| Pages:
1
2 |
Taco de Baja
Super Nomad
Posts: 1913
Registered: 4-14-2004
Location: Behind the Orange Curtain, CA
Member Is Offline
Mood: Dreamin' of Baja
|
|
Urging Mexico to strive for a better health care system could relieve the burden on US taxpayers
Interesting opinion piece from the Christian Science Monitor.
| Quote: |
Health care and illegal immigrants in America: why Mexico is the key
Urging Mexico to strive for a better health care system could relieve the burden on US taxpayers.
By George W. Grayson
from the November 19, 2009 edition
Mexico City - Few issues have caused as much of a stir this year as the question of whether illegal immigrants will be included in the Democratic
healthcare bill.
Rep. Joe Wilson's "You lie!" outburst after President Obama stated in September that illegal immigrants wouldn't be covered is just one example of the
tension. Eighty percent of Americans are loath to subsidize illegal immigrants according to a June 2009 Rasmussen poll. Amid a wobbly economy, the
uncertain though certainly high cost of the health care bill contributes to such hostility.
But there's something that might help solve part of the problem, satisfying both Democrats and Republicans: a campaign by Mexican officials to improve
the state of healthcare in their own country.
Mexico's healthcare system is corrupt, unwieldy, and grossly underfunded and it's costing American taxpayers big-time. Consider this: The Mexican
government spends $535 per capita on healthcare, yet American taxpayers fork out more than $1,100 in healthcare for the 12 million-plus illegal aliens
in the US most of whom are Mexicans who are uninsured or on Medicaid illegally.
Mexico's poor quality of healthcare is a forgotten factor that drives so many Mexicans across the border. As things stand now, illegal immigrants
like all who show up cannot be turned away from hospital emergency rooms, for anything from a broken bone to illness and pregnancies. Each year,
about 1 in 10 births in this country are to illegal aliens.
In general, they receive better quality care than what they could hope to receive back home. Even though lawmakers insist that healthcare reform
wouldn't subsidize care for illegals, US taxpayers in practice will contribute to covering the cost of their care. If Mexico had better structure
and Congress can and should encourage such self-help perhaps the US wouldn't have such a burden on its own system. Instead, Mexican leaders, who
often live like princes, prefer to shift the obligation to the US, and America is taking the bait.
Inadequate funding isn't the only problem with Mexico's system: It staggers under the poor delivery of services, a venal labor union linked to drug
smuggling and selling jobs at public healthcare agencies, and a Balkanization of the government-subsidized providers.
In addition to the Mexican Social Security Institute (IMSS), which provides health and retirement benefits to 45.8 percent of the population, there
are individualized programs for government bureaucrats, oil workers, the two electricity companies, the armed forces, and the extremely poor.
The multiple agencies and state-federal overlap of functions accentuate delays, errors, overhead expenses, and corruption. No wonder Mexico falls at
the bottom of the 30 OECD states in terms of out-of-pocket outlays on physician and hospital visits.
According to the Associated press, "Mexicans will do almost anything to avoid a public hospital emergency room, where ailing patients may languish for
hours slumped on cracked linoleum floors that smell of sweat, sickness, and pine-scented disinfectant. Many don't see doctors at all, heading instead
to the clerk at the corner pharmacy for advice on coping with a cold or a flu."
Mexico's National Human Rights Commission has criticized the lack of general practice physicians, specialists, and nurses, as well as "the
insufficiency of beds, medicine, instruments, and medical equipment in general." To make matters worse, administrative costs devour 10.8 percent of
the nation's meager health budget more than twice the level of Medicare in the US.
Corrupt union practices compound the problem.
The Health Workers' Union has gained one benefit after another since its founding in 1944. Not only do union members boast tenured positions, relative
high salaries, free medical care for themselves and their families, generous Christmas bonuses, and additional compensation for arriving at work on
time, but their retirement plan is one of the most attractive in the country. The lion's share of the nation's 374,000 union members can retire with
pensions in their mid-50s compared with the minimum retirement age of 65 for most other Mexicans.
So what can be done? Instead of turning a blind eye to the Mexican government's unwillingness to improve the medical care of its people, the Hispanic
Congressional Caucus and other special pleaders for including illegal aliens in healthcare legislation should insist that our southern neighbor launch
a root-and-branch reform of how it addresses its own citizens' medical needs.
