|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
posted June 13, 2013 12:18 AM |
|
|
The U.S. system is actually ranked the lowest from 17 high income countries. They spend the most on healthcare (private), yet they have the highest prevalence of infant mortality, heart and lung disease, sexually transmitted infections, adolescent pregnancies, injuries, homicides, and disability. On average, a U.S. male can be expected to live almost four fewer years than those in the top-ranked country.
Wiki
I will not argue on moral issues, just providing facts, statistics, everyone is free to make his own analysis then support or not.
____________
Era II mods and utilities
|
|
xerox
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 13, 2013 12:23 AM |
|
|
I wonder how much of that is attributed to the unhealthy lifestyle many Americans live.
____________
Over himself, over his own
body and
mind, the individual is
sovereign.
- John Stuart Mill
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted June 13, 2013 12:25 AM |
|
|
Quote:
B) A society doesn't have to be anything in particular (just compare countries like 1930s Germany to modern-day USA to 1950s Soviet Union). It is decided by the people who hold the majority of power which in a civil society, is based purely upon number, in an uncivil society, on military might.
Yes, and right know we are discussing IF it is good to have government involved in healthcare. I didn't suggest it is good because that is the way God intended it, I said a basic healthcare service providing system is a better one.
Quote:
E) Not to mention there is almost nothing random at all about a bazaar.
The existence of a bazaar is not random, it's about trade routes etc etc. But unlike a corporation, the people interacting in that bazaar are not "members" of that bazaar, they are, or to make it clearer, they MAY BE by passers. Corporations are not like that, that's why I said it is wrong to say society is like a bazaar rather than a corporation. I don't think a society is a corporation either, Mvass was criticized for treating it as one, he answered he sees it more like a bazaar and I emphasized that is even a worse analogy. So this is kind of irrelevant:
Quote:
F) Thank god society is not actually like a corporation like you say, where everyone is "tied" to it, and that I can come and go as I please. I think Henry David Thoreau and Ralph Waldo Emerson (as well as many other free-thinking individuals) are glad that society and how you function in it is completely optional and for one's own mutual benefit.
@Mvass
Quote:
artu:
That's why you have people pay for themselves (or voluntarily pay for others) - if they think it benefits them, they should be the ones who pay for it. Then no central planner would have to determine whether something benefits everyone who's paying for it for every little thing. This works well for goods the benefits of which are received solely by the person who pays for them, which is the case for most goods/services, and in particular for most forms of health care. But there are some goods with distributed benefits - for example, if you pay for the police, everyone benefits from it. For goods/services like that, the optimal level of provision (at which it benefits everyone involved) may require taxation.
Well, my point was, the question is IF healthcare is a basic service or not, and I think it qualifies. Your objection was flawed because it was not analyzing if healthcare is a basic service or not but rather expecting a precision in any kind of basic service which is practically impossible.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 13, 2013 12:30 AM |
|
|
Salamandre:
Considering that Americans on average have different lifestyles than Europeans, it's not surprising that outcomes are different. Less walking and a higher-fat diet will do that. Part of it is education, especially sex education - the US does poorly about educating people on how to have safe sex. But introducing comprehensive sex education has nothing to do with the government paying for health care.
Also, I'm not defending the current US system. I support a free market in health care, which is definitely not what the US has right now.
artu:
What's the difference between a "basic service" and any other service?
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted June 13, 2013 12:35 AM |
|
|
I was more focusing on irreversible effects on the whole individual contribution which, at long term, could affect the global economy.
A 2010 report observed that lack of health insurance causes roughly 48,000 unnecessary deaths every year in the United States. In 2007, 62.1% of filers for bankruptcies claimed high medical expenses. A 2013 study found that about 25% of all senior citizens declare bankruptcy due to medical expenses, and 43% are forced to mortgage or sell their primary residence.
There is no evidence we should take those studies for propaganda only, I find those percentages very disturbing.
____________
Era II mods and utilities
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted June 13, 2013 12:36 AM |
|
Edited by artu at 00:37, 13 Jun 2013.
|
|
A basic service is considered to be a responsibility of the government as a norm. Like in this recent post of yours, you complain about education and imply it should be better. You don't say, every individual who cares about that must go and buy the books on sex education themselves.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 13, 2013 02:34 AM |
|
|
If a basic service is a service that the government should provide, then yes, I am analyzing whether healthcare is a basic service. If a service doesn't meet the criterion that I put forward earlier, then the government shouldn't provide it (and then it's not a basic service, for your definition of "basic service").
