Controversial Michael Moore Flick 'Sicko' Will Compare U.S. Health Care with Cuba's

Sheri257 · Jul 8, 2007

But how much are we willing to have the government TAKE from our paychecks? From what I've read, in places w/UHC, France for instance, the government takes a MANDATORY 40% out of your check. I don't know about you, but I can't live on 60% of what I make!

Funny that you mention this. After we watched Moore's movie we decided to start researching France for our retirement.

From what I've reading, the taxes don't get too bad until you're making over $96K per year at current exchange rates. And they do have exemptions and deductions, just like when you do your U.S. tax return so the real tax rate is lower.

Also keep in mind that with the exception of Paris, the cost of living in France is generally lower than the U.S. so, you may have less income after tax but, it may not matter that much with the lower cost of living.

Personally I don't mind paying taxes for the best health system in the world. Everybody here screams about taxes but, how much are they paying for health insurance?

Last time I checked, the average U.S. family health insurance premium is now running about $11-$12K a year. Since average household income is about $50-$60K ... that's over 20 percent of average household income and probably why we have so many uninsured Americans.

Hopefully your employer is picking most of the tab but, I have two friends who are self employed and have to pay those premiums themselves. What good is lower tax rates when you have to pay those kinds of premiums for, at best, mediocre healthcare?

:typing

anononurse · Jul 8, 2007

What about waiting lists for routine procedures? Is this true? I don't recall this being addressed in the movie. I saw the MM movie last night, and it sounds like UHC is the answer IF taxes aren't raised, and it really does improve access to quality healthcare. HOWEVER, I'm still a little skeptical.... b/c I don't trust our government. However...the idea of moving to Canada is beginning to appeal to me!!

HM2VikingRN, RN · Jul 8, 2007

funny that you mention this. after we watched moore's movie we decided to start researching france for our retirement.
the taxes can get up to 49 percent, actually, but that's for the top tax bracket. from what i've reading, the taxes don't get too bad until you're making over $96k per year at current exchange rates. and they do have exemptions and deductions, just like when you do your u.s. tax return so the real tax rate is lower.
also keep in mind that with the exception of paris, the cost of living in france is generally lower than the u.s. so, you may have less income after tax but, it may not matter that much with the lower cost of living.
personally i don't mind paying taxes for the best health system in the world. everybody here screams about taxes but, how much are they paying for health insurance?
last time i checked, the average u.s. family health insurance premium is now running about $11-$12k a year. since average household income is about $50-$60k ... that's over 20 percent of average household income and probably why we have so many uninsured americans.
hopefully your employer is picking most of the tab but, i have two friends who are self employed and have to pay those premiums themselves. what good is lower tax rates when you have to pay those kinds of premiums for, at best, mediocre healthcare?
:typing

to support what you are discussing: (emphasis added)

for-profit, investor-owned hospitals (link 11, 22, 33, & 44), hmos5 and nursing homes6 have higher costs and score lower on most measures of quality than their non-profit counterparts.
1. editorial by david himmelstein, md and steffie woolhandler, md in the canadian medical association journal
2. devereaux, pj "payments at for-profit and non-profit hospitals," can. med. assoc. j., jun 2004; 170
3. devereaux, pj "mortality rates of for-profit and non-profit hospitals," can. med. assoc. j, may 2002; 166
4. himmelstein, et al "costs of care and admin. at for-profit and other hospitals in the u.s." nejm 336, 1997
5. himmelstein, et al "quality of care at investor-owned vs. not-for-profit hmos" jama 282(2); july 14, 1999
6. harrington et al, "himmelstein, et al "quality of care at investor-owned vs. not-for-profit hmos" jama 282(2); july 14, 1999," american journal of public health; vol 91, no. 9, september 2001

http://www.pnhp.org/single_payer_resources/pnhp_research_the_case_for_a_national_health_program.php

great post!

Sheri257 · Jul 8, 2007

Just to follow up on what the French pay in taxes ... I'm sure some will find flaws with this analysis and I'm sure it's far from perfect but, perhaps it will give some perspective. In France, the top tax rate is 40 percent (I was wrong about the 49 percent ... the top rate was lowered to 40 percent a couple of years ago).

But, that only applies if you're making more than $90K a year. The tax rate goes down with income and the number of members in each household.

For example, if you and your husband make a total income of $60,000 (the average American household income) then in France your income tax would be 28 percent ... not 40 percent. If you have kids then the tax rate gets down to 22 percent or less.

