A question for Candadians and UK folks and the Universal Healthcare

[redhen]

Quote:
THIS is what i have heard from other Canadians also...
I have a big fear that we're in for some big trouble here soon..

 

[HeatherLynn]

Quote:
Here is a key to cutting costs. Can Americans accept "plain but excellent"? I really don't know.

Many just wonder why we should HAVE to accept plain but excellent. I personally do not believe the excellent part. I have had 2 relatives die under state funded medicine in Austria. Needlessly died and I am not a forgiving person.

But again to the question why should we have to accept a change we do not want? I have excellent health care. I personally love my insurance. Do I trust them with my life. Heck no but I don't trust the government with it either. Heck I only trust them with my tax money because I have no choice. There are other alternatives that can make health care much more affordable and available.

If we were to make changes like limiting the cost of malpractice lawsuits, expanding the authority of nurses to relieve shortage situations, getting rid of limitations on states offering group health insurance ( yes currently there is so much regulation that an easy and much more affordable fix for most self employed is not available. I learned that one when I became licensed to sell insurance and had to take the health insurance course), making changes to life time limits and pre existing conditions requirements allowed to insurance companies. So many things we can do to make an already working system work so much better. Instead we choose to put together a mishmosh that no one understands, the government might not be able to afford, and most Americans do not want. There are some who would love insurance that cannot afford it and I understand that and we have systems for them to get the help they need, it may just need to be expanded a bit. We also have some who would rather save their money on health insurance premiums and then whine when they have to go. ( I have a relative like that much to my dismay) Those who can afford it I do not feel sorry for. They can be responsible like the rest of us have to be. There are simple fixes to those who are shut out that should be and can be dealt with.

 

[Dunkopf]

Quote:
I couldn't understand it either. I think many in this country describe heartlessness as "freedom" and "personal responsibility".

Perhaps that's a euphemism for 'survival of the fittest' or 'law of the jungle'. I can only imagine that those who hold such a view in one of the world's greatest societies either have the money to self-fund their health care, have enough income to buy insurance or are looking to justify their disinclination to buy insurance.

They also have the strongest media. You'll notice we don't really have any change in our health care. Mandatory care for all with much higher rates than single payer would have been. No prior condition restrictions but loopholes allowing the insurance companies to charge through the nose. They could have done single payer with the insurance companies doing the administration without the huge profits they make now. No job losses just pay decreases for the CEO's and VP's.

You hit the nail on the head Thai. You too Fiddler.

 

[thaiturkey]

Quote:
Here is a key to cutting costs. Can Americans accept "plain but excellent"? I really don't know.

Many just wonder why we should HAVE to accept plain but excellent. I personally do not believe the excellent part. I have had 2 relatives die under state funded medicine in Austria. Needlessly died and I am not a forgiving person.

But again to the question why should we have to accept a change we do not want? I have excellent health care. I personally love my insurance. Do I trust them with my life. Heck no but I don't trust the government with it either. Heck I only trust them with my tax money because I have no choice. There are other alternatives that can make health care much more affordable and available.

If we were to make changes like limiting the cost of malpractice lawsuits, expanding the authority of nurses to relieve shortage situations, getting rid of limitations on states offering group health insurance ( yes currently there is so much regulation that an easy and much more affordable fix for most self employed is not available. I learned that one when I became licensed to sell insurance and had to take the health insurance course), making changes to life time limits and pre existing conditions requirements allowed to insurance companies. So many things we can do to make an already working system work so much better. Instead we choose to put together a mishmosh that no one understands, the government might not be able to afford, and most Americans do not want. There are some who would love insurance that cannot afford it and I understand that and we have systems for them to get the help they need, it may just need to be expanded a bit. We also have some who would rather save their money on health insurance premiums and then whine when they have to go. ( I have a relative like that much to my dismay) Those who can afford it I do not feel sorry for. They can be responsible like the rest of us have to be. There are simple fixes to those who are shut out that should be and can be dealt with.

How would you fund the needs of poorly paid people, the unemployed, the disabled and the chronically and terminally ill. They are all groups of people who probably cannot afford insurance and, if you were to make it easier for insurers to cancel and restrict cover, many would not be able to buy it at any price.

