Can the US afford socialized medicine?

[Magic Man]

The chart does not demonstrate superior healthcare in other countries. A myriad of factors contribute to those results.

Well, they must be doing something right since they live longer and healthier. Sure, there are other factors, but the healthcare's pretty good.

 

[Watchmen]

Well, they must be doing something right since they live longer and healthier. Sure, there are other factors, but the healthcare's pretty good.

That's just a repeat of your conclusion with no evidence of how or why foreign healthcare is superior.

 

[Magic Man]

That's just a repeat of your conclusion with no evidence of how or why foreign healthcare is superior.

Yes, it's just a repeat of my conclusion. The evidence is that the have better results.

 

[Reverend Rick]

Yes, it's just a repeat of my conclusion. The evidence is that the have better results.

mball believes if he repeats himself enough, and explains it over and over that we will convert to his beliefs. When we do not do this, he insults our intelligence or calls us ignorant.

You do realize that you are actively seeking conversion right Matt?

 

[Magic Man]

mball believes if he repeats himself enough, and explains it over and over that we will convert to his beliefs. When we do not do this, he insults our intelligence or calls us ignorant.

Hahaha! Wow. It's rare that you see such hypocrisy. Well done, Rick, well done. ...wow

You do realize that you are actively seeking conversion right Matt?

Yes, I am. I'm actively seeking conversion to a better way of taking care of people.

 

[KatNotKathy]

That's just a repeat of your conclusion with no evidence of how or why foreign healthcare is superior.

And the results aren't evidence enough? What do you want, a study specifically linking a nation's health to it's health care system? Doesn't that seem just a bit obvious?

 

[Watchmen]

Yes, it's just a repeat of my conclusion. The evidence is that the have better results.

The better results is not evidence where there are a myriad of factors affecting such.

 

[Watchmen]

And the results aren't evidence enough? What do you want, a study specifically linking a nation's health to it's health care system? Doesn't that seem just a bit obvious?

There are many factors affecting the results in the chart. Healthcare is but one. If you make some effort, I bet you could think of others that have significant impact.

 

[Magic Man]

The better results is not evidence where there are a myriad of factors affecting such.

Yes, it is. You are welcome to argue it's not, but it's a losing and silly argument. It could be that magically 50 other countries have better luck with health issues, but that's a ridiculously hard argument to make.

 

[Watchmen]

Yes, it is. You are welcome to argue it's not, but it's a losing and silly argument. It could be that magically 50 other countries have better luck with health issues, but that's a ridiculously hard argument to make.

Let me rephrase. It is evidence, but it is not sufficient evidence upon which to base your conclusion. Magic is irrelevant. Factors affecting the chart in the OP include, among other things: pollution, diet, climate, family construct, stress levels, physical activities, water, and so on. To say access to healthcare is what produces the numbers in the chart is an unsupportable leap when many other factors exist. There's a reason scientists set up controls when performing experiments.

 

[enchanted_one1975]

So, what you're saying is that I'll never convince you to look at the facts of a situation and then come to a logical, reasonable conclusion? That's quite an admission.

I have already looked at the facts and I have already come to a logical, reasonable conclusion. It is just not the same conclusion that you have come to so you cannot comprehend it for some reason.

 

[Magic Man]

Let me rephrase. It is evidence, but it is not sufficient evidence upon which to base your conclusion. Magic is irrelevant.

Let me put it another way. They get better results with a cheaper system of healthcare. That might have as much to do with other factors as it does with the healthcare system, but the fact is they spend less money than us on healthcare and have longer, healthier lives in general. That means we could have a healthcare system as cheap as theirs and get better results than we do now. That might mean making changes other than just the healthcare system, but the point is that it's possible to follow their models and get better results cheaper.

 

[Magic Man]

I have already looked at the facts and I have already come to a logical, reasonable conclusion.

No, you haven't. You may have looked at the facts, but you haven't come to a logical, reasonable conclusion.

It is just not the same conclusion that you have come to so you cannot comprehend it for some reason.

Oh, I can comprehend it, but it's still wrong.

 

[enchanted_one1975]

No, you haven't. You may have looked at the facts, but you haven't come to a logical, reasonable conclusion.



Oh, I can comprehend it, but it's still wrong.

