.

[KnightSlayer]

Wow! There is a strong need for government funding for infrastructure, defense, safety, education and oversight. However, free markets are almost always better. Why? Collective people are always smarter than govts. Businesses find needs and fill them for gain and profit. If you travel in any communist or socialist countries, you will see this play out in spades.

As Joe always taught: It is a balance.

What is funny, at my age, I am at the point where pivoting to being on the govt payroll is personally advantageous. However, can't stand the thought of it for the good of the country.

Which one of these countries will I see this played out in spades?

• Denmark
• Finland
• Netherlands
• Canada
• Sweden
• Norway
• Ireland
• New Zealand
• Belgium
• China

 

[ivan brunetti]

You and I will both agree on this... so it's almost useless saying it, but the more the government tries to subsidize healthcare, the more people in the private sector with incomes will suffer.

Just like college tuition.

Just like home loans

I'm paying my own healthcare right now. It's $2400 a month (family). No health issues. That's absolutely insane.

LdN

That is why most of the successful western countries have moved to single payer.

 

[LionDeNittany]

That is why most of the successful western countries have moved to single payer.

Under single payer I'd be paying more. And most successful western countries are bankrupt... but that's another discussion.
Personally I'm generally for single payer. The problem is within 30 years it will be a disaster like in the UK.

LdN

 

[MJG-90]

Wow! There is a strong need for government funding for infrastructure, defense, safety, education and oversight. However, free markets are almost always better. Why? Collective people are always smarter than govts. Businesses find needs and fill them for gain and profit. If you travel in any communist or socialist countries, you will see this play out in spades.

As Joe always taught: It is a balance.

What is funny, at my age, I am at the point where pivoting to being on the govt payroll is personally advantageous. However, can't stand the thought of it for the good of the country.

There needs to be a balance between business and government. We've seen often enough how a business can make a fraudulent product (VW Diesel) or cook the books somehow (Enron). Yeah, business can probably do better cost wise because of competition. But then they want a profit too. So they might take a shortcut and try to hide it. It would be nice if people were still mostly honest.

 

[Obliviax]

Which one of these countries will I see this played out in spades?

• Denmark
• Finland
• Netherlands
• Canada
• Sweden
• Norway
• Ireland
• New Zealand
• Belgium
• China

First, these are hardly comparable countries. Your first one, Denmark, has the population of Colorado. And, they never had slavery or mass immigration to worry about. You want to throw out everyone but the most fortunate 5,000,000 people in America, remove anyone who's ancestor was a slave, change diets to fish? , ? That model will work quite well.

A quick look and you will see that all have been in very advantageous positions geographically, population wise and/or in terms of raw materials. The only larger ones there are

• Canada where people often come to the US for healthcare.
• China. If you think that place is a great place to live, I suggest you visit or move there. BTW, find a mosque and see if you can pray there.

I could go on and on but know a meaningful discussion is a waste of time...So I'll stop their and bail out of this thread.

 

[LionDeNittany]

First, these are hardly comparable countries. Your first one, Denmark, has the population of Colorado. And, they never had slavery or mass immigration to worry about. You want to throw out everyone but the most fortunate 5,000,000 people in America, remove anyone who's ancestor was a slave, change diets to fish? , ? That model will work quite well.

A quick look and you will see that all have been in very advantageous positions geographically, population wise and/or in terms of raw materials. The only larger ones there are

• Canada where people often come to the US for healthcare.
• China. If you think that place is a great place to live, I suggest you visit or move there. BTW, find a mosque and see if you can pray there.

I could go on and on but know a meaningful discussion is a waste of time...So I'll stop their and bail out of this thread.

I've been to Norway many times. Swedish youth go there to work... as waiters and clerks, because there is less opportunity in Sweden. It was eye opening because I always viewed Sweden as some incredible place where everyone is wealthy.

Norway, of course, sits on 600bln of oil reserves with a very tiny population.

Without the US both of these countries would be part of Russia.

