For example the population of Sweden is aproximately 9,045,389, the UK 60,943,912, Australia' 21,007,310. There is no way in hell you can compare those countries healthcare systems, based on various tax schemes, politics, social issues, demographics, etc based on a country like the US with a population of aproximately 303,824,640. No way.

Plenty of others seem to manage to compare various health care systems world wide.

For example, you could say that compared to the US, the current health care system in Somalia is very bad.

Anyone can make a comparison of any two (or more) things. Just because you don't agree, doesn't mean the comparison is invalid.

No, Somalia's health care plan has never been floated in this country as something to behold and to be emulated. The others have and they would not work in the same way with the same set of rules that those countries have as the basis for their plans.

I think the reason Australian and UK health care systems are compared to that of the US so often is simply because as nations we do share similar (multi) cultures and the basic structures are also very similar.

I'm sure there are some great things about the US health care system, but from what I have learned, I definitely prefer the one we have here because medical assistance seems so much more accessible and affordable for everyone. In saying that though, I have to acknowledge that it is a biased view. If I lived in a rural area I doubt I'd feel the same or if I were an indigenous person living in a remote community.

Each has good and bad points, and I think the point of making the comparison between different countries is to inform ourselves on what we're failing in and what we're succeeding in.

What about the ethnic subcultures. They have very diverse value systems and care for their ill, elderly or infirm in many different ways.

Most of them would be politicians. Just like statistics, they make their point and then use a comparison, good or bad - valid or not, to justify it.

Well I was implying that everyday people don't seem to have a difficulty in making comparisons. It happens on this board all the time.

We very rarely have reports of our health care system being compared to that of other countries in the media here. Mainly it's reports about what's wrong and what should be fixed and how much it will cost according to what person.

It reminds me of the time on active duty and while on exchange with UK forces. They marveled at how big our forces resources were while I marveled at the simplicity of their structure. Great observations and there is much we can learn from each other, but to think that we can simply solve each others problems by adapting the others process and structure is pure fantasy. Same goes for our health care systems.

I agree. We have a totally different economic structure here and the UK is different again. I see Australia as being somewhere in the middle of the US and the UK as far as health care goes.

Reread my post and the point of my post. I never compared economics, military issues, politics, or health benefits. In fact, you will find out that we are making the same exact point.

Explain what you mean.

Ethnic Somalis living in the United States usually practice Somali culture with obvious American, more African-American in this case, traits. If you are using their value systems I wouldn't call it American.

I don't know if we are on the same page or not.

No PH, I wasn't talking about Somalis at all.

Dude, you are drifting out to sea.

I was using them as an example. Why didn't you define ethnic subcultures as I asked?

Do you mean Chinese-American versus European American, do you mean rural America versus suburban America, or do you mean something completely different?

Either way, since the Oakland County police officers dealt with the problem, we can conclude that he lived in the bay area. That either means he lived in a urban or suburban environment. In either of those environments, there sometimes is no safety net for people who are alone and this is the result. The government doesn't have a responsibility, the utility company doesn't have a responsibility, his family doesn't have a responsibility.

In both suburban and rural areas, people live a very independent lifestyle so it is no surprise that something like this will happen every once in a while. Precautions should be taken, but they cannot be guaranteed 100% effective.

Sorry PH - my drift was far beyond yours. If you were in the ocean as merc said, then I was nearing Jupiter.

I was going in the direction of the Chinese-American, Asian-American and so on. The many varied cultures in America deal with this type of issue and many similar to it, in very different ways. That is all I was thinking about.

Just a point of clarification - he lived in the small city of Bay City, Michigan, which is in Bay County, and which is located right on the web (that area where the thumb meets the rest of the hand). Incidentally, this is the town which the Bay City Rollers named themselves after.

Hmm......thinking about this again.....I really don't think this could ever happen near Oakland.

They didn't pull the plug. They installed a device at the meter which cuts the power off if the usage exceeds a certain rate. The resident is able to go to the device and turn it back on immediately - just like a breaker. Apparently, there were 61 such devices in service at the time Mr. Schur died. All 61 have subsequently been removed.

