Re: Just Saw Sicko, Now Have Question
 

[ QUOTE ]


True, those people should have gotten an education, a job, and bought some insurance.

They didn't. So they suffer the consequences.

Should society provide them a mercedes and a mansion as well?

You want to take from some people who were responsible, and give to those that weren't. That is called theft.

[/ QUOTE ]


Keep... forgetting... i'm not... in BBV... and these people.. are serious...

Re: Just Saw Sicko, Now Have Question
 

[ QUOTE ]


The thing that annoyed me the most were the stories about people getting denied their claims on technicalities. Regardless of the dishonest example picking moore used, in a free market companies that ran around denying people legitimate care would go out of business.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're ignorant about this. There's no other way to say it. It's called bad faith insurance and it happens a lot more often than you think. Lawyers have gotten rich off the failure of health insurance companies to own up to their responsibilities and pay for care that is covered under the policies they sell. A lot of people don't have money to hire an attorney and a lot of state health care regulation boards are bought and paid for by the private insurance companies. Now I realize that you're probably pretty sheltered and have no clue what's really going on, so I suggest you go to Google and punch in what I told you to punch in, in quotes, and then come back to me and tell me that what Moore was talking about doesn't really happen that often, if at all. If you can do that with a straight face, congrats, you should probably apply for a position in the Bush administration.

And the stuff about howt axes would have go to up tremendously just isn't true. You have no proof to back up your assertions but I could quote plenty of studies that show that it wouldn't cost any more than we're already spending. If you'd like me to, say so.

Re: Just Saw Sicko, Now Have Question
 

Apples & Oranges a simple test

The US has the best healthcare in the world but not the best system. It has lots of problems.

1)Of the 8 largest countries pick the one you want average care in:China India US Indonesia Brazil Pakistan Bangladesh Nigeria

2)You are a 23 week premature baby pick a country to be born in? England US Cuba (hint 2 decisions are fatal)

3)You have cancer pick a country for treatment? Canada US Cuba

4) You are a country (other than US) and you want to cure a disease. You can (A) pay for the research yourself or (B) let the Americans pay.

***obv i picked biased questions

The US will continue to have the best care in the world and it will continue to cost more than anywhere in the world even if it goes to single payor. Cost should not be the reason for change.

Re: Just Saw Sicko, Now Have Question
 

John Spartan,

You've valiantly held the line, almost single handedly, while being woefully outnumbered. Kudos.

Re: Just Saw Sicko, Now Have Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
I care about ME and my family. Period. I can afford health care because I have an education and a good job and am a productive member of society. I don't really give a crap about anything else. Does that make me "selfish" or "immoral"? Well that's up to you and your definition of the word immoral.

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess it does mean something that you're the only person to come out and blatantly admit it. Care about your family huh? That's awesome. Your mom? She didn't die or anything, right, like from cancer or something, right? Awesome, good for you.



Plus, I really like how you tacked on the productive part below:

[ QUOTE ]
I have an education and a good job and am a productive member of society.

[/ QUOTE ]

You almost, just almost, make it seem like you actually did 'earn' something and it's not a big lottery. Great.

Re: Just Saw Sicko, Now Have Question
 

more apples and oranges

Comparing the US to a country of 4 million who are wealthy educated and healthier doesn't seem fair. Americans are violent $3B per year spent treating gunshot wounds. There are 16-20 mil non-citizens living here.

American are fatter and sicker

England with the highest premature birthrate in europe has 50,000/y (pop 60mil)vs the US with 500,000/y premature births (pop 300 mil. One could think that if these expectant mothers received better care there wouldn't such a discrepancy (2x). But all these mothers are eligible for free government sponsored and administrated health care.

The best health care in the world is available to you in america you just have to find a way to get it.

Re: Just Saw Sicko, Now Have Question
 

[ QUOTE ]


The best health care in the world is available to you in america you just have to find a way to get it.

[/ QUOTE ]

and you are the whim of your private insurance company and whether or not they are going to cover your care, if you are lucky enough to have insurance(i do).

Re: Just Saw Sicko, Now Have Question
 

Thanks chump.


[ QUOTE ]
I have an education and a good job and am a productive member of society.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
You almost, just almost, make it seem like you actually did 'earn' something and it's not a big lottery. Great.

[/ QUOTE ]

It really is amazing how these people conveniently ignore the fact that they won the womb lottery. Plenty of people didn't. I did, and was able to afford health insurance.

What these people fail to see is how much the infrastructure of the United States government contributes to their ability to get and maintain wealth. Asking the people at the very top to pay a bit more in taxes to cover everyone with health insurance(repealing the Bush tax cuts basically, which went mostly to the top 1% of income earners, people earning over $320k or so a year, would go a long way toward doing this) is hardly fascist or socialist. It's common sense.