And if the US encouraged Mexico to strive for a better system, the health bill now before the Senate would be relieved of one less roadblock.
------
George W. Grayson teaches government at the College of William & Mary. His latest book is "Mexico: Narco-Violence and a Failed State?"
|
link
Truth generally lies in the coordination of antagonistic opinions
-Herbert Spencer
|
|
|
Bajahowodd
Elite Nomad
Posts: 9274
Registered: 12-15-2008
Location: Disneyland Adjacent and anywhere in Baja
Member Is Offline
|
|
The author has many things right. But there are some things not so right and somethings missing. Sure, there's little question that the Mexican
government could do much to improve healthcare delivery to its citizens. However, to imply that healthcare is in any way, a significant factor driving
illegal immigration, is plain nonsense. if a Mexican in Mexico falls ill, who thinks they are going to attempt the arduous journey to get to El Norte?
OK, so many babies are born to illegals NOB, but there are two factors that override the quality of healthcare. The first being that the mother
happened to be here at the time. The second being that there has been a long time desire to have a child with dual citizenship.
As far as the author decrying the long waits for care in the Mexican ER, perhaps he should visit an ER or two in the US. Poor folks of any status,
uninsured people, lot's of folks use the ER as primary care because they know that they cannot be refused care and they also know that they probably
won't have to pay for it.
I know someone is going to place the blame on the crowded US ERs. But statistics do not bear this out. Illegals are the last people to seek treatment
for fear their status may be determined and they will be deported.
|
|
|
tripledigitken
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 4848
Registered: 9-27-2006
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Bajahowodd
...As far as the author decrying the long waits for care in the Mexican ER, perhaps he should visit an ER or two in the US. ...I know someone is going
to place the blame on the crowded US ERs. But statistics do not bear this out. Illegals are the last people to seek treatment for fear their status
may be determined and they will be deported. |
This doesn't support your view.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/immigration/parkland.asp
|
|
|
Bajahowodd
Elite Nomad
Posts: 9274
Registered: 12-15-2008
Location: Disneyland Adjacent and anywhere in Baja
Member Is Offline
|
|
Interesting, Ken. However, it appears that this article began with a particular point of view, as it referenced "anchor babies". Not saying it isn't
factually correct, but on the other hand, Dallas is not exactly on or near the border. Perhaps someone could enlighten me as to how such a high
percentage of illegals are found at a Dallas hospital.
|
|
|
Dave
Elite Nomad
Posts: 6005
Registered: 11-5-2002
Member Is Offline
|
|
A 'Christian Scientist' article about ...
Health care??? 
Gotta love it.
| Quote: | Originally posted by Taco de Baja
The Health Workers' Union has gained one benefit after another since its founding in 1944. Not only do union members boast tenured positions, relative
high salaries, free medical care for themselves and their families, generous Christmas bonuses, and additional compensation for arriving at
work on time |
I'm curious as to whether 'additional compensation' is ever paid.
I used to offer a similar plan to my Mexican employees where 'compensation' meant continuing to receive a paycheck. It wasn't viewed as an
incentive and didn't seem to interest them in the least. 
|
|
|
Bajahowodd
Elite Nomad
Posts: 9274
Registered: 12-15-2008
Location: Disneyland Adjacent and anywhere in Baja
Member Is Offline
|
|
Kudos, Dave. I missed the irony.
|
|
|
Dave
Elite Nomad
Posts: 6005
Registered: 11-5-2002
Member Is Offline
|
|
There's power, wonder working power
Is there a charge for converting to 'Christian Scientist'?
Are there, like, dues?
Cause if Obama makes health insurance mandatory I'll bet these nut jobs get a free pass.
I'm just thinkin'....
Pray for me. 
|
|
|
Santiago
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 3512
Registered: 8-27-2003
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Dave
The is power, wonder working power
|
Dave: having spent a bunch of my misspent youth being dragged, kicking a screaming to tent revival meetings, I must correct your lyrics:
"There is power, power, wonder working power..." 2 'powers'.
As a lad I thought they were singing about the actual blood of an actual lamb - turns out they were sing about one of the Alou brothers. Go figure.
|
|
|
Iflyfish
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 3747
Registered: 10-17-2006
Member Is Offline
|
|
Interesting, why then do so many from the USofA go to Mexico for medical treatment? The for profit system of medical care in the US is broken and
there is much that could be learned from the Mexican health care system.
