In My Country, We Systematically Kill Old People Because We Hate Them.

[owise1 0]

(owise1 @ Tuesday, August 11th, 2009, 3:14 PM) Noting the U.S. spends more per person than any country in the world but underperforms many other nations in results, Obama said

I'm always surprised that people would use "spending per person" as an indicator of a failed system.The US spends more on video games per capita than Somalia. Does Somalia have a better video game industry?The US spends more per capita on iPhones than any other country. Do we have a failed iPhone industry?The simple fact is that if people voluntarily spend more on something, that's a pretty good indication that the product is more desirable than a product that people spend less on.

It is about spending and results. If two different builders build the exact same house (in the same area or even next door to each other) but one is substantially less expensive, why wouldn't you choose the less expensive one? Or, better yet, if two different builders were given a budget of one million dollars and indentical plots of land again in the same area or even next door to each other. The first one builds a substantially better house, who wouldn't want that house? Wasn't the money spent buy the first builder better spent? Isn't there more added value (or equity) in the first house? And conversly, wouldn't the second home be built more inefficiently, wasting limited resources?I don't know about you, but if I am in a serious accident or get seriously ill etc..., I don't think there is anything voluntary about the situatition. We have all heard the horror stories of people being unable to pay or turned away because of no insurance, either you pay and get the medical treatment/medicine you need or you don't. By the way, who has seen the Oscar nominated documentary Sicko by Michael Moore? I would suggest it to all.

[Naked_Cowboy 0]

It is about spending and results. If two different builders build the exact same house (in the same area or even next door to each other) but one is substantially less expensive, why wouldn't you choose the less expensive one? Or, better yet, if two different builders were given a budget of one million dollars and indentical plots of land again in the same area or even next door to each other. The first one builds a substantially better house, who wouldn't want that house? Wasn't the money spent buy the first builder better spent? Isn't there more added value (or equity) in the first house? And conversly, wouldn't the second home be built more inefficiently, wasting limited resources? I don't know about you, but if I am in a serious accident or get seriously ill etc..., I don't think there is anything voluntary about the situatition. We have all heard the horror stories of people being unable to pay or turned away because of no insurance, either you pay and get the medical treatment/medicine you need or you don't. By the way, who has seen the Oscar nominated documentary Sicko by Michael Moore? I would suggest it to all.

There are so many things hilariously and unbelievably wrong with this post that I don't even know where to start. I actually started laughing out loud when I realized you had gotten your information from michael moore.

[85suited 0]

By the way, who has seen the Oscar nominated documentary Sicko by Michael Moore? I would suggest it to all.

epic fail

[strategy 4]

the first half of sicko is pretty awesome. the second half was maybe the most ridiculous PR stunt I've ever seen. at least the production quality wasn't as awful as F9/11."I don't know about you, but if I am in a serious accident or get seriously ill etc..., I don't think there is anything voluntary about the situatition."Have you never seen a person riding a motorcycle? Smoking cigs? Eating fast food? There are lots of ways to voluntarily increase one's risk of serious accident or illness.I wonder if anyone's done the math on medicare costs related to emphysema vs. tobacco tax revenue.

[hblask 1]

There are so many things hilariously and unbelievably wrong with this post that I don't even know where to start. I actually started laughing out loud when I realized you had gotten your information from michael moore.

QFT, I started thinking of replies, but seriously, pretty much every sentence was so wrong it would take a book to fix.

[James D 0]

I haven't read every post in this thread so I'm not sure if it's been noted, but I hope that you guys know that we do have private healthcare in this country too. It's not like some sub-standard, dirty hospital is forced upon us if we don't want it, and that we're all made to wait for weeks on end for treatment. We have a choice.You pay, you go private. Sorted... What's the problem?

[DonkSlayer 1]

wow, he doesn't even have an accent!

I laughed. That's all for now.

[85suited 0]

I haven't read every post in this thread so I'm not sure if it's been noted, but I hope that you guys know that we do have private healthcare in this country too. It's not like some sub-standard, dirty hospital is forced upon us if we don't want it, and that we're all made to wait for weeks on end for treatment. We have a choice.You pay, you go private. Sorted... What's the problem?

simple - I have to pay for govt option and private option...so I pay twice

[hblask 1]

simple - I have to pay for govt option and private option...so I pay twice

Exactly. It's the same argument people make against private schools and private roads. Sure, we made you pay for the public version, but you are still free to pay *again* for the private version. What that really means is that the private version can't just be 10% better, or even 80% better. It has to be 100% better to justify paying twice for it.The fact that private roads and private schools exist at all is a strong statement on the failures of the public versions.

