General Discussion

Monk06

(7,675 posts) Fri Jun 29, 2012, 06:54 PM Jun 2012

Just a view from the attic re the mandate/tax and compulsory purchase of medical insurance.

In Canada, specifically BC you are REQUIRED to enroll in MSP, the provincial medical plan if you are a resident of BC. Failing to enroll carries a penalty. Any person who is a BC resident and fails to enroll open an MSP account is liable for the full cost of medical treatment including emergency services.

And guess what? the system has been in place nationwide since 1964 and only the Tories make the tired claim that compulsory single payer medical insurance deprives citizens of freedom of choice compared to private insurance.

Penalizing people who don't purchase insurance, who then go on to acquire FREE medical services by using emergency services, is a legitimate and fair way to lower health care costs and penalize people who game the system.

ACA provides for the indigent with subsidies so there is justification for saying, "I'm young and healthy and should not be forced to buy health insurance if I don't want to."

In short mandates or tax charges are a legitimate way to ensure that every citizen is covered by insurance and everyone pays their fair share of the risk of illness or accident.

For a summery of the compulsory obligation to self insure and the various benefits and obligations go here.

http://www.health.gov.bc.ca/msp/infoben/eligible.html#who

4 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Just a view from the attic re the mandate/tax and compulsory purchase of medical insurance. (Original Post) Monk06 Jun 2012 OP

Here is a huge difference between Canada and the US from your link Bluenorthwest Jun 2012 #1

You can thank Trudeau and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms for that. Monk06 Jun 2012 #2

A few differences. enlightenment Jun 2012 #3

I admit I was trying to look on the bright side. MSP and ACA are not the same or even similar Monk06 Jun 2012 #4

Bluenorthwest

(45,319 posts)

1. Here is a huge difference between Canada and the US from your link

Reply to Monk06 (Original post)

Fri Jun 29, 2012, 07:05 PM

Jun 2012

In Canada:
"Spouse - means a resident who is either married to or is living and cohabiting in a marriage-like relationship with the applicant and may be of the same gender as the applicant."

Under the ACA, only heterosexual couples count as couples, the rest of us are just strangers on a 25 year train. Add to that the fact that the tax code will be used to figure premiums and subsidies, and the lack of fairness in the US law is startling.

Monk06

(7,675 posts)

2. You can thank Trudeau and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms for that.

Reply to Bluenorthwest (Reply #1)

Fri Jun 29, 2012, 07:15 PM

Jun 2012

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

Calling someone a fag will get your ass kicked up here and same sex marriage was approved by a wide margin. Not a whisper of complaint except from Evangelicals who nobody listens to here.

enlightenment

(8,830 posts)

3. A few differences.

Reply to Monk06 (Original post)

Fri Jun 29, 2012, 07:44 PM

Jun 2012

The rates, particularly in terms of how much subsidy/assistance a citizen of BC is eligible for - the full premium doesn't kick in until a person is making $30,000 ($29,513 US). Also, the rates are not based on age - there is no penalty for getting older, which there certainly is under ACA.

The coverage. This is where it gets very, very different. I might - as a single person - be able to get insurance under the exchange for a cost similar to what a single person would get it in BC ($64 CAD monthly). Let's assume I can. I guarantee you that any plan I am able to pay for at that rate is going to cover next to nothing - I'll be paying for the privilege of saying I have insurance, not because it will be something I can afford to actually use.

My BC counterpart, however, will be able to go to the doctor - have check-ups, diagnostic tests . . . hospitalizations. They won't be receiving bill after bill from every visit, or tearing their hair out trying to figure out what they are being charged for - or why their deductible didn't apply - or why their co-pay changed - or any other of a thousand issues that Americans deal with daily as they try to navigate the for-profit insurance snake-pit.

There really is no comparison, Monk06, beyond the obligation to pay toward the care they receive. The MSP is a HEALTH plan - not an insurance plan that puts another layer of cost and obfuscation between the individual and their health care.

Monk06

(7,675 posts)

4. I admit I was trying to look on the bright side. MSP and ACA are not the same or even similar

Reply to enlightenment (Reply #3)

Fri Jun 29, 2012, 08:03 PM

Jun 2012

according to your comparison and you are correct. But bear in mind I took Canada from 1948 to 1964 to get a true single payer national health plan in place that provided affordable preventative and emergency medical coverage. We only succeeded by allowing doctors to be independent practitioners instead of government employees as is the case with the UK's NHS.

Most importantly we made it illegal for insurance companies to sell medical insurance except for dental services and cosmetic surgery.

I don't see that ever happening in the US. The insurance industry is to large and powerful and legislating insurance companies out of the health care market would almost certainly be unconstitutional.

Frankly I'm surprised ACA was upheld. It's not anywhere near single payer and in fact is not a health plan at all but it's a start.

Reply to this discussion