I have had excellent medical care both in the USofA and Mexico.
Mexico has a combined public/private medical care system. This is a model that is very successful in European countries.
There is much that can be improved in regard to health care delivery in Mexico. There are large areas that are underserved, however rural health care
delivery is also a problem in the USofA.
All medical care is rationed. This is so because it is in scarce supply. It is rationed in all countries in the world. In the US that rationing is
based upon employment with a company that provides insurance and for pofit insurance companies that limit access to care via "Managed Care". The issue
in this regard has to do with who does the rationing, a for profit corporation accountable to its board and the need to make quarterly profits for its
share holders or a government agency whose goal it is to provide quality medical care for all of its citizens.
At least in Mexico medical care is a right and not a privilage as it is in the USofA.
There is world class medical care available in Mexico and that care, as in the USofA is generally to be found in larger urban areas where more
sophisticated people choose to live.
Mexico subsidizes medical training and requires physicians to spend time in public health contexts to "repay" their training. This is a good model
that could well be used in the US to break the strangle hold on the guild that the AMA has set up. In the US the AMA limits the number of doctors who
can be trained each year to protect their market share. This is one of the problems in the USofA that creates problems for rural areas who have
trouble recruiting doctors.
This article strikes me as a biased. Notice how the cost per person for medical care in the Mexico is about 1/3 of the cost for care in the USofA.
What do we get for paying three times more than is paid in Mexico? We get rather poor care when compared to other nations in lower life expectancy,
infant mortality and that list goes on. There is a huge managerial overhead in the USofA that goes directly to the Insurance Corporations in the form
of overhead and profit. The graft in Mexico is nothing compared to the cream that is scooped off of the premiums of those who accidently were born in
the USofA. This overhead amounts to up to 1/3 of our insurance dollars in the USofA and those dollars spent on it do not provide one ounce of care.
Iflyfishwhennotgrindingmyteathoverthelatestconservativehealthcare
|
|
|
Iflyfish
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 3747
Registered: 10-17-2006
Member Is Offline
|
|
If this topic interests you then check this out:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2009-08-31-mexico-health-...
Iflyfishwhenmyheadisn'tspinningfromallthecorporatespinpaidforbyinsurance
|
|
|
arrowhead
Banned
Posts: 912
Registered: 5-5-2009
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Iflyfish
Interesting, why then do so many from the USofA go to Mexico for medical treatment? |
A better question would be why do so many Mexicans go to the US for medical treatment? With fully 10% of the Mexican population living in the US
(about 10 million)and receiving medical treatment in the US, even with a conservative estimate, that works out to about 100 Mexicans receiving US
medical treatment for every 1 American receiving Mexican medical treatment.
| Quote: | | Mexico has a combined public/private medical care system. This is a model that is very successful in European countries. |
So does the US. The VA system is public, so is Mexicare, and just about every county has a public health facilities. One of the largest health
providers in Mexico is the Red Cross, which is not funded by the Mexican government.
| Quote: | | There is much that can be improved in regard to health care delivery in Mexico. There are large areas that are underserved, however rural health care
delivery is also a problem in the USofA. |
20% of the people in the US live in rural areas. 25% of the people in Mexico live in rural areas. It will always be a problem becuase it is only
efficient to place medical facilities where they will be 100% utilized. If the population of an area is too low to keep a doctor busy all day, then
you are wasting medical talent to provide rural health care and are taking services away from urban areas.
| Quote: | | All medical care is rationed. This is so because it is in scarce supply. It is rationed in all countries in the world. In the US that rationing is
based upon employment with a company that provides insurance and for pofit insurance companies that limit access to care via "Managed Care". The issue
in this regard has to do with who does the rationing, a for profit corporation accountable to its board and the need to make quarterly profits for its
share holders or a government agency whose goal it is to provide quality medical care for all of its citizens. |
The total health insurance and managed care industry profits are 0.36% of the national bill for health care.
| Quote: | | At least in Mexico medical care is a right and not a privilage as it is in the USofA. |
Emergency care is a right in the US. In the US, the patient gets to determine what is an emergency. Anybody presenting themselves to an emergency care
facility in the US must be attended to. That is a federal law. In Mexico, it is a priviledge. In Mexico, the attending physician gets to determine
what is an emergency, and has the right to refuse treatment on the grounds the health problem in NOT an emergency.
| Quote: | | Mexico subsidizes medical training and requires physicians to spend time in public health contexts to "repay" their training. This is a good model
that could well be used in the US to break the strangle hold on the guild that the AMA has set up. In the US the AMA limits the number of doctors who
can be trained each year to protect their market share. This is one of the problems in the USofA that creates problems for rural areas who have
trouble recruiting doctors. |
Medical students in the US do a one-year internship and then several years of residency
Doctors per 1,000 population:
US = 2.3
Mexico = 1.5
So under the Mexican model, they only have 65% of the doctors as the US.