LdN

 

[Cletus11]

First, these are hardly comparable countries. Your first one, Denmark, has the population of Colorado. And, they never had slavery or mass immigration to worry about. You want to throw out everyone but the most fortunate 5,000,000 people in America, remove anyone who's ancestor was a slave, change diets to fish? , ? That model will work quite well.

A quick look and you will see that all have been in very advantageous positions geographically, population wise and/or in terms of raw materials. The only larger ones there are

• Canada where people often come to the US for healthcare.
• China. If you think that place is a great place to live, I suggest you visit or move there. BTW, find a mosque and see if you can pray there.

I could go on and on but know a meaningful discussion is a waste of time...So I'll stop their and bail out of this thread.

why is slavery being injected into this conversation?

 

[Obliviax]

why is slavery being injected into this conversation?

My point is that the rule of govt is different from country to country. The cultures, needs, history and much more are different. The poster was comparing the USA to countries like Denmark, Sweden and New Zealand. These are vastly different countries in terms of diet, size, diversity, population etc. A history of Slavery, and the ongoing problems this time presents to the UDA, was simply one example of what makes the USA different from Denmark or Sweden.

 

[Cletus11]

My point is that the rule of govt is different from country to country. The cultures, needs, history and much more are different. The poster was comparing the USA to countries like Denmark, Sweden and New Zealand. These are vastly different countries in terms of diet, size, diversity, population etc. A history of Slavery, and the ongoing problems this time presents to the UDA, was simply one example of what makes the USA different from Denmark or Sweden.

i still see no reason to bring up slavery as a difference between USA and Scandanavia with respect to single payer healthcare and the general capitialism vs. socialism discussion. I see no correlation. norway had vikings and USA did not, who cares. you want to talk about population, natural resources, current federal deficit, standard of living, etc...those are all good topics. Slavery occuring 150+ years ago in USA versus what other countries had (which most countries had some form of slavery/indentured servititude type situation in their history) I see having no bearing on current socialism discussion.

 

[LemonEars]

That is why most of the successful western countries have moved to single payer.

Plus the "successful western countries" have their military protection paid for by American taxpayers. Their military budgets are next to nothing because we defend them. The "Western countries" should pay for American citizen's healthcare to pay us back for providing them military protection.

 

[Obliviax]

i still see no reason to bring up slavery as a difference between USA and Scandanavia with respect to single payer healthcare and the general capitialism vs. socialism discussion. I see no correlation. norway had vikings and USA did not, who cares. you want to talk about population, natural resources, current federal deficit, standard of living, etc...those are all good topics. Slavery occuring 150+ years ago in USA versus what other countries had (which most countries had some form of slavery/indentured servititude type situation in their history) I see having no bearing on current socialism discussion.

OK...duly noted.

 

[ivan brunetti]

Plus the "successful western countries" have their military protection paid for by American taxpayers. Their military budgets are next to nothing because we defend them. The "Western countries" should pay for American citizen's healthcare to pay us back for providing them military protection.

Trump has boasted that Europe is now paying its fair share for defense. So where is our windfall? That should mean we can cut our military budget by about $100 billion. Instead, we waste even more money on the military. It is ridiculous.

 

[Cletus11]

One HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE difference in all those countries you talk about is liability and lawsuits. Laywers have taken over the USA and those other countries have nowhere near the liability related issues that US doctors have and are driving a lot of the healthcare cost issues. Not only huge malpractice premiums for doctors, but the fact that many doctors now have to push for unnecessary testing or tell you to goto the emergency room purely to cover themselves from a future malpractice lawsuit.

