Tuesday, March 30, 2010

What U.S. health care reform means for Canada

We try to stay away from politics as much as possible, but there is a movement that now it's pretty hard to ignore.

As you know, Barack Obama signed legislation yesterday that largely a system heavily criticized reform of U.S. health care.

And while that is great news for millions of Americans - despite being a thorn in the side about 100 million Republicans - could have positive effects for Canadians, here north of the border?

The reasoning is, with a public commitment to fund the attention of Americans health needs in place, millions of would the Yankees have now discovered the confidence (or is it 'no fear? ") For the treatment of their finances rationally without preparing for a medical pump that had hurt your finances.

For example, say that the family X has no health coverage and maintain a fund of $ 20,000 saved if the grandmother became ill with asthma or junior or whatever. In theory, now, which is $ 20,000 more than can be pumped into the U.S. economy on a variety of ways.

That's not much, but multiply in cash and in the estimated 32 million Americans who have had no coverage and that is on the increase.

What does this mean for Canadians? However, many experts - such as the Financial Post, Diane Francis - chalk this as nothing more than "good news" for countries like ours that depend on a prosperous America for our own success.

According to Francis, another big boost to U.S. economy come from the 3% of U.S. GDP is currently used for litigation to decide whether to cover medical expenses. With much of the bureaucracy eliminated on that front, which is money that can be spent, for example, subsidizing companies with subsidies to keep manufacturing on U.S. soil.

It will take time for Canadians to feel the real economic effects of the U.S. health reform, but some improvements have come earlier, at least.

TSX health care activities are already following the new U.S. law, according to the Montreal Gazette.

"People perceive that it will be a much more public money that comes in health care, so it might be good for a number of different companies that provide both equipment and services, or whatever," a privileged financial told the newspaper.

No comments: