On Mar 2, 7:23*am, Ron Rosenfeld <ronrosenf...[at]nospam.org> wrote:
- quote -

Thank you Ron, for returning the topic to the OP's question (and not
diving into the Cold War again).
Excellent point you make - there are some doctors, clinics, hospitals,
communities, nurses, and so forth that are better than others,
investigating specifically what is available in the region or town
should clear up the picture. Quality and availability probably varies
by specialty as well. If an individual's genetics indicate family
history of heart problems, one might check for that specialty in the
town or city. There are numerous services in the U.S. screening
doctors, ranking hospitals and nursing homes - there may be similar
services in other countries.

The overall quality of life in retirement may be more important than
health care - I believe low stress, good diet (such as a variety of
fresh fruits and non-processed foods), happy people and activities may
do more for one's enjoyment of living than anything a doctor can do.
World-wide, health care has made vast strides, as well as very
expensive ones, but I wonder if there is an element of morbid fixation
on postponing death of the body?

------ Misc.invest.financial-plan is a moderated newsgroup where Moderators strive
to keep the conversations on-topic for financial planning. Other posting
guidelines include a request for brevity and another for trimming posts to
which we respond. For all of the other tips and suggestions, see "FROM THE
MODERATORS: Posting to misc.invest.financial-plan", a weekly post now on the
Newsgroup.

On 2008-03-01 20:48:16 -0800, dapperdobbs <GeorgeCFL[at]hotmail.com> said:
- quote -


Somehow I have the impression that the number of "choices" available in
the social/political realm are more numerous. To fixate on only two
restricts our thinking and planning too much. For example, if I had to
choose between dictatorial Nazism and dictatorial communism, I would
choose communism. But isn't there something in between?

As an analogy, if someone claimed that financial planning is a matter
of either buying mutual funds or irresponsibly spending and running up
credit card debt, I would hesitate to accept either of those "choices."
But more pertinent to the present topic, someone who plans their
financial future on the belief that our present health care system in
the USA will forever be as it is today, is making a risky assumption.

------ Misc.invest.financial-plan is a moderated newsgroup where Moderators strive
to keep the conversations on-topic for financial planning. Other posting
guidelines include a request for brevity and another for trimming posts to
which we respond. For all of the other tips and suggestions, see "FROM THE
MODERATORS: Posting to misc.invest.financial-plan", a weekly post now on the
Newsgroup.

"dapperdobbs" <GeorgeCFL[at]hotmail.com> wrote
- quote -

Of course Universal Health Care by itself does not determine
violence. In fact, as you should know full well, countries
with Universal Health Care overwhelming have significantly
superior infant mortality rates, among other health
statistics. E.g. compare the U.S.'s rate of 6.4 deaths per
1000 births to Britain's, Canada's, and Japan's rates of
5.0, 4.6, and 2.8.

------ Misc.invest.financial-plan is a moderated newsgroup where Moderators strive
to keep the conversations on-topic for financial planning. Other posting
guidelines include a request for brevity and another for trimming posts to
which we respond. For all of the other tips and suggestions, see "FROM THE
MODERATORS: Posting to misc.invest.financial-plan", a weekly post now on the
Newsgroup.

On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 12:46:30 -0600, "abby" <abbybrown[at]charter.net> wrote:

- quote -

WHO is ranking the health care SYSTEM in various countries. It looks at
different parameters than you might as an individual. The major parameters
of the WHO ranking are 1) good health: "making the health status of the
entire population as good as possible" across the whole life cycle, 2)
responsiveness: responding to people’s expectations of respectful treatment
and client orientation by health care providers, and 3) fairness in
financing: ensuring financial protection for everyone, with costs
distributed according to one’s ability to pay.

As a retiree, you are concerned with whether you, personally, will have
access to good quality medical care of the type you may require, and that
you can afford. In the US you can find areas of excellent, and very
accessible, health care (e.g. Boston area); and also areas where health
resources are very limited. That variance may be less true in smaller,
more homogenous countries.

So I guess the implications for a retiree is that, no matter where you
retire, if health care quality is an issue, you need to investigate its
availability and quality in the specific area to which you may retire.
--ron

------ Misc.invest.financial-plan is a moderated newsgroup where Moderators strive
to keep the conversations on-topic for financial planning. Other posting
guidelines include a request for brevity and another for trimming posts to
which we respond. For all of the other tips and suggestions, see "FROM THE
MODERATORS: Posting to misc.invest.financial-plan", a weekly post now on the
Newsgroup.

