, that the people don´t have to pay for health care.

But, according to projections, this type of system is short lived.

[TahitiNut]

24. $4,631 per capita in U.S. and $2,748 per capita in Germany

#1 United States: $4,631.00 per capita
#2 Switzerland: $3,222.00 per capita
#3 Germany: $2,748.00 per capita
#4 Iceland: $2,608.00 per capita
#5 Canada: $2,535.00 per capita
#6 Denmark: $2,420.00 per capita
#7 France: $2,349.00 per capita
#8 Norway: $2,268.00 per capita
#9 Belgium: $2,268.00 per capita
#10 Netherlands: $2,246.00 per capita
#11 Australia: $2,211.00 per capita
#12 Austria: $2,162.00 per capita
#13 Italy: $2,032.00 per capita
#14 Japan: $2,011.00 per capita
#15 Ireland: $1,953.00 per capita
#16 United Kingdom: $1,764.00 per capita
#17 Finland: $1,664.00 per capita
#18 New Zealand: $1,623.00 per capita
#19 Spain: $1,556.00 per capita
#20 Portugal: $1,439.00 per capita


Healthy life expectancy at birth
#1 Japan: 75
#2 San Marino: 73.4
#3 Sweden: 73.3
#4 Switzerland: 73.2
#5 Monaco: 72.9
#6 Iceland: 72.8
#7 Italy: 72.7
#8 Australia: 72.6
#9 Spain: 72.6
#10 Andorra: 72.2
#11 France: 72
#12 Norway: 72
#13 Canada: 72
#14 Germany: 71.8
#15 Luxembourg: 71.5
#16 Austria: 71.4
#17 Israel: 71.4
#18 Netherlands: 71.2
#19 Belgium: 71.1
#20 Finland: 71.1
#21 Malta: 71
#22 Greece: 71
#23 New Zealand: 70.8
#24 United Kingdom: 70.6
#25 Singapore: 70.1
#26 Ireland: 69.8
#27 Denmark: 69.8
#28 Slovenia: 69.5
#29 United States: 69.3
#30 Portugal: 69.2

[Angela Shelley]

26. What´s the title of the first "per capita" list?

[TahitiNut]

30. "Health care funding - Total per capita (most recent) by country"

Here ... knock yourself out.

http://www.nationmaster.com/cat/hea-health

:eyes: :shrug: :eyes:

[SOS]

31. It's even worse now

For 2006, the number rose to $6,100 per capita in the US, more than double the OECD average.

If the US adopted the German system we could insure everyone at half the cost.

Imagine...that's a savings of $900 billion a year!

[TahitiNut]

32. Yup. Those are OECD numbers for 2000. (Here're numbers for 2004...)

It's INSANE. It's not even close to being cost-effective.
Profiteering, corruption, greed, and just gross incompetence in the private health insurance industry.
It's less moral than a "protection racket."
ANYONE who can't see it is just too fucking blind to spend the time and money, UNDER A SYSTEM THEY LIKE, to bother with.

Health Statistics - expenditure per capita - current US$ (most recent) by country
(Just the OECD countries.)
#1 United States: 6,096.2 $ 2004 ...
#2 Luxembourg: 5,904 $ 2004 ...
#3 Switzerland: 5,571.9 $ 2004 ...
#4 Norway: 5,404.7 $ 2004 ...
#5 Iceland: 4,413 $ 2004 ...
#6 Denmark: 3,896.6 $ 2004 ...
#7 Austria: 3,683.31 $ 2004 ...
#8 Sweden: 3,532 $ 2004 ...
#9 Germany: 3,521.4 $ 2004 ...
#10 France: 3,464 $ 2004 ...
#11 Netherlands: 3,441.7 $ 2004 ...
#12 Belgium: 3,363.2 $ 2004 ...
#13 Ireland: 3,234.1 $ 2004 ...
#14 Australia: 3,123.3 $ 2004 ...
#15 Canada: 3,037.6 $ 2004 ...
#16 United Kingdom: 2,899.7 $ 2004 ...
#17 Japan: 2,831.1 $ 2004 ...
#18 Finland: 2,664.3 $ 2004 ...
#19 Italy: 2,579.6 $ 2004 ...
#20 New Zealand: 2,039.6 $ 2004 ...
#21 Spain: 1,971.2 $ 2004 ...
#22 Greece: 1,879.3 $ 2004 ...
#23 Portugal: 1,665.1 $ 2004 ...
#24 Hungary: 800.2 $ 2004 ...
#25 Korea, South: 787 $ 2004 ...
#26 Czech Republic: 770.8 $ 2004 ...
#27 Slovakia: 565.1 $ 2004 ...
#28 Mexico: 424.3 $ 2004 ...
#29 Poland: 410.7 $ 2004 ...
#30 Turkey: 324.8 $ 2004 ...

http://www.nationmaster.com/red/graph/hea_exp_per_cap_cur_us-expenditure-per-capita-current-us&int=-1&id=OECD

[Selatius]

35. That number is closer to 7000 now for more recent years. n/t

[TahitiNut]

37. But the RELATIVE costs remain close. It's about the relative performance (bang for buck)

Life expectancy numbers change fractionally as well. Statistics are never "now"... and always reflect the past.

The systemic conditions that are reflected in those numbers are what's meaningful.

[killbotfactory]

27. They mean free at the point of use

Free as in it costs nothing or little to see a doctor. I think everyone realizes that it will be paid for with taxes. It means not going into bankruptcy when you have a serious illness.

[Brigid]

28. And don't forget . . .

medical bills are the #1 cause of personal bankruptcies in this country. Obscenity doesn't just come out of Hollywood.

[Eurobabe]

33. OK, you are officially hooked on DU now

Coffee, tea when I come home? :rofl:

Welcome to my world.

[Breeze54]

36. Angela, are you from Germany?

:shrug:

You should activate your 'profile'. Just saying.

[reorg]

38. Well, there may be misunderstandings

but "free health care for all" obviously means something different than you make it out to be: it means that everybody can go to the doctor or to a hospital when they need to - without fear of not being able to pay for it.

Even though the system has been corrupted over the last 20 years or so, the above still holds true in Germany.

That "someone" has finally got to pay for the services rendered is an insight so trivial that I am puzzled as to why anybody would mention it (here). Even in Kuwait, the doctors get paid, don't you think? In Germany's public system, the idea still largely is that insurance premiums are paid as a percentage of your income, meaning that people with low income pay less than those with better pay. And what anybody pays is not contingent upon their state of health, or likelihood of becoming ill. That's the social aspect of the system, what right-wingers might point out to be a "free" lunch for lesser performers.