No soy por ni contra apatνa.
|
|
|
Iflyfish
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 3747
Registered: 10-17-2006
Member Is Offline
|
|
I appreciate the clarity of your response. There are figures to check in your posting and I will do so. This is one of the reasons that I appreciate
Nomads, sometimes one can actually learn something on this site. Thanks for your post.
My experience with medical care in Mexico has been excellent, however my experience is only mine and you present some very interesting statistics.
Iflyfish
|
|
|
mtgoat666
Select Nomad
Posts: 18397
Registered: 9-16-2006
Location: San Diego
Member Is Offline
Mood: Hot n spicy
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by arrowhead
The total health insurance and managed care industry profits are 0.36% of the national bill for health care.
|
What a load of horse poop! sounds like a statistic calculated by a lobbyist.
There must be a lot of profit being taken from the national health care bill. My doctor friends that own clinics are doing quite well. My stocks in
drug and health care companies sure pay good dividends, a lot more than 0.36% 
Never seen a publlicly traded insurance company post profits as low as 0.36% (except AIG and a few others last year, and maybe a few insurers affter a
particularly gusty hurricane)
right wingnut talking points are always wrong, and always written by big corporation lobbyists
|
|
|
tripledigitken
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 4848
Registered: 9-27-2006
Member Is Offline
|
|
Goat,
Put up some data to support your side, not just political counterpoints.
Ken
|
|
|
Pescador
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 3587
Registered: 10-17-2002
Location: Baja California Sur
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by mtgoat666
What a load of horse poop! sounds like a statistic calculated by a lobbyist.
There must be a lot of profit being taken from the national health care bill. My doctor friends that own clinics are doing quite well. My stocks in
drug and health care companies sure pay good dividends, a lot more than 0.36%
Never seen a publlicly traded insurance company post profits as low as 0.36% (except AIG and a few others last year, and maybe a few insurers affter a
particularly gusty hurricane)
right wingnut talking points are always wrong, and always written by big corporation lobbyists |
Here goes the goat with more liberal claptrap that is totally unsupported. Most health care companies like Blue Cross and Blue Shield as well as
Aetna and Humana, operate on very small margins of profit and only make money on the total operation of the business which means that they take the
premiums paid in and put that money in to short term investments and other tools to generate additional monies. It is not a straight line function of
bringing in more premiums than is paid out in claims. But it is so easy to want to blame "Big Insurance" in the same meaningless way that "Big Oil"
is evil or "Big Pharmacy". It is a misguided perception that working for social causes is a higher level of motivation than working for profit. If
that were true then all of the socialistic countries like Cuba would be much better off economically than they are.
|
|
|
mtgoat666
Select Nomad
Posts: 18397
Registered: 9-16-2006
Location: San Diego
Member Is Offline
Mood: Hot n spicy
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Pescador
| Quote: | Originally posted by mtgoat666
What a load of horse poop! sounds like a statistic calculated by a lobbyist.
There must be a lot of profit being taken from the national health care bill. My doctor friends that own clinics are doing quite well. My stocks in
drug and health care companies sure pay good dividends, a lot more than 0.36%
Never seen a publlicly traded insurance company post profits as low as 0.36% (except AIG and a few others last year, and maybe a few insurers affter a
particularly gusty hurricane)
right wingnut talking points are always wrong, and always written by big corporation lobbyists |
Here goes the goat with more liberal claptrap that is totally unsupported. Most health care companies like Blue Cross and Blue Shield as well as
Aetna and Humana, operate on very small margins of profit and only make money on the total operation of the business which means that they take the
premiums paid in and put that money in to short term investments and other tools to generate additional monies. It is not a straight line function of
bringing in more premiums than is paid out in claims. But it is so easy to want to blame "Big Insurance" in the same meaningless way that "Big Oil"
is evil or "Big Pharmacy". It is a misguided perception that working for social causes is a higher level of motivation than working for profit. If
that were true then all of the socialistic countries like Cuba would be much better off economically than they are. |
pesco:
health insurers typically make around 6% profit. that's fine, in fact i want them to make good profit. it is a low risk business and deserves a low
profit.