Re: Just Saw Sicko, Now Have Question
 

[ QUOTE ]

The thing that annoyed me the most were the stories about people getting denied their claims on technicalities. Regardless of the dishonest example picking moore used, in a free market companies that ran around denying people legitimate care would go out of business.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you suggesting that companies don't in fact do this?
Just because your economic models say something should happen doesn't make it true.

These models are only worth anything to the extent that they mirror actual reality. And healthcare markets diverge too strongly in too many ways from the assumptions of the perfectly competitive economic model to just say that this is what "would happen" under the free market when observed reality is so different.

Re: Just Saw Sicko, Now Have Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
more apples and oranges

Comparing the US to a country of 4 million who are wealthy educated and healthier doesn't seem fair.

[/ QUOTE ]

On average, American is much wealthier and better educated than most contries with universal healthcare. The fact that we have more people in poverty is, IMO, a pretty compelling reason why would should have universal health care, not an argument against it.

Americans are fatter, but have a lot fewer smokers. I'm not sure what the balance is here. But at least some obesity is caused by the fact that people are never informed about the health risks or good nutrition (especially good nutrition for children) because they never see a doctor because they don't have health insurance.

[ QUOTE ]
Americans are violent $3B per year spent treating gunshot wounds.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you have an estimate for what % of health care costs are due to treating violent injuries? ($3B per year on gunshots is only $10/per capita, just a small fraction of 1% of a person's annual healthcare spending.)

[ QUOTE ]
The best health care in the world is available to you in america you just have to find a way to get it.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is true...but how is it an argument against make it easier for people to find a way to get healthcare?

Re: Just Saw Sicko, Now Have Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
Can someone please lay out the libertarian stance on government in like a paragraph or two?

[/ QUOTE ]

I can't lay out the Libertarian stance specifically, but I can tell you what a morally just stance is.

Essentially, society is comprised of individuals who gain much by cooperating. In order to allow for this cooperation, individuals must be free to make decisions for themselves based on whatever they think is best without the use of force to influence them one way or another. These individuals are free to trade with one another using persuasion, to the benefit of both parties. Individuals who have grouped together form governments to ensure that they can trade with each other without the threat of force by others. These governments have 3 basic responsibilities:

1. Police - to stop rogue elements in society (and every society has them)

2. Military - to stop foreign invaders.

3. A court system - to settle honest disputes amongst me.

The government shouldn't be in the business of doing ANYTHING else.

Now, without taxes, how does one pay for these things? One suggestion is a lottery, another, better suggestion is to institute a 1% tax on all financial transactions. This tax would be voluntary and would ensure that those who paid it would receive the benefits of gov't protection from crooks (police), foreign enemies (military) and would hear the case in case a dispute was brought forward by the parties who were part of the original transaction.

Re: Just Saw Sicko, Now Have Question
 

jack, can please address my questions wrt how things are actually going to play out in real life? Do you honestly believe this country would be a better place w/o guaranteed emergency room care, emissions standards, wheelchair ramps, civil rights laws, anti-trust laws, auto-safety regulations, the interstate highway system, endangered species laws, etc. etc. etc.?

My fundamental problem with libertarianism is this all-or-nothing attitude. I have no problem with the idea that *some* or even *a lot* of government spending is complete waste. But to say that *all* of the laws enacted to help sick/poor people, keep a level playing field for business, or protect the environment are completely unecsessary makes no sense. To be honest it seems to me like libertarianism attracts people who want things to be black and white in life, and can't handle compromise or grey areas.

Watch Gangs of NY. NYC used to be a lot more like the system you describe. Firefighters were paid by the job. So they used to go to war over who put out the fire, and let the house burn to the ground sometimes. Then the poor rioted and started sacking homes uptown. It finally dawned on the people with some money that they might be better off at least making sure the lowest rung of society had *some* level of basic services to keep the situation from total chaos. Sort of like how even George Bush gets that we have to do something about aids in Africa. Or *we* will be dealing with the fallout for 100 years to come.

No system is perfect. But at least from this perspective at this point in time, the western brand of socio-capitalism seems about the best solution. Your answer sounds more like Somalia.

Re: Just Saw Sicko, Now Have Question
 

I don't think what I am advocating is possible without a lot of education. This is definitely not an overnight sort fo solution. The reason I bring it up is because it is the right thing to do and I would rather start taking baby steps in the right direction than just throw my hands up in the air and say it is impossible to do EVERYTHING right tomorrow, so we may as well continue to legislate immoral law.

