3 ms·

Soo much wrong here.. One the "better outcomes" is actually debatable due to a whole host of factors, including that American are generally less healthy not be

by syshum 5y ago

Soo much wrong here.. One the "better outcomes" is actually debatable due to a whole host of factors, including that American are generally less healthy not because of our healthcare system but because we have large amounts of high processed high carb food with little excersise which is not the case in the EU. The only way the US would "save" money on socialize care is if they highly regulated and heavily taxed "bad food" which I am sure you would support but I dont as I oppose using the tax code for social goals If you look at stats that take into account these factors the US health system is the best in the world. better Cancer Survivor rates, Lower wait times, faster times to specialists, lower Doctor to Patient counts, Semi-private hospital rooms standard, etc, etc. Also looking a Total spend as a % of GDP is completely moronic statistic to compare as well, and there is NO WAY the government could socialize health care and capture anywhere near the amount of money to pay for it in taxation. Not even close, to believe that you have to ignore all of recorded tax history.

ROTMetro 5y ago
First, the USA has socialized medicine, but in the most expensive yet most ineffective way, and that is in the ER. American ERs can not legally turn patients away for inability to pay. Anyone that tries to argue against socialized healthcare in the USA is making a pointless argument, we already have it. They are just arguing against "effective" socialized medicine. If I take the opinion of McDonalds customers, they will tell me McDonalds has much better food than if I include the opinion of McDonalds customers AND the people that don't go there. There is what the USA numbers show, outcome for people for whom the USA medical system works. The US numbers are self selecting, because many poorer people in bad health don't make it to the starting point to even be included in the numbers for "Cancer Survivor", they just don't receive any treatment and are invisible to you syshum. When you have a whole section of society (the section that happens to be less healthy, exposed to more chemicals, harsher working conditions, poorer diet on average) excluded from the numbers you use you can't really use your statistics for any valid comparison. My grandfather who had VA benefits had great healthcare. My grandmother, well, she was just invisible in your statistics because she had no healthcare. For lower wait times, are you conflating elective surgery with non-elective? Please show me the USA vs other countries statistics that you are using broken out by elective and non-elective. I would say a better measure of healthcare would be wait time for non-elective treatment, while elective wait time is more a quality of life measurement, two different things. Kind of like medications versus vitamins, they are booth pills, but you don't die if you don't have access to vitamins. Take out elective (and highly profitable in USA but lower priority than saving lives under other forms of healthcare) and I think your statistics are going to show no advantage for USA healthcare. Yes, the USA healthcare system is best in the world for rushing people into high profit surgery/treatment. But is that truely a healthcare metric, or is that more a quality of life metric? Your last argument where you state the prior poster is moronic is purely opinion with no attempt at persuasion or presentation of reasons for the opinion.
- syshum 5y ago
  I would agree that US has socialized medicine but not because of the ER, but because most of the Healthcare spending is now under 3 government programs. Medicare, Medicade, and VA. ER is often a convenient target for explaining the high cost of care but while a factor is not the primary factor. Instead the high cost of normal care is down to regulations, poor government reimbursement rate under the 2 big programs, and our linking health insurance to be "comprehensive prepaid health plans" not insurance in the sense of any other insurance product. >>>But is that truely a healthcare metric, or is that more a quality of life metric? I would say it is both. This is another area where I disagree with the healthcare field in as too often healthcare does not factor in quality of life in to their choices. I think quality of life is critical >>>For lower wait times, are you conflating elective surgery with non-elective? Please show me the USA vs other countries statistics that you are using broken out by elective and non-elective. I guess then we would have to define what you consider "elective" as many nations with Single Payer health system have broaden that term to include any surgery that is not immediate life saving care. So something like a hip surgery is "elective" to them, which I do not consider to be elective if you have a broken hip and are in pain all the time. In some nations however it is perfectly acceptable for them to live the rest of their life in a lower mobility state, using pain management drugs to suffer until their death. i find that morally abhorrent That said at the end of the day even if government run care was grand, wonder, the best thing ever i would still oppose it. healthcare is not a proper role of government. I do not want a paternalistic government to rule over me like I was a subject of the government.
WhyNotHugo 5y ago
> One the "better outcomes" is actually debatable due to a whole host of factors, including that American are generally less healthy not because of our healthcare system but because we have large amounts of high processed high carb food with little excersise which is not the case in the EU. Having low quality foods IS part of public healthcare spending. Regulating and controlling what foods are considerable fit for humans is within the domain of healthcare too. Taxing highly unhealthy foods to deter excessive compunction, for example, works wonders since there's either more money for healthcare, or less people getting so sick. Healthcare isn't just about covering the doctor's fee, it's also about reducing how much people need to go to the doctor or get sick in the first place.
- syshum 5y ago
  I do not believe it is the proper role of government to dictate to me what foods I can and can not consume, or to manipulate my behavior on what they feel is the "best" diet today, that will change tomorrow Remember the US government gave us the Food Pyramid which by an large indoctrinated multiple generations into the High Carb, low Protein diet that has lead to the Obesity epidemic So you will have to explain why in hell I should trust them to tax and regulate my diet?