The average American household income tax rate is 15 percent so, it's definitely less than the French but ... consider this. IF you have health coverage through your employer (and only about 60 percent of working Americans do) ...

The Kaiser Foundation says you're probably paying about $3,000 in premiums each year, even if you're employer is picking up most of the tab of the average family policy, which now costs $11,400.

So with a $60K income ... that $3K is an extra 5 percent cost right there ... bringing you up to 20 percent. So, at that point ... we could be have a negligible two percent difference in costs (20 percent versus 22 percent).

And, if you're one of the 40 percent of working Americans who don't have employer subsidized insurance then ... the tax question becomes moot. Because with an average family policy cost of $11,400 ... you're basically paying 20 percent of your average family income for health insurance ... plus 15 percent taxes so ... that, for all practical purposes is a 35 percent tax bracket.

But, of course, most American households can't afford those premium costs which is why we have so many uninsured Americans.

Now, the French are also required to buy health insurance to supplement extra expenses but it's run by government sponsored non-profit organizations so it's dirt cheap ... I've seen rates quoted at $20-$40 a month. And what do they get for that money? Most of their co-payments, drugs, etc. are reimbursed in full ... unlike our system where we often have to pay for those expenses.

Not to mention, in France everybody is covered. Of course in the U.S., even if you do pay for insurance ... that doesn't mean you'll get adequate care.

:typing

anononurse · Jul 8, 2007

Iagree, someone should be a messenger for the healthcare syst. - but could we get an honest one? I don't think MM meets that criteria (see above link).

Interesting..... so does this make everyone in his films liars too? Thank goodness we know the government is honest!! :uhoh3:

ramboRN, RN · Jul 9, 2007

Almost all healthcare Businesses are collusion Businesses today as they are all suckling from insurance money regulated by government(our Money)or Government tax derived money (our money). What I am suggesting is : Instead of creating big pools of money for these lazy psuedo business people to just qualify for, lets take our PowerBack (OUR MONEY) let us dictate the terms instead of being at thier mercy{lol}. Why should these self appointed slugs dictate anything. Again lets handcuff the Government, and fire the insurance parasites. take back our money and power and i swear we will all be healthier and will have no shortage of PLACES to spend our health bucks that are in our bank acconts, not thiers. DOES ANYBODY ELSE SEE THIS?

pickledpepperRN · Jul 9, 2007

Almost all healthcare Businesses are collusion Businesses today as they are all suckling from insurance money regulated by government(our Money)or Government tax derived money (our money). What I am suggesting is : Instead of creating big pools of money for these lazy psuedo business people to just qualify for, lets take our PowerBack (OUR MONEY) let us dictate the terms instead of being at thier mercy{lol}. Why should these self appointed slugs dictate anything. Again lets handcuff the Government, and fire the insurance parasites. take back our money and power and i swear we will all be healthier and will have no shortage of PLACES to spend our health bucks that are in our bank acconts, not thiers. DOES ANYBODY ELSE SEE THIS?

How do you envision this being done?

ss07 · Jul 9, 2007

I love this country. But I saw that movie today. One of the things that made tears come down my face was seeing former Ground Zero workers who have contracted illnesses from breathing the air there, with no medical coverage for the illnesses they have. People just like you and me, while the terrorist prisoners at Guantanamo Bay who helped in causing 9/11, have the best health care there is to offer in this country. I'm not on MM's side or anybody else's except God's. But I hated seeing that. If people out there think that the drug companies and HMO's and insurance companies arent' making money off of us in an awful way, then perhaps this information needs to be given to us. America was not built on complacency. It was built on people speaking freely in order to fix that which is wrong in order to make America even better. Everything could always stand improvement, since nothing is perfect.

fronkey bean · Jul 9, 2007

If they are working on a mismatched SS number (which does happen) they do pay in payroll taxes (SS, medicare, state, federal income tax etc). Believe it or not there is actually a program available through the IRS which helps undocumented immigrants file and pay taxes.
I must disagree with your assertion about sales taxes. In many states sales taxes are paid on every purchase. The point remains that they are paying taxes on the money that they earn here in the US. The studies and columns that I posted directly allude to the ways that they are paying into the health care system. Here is another example of how immigrants pay into supporting the health care system. In MN, there is a tax attached to cigarettes that is directly targeted to helping pay for MN Care. Anybody who smokes is paying into the funding stream for MN Care which is the health insurance program for the working poor. If you smoke you help pay for health care.