Second issues is that to some extent the USA is paying for the world to have better drugs as price controls in all other countries control the drug price so the only place to make real money is in the USA. All the cost of a drug is in the years of development, to literally make most drugs cost pennies. It was the $200 million and 10 years of research that cost all the money so the drug company does have to recoup that cost. But since other countries have caps on pricing, the drug company can only charge so much per pill/injection. But in USA, they charge whatever they want/can as they have to recoup that money somehow and USA is only place to do so.

there is also a culture shift in the usa to goto the doctor everything and anything. there is not an urgent care on every corner anymore because they don't make money. it is because any kid gets a sniffle and mom has to run them to the doctor. gone are the days when you slept on it and only after a couple of days of sniffles or cough went to the doctor (and 50% of the time the sniffle went away during that period). and since the internet, the amount of hypochondriacs has exploded in the usa such that they are going to the doctor with phantom illnesses found on the internet and demanding the latest drug. so it is easiet for the doctor to just give in and say yes and prescribe. the doctor does that because the one and million chance that he doesn't do it and the person does have the illness means a huge lawsuit. so grossly overprescribing medication to prevent lawsuits.

single payer is not going to magically make everything better. there are a ton of underlying issues in the usa (that other countries with single payer do not have) that have to be addressed or nothing is going to change.

 

[Media Fan]

Identity politics doesn’t help, and it seems to feed the I’m right, You’re wrong obsessiveness of today’s world.
Please toss in rights we’re intended to be inalienable/ indivisible- and identity politics is contrary to that intention imo.

 

[KnightSlayer]

One HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE difference in all those countries you talk about is liability and lawsuits. Laywers have taken over the USA and those other countries have nowhere near the liability related issues that US doctors have and are driving a lot of the healthcare cost issues. Not only huge malpractice premiums for doctors, but the fact that many doctors now have to push for unnecessary testing or tell you to goto the emergency room purely to cover themselves from a future malpractice lawsuit.

Second issues is that to some extent the USA is paying for the world to have better drugs as price controls in all other countries control the drug price so the only place to make real money is in the USA. All the cost of a drug is in the years of development, to literally make most drugs cost pennies. It was the $200 million and 10 years of research that cost all the money so the drug company does have to recoup that cost. But since other countries have caps on pricing, the drug company can only charge so much per pill/injection. But in USA, they charge whatever they want/can as they have to recoup that money somehow and USA is only place to do so.

there is also a culture shift in the usa to goto the doctor everything and anything. there is not an urgent care on every corner anymore because they don't make money. it is because any kid gets a sniffle and mom has to run them to the doctor. gone are the days when you slept on it and only after a couple of days of sniffles or cough went to the doctor (and 50% of the time the sniffle went away during that period). and since the internet, the amount of hypochondriacs has exploded in the usa such that they are going to the doctor with phantom illnesses found on the internet and demanding the latest drug. so it is easiet for the doctor to just give in and say yes and prescribe. the doctor does that because the one and million chance that he doesn't do it and the person does have the illness means a huge lawsuit. so grossly overprescribing medication to prevent lawsuits.

single payer is not going to magically make everything better. there are a ton of underlying issues in the usa (that other countries with single payer do not have) that have to be addressed or nothing is going to change.

https://www.vox.com/2015/2/11/8018691/big-pharma-research-advertising

9 of 10 top drugmakers spend more on marketing than research


http://malpracticecenter.com/states/uk

For public claims against care received under the NHS or NHS-affiliated providers, UK medical malpractice laws permit claims to be filed under the following rubric:

• Claims will be made against the National Health Service and if awarded, paid via the budget of the Department of Health.
• Claims payments made by NHS toppled 12,000 claims made in 2013/2014 and had seen a significant increase in the past decade.
• NHS pays out UK citizen claimants billions of pounds annually for claims of clinical negligence made by patients, with the payouts in light of several recent public scandals at the NHS relating to poor-quality care only increasing payout sums over time
• These claims of clinical negligence apply a reasonable standard of care metric per the nationwide NHS clinical standards, which are frequently breached during the course of ordinary care under the NHS healthcare system
• Damages claims for increased health risks, wrongful diagnosis, failure to diagnosis, surgical mistakes, prescription drug errors, and other medical harms sustained by patients are common complaints made against the NHS and its employed medical professionals
• Claims can be filed for NHS-covered dental and vision service providers that fail to provide a reasonable standard of care

 