your fishy self missed my point -- it is ludicrous to say that firms in health care field only make 0.36% profit. all of the for-profits on average
make more profit than that, and well they should.
re your comparison to cuba, you mistakenly measure success and happiness in only monetary terms.
from what i hear in my travels in south america, many people in latin america are impressed with the cuban health care system and what it accomplishes
for money spent.
perhaps you should have measured per capita medical care spending in USA and Cuba and asked USAers and cubanos about their happiness with medical
care??
|
|
|
Pescador
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 3587
Registered: 10-17-2002
Location: Baja California Sur
Member Is Offline
|
|
Well, Goat, here is what I do know from a lot of personal experience, after having traveled to Cuba and spending a number of years as a teacher on the
Indian Reservation. People get accustomed to whatever system that they have and adjust accordingly. In Cuba, I saw people going in to dingy offices
to see doctors who were impolite, uncaring, and not heavily motivated to do anything more than basics. On the Indian Reservation I had pretty much
the same experience and witnessed health care professionals and doctors who were taking care of their government obligation by working in poverty
areas, and because I kept in touch with a couple of the doctors, I got to see the difference in behavior and deportment when they went in to private
practice later in life.
So anecdotal reports are not very effective indicators as to the effectiveness of any particular medical delivery system. The World Health
Orginization has a rating system but it is so heavily weighed according to socialistic principles that the US delivery system comes out lower. A real
interesting statistic is the cancer survival rates which are dismal in most of those other countries that look so good on the WHO reports.
[Edited on 11-21-2009 by Pescador]
|
|
|
Bajahowodd
Elite Nomad
Posts: 9274
Registered: 12-15-2008
Location: Disneyland Adjacent and anywhere in Baja
Member Is Offline
|
|
I'm thinking that you fellas are overlooking something in this dabate. Assuming Arrowhead's figure was correct; that insurance companies retain 0.36%
of the national healthcare bill- according to the Kaiser Foundation, the national healthcare bill, in 2007 was $2.2 trillion dollars. Grab your
calculators and you can see that these guys did quite well for themselves, their executives and shareholders.
|
|
|
Iflyfish
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 3747
Registered: 10-17-2006
Member Is Offline
|
|
arrowhead,
I have researched some of your stats and what I have found so far is that they are accurate. I was shocked to learn that 10% of the Mexican National
population is in the USofA. That is really a remarkable statistic and one of which I have been unaware. I love Mexican culture and I have appreciated
its increased footprint here. This being the case my blinders have been on in relation to the size of the population. I appreciate your sharing this
information with us. It is always helpful and useful to have unbiased information to use in discussing an issue. You have provided us with some of
that much needed commodity.
As to the income of Health Insurance Companies the .36% profit is after that money that is paid for lobbying, executive salaries etc.
An interesting resource of information on US for profit health care corporations and their practices that increase profit can be found can be found in
the testimony of Wendell Potter a retired Cigna Media Relations Exec. A Google search of his perspective is very interesting.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/Potter%20Commerc...
Potter advocates for a single payer universal health care plan in the USofA that would eliminate more expensive for profit Corporate overhead with a
single payer plan like Medicare, which has a lower overhead.
I am learning from your post and will continue to explore the information you have presented.
Iflyfish
|
|
|
toneart
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 4901
Registered: 7-23-2006
Member Is Offline
Mood: Skeptical
|
|
I have received good medical treatment in both The United States and in Mexico. Generally, Mexican doctors give you whatever time you need and seem to
be more compassionate. They aren't jaded or time-restricted like those in the U.S., who have to follow insurance company mandates. While I often feel
rushed, I watch carefully. I keep my questions to a minimum because the doctor usually anticipates those that are necessary. I try to not be a pain in
the neck, but if not satisfied, I will prolong the visit.
Wherever you are and regardless of the political system, it is the patient's responsibility to be well informed and insist on thorough diagnosis and
treatment if it is not forthcoming. Doctors will respect you for that.
|
|
|
| Pages:
1
2 |
![[*]](images/xmbforum/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