Here's my view on health care provision. I worked for 44 years in insurance and saw it all. Health care funding is such a vital right in a civiised society that it should not be left in the hands of private insurers, private hospitals or private doctors. I don't advocate State run businesses in general but I would rather my health care be in the hands of a body that is controlled by democratically elected representatives than some guy who has an eye on profit and bonus. Private insurers have to make profits for their shareholders and sympathy for the poor, sock and elderly is way down their list of priories.

 

[PineappleMama]

Quote:
How bad a person am I that that line made me laugh!??!

Okay, that's precisely what I thought it was... AWESOME... love it when I finally get it!

So, is your income tax as simple as your NHS taxes... 0-97, 98-844, 845++ or is there another set of 'brackets' altogether?

I know that really doesn't have to do with this particular topic but to compare it to US you have to include what we pay to pay for Medicaid, which is NOT part of Medicare/SS I don't think. To get a truly honest idea of what the cost differences are (again n'mind the differences in service or the whole Co Pay thing) you have to count ALL our insurance programs on the books... not to mention the retirement thing... but I donno that we could manage to calculate what Medicaid actually costs because it's lumped in with SO many other things... food stamps to politician pay... so perhaps the easiest thing would simply be to add up ALL the taxes taken and then compare what you get and what the costs are? Whatchu think?

 

[thaiturkey]

Quote:
How bad a person am I that that line made me laugh!??!

Okay, that's precisely what I thought it was... AWESOME... love it when I finally get it!

So, is your income tax as simple as your NHS taxes... 0-97, 98-844, 845++ or is there another set of 'brackets' altogether?

I know that really doesn't have to do with this particular topic but to compare it to US you have to include what we pay to pay for Medicaid, which is NOT part of Medicare/SS I don't think. To get a truly honest idea of what the cost differences are (again n'mind the differences in service or the whole Co Pay thing) you have to count ALL our insurance programs on the books... not to mention the retirement thing... but I donno that we could manage to calculate what Medicaid actually costs because it's lumped in with SO many other things... food stamps to politician pay... so perhaps the easiest thing would simply be to add up ALL the taxes taken and then compare what you get and what the costs are? Whatchu think?

The income tax system has different income bands and rates from NI. Why make it simple?

Tax officials have been made to make mistakes both ways and I hate form filling so I pay my accountant in the UK to do it all for me. The aim for straight tax on wages is that you pay the correct amount each month but file a declaration each year to catch up with any changes during the tax year. Income tax is used to fund many things and I think a comparison with tax paid and expenditure between the UK and US would be difficult.

Here's a chart to show the income bands and the rates applicable:

http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/rates/it.htm

Enjoy!

 

[BlackBart]

Quote:

I think they are trying to wear us down because Health Care is costing so much because of the aging population. People are not as healthy as they used to be either. Could that be because of all the garbage in our food ?
I say cut the pension benefits of the retired Senators and divert that mega sum to healthcare

The government spends money foolishly. 2010 Olympic Games for one, Oh the money spending scandals! Open purse policy. Cost plus mentality. Impluse spending, pay later, then cut funding to social programs.

But, something is better than nothing, warts and all. The Canadian Healthcare system is not a money making industry, its a huge drain. Almost everything is paid for by the Government. That $ amount is huge. Canadian Provinces are given a "X" amount in transfer payments from the Federal Government. But it doesn't seem to take into account that some Provinces have a large aging population moving to them because of their climate.

My sister-in-law (Radiologist) worked in a few US hospitals for several years and she said they were run like a business. They were run to make a profit. My parent's neighbor is a USA Radiologist and he is a millionaire, my sister-in-law isn't. Her wages were capped in Canada. That is probably why Doctors choose to work where there isn't any limit to their wage. I can't imagine a universal healthcare system being able to afford wages that aren't capped.

My American neighbor told me it would have cost him $55,000 for his by-pass surgery in the USA, but he got it done here and it cost him zero.