[DonkSlayer 1]

Exactly. It's the same argument people make against private schools and private roads. Sure, we made you pay for the public version, but you are still free to pay *again* for the private version. What that really means is that the private version can't just be 10% better, or even 80% better. It has to be 100% better to justify paying twice for it.The fact that private roads and private schools exist at all is a strong statement on the failures of the public versions.

Perhaps with the roads, with the exception of someone choosing to build a road through their private property that the gov hasn't seized yet. Private schools as a choice has environment-control as a major variable. Obviously there are many substandard public school systems, but I wouldn't advocate public schools holding particular-religious classes, or being single-sex, or being military-style, etc...but some parents wish for those things, among others, for their children, so they elect to send them to private school.

[hblask 1]

Perhaps with the roads, with the exception of someone choosing to build a road through their private property that the gov hasn't seized yet. Private schools as a choice has environment-control as a major variable. Obviously there are many substandard public school systems, but I wouldn't advocate public schools holding particular-religious classes, or being single-sex, or being military-style, etc...but some parents wish for those things, among others, for their children, so they elect to send them to private school.

Yep, and they end up paying for school twice. So in essence we have a government that is actively discouraging parental choice in education by forcing us to pay for mediocrity, and then paying again if we want excellence.It would be a shame if the same happened with health care. And there is no plausible explanation of how paying twice can reduce costs.

[DonkSlayer 1]

Yep, and they end up paying for school twice. So in essence we have a government that is actively discouraging parental choice in education by forcing us to pay for mediocrity, and then paying again if we want excellence.It would be a shame if the same happened with health care. And there is no plausible explanation of how paying twice can reduce costs.

I agree with your premise on healthcare, but I disagree that every public school is so inadequate that it's the prevailing reason parents put their kids in private school.

[James D 0]

No no, it's not like paying twice, you're over-simplifying how it works in real terms.Basically, if I want to go to my local GP for a check up, or if I have a minor ailment etc, I go for free on the NHS. It's easy, usually on the same day and you get your own allocated doctor (to build patient/doctor relationship). Or even if I have an accident and sprain or break my arm for example, I go to the local Accident & Emergency at the local hospital... get seen straight away.But, if I was to have something more important like a big operation, or important dental work, or if I was diagnosed with a really serious illness and needed the best treatment, I'd go private. To compare with the analogy of private schools for example... you can't pay to go to a private school and then keep popping into a public school whenever you feel like it, because the class is just as good for that particular course. For the comparison to be the same, you'd be able to show the private school which classes you've been to at the end of that year when paying the bill, and demand your money back because you didn't attend.. you got some tuition from the public school. Doesn't work like that.I think there's lots wrong with my country I'll be the first to admit, but I don't believe the health care system is one of them. I honestly think it works very well.

[hblask 1]

No no, it's not like paying twice, you're over-simplifying how it works in real terms.Basically, if I want to go to my local GP for a check up, or if I have a minor ailment etc, I go for free on the NHS. It's easy, usually on the same day and you get your own allocated doctor (to build patient/doctor relationship). Or even if I have an accident and sprain or break my arm for example, I go to the local Accident & Emergency at the local hospital... get seen straight away.But, if I was to have something more important like a big operation, or important dental work, or if I was diagnosed with a really serious illness and needed the best treatment, I'd go private. To compare with the analogy of private schools for example... you can't pay to go to a private school and then keep popping into a public school whenever you feel like it, because the class is just as good for that particular course. For the comparison to be the same, you'd be able to show the private school which classes you've been to at the end of that year when paying the bill, and demand your money back because you didn't attend.. you got some tuition from the public school. Doesn't work like that.I think there's lots wrong with my country I'll be the first to admit, but I don't believe the health care system is one of them. I honestly think it works very well.

I guess this is an example of the "competing private system":http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2009/02/04/Man...87911233783787/BEVERLY, England, Feb. 4 (UPI) -- A British man says he used pliers to pull 13 teeth from his own mouth because he couldn't find a dentist willing to take government-insured patients. Iraq War veteran Ian Boynton told the British tabloid The Daily Mail Wednesday that he asked more than two dozen dentists in East Yorkshire to look after his teeth, which he says were causing him severe pain. But since he couldn't provide private insurance, he was turned down, he said. "I've tried to get in at 30 dentists over the last eight years but have never been able to find one to take on (National Health Insurance) patients," Boynton, 42, of Beverly, England, told the newspaper. Instead, he removed a tooth with a pair of pliers in 2006. "In the end I knew it had to come out, and had to use the pliers to pull it. Amazingly, it did not hurt as much as you might think," said Boynton, a former British Army medic. Since then has taken out 12 more, and now only has two teeth left in the roof of his mouth, The Daily Mail said.

