British people guess how much US healthcare costs.

[Father Heathen]

Business is risky in a free-market. Even for hospitals -they lose all the time.

...Maybe that's why the prices are so high? To compensate for predicted losses?

Imagine if police or fire departments were private businesses that were ran just like that. Or if every single road were a privately owned toll road? Your own *** is held for ransom and gouged.

But that's apparently how you like it.

 

[Father Heathen]

Actually, it's not the governmemt, it's big pharma.

Exactly. Our privatized for-profit medical industry holds our health hostage and bleeds our bank accounts dry.

 

[HonestJoe]

Yes, you pay tax also.

We do but I was only trying to get you to admit that when you stated that "National Insurance is 12% of earnings" you were wrong. If you can't accept the fundamental difference between tax rates and tax revenue, none of your comments on the topic can be taken on face value.

Further working i have adjusted my figure down to around 10% of income goes on healthcare?

I've still no idea how you're working that out, even as an average, let alone at the individual level. All national taxation effectively goes in to a single pot and all spending, including NHS and other health spending, comes out of that pot. I don't see how it's possible to definitively state what proportion of any given form of taxation is spent on any specific expenditure.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

There are countless Americans who've been financially ruined by medical debt or who are forgoing critical care because they can't afford it, but still oppose universal healthcare because they've been brainwashed into believing that it will magically turn the U.S. into the U.S.S.R.

I can give you a great example of that from first-hand experience. Back in the early nineties, when I was a hospice medical director, I made a home visit to meet and evaluate a new patient referred to to hospice. He had had a brain cancer a few years back while uninsured and before he reached Medicare age, that wiped him out financially.

About eight months before reaching Medicare age, he began experiencing headaches again, but declined to have them evaluated until he had his Medicare coverage.

That came, he saw a doctor, had an MRI which revealed widespread metastatic carcinoma, was declared inoperable, and was referred to hospice, which is where I came in.

Recall that in the early years of the Clinton administration, both Clintons were actively trying to arrange for single-payer coverage for all Americans, firmly resisted by the Republicans, who, as you know eventually prevailed. I was thinking about how much this man could have benefited from that kind of help, and lamented his fate.

Then I returned to my vehicle, this time seeing the back end of his parked vehicle, and a bumper sticker with caricatures of the Clintons and the caption, "Twin air bags." I was speechless. He died shortly thereafter, confident no doubt that people like him were saving Americans from socialism.

I was speechless, but Darwin would have known what to say.

 

[Cooky]

Exactly. Our privatized for-profit medical industry holds our health hostage and bleeds our bank accounts dry.

Can I ask you through what budget do countries like Britain develop new medicine? Because our pharmacies would seem to produce greater developmental advancements in medicine having greater funds for experiments, since they have the funds to explore

...Say for example the entire western world went medicinally/ medically socialized. Would new vaccines, treatments and cures become stagnant? This is me genuinely asking your opinion, aside from our differences.

 

[Cooky]

But that's apparently how you like it.

I'll ignore this flaming, but I urge you to think not just about social actions and consequences, but also scientific ones -Particularly those of the private sector, and the impact they've had alongside governmental research.

...is it worth losing? Or is there nothing to lose in your opinion?

Bending the Productivity Curve: Why America Leads the World in Medical Innovation

FROM THE LINK:
"In three of the four general categories of innovation examined in this paper — basic science, diagnostics, and therapeutics — the United States has contributed more than any other country, and in some cases, more than all other countries combined."

 

[Father Heathen]

Can I ask you through what budget do countries like Britain develop new medicine? Because our pharmacies would seem to produce greater developmental advancements in medicine having greater funds for experiments, since they have the funds to explore

...Say for example the entire western world went medicinally socialized. Would new vaccines and cures become stagnant? This is me genuinely asking your opinion, aside from our differences.

I'll ignore this flaming, but I urge you to think not just about social actions and consequences, but also scientific ones -Particularly those of the private sector, and the impact they've had alongside governmental research.

...is it worth losing? Or is there nothing to lose in your opinion?

Bending the Productivity Curve: Why America Leads the World in Medical Innovation

Just for clarification, are you claiming that progress and advancements in the medical fields require artificial inflation and price gouging? That new treatments and cures can only arise from this mountain of debt and death?

 

[Cooky]

America is fast-tracking the world into the future, through our uniquely situated economic system. The socialized countries should be thanking us for towing this burden FOR THEM, and everyone in the world.

...IMO.

 

[Cooky]

Just for clarification, are you claiming that progress and advancements in the medical fields require artificial inflation and price gouging? That new treatments and cures can only arise from this mountain of debt and death?

Not exactly. That's a very one sided, negative perspective in viewing it.

...But essentially, the fact is that the U.S. leads the world in medical advancement. And the reason is because our scientists are privately funded by our massive population.

...Once this goes away, it goes away forever. Don't you think? Just curious. Because I think you're viewing this only from one side of the coin -ignoring the science, and focusing on the social aspect only.

...This is not something anyone seems to want to talk about, but is vitally important.

 

[Cooky]

Essentially, we're all like Jesus. Carrying the medical cross for the world.

 

[ChristineM]

We do but I was only trying to get you to admit that when you stated that "National Insurance is 12% of earnings" you were wrong. If you can't accept the fundamental difference between tax rates and tax revenue, none of your comments on the topic can be taken on face value.

