A Candidate-Free Discussion

[Smoke]

Cost. Health care is already 16 cents of every dollar spent in America. Who is going to pay for this?

We already pay more per person for healthcare than any advanced country -- and if I recall correctly, we pay twice as much as any advanced country except Switzerland -- and yet they all have better healthcare outcomes than we do. We're already paying much more than anybody else for results that are inferior to theirs.

 

[Reverend Rick]

Dividend tax helps the poor; most of the rich don't acquire wealth through salary.

That is 100% right. Now, tell everyone who thinks making more money will make them rich understand this.

It's not how much you make, it's what you do with the money you make that will make you well off.

 

[McBell]

Cost. Health care is already 16 cents of every dollar spent in America. Who is going to pay for this?

Price gouging at it's finest.

Management. I still think it is a bad idea to put healthcare in the hands of someone who is more interested in getting reelected then getting the job done.

I agree.
I also say the exact same about law enforcement.

Quality. If you remove the possibility for healthcare providers to make money, they will find a different gig.

I do not want to remove the profits.
I want the system to be set a bit more fairly.

I spent three hours after my appointment time to be seen.
I was told I had a chest cold.
I was told to rest and clear liquids.
I was also charged $378. (no insurance)

Funny thing is that if I was to be three hours late for my appointment, I would not get seen at all, and STILL be charged $378.

The next day my wife takes me to the ER because I cannot breathe.
The doctors there diagnose me with pneumonia, prescribe an antibiotic, say to stay on the clear liquid diet, etc.

I have not yet received the bill for that visit.

So the quality ALREADY sucks big time compared to the cost.

 

[Smoke]

We already pay more per person for healthcare than any advanced country -- and if I recall correctly, we pay twice as much as any advanced country except Switzerland -- and yet they all have better healthcare outcomes than we do. We're already paying much more than anybody else for results that are inferior to theirs.

I was wrong. We don't pay twice as much as anybody but Switzerland. We do pay more than other wealthy countries, with worse results. Data from the World Health Organization:

Total expenditure on health as a percentage of GDP:
Japan: 7.8
Luxembourg: 8.0
Spain: 8.1
United Kingdom: 8.1
New Zealand: 8.4
Denmark: 8.6
Italy: 8.7
Sweden: 9.1
Netherlands: 9.2
Australia: 9.6
Belgium: 9.7
Norway: 9.7
Canada: 9.8
Iceland: 9.9
France: 10.5
Germany: 10.6
Switzerland: 11.5
United States: 15.4

Per capita total expenditure on health (expressed in US dollars):
Spain: $1,971.20
New Zealand: $2,039.60
Italy: $2,579.60
Japan: $2,823.20
United Kingdom: $2,899.70
Canada: $3,037.60
Australia: $3,123.30
Belgium: $3,363.20
Netherlands: $3,441.70
France: $3,464.00
Germany: $3,521.40
Sweden: $3,532.00
Denmark: $3,896.60
Iceland: $4,413.00
Norway: $5,404.70
Switzerland: $5,571.90
Luxembourg: $5,904.00
United States: $6,096.20

Life expectancy at birth (males):
Australia: 79
Iceland: 79
Japan: 79
Sweden: 79
Switzerland: 79
Canada: 78
Italy: 78
France: 77
Netherlands: 77
New Zealand: 77
Norway: 77
Spain: 77
United Kingdom: 77
Belgium: 76
Denmark: 76
Germany: 76
Luxembourg: 76
United States: 75

Life expectancy at birth (females):
Japan: 86
Australia: 84
France: 84
Italy: 84
Spain: 84
Switzerland: 84
Canada: 83
Iceland: 83
Sweden: 83
Belgium: 82
Germany: 82
Luxembourg: 82
New Zealand: 82
Norway: 82
Netherlands: 81
United Kingdom: 81
Denmark: 80
United States: 80

Healthy life expectancy at birth (males):
Iceland: 72
Japan: 72
Sweden: 72
Australia: 71
Italy: 71
Switzerland: 71
Canada: 70
Germany: 70
Netherlands: 70
Norway: 70
Spain: 70
Belgium: 69
France: 69
New Zealand: 69
United Kingdom: 69
Denmark: 69
Luxembourg: 69
United States: 67

Healthy life expectancy at birth (females):
Japan: 78
France: 75
Italy: 75
Spain: 75
Sweden: 75
Switzerland: 75
Australia: 74
Canada: 74
Iceland: 74
Germany: 74
Luxembourg: 74
Norway: 74
Belgium: 73
Netherlands: 73
New Zealand: 72
United Kingdom: 72
Denmark: 71
United States: 71

Years of life lost to communicable diseases:
Denmark: 4
Sweden: 4
Australia: 5
Belgium: 5
Germany: 5
Iceland: 5
Italy: 5
Luxembourg: 5
New Zealand: 5
Norway: 5
Switzerland: 6
Canada: 6
France: 6
Spain: 6
Netherlands: 7
Japan: 8
United States: 9
United Kingdom: 10