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted June 13, 2013 02:41 AM |
|
|
@minion
Quote:
I on the other hand don't see evidence why Universal Healthcare is such a poor system, considering that most of them are ranked above the US system.
Ranked by whom, and according to what metric?
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted June 13, 2013 02:50 AM |
|
|
Nope. I don't wanna go you said I said on this, that's what's so practical about communicating on text isn't it, you can go back and read it again:
Quote:
Why should anyone support a service they don't benefit from? If it's a service that benefits everyone who is taxed, there's good reason to support its existence. But if it takes from some and gives to others, it's no different from robbery.
Expecting the kind of precision I was objecting to. Mind you, same goes for schools or roads or any kind of fund. Oh, and before that, you were talking about police being cheaper if the problem is a social reaction:
Quote:
If social peace is what you're worried about, I think police is cheaper than health care.
That was especially fun to read in today's Istanbul
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted June 13, 2013 02:55 AM |
|
Edited by artu at 02:55, 13 Jun 2013.
|
@Corribus
Quote:
Ranked by whom, and according to what metric?
Why does that only apply to public healthcare and not private healthcare? And why doesn't it apply to public schools or roads being funded by the government? Why are those basic needs of a citizen and health is not?
|
|
dhoney
Tavern Dweller
for the tavern wenches
|
|
posted June 13, 2013 03:00 AM |
|
|
I actually wouldn't mind universal health care if it were done efficiently and had an age limit of 25 or so. I think once you reach a certain age, you should be able to pay for your own health care. Even without an age limit, I still think there are many valid arguments for public health care, the best one being the fact that there are many different nations with public health care programs that are superior to America's private health care. It all depends on the specifics of the system being proposed though. Just seeing the length of obamacare in terms of sheer number of pages (2,400) makes me believe that it will be a complete failure in terms of efficiency. Think of how much wasted time will be spent trying to understand that law. I don't see how anyone can argue in favor of obamacare for that sole reason. I see some pretty sound logic in possibly implementing a universal healthcare system if it were actually efficient though. For instance, Germany has a wonderful public healthcare system. While they are constantly reforming the law, it has never been as complex as Obamacare.
Just gotta watch out for countries like Norway which are trying to make vitamin c illegal in large doses...
____________
The Crystal Silence Cries
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted June 13, 2013 03:50 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Why does that only apply to public healthcare and not private healthcare? And why doesn't it apply to public schools or roads being funded by the government? Why are those basic needs of a citizen and health is not?
I'm not sure how this applies to my post.
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 13, 2013 04:03 AM |
|
|
artu:
Quote:
Expecting the kind of precision I was objecting to. Mind you, same goes for schools or roads or any kind of fund. Oh, and before that, you were talking about police being cheaper if the problem is a social reaction
It doesn't require much precision, just an understanding of how the costs and benefits of a good are distributed (whether they accrue exclusively to the buyer/user, or if other people also benefit or have costs imposed on them) and how that interacts with people. It's not as difficult as you're making it sound.
As for the costs of police, to make a correct analysis you shouldn't compare the total cost of healthcare to the total cost of police, but the total cost of government healthcare to the additional cost of police that comes from not having healthcare. This is because the government isn't choosing between providing healthcare or police, but between providing health care and spending a little more on police.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted June 13, 2013 04:03 AM |
|
Edited by artu at 04:05, 13 Jun 2013.
|
Quote:
I'm not sure how this applies to my post.
Well, note that anybody who is not from the US is reading all of this thread as a discussion about free healthcare in general, not Obamacare as you guys call it, so when you say:
Quote:
Besides which, I'm not even sure what "universal healthcare" even means in the context of that figure. It's just propaganda at this point.
Minion replies (paraphrasing) "why is it propaganda, it works and the statistics are better than your system?"
Since it's you, who then come up with such a general question as "according to what metric" I assumed there should be some universal measurement that tells us how to run hospitals?
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted June 13, 2013 04:09 AM |
|
|
Quote:
As for the costs of police, to make a correct analysis you shouldn't compare the total cost of healthcare to the total cost of police, but the total cost of government healthcare to the additional cost of police that comes from not having healthcare. This is because the government isn't choosing between providing healthcare or police, but between providing health care and spending a little more on police.
You really don't get it do you, it is not about just expenses. We could have the SS, in short term they will be the cheapest!
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted June 13, 2013 04:53 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Minion replies (paraphrasing) "why is it propaganda, it works and the statistics are better than your system?"
Since it's you, who then come up with such a general question as "according to what metric" I assumed there should be some universal measurement that tells us how to run hospitals?