I've still no idea how you're working that out, even as an average, let alone at the individual level. All national taxation effectively goes in to a single pot and all spending, including NHS and other health spending, comes out of that pot. I don't see how it's possible to definitively state what proportion of any given form of taxation is spent on any specific expenditure.

The government is specific in its statement, i followed government wording. And quoted it for you TWICE. Sorry you dont like that so best if you put me on ignore then i won't be upsetting you again

Whether taxation goes into a single pot or not it is known that healthcare cost each person £2989 per year.
Healthcare expenditure, UK Health Accounts - Office for National Statistics

The average weekly wage is £26104 per year.
Average weekly earnings in Great Britain - Office for National Statistics

 

[HonestJoe]

The government is specific in its statement, i followed government wording. And quoted it for you TWICE.

There is no singular government statement. You linked a government webpage which explains the entire system. It’s a somewhat progressive system so there is no single figure for the percentage of earnings all people pay. Your statement that we pay 12% of our earnings in National Insurance remains false. I pay around 8% and other people will pay lower or higher percentages depending on their income and circumstances.

Whether taxation goes into a single pot or not it is known that healthcare cost each person £2989 per year.

Total health expenditure yes. It’s slightly less for government expenditure.

The average weekly wage is £26104 per year.

Yes, though I’m not sure how meaningful that basic mean average actually is in context. What any given individual spends on healthcare, indirectly via taxation, indirectly via other means and directly for themselves, will vary massively depending on a whole range of factors and income is only one of them.

 

[Augustus]

America is fast-tracking the world into the future, through our uniquely situated economic system. The socialized countries should be thanking us for towing this burden FOR THEM, and everyone in the world.

Essentially, we're all like Jesus. Carrying the medical cross for the world.

Being a dupe and paying vastly more than market rate for your meds is worthy of the Christ himself... Not sure even the most shameless PR flack would have the chutzpah to spin it to that extent

There's nothing noble about being a sucker, especially while being an apologist for those who treat you like a sucker. That's just weak.

"Socialised" countries still buy their medical supplies at market rates from the same companies you do. They just pay the correct price, i.e. capitalism. Of the biggest 10 biomedical/pharma companies, 5 are European and 5 are American (top 25: 12.5 American 12.5 non-American). Europe appreciates your unnecessary contribution to economic well being, but they do feel a bit bad for the fact you keep on doing it willingly without getting any the wiser. They'd really be happier if you stopped doing so as it would help save many lives.

You are the victim of what is known as rent seeking, when companies engage in profiteering without offering additional value. In this case, it's as a result of anti-competitive policies enacted by your government.

 

[Mock Turtle]

America is fast-tracking the world into the future, through our uniquely situated economic system. The socialized countries should be thanking us for towing this burden FOR THEM, and everyone in the world.

...IMO.

I think you win 'Delusion of the year' award, in my humble opinion.

 

[ChristineM]

There is no singular government statement. You linked a government webpage which explains the entire system. It’s a somewhat progressive system so there is no single figure for the percentage of earnings all people pay. Your statement that we pay 12% of our earnings in National Insurance remains false. I pay around 8% and other people will pay lower or higher percentages depending on their income and circumstances.

Total health expenditure yes. It’s slightly less for government expenditure.

Yes, though I’m not sure how meaningful that basic mean average actually is in context. What any given individual spends on healthcare, indirectly via taxation, indirectly via other means and directly for themselves, will vary massively depending on a whole range of factors and income is only one of them.

Again, i quoted the page linked issued by the government. And as i said, there are exceptions so your point in pushing this seems rather a waste of time.

Slightly less, sure.

Which is why i stated average

 

[Father Heathen]

Essentially, we're all like Jesus. Carrying the medical cross for the world.

Oh. My. God.

 

[HonestJoe]

Slightly less, sure.

Which is why i stated average

I think what I'm trying to get down to is what is the point you're actually trying to make. All we really have so far is that healthcare in the UK costs an amount of money.

 

[Father Heathen]

Not exactly. That's a very one sided, negative perspective in viewing it.

...But essentially, the fact is that the U.S. leads the world in medical advancement. And the reason is because our scientists are privately funded by our massive population.

...Once this goes away, it goes away forever. Don't you think? Just curious. Because I think you're viewing this only from one side of the coin -ignoring the science, and focusing on the social aspect only.

...This is not something anyone seems to want to talk about, but is vitally important.

A pathetic display of stockholm syndrome. Nothing more.

 

[ChristineM]

I think what I'm trying to get down to is what is the point you're actually trying to make. All we really have so far is that healthcare in the UK costs an amount of money.

I was asking a question that has been adequately answered.

Queries and objections to that question have resulted in this thread getting close to 5 pages long.

 

[Salvador]

-The link to video-

What are your thoughts?

If Congress were to work together on implementing Trump's plan to lower prescription drug prices rather than get sidetracked on the Democratic partisan impeachment coup attempt to depose our P.O.T.U.S., then perhaps the overall cost of American health care would decrease.

President Donald J. Trump’s Blueprint To Lower Drug Prices | The White House

Please let your Congressional Representative know we'd rather have them enact legislation to lower prescription drug prices rather than waste their time on trying to depose our P.O.T.U.S.