KSB and jerry

[DankNuggs 305]

Link?

 

We can play politically correct pretendland

[DankNuggs 305]

Have you noticed that all the countries that have national health care provide it both cheaper and more universal than free market pre-Obama USA? Or that Medicare itself is cheaper as well?

 

Now this makes more sense.

Think you need to look at health outcomes as well.. Covering everyone for free with poor care isn't necessarily better. My sister has lived in England for 5 years and could tell you all about NHS.

[jerryskids 6,829]

Mandatory catastrophic is a far cheaper structure than mandatory and subsidized Cadillac plans

Agreed, but we already kinda had that pre-Obamacare, and it was free for the poor. So such coverage would make it harder on the poor.

[Voltaire 5,317]

Think you need to look at health outcomes as well.. Covering everyone for free with poor care isn't necessarily better. My sister has lived in England for 5 years and could tell you all about NHS.

OK. One measure of health care outcomes could be life expectancy, where the UK average is 79M/82F or Canada is 80M/84F both at significantly less cost than the US whose averages are 76M/81F.

[Voltaire 5,317]

Agreed, but we already kinda had that pre-Obamacare, and it was free for the poor. So such coverage would make it harder on the poor.

I guess if your definition of free catastrophic health care coverage includes losing all your assets in bankruptcy ... I'm not sure many folks would agree with that.

[jerryskids 6,829]

OK. One measure of health care outcomes could be life expectancy, where the UK average is 79M/82F or Canada is 80M/84F both at significantly less cost than the US whose averages are 76M/81F.

I asked earlier about the impact of population size from penult and never heard back. So I did some research and here is what I've found. Countries by population: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population

Countries by life expectancy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancy

 

Now let's take countries by population and list their life expectancy ranking:

China 49

India 138

US 33

Indonesia 115

Brazil 73

Pakistan 131

Nigeria 180

Bangladesh 128

Russia 118

Japan 1

 

So we need to get to #10 (Japan) to get to one that has a higher life expectancy, and that is the highest. But their population is 127M vs. 317M, or about 40%. And their population is much more homogeneous, in a smaller geographical area.

 

So my theory veiled in a question is: are their challenges to large populations, and possibly lack of homogeneosity (word?), which make health care difficult?

[Voltaire 5,317]

I asked earlier about the impact of population size from penult and never heard back. So I did some research and here is what I've found. Countries by population: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population

Countries by life expectancy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancy

 

Now let's take countries by population and list their life expectancy ranking:

China 49

India 138

US 33

Indonesia 115

Brazil 73

Pakistan 131

Nigeria 180

Bangladesh 128

Russia 118

Japan 1

 

So we need to get to #10 (Japan) to get to one that has a higher life expectancy, and that is the highest. But their population is 127M vs. 317M, or about 40%. And their population is much more homogeneous, in a smaller geographical area.

 

So my theory veiled in a question is: are their challenges to large populations, and possibly lack of homogeneosity (word?), which make health care difficult?

 

Half the population of Nigeria or Bangladesh live in huts with no running water. Why would you rather compare a bunch of poor, overpopulated countries that have nothing in common with the US on HC costs rather than the US's peer advanced modern first world ones with access to first world hospitals and doctors?

 

You'd be better off taking an individual state and finding a modern first world country of similar size/population. Comparing Belgium to Ohio would work better.

 

[jerryskids 6,829]

 

Half the population of Nigeria or Bangladesh live in huts with no running water. Why would you rather compare a bunch of poor, overpopulated countries that have nothing in common with the US on HC costs rather than the US's peer advanced modern first world ones with access to first world hospitals and doctors?

 

You'd be better off taking an individual state and finding a modern first world country of similar size/population. Comparing Belgium to Ohio would work better.

 

Why would it work better, when my point is to question the challenges of providing health care on a national level for heavily populated countries?

[IGotWorms 4,058]

Agreed, but we already kinda had that pre-Obamacare, and it was free for the poor. So such coverage would make it harder on the poor.

No we didn't.

[jerryskids 6,829]

No we didn't.

Sure we did. Anyone could go to an emergency room and get treatment.

[IGotWorms 4,058]

Sure we did. Anyone could go to an emergency room and get treatment.

That's not nearly the same as insurance, Mitt.