If the US plans to implement a healthcare system. Keep it simple and basic for all. Just medical coverage.

 

[PineappleMama]

Ahhh NOW it's starting to look more like ours.

Okay... so I'ma try and work this out... our gross is 560/wk... pounds that'd be 353.29...
So we'd chip in 0% on the first 97/wk and then 11% (38.86) on the rest (we don't hit the 844) total for NHS = 38.86/wk

Then income tax... bit more confuzzling IMO... actually, I'm totally lost to be honest... the second table says the percents, but it specifies savings income... that's how I read it anyways... or is that the % for any kind of income?

And as to the allowances... is that the amount of non-taxable income (ala under 97 in the NHS charts?) allowed per household OR per person? And does a minor/non-working spouse get the same allowance as a working adult?

Family of four like us... do we get a 6475 allowance for DH (breadwinner) or do we get 25900, 6475x4 of us?

And from there... is the 6475/25900 taxed from 0- at ??? % or does the taxing only begin AT 6475/25900 and up?

In the US we do dependents and earned income credits and all sorts of gobblty gook... I don't even understand all of my OWN system... so I beg for patience.

Libertarians are all about SMALLER government, but I'm totally willing to listen to facts... IF I can ever wrap my head around them anyways... and making it apply to us makes it a lot easier to grasp... if it turns out that the math proves that you guys are getting more bang, ala better care AND retirement!, for your buck then I'll have no problem standing behind a system that's the same... but again I don't think what's happening here comes close to being the same idea as what you guys have... not even close.

 

[thaiturkey]

Quote:
Ignore all of the taxes, such as capital gains, other than Income tax. Income tax is applicable to wages and savings. Self-employment income is dealt with differently, even if you have a job income and part time self-employment. You see why I use an accountant?

You pay no income tax on the first £6475. The threshold is higher for older people, as you see. I don't know whether there is a tax free band for savings income because I've always been in the happy position of paying income tax and expected no relief on saving interest. Banks and other savings institutions have to deduct tax at source on your interest and you argue the toss about the amount when you file your annual return. My kids were given savings accounts as soon as they were born and have been tax payers since then as a result so I guess that there's still no tax free allowance for that.

If you scroll down you will come to the tax bands and rates. It works in the same way as the NI equivalent.

The system is complicated. The thresholds change every year and so may the rates. There is no doubt that the UK taxpayer is heavily taxed in total but you need to consider the benefits and the alternative cost of private suppliers of those services.

All of the income tax allowances are per person. So, one spouse could be paying tax while the other had a small tax free income. There are also credits to help lower income families but it's complicated and won't help your understanding of the main structure. There's a small allowance for children paid to the mother but that might go soon because the bankers wrecked the economy and need to be paid their bonuses.

You'll be a UK tax expert soon!

 

[PineappleMama]

Oh yeah, agree let's TOTALLY ignore all the fancy income and stick to plain jane.

Okay... so lemme see if I've got it... yet.

DH's income = 560/wk = 353.29 pounds... or 29120/18367.3 per year

DH's INCOME tax would be 20% on the bit above the 6475 mark... 18367.3-6475=11892.3x0.2= 2378.46 Income Tax/yr
My Income = 0 so 0 tax
DS's Income = 0 so 0 tax
DD's Income = 0 so 0 tax

So total Income Tax for our household would be the 2378.46?
Divided by 52 weekly paychecks = 45.74 taken out per week.

(do you guys do ONE tax form for the household or does each person have to do one?)

Add to that the NHS stuff... 0% on his first 97/wk, then 11% on the remaining 256.29 = 28.19

So... for our 353.29/wk income a total of 73.93 is taken out.

That isn't counting any savings/interest taxes, or bonds or any of that weird stuff. This is just plain ol' guy who works his hours and gets a check at the end of the week. Are these the only two things that are taken out? Income and NHS? Or is there anything else to consider?

If that's it then it looks like 20.93% on 'our check'... obviously that's going to vary, but as to how it would pertain to us in particular... 20.93%... is that right?

That doesn't really seem all that high to me... feels like I MUST be missing something.... is your sales tax crazy or something?