[James D 0]

The story says he couldn't provide private insurance? That means he couldn't afford it, so I'm not sure what your point is?

[Naked_Cowboy 0]

But, if I was to have something more important like a big operation, or important dental work, or if I was diagnosed with a really serious illness and needed the best treatment, I'd go private.

But you could go public, wait longer, and have it covered by the government eventually, right?

[James D 0]

But you could go public, wait longer, and have it covered by the government eventually, right?

Yeah, if I wanted to.

[hblask 1]

The story says he couldn't provide private insurance? That means he couldn't afford it, so I'm not sure what your point is?

That he already paid for a service that is unavailable to him. You don't think that's the least bit unfair and immoral?Also, I think the story proves that any claims that the system is working are blatant lies.

[CaneBrain 95]

That he already paid for a service that is unavailable to him. You don't think that's the least bit unfair and immoral?Also, I think the story proves that any claims that the system is working are blatant lies.

It certainly explains the stereotype about Brits and bad teeth....

[Naked_Cowboy 0]

Yeah, if I wanted to.

So, for all serious non emergency care, you are kinda saying you pay for it twice.

[James D 0]

That he already paid for a service that is unavailable to him. You don't think that's the least bit unfair and immoral?Also, I think the story proves that any claims that the system is working are blatant lies.

No system in the world is completely perfect, I think we can establish that right? We don't have to say 'that's 100% blatent lies' or 'that categorically doesn't work'. There's more gray areas than that.The worst part of the NHS happens to be dentists, so I'm not surprised that you found something regarding dentistry as your exposee. Waiting lists for dentists are fairly long and unacceptable. I experienced this last year, personally, when I needed my wisdom teeth out. It was going to take approx 6 weeks on the NHS, so I got it done privately. Smaller work, caps, general check ups etc are much quicker, usually within a couple of days... but any major dental work you really should go private in the UK.

[hblask 1]

No system in the world is completely perfect, I think we can establish that right? We don't have to say 'that's 100% blatent lies' or 'that categorically doesn't work'. There's more gray areas than that.The worst part of the NHS happens to be dentists, so I'm not surprised that you found something regarding dentistry as your exposee. Waiting lists for dentists are fairly long and unacceptable. I experienced this last year, personally, when I needed my wisdom teeth out. It was going to take approx 6 weeks on the NHS, so I got it done privately. Smaller work, caps, general check ups etc are much quicker, usually within a couple of days... but any major dental work you really should go private in the UK.

So they can't get something as simple as dental care right for a population of 60M, but we're supposed to believe that the government can get it right for 5X that many for all services here in the US? LOL, interesting theory.

[James D 0]

So, for all serious non emergency care, you are kinda saying you pay for it twice.

Only because I can afford it if I need to though. I think in 95% or more situations, I'm happy going with the NHS and the treatment will be almost identical (maybe NHS dentists are exempt from that though, for me, because even though I'm a Brit I actually have nice teeth and I want them to stay that way - I'll agree with criticism of NHS dentists, that I concede).

[James D 0]

So they can't get something as simple as dental care right for a population of 60M, but we're supposed to believe that the government can get it right for 5X that many for all services here in the US? LOL, interesting theory.

Maybe dental care should be made seperate or something, I don't know. Dental care aside though, the NHS is a fantastic service. This is coming from an anti-socialism, right wing, slightly snobbish-at-times UK male.

[Naked_Cowboy 0]

No system in the world is completely perfect, I think we can establish that right? We don't have to say 'that's 100% blatent lies' or 'that categorically doesn't work'. There's more gray areas than that.

Obviously. I don't think any thinking poster here is saying that there's a utopian system in existence. The problem with the current bill proposed here in the US is that a lot of the options you enjoy in the UK are removed. The president can say a hundred times on TV that the bill lets you keep your insurance but you don't even have to get 20 pages deep for it to be spelled out that he only means "very temporarily". The bill contains tremendous disincentives for specialization, innovation, and is intentionally extremely vague as to what private medical services will be able to be even legally provided. It also does virtually nothing to actually address the major drivers of cost overruns in american medicine. The combination of all of these things into a bill that many legislators haven't even read is what is so mind blowing to us. Bob pointed it out last week, and I apologize if we come off painting other countries as ass backwards because their systems bear some similarities to some of the things we dislike in the bill.