Just because my views do not agree with yours do not mean they are wrong. Last I checked you were not my dictator.

 

[Valjean]

Superior in what way? According to an NPR story a few months back, US MRI's used better technology and had short wait times than Canada's MRI's. Just an example.

And in Japan MRIs are as common as bloodpressure checks here, and cost less than $100. What's your point?
Canada's wait times have been recognised and are being addressed. We in the US wait as long as Canadians for many other procedures and appointments. My point is, there will always be problems with any health delivery system, but here in the US these are addressed only when they begin to affect profits. In other countries they're addressed as public policy as soon as they're recognised.

As far as quality of care, you can google any number of studies, using all sorts of paramaters, not just the usual infant mortality, lifespan, &c, and see that the US is decidedly second rate.

You should familiarise yourself with the other three healthcare modalities, Watchmen, and with how they work in other countries.

 

[Watchmen]

Let me put it another way. They get better results with a cheaper system of healthcare. That might have as much to do with other factors as it does with the healthcare system, but the fact is they spend less money than us on healthcare and have longer, healthier lives in general. That means we could have a healthcare system as cheap as theirs and get better results than we do now. That might mean making changes other than just the healthcare system, but the point is that it's possible to follow their models and get better results cheaper.

What you say might be true or it might not. Again, conclusions with no correlations. Even if we go to a cheaper system that does not mean we'll get better results than we do now. All those other factors will play a part.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

Let me rephrase. It is evidence, but it is not sufficient evidence upon which to base your conclusion. Magic is irrelevant. Factors affecting the chart in the OP include, among other things: pollution, diet, climate, family construct, stress levels, physical activities, water, and so on. To say access to healthcare is what produces the numbers in the chart is an unsupportable leap when many other factors exist. There's a reason scientists set up controls when performing experiments.

So here is what scientists at the Institute of Medicine of the National Academies had to say in 2004:

"Lack of health insurance causes roughly 18,000 unnecessary deaths every year in the United States. Although America leads the world in spending on health care, it is the only wealthy, industrialized nation that does not ensure that all citizens have coverage."​

An enormous amount of data links lack of insurance to lack of access to healthcare to poor health in the U.S. Even when you control for other factors, lack of insurance/access is correlated with poor health outcomes.

Just the other day I spoke with a woman with cystic fibrosis who volunteers for a legal hotline for health insurance. She said just recently a 9-year-old's private insurance wouldn't cover a liver transplant, and the law requires 4 weeks of waiting before you can get on public insurance. She died waiting for the coverage to kick in. Conservatives say no one is allowed to die in a hospital in America because they can't afford treatment. They are living in a fantasy world.

The woman told me this kind of thing happens all the time, but it's very difficult to organize because people who are sick and dying, or bereaved, have a hard time taking political action.

Anyway, a LOT more relevant, scientific information is available from the non-partisan Kaiser foundation:
http://www.kff.org/uninsured/upload/7451-05.pdf

The evidence seems overwhelming to me.

 

[Watchmen]

And in Japan MRIs are as common as bloodpressure checks here, and cost less than $100. What's your point?
Canada's wait times have been recognised and are being addressed. We in the US wait as long as Canadians for many other procedures and appointments. My point is, there will always be problems with any health delivery system, but here in the US these are addressed only when they begin to affect profits. In other countries they're addressed as public policy as soon as they're recognised.

As far as quality of care, you can google any number of studies, using all sorts of paramaters, not just the usual infant mortality, lifespan, &c, and see that the US is decidedly second rate.

You should familiarise yourself with the other three healthcare modalities, Watchmen, and with how they work in other countries.

I lived in Japan and received healthcare services in Japan. My wife is Japanese and has received the same. We agree that US technology and services are superior. You should not worry about what I'm familiar with or not. Just because we come to different conclusions does not mean I'm ignorant. And, for the record, I do support universal healthcare for children and a public option. But making conclusory statements like "foreign healthcare is superior" is not useful to the debate.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

Especially pay attention to pages 7-8 in the uninsured primer, I believe it addresses the question of data linking access to health care to health outcomes.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

We agree that US technology and services are superior.

Fair enough Watchmen but this also has to be recognized: it's not superior for those who can't afford it; and fancy technology and services are not usually necessary if the basic preventative care is available.