On Mar 1, 10:25*pm, Don <dwz...[at]telus.net> wrote:
- quote -

The capitalist model of properity and success is based on the notion
of private property, which in turn is based upon the very simple idea
that if one has the money to buy things, then one has the free choice
to buy them or not. The countervailing notion of common property has
led to over 100,000,000 deaths in Russia and China alone. Choose.

------ Misc.invest.financial-plan is a moderated newsgroup where Moderators strive
to keep the conversations on-topic for financial planning. Other posting
guidelines include a request for brevity and another for trimming posts to
which we respond. For all of the other tips and suggestions, see "FROM THE
MODERATORS: Posting to misc.invest.financial-plan", a weekly post now on the
Newsgroup.

On 2008-02-29 10:46:30 -0800, "abby" <abbybrown[at]charter.net> said:

- quote -

The USA has excellent health care available for affluent people who are
able to pay for it. There is a lot of high-tech medical equpment around
and many well trained medical specialists ready to use it. However,
there is hardly enough of that equipment and those doctors to serve all
the people in a large nation, so the ones who can pay get first choice.

Citizerns with mid-range and lower incomes would be better off in other
countries, most likely about 36 other countries, just like the WHO
claims. It is possible for US citizens to work hard all their lives and
make prudent financial decisions, just as recommended by experts in
this newsgroup, and still end up broke in their old age because of
devasting and expensive illnesses. When you get a chance, go see
Michael Moore's film "Sicko" if you haven't already done so. But cheer
up. I do believe universal health care is coming to the USA in the not
too distant future.

- quote -

buy or how to allocate your assets. Your chances of having a serious
illness in middle age or later, I would surmise, are greater than your
chances of making a killing with a super-performer stock or mutual
fund. But too many people are focused mainly on the latter type of
"financial planning" and have their heads in the sand and do not want
to recognize the former.

------ Misc.invest.financial-plan is a moderated newsgroup where Moderators strive
to keep the conversations on-topic for financial planning. Other posting
guidelines include a request for brevity and another for trimming posts to
which we respond. For all of the other tips and suggestions, see "FROM THE
MODERATORS: Posting to misc.invest.financial-plan", a weekly post now on the
Newsgroup.

On Feb 29, 1:46 pm, "abby" <abbybr...[at]charter.net> wrote:
- quote -

I think you got it right in the above last paragraph, as far as Doctor
quality. The WHO may very well have political agendas of its own,
something like the United Nations? And their ranking system may
consider "stated costs" (which opens up long discussions of private v.
public, and which is actually more cost efficient, which inevitably
borders on political issues of "free" medical service, the "rich" v.
the "poor" and the WHO probably favors "free"). Would you like to
retire in France where unemployment amongst young people is what, 40%?
Also note that if you retire elsewhere, you may be exposed to
environmental conditions dissimilar to your developed immunities as
well as to your genetic stock, and possible language problems.

------ Misc.invest.financial-plan is a moderated newsgroup where Moderators strive
to keep the conversations on-topic for financial planning. Other posting
guidelines include a request for brevity and another for trimming posts to
which we respond. For all of the other tips and suggestions, see "FROM THE
MODERATORS: Posting to misc.invest.financial-plan", a weekly post now on the
Newsgroup.

Hi,

When looking into retirement outside the US I came upon the
startling fact the the WHO ranks the US 37th in health care.
France is 1st, Italy 2nd, even Columbia, Chile and Costa Rica
are ranked ahead of the US. Why is that and what are the
implications for retirees?

One of my concerns about retiring elsewhere was health care
quality. Because we live just outside Boston and are
accustomed to first rate health and dental care.

Thanks,
Gary


======================================= MODERATOR'S COMMENT:
Posters to this thread should relate comments to general financial planning.

------ Misc.invest.financial-plan is a moderated newsgroup where Moderators strive
to keep the conversations on-topic for financial planning. Other posting
guidelines include a request for brevity and another for trimming posts to
which we respond. For all of the other tips and suggestions, see "FROM THE
MODERATORS: Posting to misc.invest.financial-plan", a weekly post now on the
Newsgroup.