[DankNuggs 305]

I asked earlier about the impact of population size from penult and never heard back. So I did some research and here is what I've found. Countries by population: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population

Countries by life expectancy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancy

 

Now let's take countries by population and list their life expectancy ranking:

China 49

India 138

US 33

Indonesia 115

Brazil 73

Pakistan 131

Nigeria 180

Bangladesh 128

Russia 118

Japan 1

 

So we need to get to #10 (Japan) to get to one that has a higher life expectancy, and that is the highest. But their population is 127M vs. 317M, or about 40%. And their population is much more homogeneous, in a smaller geographical area.

 

So my theory veiled in a question is: are their challenges to large populations, and possibly lack of homogeneosity (word?), which make health care difficult?

It's a good point, 10-15% of our population is first generation immigrants, obv japan isn't anything like that. In fact all the glorious socialist national HC countries don't have to compete with that. A huge sum of people who didn't grow up in the HC system.

[Voltaire 5,317]

It's a good point, 10-15% of our population is first generation immigrants, obv japan isn't anything like that. In fact all the glorious socialist national HC countries don't have to compete with that. A huge sum of people who didn't grow up in the HC system.

You again have no idea what you're talking about:

 

http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_STAT-12-105_en.htm

 

And if you have a situation with unwelcome illegals swarming into your country, I'd guess you're much better off with them being Mexicans than Muslims.

[DankNuggs 305]

You again have no idea what you're talking about:

 

http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_STAT-12-105_en.htm

 

And if you have a situation with unwelcome illegals swarming into your country, I'd guess you're much better off with them being Mexicans than Muslims.

When health outcomes are off 5-10% and you have a foreign outside population at 12% not subjected to that care their whole life makes zero difference in total health outcomes? Ok...

 

It's ready established health outcomes for the poor and and uninsured are virtually equal.

 

The fact socialist countries don't allow immigration as a cost saving measure may have a double effect of making sure a higher percentage of the population is under the same cradle to grave HC.

 

I'm no expert just putting out a theory.

[DankNuggs 305]

You again have no idea what you're talking about:

 

http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_STAT-12-105_en.htm

 

And if you have a situation with unwelcome illegals swarming into your country, I'd guess you're much better off with them being Mexicans than Muslims.

Also there were 38mm foreign born in US in 2007, figure that figure went up a little and divide by 300mm is where I got my number. Funny there was 33mm combined in the entire EU 27 per your article

[penultimatestraw 473]

 

We can play politically correct pretendland

I'm serious. I don't believe what you said is correct.

[penultimatestraw 473]

I asked earlier about the impact of population size from penult and never heard back. So I did some research and here is what I've found. Countries by population: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population

Countries by life expectancy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancy

 

Now let's take countries by population and list their life expectancy ranking:

China 49

India 138

US 33

Indonesia 115

Brazil 73

Pakistan 131

Nigeria 180

Bangladesh 128

Russia 118

Japan 1

 

So we need to get to #10 (Japan) to get to one that has a higher life expectancy, and that is the highest. But their population is 127M vs. 317M, or about 40%. And their population is much more homogeneous, in a smaller geographical area.

 

So my theory veiled in a question is: are their challenges to large populations, and possibly lack of homogeneosity (word?), which make health care difficult?

It's possible. How do countries with the lowest populations fare?

[jerryskids 6,829]

It's possible. How do countries with the lowest populations fare?

I provided the links, you tell me. I'm at work on my phone.

[penultimatestraw 473]

I provided the links, you tell me. I'm at work on my phone.

The relationship is inconsistent, as the quality of healthcare is surely multifactorial.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

The relationship is inconsistent, as the quality of healthcare is surely multifactorial.

So, your claim that gubmint run healthcare is better is just an opinion with no real evidence to support it.

[penultimatestraw 473]

So, your claim that gubmint run healthcare is better is just an opinion with no real evidence to support it.

No, I gave evidence of better run healthcare in several other countries. Can you remind me what concrete data you have that the free market/hybrid system we have is better? I suggest you avoid looking at cost and traditional quality metrics, because we have a lot of people in this country.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

So now we need to throw out "traditional quality metrics" to get to your conclusion?

[IGotWorms 4,058]

So now we need to throw out "traditional quality metrics" to get to your conclusion?

[Recliner Pilot 61]

No, I gave evidence of better run healthcare in several other countries. Can you remind me what concrete data you have that the free market/hybrid system we have is better? I suggest you avoid looking at cost and traditional quality metrics, because we have a lot of people in this country.