I understand your fundamental problem and it is one many people have - the all or nothing issue. Lets break it down to components.

First, what are rights? Rights are moral principles defining a mans freedom of action in a social context.

1. The most fundamental right we all have is the right to life, from which all other rights stem (liberty, property and the pursuit of happiness).
2. This right is inalienable, it cannot be given to you or taken away from you (a man may take away your life but your right to it has not been alienated).
3. In order to excersize our right to life we require only one thing from our fellow man - freedom of action.

Do our actions always guarantee success? No, they don't. We will sometimes make good decisions and sometimes make bad ones - but it is our own decision to make.

Now, since we have the right to life, we have the right to defend our lives. If someone attacks us, we can strike back in self defense. Teh attacker in this instance is the one who is morally wrong, not the defender. As a society, we have extended that very right of self defense to our government. Once we give our government the authority to levy taxes and back up their "request" by the threat of the use of force, we have now become the agressor, the thief who initiates force against others - who shoudl rightly defend themselves against this attack.

So you see, from a moral perspective, we have no aothority to allow our government to levy taxes in order to build roads, create social programs, guarantee emergency care or any other thing they do. Futhermore, to think that no private entity would arise that would fill these needs, in a much better way than gov't reminds of the panic that set in when the soviet union collapsed (who will supply shoes/bread/cars etc... now that the gov't is gone???).

I watched Gangs of NY and I remember the scene you describe. I also remember that corruption was rampant during that era due to "fake" capitalism, the kind that gets produced when private companies are allowed to operate but require a license/permit/authorization from some politician. I also remember how corrrupt those politicians were. In a free society, where anyone is able to set up shop, businesses would be judged on their merits, and cosumer opinion rather than be cloaked in the authoritative green light of a beaurocrat who is often incompetent, sometimes criminal and always out of his element.

Hope this answered some of your questions. I wish I was a better writer nad could brings these important points across in an easier to read/understand way. The best thing I can suggest is that you read the FAQ/do the visual tour here: http://capitalism.org/ It is quick, to the point and very clear.

Re: Just Saw Sicko, Now Have Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
jack, can please address my questions wrt how things are actually going to play out in real life? Do you honestly believe this country would be a better place w/o guaranteed emergency room care, emissions standards, wheelchair ramps, civil rights laws, anti-trust laws, auto-safety regulations, the interstate highway system, endangered species laws, etc. etc. etc.?

My fundamental problem with libertarianism is this all-or-nothing attitude. I have no problem with the idea that *some* or even *a lot* of government spending is complete waste. But to say that *all* of the laws enacted to help sick/poor people, keep a level playing field for business, or protect the environment are completely unecsessary makes no sense. To be honest it seems to me like libertarianism attracts people who want things to be black and white in life, and can't handle compromise or grey areas.

Watch Gangs of NY. NYC used to be a lot more like the system you describe. Firefighters were paid by the job. So they used to go to war over who put out the fire, and let the house burn to the ground sometimes. Then the poor rioted and started sacking homes uptown. It finally dawned on the people with some money that they might be better off at least making sure the lowest rung of society had *some* level of basic services to keep the situation from total chaos. Sort of like how even George Bush gets that we have to do something about aids in Africa. Or *we* will be dealing with the fallout for 100 years to come.

No system is perfect. But at least from this perspective at this point in time, the western brand of socio-capitalism seems about the best solution. Your answer sounds more like Somalia.

[/ QUOTE ]

I absolutely agree with this.

However, I think the economics of this should work from the bottom up. Most of the finanacing comes from the community who receives the services, with little to no money coming from the federel government.

No reason that people in California need to be paying for services enjoyed in West Virginia.

Re: Just Saw Sicko, Now Have Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
No reason that people in California need to be paying for services enjoyed in West Virginia.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree. So let's extend this a bit. Should people in LA pay for services in SF? How about people in the Hollywood area, should they pay for those in the Encino area? How far should we go? I stipulate that we go down to the smallest possible unit - the individual. Let each individual pay for what they want to use and be done with it.

Re: Just Saw Sicko, Now Have Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
Basically, if you're middle or upper middle class what is the play in the event of some insanely expensive long term illness, which doesnt kill you immediately, but requires hundreds of thousands of dollars of medical care in the interim.

[/ QUOTE ]

My wife had breast cancer. Well over $100k in bills. All covered under my employer's plan.

Re: Just Saw Sicko, Now Have Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Basically, if you're middle or upper middle class what is the play in the event of some insanely expensive long term illness, which doesnt kill you immediately, but requires hundreds of thousands of dollars of medical care in the interim.