by syshum 5y ago

ROTMetro 5y ago

First, the USA has socialized medicine, but in the most expensive yet most ineffective way, and that is in the ER. American ERs can not legally turn patients away for inability to pay. Anyone that tries to argue against socialized healthcare in the USA is making a pointless argument, we already have it. They are just arguing against "effective" socialized medicine. If I take the opinion of McDonalds customers, they will tell me McDonalds has much better food than if I include the opinion of McDonalds customers AND the people that don't go there. There is what the USA numbers show, outcome for people for whom the USA medical system works. The US numbers are self selecting, because many poorer people in bad health don't make it to the starting point to even be included in the numbers for "Cancer Survivor", they just don't receive any treatment and are invisible to you syshum. When you have a whole section of society (the section that happens to be less healthy, exposed to more chemicals, harsher working conditions, poorer diet on average) excluded from the numbers you use you can't really use your statistics for any valid comparison. My grandfather who had VA benefits had great healthcare. My grandmother, well, she was just invisible in your statistics because she had no healthcare. For lower wait times, are you conflating elective surgery with non-elective? Please show me the USA vs other countries statistics that you are using broken out by elective and non-elective. I would say a better measure of healthcare would be wait time for non-elective treatment, while elective wait time is more a quality of life measurement, two different things. Kind of like medications versus vitamins, they are booth pills, but you don't die if you don't have access to vitamins. Take out elective (and highly profitable in USA but lower priority than saving lives under other forms of healthcare) and I think your statistics are going to show no advantage for USA healthcare. Yes, the USA healthcare system is best in the world for rushing people into high profit surgery/treatment. But is that truely a healthcare metric, or is that more a quality of life metric? Your last argument where you state the prior poster is moronic is purely opinion with no attempt at persuasion or presentation of reasons for the opinion.

syshum 5y ago
I would agree that US has socialized medicine but not because of the ER, but because most of the Healthcare spending is now under 3 government programs. Medicare, Medicade, and VA. ER is often a convenient target for explaining the high cost of care but while a factor is not the primary factor. Instead the high cost of normal care is down to regulations, poor government reimbursement rate under the 2 big programs, and our linking health insurance to be "comprehensive prepaid health plans" not insurance in the sense of any other insurance product. >>>But is that truely a healthcare metric, or is that more a quality of life metric? I would say it is both. This is another area where I disagree with the healthcare field in as too often healthcare does not factor in quality of life in to their choices. I think quality of life is critical >>>For lower wait times, are you conflating elective surgery with non-elective? Please show me the USA vs other countries statistics that you are using broken out by elective and non-elective. I guess then we would have to define what you consider "elective" as many nations with Single Payer health system have broaden that term to include any surgery that is not immediate life saving care. So something like a hip surgery is "elective" to them, which I do not consider to be elective if you have a broken hip and are in pain all the time. In some nations however it is perfectly acceptable for them to live the rest of their life in a lower mobility state, using pain management drugs to suffer until their death. i find that morally abhorrent That said at the end of the day even if government run care was grand, wonder, the best thing ever i would still oppose it. healthcare is not a proper role of government. I do not want a paternalistic government to rule over me like I was a subject of the government.

WhyNotHugo 5y ago

> One the "better outcomes" is actually debatable due to a whole host of factors, including that American are generally less healthy not because of our healthcare system but because we have large amounts of high processed high carb food with little excersise which is not the case in the EU. Having low quality foods IS part of public healthcare spending. Regulating and controlling what foods are considerable fit for humans is within the domain of healthcare too. Taxing highly unhealthy foods to deter excessive compunction, for example, works wonders since there's either more money for healthcare, or less people getting so sick. Healthcare isn't just about covering the doctor's fee, it's also about reducing how much people need to go to the doctor or get sick in the first place.

syshum 5y ago
I do not believe it is the proper role of government to dictate to me what foods I can and can not consume, or to manipulate my behavior on what they feel is the "best" diet today, that will change tomorrow Remember the US government gave us the Food Pyramid which by an large indoctrinated multiple generations into the High Carb, low Protein diet that has lead to the Obesity epidemic So you will have to explain why in hell I should trust them to tax and regulate my diet?