[Cletus11]

https://www.vox.com/2015/2/11/8018691/big-pharma-research-advertising

9 of 10 top drugmakers spend more on marketing than research


http://malpracticecenter.com/states/uk

For public claims against care received under the NHS or NHS-affiliated providers, UK medical malpractice laws permit claims to be filed under the following rubric:

• Claims will be made against the National Health Service and if awarded, paid via the budget of the Department of Health.
• Claims payments made by NHS toppled 12,000 claims made in 2013/2014 and had seen a significant increase in the past decade.
• NHS pays out UK citizen claimants billions of pounds annually for claims of clinical negligence made by patients, with the payouts in light of several recent public scandals at the NHS relating to poor-quality care only increasing payout sums over time
• These claims of clinical negligence apply a reasonable standard of care metric per the nationwide NHS clinical standards, which are frequently breached during the course of ordinary care under the NHS healthcare system
• Damages claims for increased health risks, wrongful diagnosis, failure to diagnosis, surgical mistakes, prescription drug errors, and other medical harms sustained by patients are common complaints made against the NHS and its employed medical professionals
• Claims can be filed for NHS-covered dental and vision service providers that fail to provide a reasonable standard of care

So the below was from a quick google and the article was in 2010. so a few billion pounds is nothing compared to the usa which is easilyl over 100 billion. you can go try to sue the govt and see how that works.

A new study reveals that the cost of medical malpractice in the United States is running at about $55.6 billion a year - $45.6 billion of which is spent on defensive medicine practiced by physicians seeking to stay clear of lawsuits.

 

[LionDeNittany]

So the below was from a quick google and the article was in 2010. so a few billion pounds is nothing compared to the usa which is easilyl over 100 billion. you can go try to sue the govt and see how that works.

A new study reveals that the cost of medical malpractice in the United States is running at about $55.6 billion a year - $45.6 billion of which is spent on defensive medicine practiced by physicians seeking to stay clear of lawsuits.

Regarding suing the government, suits against the government are already a way for connected people to shakedown the average joe. It will get worse with medical malpractice.

https://nypost.com/2018/12/07/sharptons-daughter-gets-95k-settlement-for-sprained-ankle/

LdN

 

[Lion84]

One HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE HUGE difference in all those countries you talk about is liability and lawsuits. Laywers have taken over the USA and those other countries have nowhere near the liability related issues that US doctors have and are driving a lot of the healthcare cost issues. Not only huge malpractice premiums for doctors, but the fact that many doctors now have to push for unnecessary testing or tell you to goto the emergency room purely to cover themselves from a future malpractice lawsuit.

Second issues is that to some extent the USA is paying for the world to have better drugs as price controls in all other countries control the drug price so the only place to make real money is in the USA. All the cost of a drug is in the years of development, to literally make most drugs cost pennies. It was the $200 million and 10 years of research that cost all the money so the drug company does have to recoup that cost. But since other countries have caps on pricing, the drug company can only charge so much per pill/injection. But in USA, they charge whatever they want/can as they have to recoup that money somehow and USA is only place to do so.

there is also a culture shift in the usa to goto the doctor everything and anything. there is not an urgent care on every corner anymore because they don't make money. it is because any kid gets a sniffle and mom has to run them to the doctor. gone are the days when you slept on it and only after a couple of days of sniffles or cough went to the doctor (and 50% of the time the sniffle went away during that period). and since the internet, the amount of hypochondriacs has exploded in the usa such that they are going to the doctor with phantom illnesses found on the internet and demanding the latest drug. so it is easiet for the doctor to just give in and say yes and prescribe. the doctor does that because the one and million chance that he doesn't do it and the person does have the illness means a huge lawsuit. so grossly overprescribing medication to prevent lawsuits.

single payer is not going to magically make everything better. there are a ton of underlying issues in the usa (that other countries with single payer do not have) that have to be addressed or nothing is going to change.

There is a ton of RIGHT in your post - you sighted most of the major obstacles that the US will have to take care of if we ever want to have a single payer approach that will not will not quickly bankrupt the Country - even more than it already is.