Also interesting is that the Michigan Public Service Commission does not allow electric service to be disconnected at all between Nov 1 and April 1 for any reason. However, municipal utility companies are not subject to this regulation. Perhaps that will change now.

While this is indeed tragic, I think the lynch mob mentality being directed at the power company is a bit over the top.

I agree. I don't think any of us really have all the facts her, but it appears as if something went terribly wrong and finding out the truth now will be very difficult as everyone will now be in CYA mode.

I'm sure I read earlier that his wife had died and they had had no children.
So the closest relatives are likely to be nieces/ nephews, who would likely be 60+ themselves, more likely older. And if either or both were an only child (less common 93 years ago of course) they may not even have had that.

It's a horrible thing to have happened, but given that he is supposed to have left a wad of cash out ready to pay the bill it seems just an unhappy chain of events.

It turns out he had $600,000 in assets, which he has left to an area hospital.

and there you have it. the old man died of his own stupidity.

And he left the CEO of the hospital a nest egg. Nice.

I wonder what the assets were - could have been just the house and somme life insurance - who knows? I agree with lookout to a degree in that he was either stupid, stubborn, or had Alzheimers...

No really fair.

He was 93 years of age.
Both forgetfulness and fear of going out in adverse conditions are the norm at that age.

Not only not fair, but cold and heartless too.

I don't think dementia played a part in this, considering he was ready to pay the bill with the money on the table and paperclipped to it. He knew the bill was due.

My question is why did he let it get so far behind as to let it get shut off in the first place? He found a way to get out to get groceries (or if the grocery store delievered, he at least had contact with someone...via phone or regular delivery service.

The bill should have been paid on time. I don't feel sorry for him. He lived a long life, and served our country, and I hope he's in the place of his belief system that he wanted to be. But I'm *not* pissed at the utility. At all. Not even a little bit.

lol..."don't feel sorry for him." A lot of bloody help that would be (to borrow from my British friends) to a dead man. Wasn't there a movie: Dead Men Don't Need Sympathy?

No offense, it just struck me as funny. ;)

Him being aware a bill was due and getting the money ready doesn't necessarily take dementia (or just confusion or more general memory problems) out of the picture. It just means he was aware at the time he was getting the money ready that there was a bill coming up. Whether or not he was able to get out of the house to pay it, and whether or not he was aware of the date and a bunch of other stuff, we'll never know.

Again, we'll never know. We have no idea the level of that man's competance at the time of his death. My uncle Allan used to interact very well with delivery people and customer service people over the phone, and I bet not a one of them was aware he was as mad as a bicycle. Bought all kinds of stuff for home delivery. Knew exactly what he wanted. Knew the cost of all the stuff he wanted. Totally unaware he was being ripped off on his pension by a 'friend' who used to do his regular grocery shopping for him. Competancy isn't absolute. It can be very specific and isn't always easy to quantify.

Can I ask a stupid question? Can they really tell the difference between "froze to death" and "died of natural causes and then was frozen because the regulator shut off the heat and he couldn't go turn it back on because he was dead?" The original article refers to a medical examiner doing an autopsy, so they obviously think they're sure about it, I'm just not sure how they can tell the difference.

I think there are definite differences in decomposition for one. If a person dies in a warm room decomposition sets in right away, and would be noticeable by the time the body froze. If a person freezes to death there are some cellular changes that take place during the process, but I don't remember them off the top of my head.

A good forensics person can tell just about anything from a dead body. It's pretty amazing.

Well, except for why he had 600Grand and an unpaid bill.

I wouldn't doubt depression for a minute. Anyone who's had it will tell you it can be a day's work getting psyched up to go to the mailbox. It doens't matter how much dough you have.

My lovely Uncle Charlie died on the toilet (like Elvis - but that's the only similarity between them).

He wasn't discovered for two weeks - at least they assume it was two weeks, that's the longest time he ever went without contact with either of his brothers anyway.

It was summer. Hot (not necessarily a given in this country).
They were unable to ascertain exactly what he died from because he was too decomposed to autopsy.

Not really relevant, just thought I'd share it. I loved Uncle Charlie, but I do get a ghoulish pleasure from the manner of his death. And I'm pretty sure he'd have got a kick out of that too.