I'm not claiming that one healthcare system (as though it's easy to sum up something so complicated in two words) is better than another. There have been claims here that a "Universal System" (whatever that means) is better than the alternative (whatever that is). What metric is being used to determine this?
If you don't have one that is easily measurable, then any value claims don't really mean a whole lot. And if you can't define what "Universal Healthcare" is, then the same conclusion applies.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted June 13, 2013 05:18 AM |
|
Edited by artu at 05:25, 13 Jun 2013.
|
|
Well, if it is the fire department or police, you can, at least in an ideal world, reach the optimum goal: Zero fire, zero crime. Healthcare is not like that even in theory: You can not imagine a society with no death and sickness. So, I agree universal is kind of a weird word to pick on the matter. But let's not get carried away by semantics, should healthcare be treated as a responsibility of the government or not, that is the question in practice. And if so, to what level? I've probably mentioned this earlier some months ago in this thread, a friend's father is a tourist in Cuba, he has a heart attack, they operate, he asks for the bill, they say what bill? I'm not a numbers person but even I can imagine that system should be leaking somewhere. Yet, on the other hand, you guys have senior citizens selling their houses because of common sickness that is seen on old people and their pills cost what they shouldn't according to any earthling that has a bit of common sense. I don't understand that "let the free market handle it" approach, there is no such free market, businessmen will naturally try to profit in any given situation, it's their mindset, that's why they are successful at it and the issue of healthcare is not a platform that can be left to the dynamics of that. There is no optimum to reach, it's an endless area of exploitation.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted June 13, 2013 05:41 AM |
|
|
artu:
Quote:
You really don't get it do you, it is not about just expenses. We could have the SS, in short term they will be the cheapest!
Remember, my original response was to JJ justifying universal health care on the basis of social peace. If social peace is the only goal, then there are cheaper ways of attaining it. If it's not just about expenses - what else is there? (Assuming you only care about social peace.) As for the SS, they went far beyond keeping social peace, so they're irrelevant.
Quote:
if it is the fire department or police, you can, at least in an ideal world, reach the optimum goal: Zero fire, zero crime. Healthcare is not like that even in theory: You can not imagine a society with no death and sickness
I can more easily imagine a society with crime but no death or sickness than no crime but death and sickness. If you have a very technologically advanced society, you could have technology that keeps people alive forever, but I think it's likely that at least a few people would still be committing crimes.
As for old people, in the US they're covered by Medicare, and prescription drugs are subsidized, so there's already government intervention in that area.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted June 13, 2013 05:53 AM |
|
Edited by artu at 05:57, 13 Jun 2013.
|
1- Social peace is not just social obedience. (I think) that was what JJ was trying to tell you. Obedience can be achieved on short term with brute police force (hence the SS metaphor) but if in a society people die like flies because of bad healthcare politics, it won't be cheaper to shut them up with force. Put aside all the ethical issues, it wont be a productive society either.
2- You can imagine a society with no death or sickness in terms of science fiction or fantasy (immortal humans) but they are both fictional platforms. No crime or no fire on the other hand can be imagined with only a quantitative leap of existing solutions. It is still impossible but the platform does not change.
Quote:
As for old people, in the US they're covered by Medicare, and prescription drugs are subsidized, so there's already government intervention in that area.
And you object to it on principle, because God forbid if anything should break the rules of free market the wonderful.
|
|
dhoney
Tavern Dweller
for the tavern wenches
|
|
posted June 13, 2013 06:03 AM |
|
|
The main objection to socialized medicine shouldn't be money, although that is definitely one to consider. I'm surprised no one has brought this argument up. Why would you want government regulating more things than absolutely necessary? Didn't the 20th century teach us anything? The Soviets (along with other communist nations like China) and the Nazis took control of everything and look at the destruction they caused. I'd imagine that would be the main fear with socialized medicine. It's that you're putting one of the most important things in your life in the hands of the government. I would rather trust a fellow citizen solely with that responsibility than have the government involved in any aspect of it other than the most basic regulations. Think about it, when have genocides or massive wars been caused by any group of people other than the government? The only instance I can think of would be the Catholics killing Protestants and other "religious" wars. However, even in these instances, religion was so closely tied to government that it practically was the government doing the killing. That being said, the more powerful pharmaceutical companies are becoming so closely tied to government that we're having the same problem. This is probably the main reason so many industrialized countries ignore safe herbal and nutrient-based cures for ailments in favor of drugs and surgeries (which require anesthetic drugs).
____________
The Crystal Silence Cries
|
| |
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
