41–50 of 215 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The BC government doesn't pay for my insulin. As a type 1 diabetic... yeah, I'd say it is medically required.
Medicines, in BC, are covered under a separate plan.. Pharmacare. As far as this goes, insulin is covered: http://www.health.gov.bc.ca/pharmacare/generalinfo/generalin...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Chemo is most definitely covered for me.. just as everything else that would be medically required. http://www.health.gov.bc.ca/msp/infoben/benefits.html#notcov... Nothing you have commented with is based on fact. Edit: OP added a ninja-edit to his comment that included the part about teeth-pain... as my link explains, non-emergency dentalcare is not covered by default.
You linked to a provincial health service for B.C. residents. That's not Canadian coverage and I don't see where it says that medication is covered. Most citizens in Canada don't have free (or reduced cost) medication unless they are below the poverty line. I came out of the hospital with an $800/month medication bill after a diagnosis of colitis, after missing 2 months of work being bed-ridden, while self-employed w…
Medicines, in BC, are covered under a different service, called Pharmacare.
http://www.health.gov.bc.ca/pharmacare/generalinfo/generalin...
Even though I've been researching with interest, so far I haven't run across much in the American healthcare system that makes me question my decision (as an American) to move to Denmark. My taxes are higher, but my costs are very predictable, and by design cannot ever bankrupt me: I pay a flat 8% of my income to support the national healthcare system. I won't end up with a charge equal to 20% or 50% or 500% of my in…
What is your legal status in Denmark, and how did you achieve it? Are you a "resident alien" or an immigrant or what? What restrictions/hoops did you have to jump to get permanent residence status? What did it cost?
I'm a researcher hired by a Danish university, which made for a fairly easy fast-track visa under the "researchers scheme" [1]. In fact the entire process was by mail and took one round-trip: I mailed my passport, offer letter, photos, and application to the NYC consultate, and they mailed back my passport with a visa pasted into it. Most professionals with an offer will also be able to get a visa; it's not nearly as restricted as getting U.S. visas is. If you have an offer that pays more than 375,000 DKK ($63,500), you qualify under the "pay limit scheme" for similarly preferential treatment [2]. Getting permanent residency depends on if you're an EU citizen. If yes, it's just a matter of remaining in the country as a legal resident for at least 5 uninterrupted years. If you're from outside the EU, there are more requirements [3], including that you must be employed for 3 of the 5, and must pass a language exam establishing basic competence in the language (which is unfortunately quite difficult to speak, though the grammar and vocabulary are not particularly difficult).
I must also give them kudos for giving all of this information in not only English, but straightforward, non-legalese English. Dealing with the Danish state is generally not a horrible experience so far, even for someone who speaks no Danish.
[1] http://www.nyidanmark.dk/en-us/coming_to_dk/work/researchers...
[2] http://www.nyidanmark.dk/en-us/coming_to_dk/work/pay-limit-s...
[3] http://www.nyidanmark.dk/en-us/coming_to_dk/permanent-reside...
This is an inappropriate article for HN.
Silly americans... in my country, it's obligatory to have health insurance and if you cannot afford it, the government will pay your insurance, for god's sake. Not even the most conservative and right-wing politicans who see our freedom in danger when we can't keep fully automatic assault rifles at home anymorehere question this system, because it just makes sense.
Can someone please explain to me the purpose of an insurance company when participation in the pool is mandatory? A policy like this seems like it creates a legislated middle-man that just wastes money.
While both government and private companies are both theoretically incented to drive down costs, practically there is a lot more scope for government to operate the plans in an inefficient way without consequence; on the other hand private companies are primarily incentivised by profit, which does not always correlate with the most efficient way of delivering healthcare.
This is where the nuance kicks in (i.e. big government or small government); a well run government plan would better but leaning on the private sector is a hedge against poor management.
I’ll have to have to pay less than 6% of that, because I’m lucky enough to still have insurance.
Why? If you have insurance, shouldn't that cover the whole expense? Or is it a bit like an excess on a car insurance policy? Can you get insurance that covers everything?
Even though I've been researching with interest, so far I haven't run across much in the American healthcare system that makes me question my decision (as an American) to move to Denmark. My taxes are higher, but my costs are very predictable, and by design cannot ever bankrupt me: I pay a flat 8% of my income to support the national healthcare system. I won't end up with a charge equal to 20% or 50% or 500% of my in…
8% sounds great. US currently spends around 16% of GDP on health care every year. I think the majority of Americans would support a universal health care system that provides far more coverage at half the cost. Instead our total spend is expected to double by 2020. Source: http://money.cnn.com/2011/07/28/news/economy/healthcare_spen...
In Norway it's like this: Senior citizen: 4,7% Employed: 7,8% Self-employed: 11%
Last time I checked we spent around 9% of GDP on healthcare.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You know what's a huge barrier to entrepreneurship? Needing the insurance that comes with a BigCo job, so you're not ruined financially when your kid gets bit by a bug. I know many people who have this explicit rationale for not founding or joining a startup.
Then they are grossly misunderstanding relative risks and shouldn't be launching their own startup. And its terrible reasoning. Existing law already provides for cobra, giving them an 18 month window of coverage in which they can retain your employer's insurance (by paying the full premiums). That's more than enough time to validate an idea and secure insurance in the new company, or fail and spend 6 months finding a…
Personally, I think bootstrapping, taking no outside investment at all is also a completely reasonable model (and often ends up with a more sustainable business, and can be executed by people that lack the sales skills to get investment)
If you are bootstrapping? 18 months is not a reasonable period of time to get something to the point where you can get group coverage. (In most states, to get group coverage, you need at least two employees on that insurance.)
also, I think it's quite valid to support yourself doing contract work. same problem; if you don't want a body shop to take half your pay, well, you need two employees before you can get group coverage.
Every time a healthcare discussion comes up and everyone gets derailed on whether (or how much) to socialize things, I wonder the following: from a technology, taxation, and moral standpoint, what the hell led to a system where some heavy-duty antibiotics cost about 10-15X what they should? More importantly, why do generally intellegent audiences get caught up in arguments over socialism rather than correcting the co…
The reason is simple. Many folks, myself included, hold the view that it is government intervention that has led to the insane system currently in place. Eliminating the perverse healthcare system forced on us by current policy IS the way to control the cost issue.