http://www.pnhp.org/PDF_files/Mohanty_Immigrants.pdf

[/left]

The column was using numbers from legal immiigrants to justify illegal immigrants. two different issues. You didn't include the actual number of illegals who file. Having known a few, I'm betting way less than half file taxes. Don't know the numbers of those who use fake ss numbers vs those who just get paid under the table but I would be willing to bet that 50% or less are having payroll taxes out. Migrant field workers, day laborors, and domestics are paid under the table. The tax on a hundred dollars or so of Wal-Mart purchaces two or three times a mo. won't pay for a lot of health care. And the cigs. what a great idea. Let's make them unhealthy so they'll NEED to use our health care, b/c at least their puchase will help pay for a portion.

Besides, as much as I would love to continue this discussion, the issue isn't illegals using the system, its UHC. I am ok w/ them getting health care the same as any other uninsured. We just need to figure out how to provide it and how to pay for it. That is something else to think about though. If we were to adopt a UHC and extended coverage to illegals, how many people will cross the border for health care? Canada doesn't have that prob. so their model will not help us figure out what we will do if we suddenly have thousands of new immigrants wanting to use our med. services.

fronkey bean · Jul 9, 2007

This is the best proposal out there for the US (and no it won't raise your taxes.):
http://www.pnhp.org/facts/singlepayer_faq.php#raise_taxes

I find it hard to belive that 7% tax on employers and 2% on individuals will cover the kind of program you are talking about. I'd like to see a breakdown in actual numbers. Even eliminating insurance providers you still have to pay all health care employees (mds, rns. techs, lab, radiology, etc., etc.), all bills on all healthcare facilities, meds and equipment, the building of new facilities and updating old ones, etc. Medicare will barely reimburse now (according to an earlier poster), how are they going to manage when we increase their load by adding the 15% of uninsured Americans to their services?

There is no way this can be done on the numbers you propose.

pickledpepperRN · Jul 9, 2007

If Nurses would join forces and get behind a rational Healthcare Policy we could definately make a difference if not totally dominate the debate. When I say rational i mean a policy that will not have a "Large Pool Of Money" available for the Government and thier collusion Businesses to exploit and change to thier benifit over time. I can see no other way than to put the money in the direct consumers hand so he has the power rather than Government Or other institutions. Let Market forces prevail. Lasse faire Capitalism in its pure form has never been tried or allowed show it value to mankind. we only have small case evidence that it will work. Healthcare would be the perfect place to give it a shot.
The small case evidence comes from the computer industry. The computer industry grew so fast by market forces that the government and all its colluders could not get a handle on it and exploit it for thier purposes. consequently the " Fountainhead" of values then spilled over into the marketplace and gives direct evidence of the value of "Lasse faire" capitalisms. We now can afford computers that only a few years ago would cost millions of Dollars { proof positive}Again Handcuff the govrnment and all its colluders and set the market free for the FIRST time and watch the magic of the free market do its thing. I would stake my life on the results.

Again I ask, "Should I die if the cost of saving my life is more than I can afford?

My child?

Parent?

How does a provider know the financial ability to pay before rendering care?

Why do you think a matter of life and death is the perfect place to "Give a shot" to an untried economic system?

Pre paid hospital care began in 1929 when a group of teachers in Dallas, Texas contracted with Baylor hospital to pay 50 cents a month in exchange for up to 21 days in the hospital if needed.

http://www.bcbstx.com/about/history.htm

http://eh.net/encyclopedia/article/thomasson.insurance.health.us

fronkey bean · Jul 9, 2007

Add Tricare to the list of who will no longer accept that form of insurance. I called the Orthopedist who did my knee surgery, and my husband's knee surgery, and I was told that the group voted to no longer accept Trcare. The OB-GYN, who delivered both of my kids, also no longer accepts Tricare. I now see a Family Doctor. I will now have to find an new orthopedist to look at and my knee, and so will my husband. My kids pediatrician also stopped taking Tricare several years ago, and we had to find a new pediatrician for them.
And why won't they take Tricare anymore? Because they don't get reimbursed enough. Nurses would do well to form "Practice Groups", like physicians. As a group, we will then have the power, and clout to get what we want.
Lindarn, RN, BSN, CCRN
Spokane, Washington

Tricare, that's another gov't run insurance provider isn't it? Huum! I'm starting to see a pattern. :uhoh3: I like the thought of "nurse practise groups". that would be an interesting thread.