 

 

 

HTH

[IGotWorms 4,058]

 

 

 

HTH

[Sho Nuff 720]

Im shocked one side brought evidence...the other just keeps denying it and bringing nothing but crap and insults.

 

Just another time he got smacked down by someone who knows way more about the topic than he does...yet he keeps acting like he has a focking clue.

Pathetic.

[jerryskids 6,829]

Im shocked one side brought evidence...the other just keeps denying it and bringing nothing but crap and insults.

Ahem... one side did not bring evidence, they brought data, and they inferred causality from that data. I introduced several alternative theories.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

Im shocked one side brought evidence.. .the other just keeps denying it and bringing nothing but crap and insults.

 

I am impressed, Slo-n-Nuts.

 

It was a long time ago I brought evidence of the Canadian head of state coming to the U.S. for our healthcare, and the Saudi Prince coming to the U.S. for surgery. I figured you would gloss over that.

 

Kudos.

[Sho Nuff 720]

Ahem... one side did not bring evidence, they brought data, and they inferred causality from that data. I introduced several alternative theories.

 

One side brought data...and experience and knowledge.

The other brought opinions and nothing else (as usual).

Meaning really one other person...not getting on you here jerry...its more the other person...the loudmouth.

[penultimatestraw 473]

So now we need to throw out "traditional quality metrics" to get to your conclusion?

Holy crap RP, I was being sarcastic...that comment was aimed at Jerry's grasping at straws to confirm his own bias rather than using more accepted markers of healthcare quality. I guess I need to follow such comments with an LOL or to make it crystal clear to you. LOL/

[penultimatestraw 473]

Ahem... one side did not bring evidence, they brought data, and they inferred causality from that data. I introduced several alternative theories.

You presented one theory, and the data you listed showed no clear relationship between population and life expectancy.

 

And I did provide evidence of better healthcare outside the US. Whether their superiority is due to the universal centralized nature of those systems (versus population size/homogeneity or some other factor(s)) is debatable, though it's pretty easy to attribute increased access to healthcare with better outcomes.

[DankNuggs 305]

I'm serious. I don't believe what you said is correct.

Ok, corollary being people are poor because they strive too hard and are too proactive. Or how hard you strive and how proactive you are have no effect on income...

 

:nutso:

[penultimatestraw 473]

Ok, corollary being people are poor because they strive too hard and are too proactive. Or how hard you strive and how proactive you are have no effect on income...

 

:nutso:

Hard work should increase one's earnings, but that is far from guaranteed. Conversely, people who are poor aren't necessarily lazy - there are a lot of sh!tty paying jobs in the world, and people with limited skills who perform those jobs - sometimes by choice, but often due to other factors, including their ability.

[DankNuggs 305]

Hard work should increase one's earnings, but that is far from guaranteed. Conversely, people who are poor aren't necessarily lazy - there are a lot of sh!tty paying jobs in the world, and people with limited skills who perform those jobs - sometimes by choice, but often due to other factors, including their ability.

Without a doubt. Agree with your statement, my original comment was theorizing that HC signups will skew towards the deadline.

 

I bet if you graphed IRS tax return submittals they'd skew towards the deadline when the vast majority of people get money back. Prolonging submitting a return simply prolongs receiving that money.

 

Why does this happen? Because people are lazy.

[MedStudent 56]

Sure we did. Anyone could go to an emergency room and get treatment.

I'm very surprised a person with a diabetic daughter would actually think that.

 

nobody can be denied emergency care in any hospital accepting Medicaid or Medicare meaning pretty much every hospital in the US to screen for and treat emergent medical conditions.

 

Emergent care is not the same thing as necessary care. An emergent condition is defined by the law to mean a woman in active labor, or a health problem that, if not treated immediately, would lead to death, serious harm to bodily organs, or serious impairment of bodily functions.

 

A diabetic needs regular access to medication to stay alive. They cant get insulin in an emergency room. They cant get needed eye exams or kidney function tests in the emergency room. They cant get a checkup in the emergency room. But once they go into hypoglycemic shock or once their feet become gangrenous, then they can get examined and treated.

[penultimatestraw 473]

Without a doubt. Agree with your statement, my original comment was theorizing that HC signups will skew towards the deadline.

 

I bet if you graphed IRS tax return submittals they'd skew towards the deadline when the vast majority of people get money back. Prolonging submitting a return simply prolongs receiving that money.

 

Why does this happen? Because people are lazy.

Fair enough. I don't necessarily equate procrastination to laziness though.