 

[MJG-90]

I always love getting a doctor bill. It will say something like price = $500. Amount allowed by my insurance = $49.80. Amount owed = $49.80. Why does someone without insurance have to pay $450.20 more than I have to pay for the exact same thing (assuming they have no clue their actual bill is negotiable)? Fix that problem.

 

[LionDeNittany]

I always love getting a doctor bill. It will say something like price = $500. Amount allowed by my insurance = $49.80. Amount owed = $49.80. Why does someone without insurance have to pay $450.20 more than I have to pay for the exact same thing (assuming they have no clue their actual bill is negotiable)? Fix that problem.

Anyone can negotiate pricing. Insurance companies just do this up front.

Yes it is wrong. But it is no different than buying a car and different pricing based on car buying experience.

LdN

 

[Cletus11]

Anyone can negotiate pricing. Insurance companies just do this up front.

Yes it is wrong. But it is no different than buying a car and different pricing based on car buying experience.

LdN

i might be a great, great negotiator and that might get me 5-15% off. look at your insurance and it is typically anywhere from 50-90% reduction so not the same. Second, call up some doctors offices and ask them the price is going to be to come in and visit if you don't have insurance and that you want to negotiate what that price will be. And then listen to the dial tone as they hang up. You might hearing some laughing before they actually hang up on you. Only group that i know that has successfully negotiated some pricing is a some clicks of Mennonites that goto one doctor and negotiate some pricing on common stuff and goto the local hospital and have a price to deliver a baby.

 

[Nitt1300]

So we are subsidizing other countries drug prices? Really? Is that because they negotiate lower drug prices? Or because the US prevents negotiating lower drug prices?

yes

 

[Nitt1300]

So who’s the idiot?

the American taxpayer- as always

 

[SLion]

"the amount of hypochondriacs has exploded in the usa"

While I am sure this is part of problem, the bigger problem is excessive push by doctors to get your pharmaceuticals and follow-up visits for minor stuff. Case and point, my 4 year old got hit in face at jungle gym but seemed ok. 3 hours later he starts crying at dinner about his eye. I knew it was slight cornea scratch but had to check it out. Doctor does dye test, puts patch on it..then prescribes $20 eye drops and wants a follow up visit in two days. I did neither the drops nor follow up. She is getting $100 for 15m visit. Enough is enough.

 

[Cletus11]

"the amount of hypochondriacs has exploded in the usa"

While I am sure this is part of problem, the bigger problem is excessive push by doctors to get your pharmaceuticals and follow-up visits for minor stuff. Case and point, my 4 year old got hit in face at jungle gym but seemed ok. 3 hours later he starts crying at dinner about his eye. I knew it was slight cornea scratch but had to check it out. Doctor does dye test, puts patch on it..then prescribes $20 eye drops and wants a follow up visit in two days. I did neither the drops nor follow up. She is getting $100 for 15m visit. Enough is enough.

So the reason for the follow up is the outside crazy case the eye gets infected and something bad occurs then you sue for $20 million in damage for permanent eye damage. Do you recognize that. It is a cya move by the doctor so he doesn’t get sued. You mistake that for trying to milk the insurance company and this is incorrect.

 

[Nitt1300]

https://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/indusclient.php?id=h04

part of the cost of "healthcare" in this country- a small part

what we'll never see is what this bought- but you can bet it was a lot more

 

[MJG-90]

Yes it is wrong. But it is no different than buying a car and different pricing based on car buying experience.

Except nobody is negotiating a car for 10% of MSRP. So why the high MSRP on healthcare?

 

[SLion]

So the reason for the follow up is the outside crazy case the eye gets infected and something bad occurs then you sue for $20 million in damage for permanent eye damage. Do you recognize that. It is a cya move by the doctor so he doesn’t get sued. You mistake that for trying to milk the insurance company and this is incorrect.

I realize it is partly cya but provide stats and risk associated with a slight scratch becoming infected. It is always convenient to use miniscule outliers to justify overcharges. I will take simpler explanation, two visits is more profitable than one.