Probability (per 1,000 live births) of dying under five years of age:
Iceland: 3
France: 4
Italy: 4
Japan: 4
Norway: 4
Sweden: 4
Belgium: 5
Denmark: 5
Germany: 5
Luxembourg: 5
Netherlands: 5
Spain: 5
Switzerland: 5
Australia: 6
Canada: 6
New Zealand: 6
United Kingdom: 6
United States: 8

Infant mortality rate (per 1,000 live births):
Iceland: 1
Spain: 2
Australia: 3
Italy: 3
Japan: 3
Norway: 3
Sweden: 3
Belgium: 4
Denmark: 4
France: 4
Germany: 4
Luxembourg: 4
Netherlands: 4
Switzerland: 4
Canada: 5
New Zealand: 5
United Kingdom: 5
United States: 7

Percentage of newborns with low birth weight:
Iceland: 4
Sweden: 4
Denmark: 5
Norway: 5
Italy: 5.4
Canada: 6
New Zealand: 6
Spain: 6
Switzerland: 6
Australia: 7
France: 7
Germany: 7
Belgium: 8
Japan: 8
Luxembourg: 8
United Kingdom: 8
United States: 8

Adolescent fertility rate (%):
Switzerland: 0.5
Denmark: 0.6
Japan: 0.6
Italy: 0.7
Netherlands: 0.7
Sweden: 0.7
France: 0.8
Norway: 0.8
Belgium: 1.0
Spain: 1.0
Germany: 1.1
Luxembourg: 1.1
Canada: 1.4
Australia: 1.6
Iceland: 1.6
New Zealand: 2.7
United Kingdom: 2.7
United States: 4.3

 

[Kidblop]

I always get a picture in my mind of a trash can labeled "government". Anything we can't be bothered to deal with ourselves, we toss in the bin. Health care reform? Won't be bothered, let's just have the government do it.

Uh, health care reform REQUIRES the government...

 

[tomspug]

If Uncle Sam is too incompetent to manage healthcare, than he should shouldn't be trusted with the national defense, intelligence, foreign relations, or law enforcement, either, since all of those are at least as important as healthcare. If they're honest, people who oppose national healthcare on the grounds of governmental incompetence should also advocate the abolition of the US military, the CIA, the FBI, the NSA, the State Department, the Justice Department, the Department of Defense, and the federal court system. Just for starters.

Since when did any of our founding fathers advocate that the government should do NOTHING? Defending the country is one of the government's primary roles. Universal health care only defends us from personal responsibility.

Using your logic, we should put government in control of life insurance, auto insurance... Heck, we can have the government run AGRICULTURE! Let's eliminate that aspect of the free market too! We can just have the government decide what food will be available to us (there will be standards, so of COURSE it will be good food). You just go to the grocery store and pick up your government-endorsed ingredients. This would be beneficial because then EVERYBODY would have access to food and no one would go hungry.

Why do people think that universal health care will benefit the poor at all? The taxes necessary to provide it would be enormous. Even if you could somehow only tax the rich, it would eventually get transferred to the poor anyways. Ask people who live in Norway or Sweden, they think that their health care is awful, but it's universal, so they have to be wrong!

 

[tomspug]

Uh, health care reform REQUIRES the government...

Yeah, I'm fine with the government doing it's job. I'm not fine with handing them the ENTIRE HEALTH CARE MARKET.

 

[Smoke]

Since when did any of our founding fathers advocate that the government should do NOTHING? Defending the country is one of the government's primary roles. Universal health care only defends us from personal responsibility.

Anything the government does defends us from personal responsibility. I was responding to the argument that government is incompetent to administer healthcare; do you have anything to say on that subject?

Why do people think that universal health care will benefit the poor at all? The taxes necessary to provide it would be enormous. Even if you could somehow only tax the rich, it would eventually get transferred to the poor anyways. Ask people who live in Norway or Sweden, they think that their health care is awful, but it's universal, so they have to be wrong!

Please review the statistics I posted above.

 

[Blentyn chan Celi]

If Uncle Sam is too incompetent to manage healthcare, then he should shouldn't be trusted with the national defense, intelligence, foreign relations, or law enforcement, either, since all of those are at least as important as healthcare. If they're honest, people who oppose national healthcare on the grounds of governmental incompetence should also advocate the abolition of the US military, the CIA, the FBI, the NSA, the State Department, the Justice Department, the Department of Defense, and the federal court system. Just for starters.

In the words of old Tom, "The national government is a dangerous necessity to be instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security of the people, nation or community; it should be watched closely and circumscribed in its powers.” Healthcare is a prime example of a social problem that some people want to solve by letting the government regulate it. I believe such power should remain “circumscribed.” Pardon my paranoia.