[/ QUOTE ]

My wife had breast cancer. Well over $100k in bills. All covered under my employer's plan.

[/ QUOTE ]

"158 million Americans get (Health Care) through their employers, that have either no caps or caps set at $1 million or more." -StateHealthFacts.org

Re: Just Saw Sicko, Now Have Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Basically, if you're middle or upper middle class what is the play in the event of some insanely expensive long term illness, which doesnt kill you immediately, but requires hundreds of thousands of dollars of medical care in the interim.

[/ QUOTE ]

My wife had breast cancer. Well over $100k in bills. All covered under my employer's plan.

[/ QUOTE ]

"158 million Americans get (Health Care) through their employers, that have either no caps or caps set at $1 million or more." -StateHealthFacts.org

[/ QUOTE ]

That's great. What about the other 142 million?

Re: Just Saw Sicko, Now Have Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Basically, if you're middle or upper middle class what is the play in the event of some insanely expensive long term illness, which doesnt kill you immediately, but requires hundreds of thousands of dollars of medical care in the interim.

[/ QUOTE ]

My wife had breast cancer. Well over $100k in bills. All covered under my employer's plan.

[/ QUOTE ]

"158 million Americans get (Health Care) through their employers, that have either no caps or caps set at $1 million or more." -StateHealthFacts.org

[/ QUOTE ]

That's great. What about the other 142 million?

[/ QUOTE ]

Covered by employer plans with less than a $1M cap?

Medicare

Medicaid

College sponsored Health Care for Students

Free Clinics

Charity sponsored Health Care

Their are PLENTY of opportunities for people to receive health care. "40Million people" are just too lazy or stupid or worried about their next fix. (~35Million Americans are addicted to drugs/alcohol)

Re: Just Saw Sicko, Now Have Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
"40Million people" are just too lazy or stupid or worried about their next fix.

[/ QUOTE ]
What are you basing this on? Don't me wrong, as I typically have complete confidence in unsourced and vague allegations. It's just that there's this crazy special interest group called the United States Census Bureau that claims that of the 45 million uninsured Americans it counted in 2003, 8.4 million were children, and of the 36 million adults age 18-64 who were uninsured, 21 million (about 57%) worked full-time jobs. Another 6 million worked part-time jobs, leaving 9.7 million who didn't work at all.

Could you please provide the source of your detailed analysis so I can set these reality-based whackos at the Census Bureau straight?

Re: Just Saw Sicko, Now Have Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
"40Million people" are just too lazy or stupid or worried about their next fix.

[/ QUOTE ]
What are you basing this on? Don't me wrong, as I typically have complete confidence in unsourced and vague allegations. It's just that there's this crazy special interest group called the United States Census Bureau that claims that of the 45 million uninsured Americans it counted in 2003, 8.4 million were children, and of the 36 million adults age 18-64 who were uninsured, 21 million (about 57%) worked full-time jobs. Another 6 million worked part-time jobs, leaving 9.7 million who didn't work at all.

Could you please provide the source of your detailed analysis so I can set these reality-based whackos at the Census Bureau straight?

[/ QUOTE ]

Did you miss the part where they can go to college and get health care? or the part where they can ask the local church not to send the money to zimbabwe, but to pay their insurance premium (I know plenty of churches that would love to do this, but don't see a need in the U.S.)

Re: Just Saw Sicko, Now Have Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
Did you miss the part where they can go to college and get health care?

[/ QUOTE ]
Please specify what percentage of the ~45 million uninsured Americans this arrangement would cover. I'll go ahead and assume you can knock out almost all of the 8.4 million uninsured children, save the rare Doogie Howser among them.

[ QUOTE ]
...or the part where they can ask the local church not to send the money to zimbabwe, but to pay their insurance premium (I know plenty of churches that would love to do this, but don't see a need in the U.S.)

[/ QUOTE ]
Name one. Also, specify how many of the ~45 million uninsured Americans this arrangement would cover.

Please show your work. For extra credit, please explain why someone who works full-time but can't afford tuition or gain admission into a college or university that provides health insurance, and has yet to stumble into an as-yet-unspecified church that provides health insurance is "just too lazy or stupid or worried about their next fix."

Re: Just Saw Sicko, Now Have Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Did you miss the part where they can go to college and get health care?

[/ QUOTE ]
Please specify what percentage of the ~45 million uninsured Americans this arrangement would cover. I'll go ahead and assume you can knock out almost all of the 8.4 million uninsured children, save the rare Doogie Howser among them.

[ QUOTE ]
...or the part where they can ask the local church not to send the money to zimbabwe, but to pay their insurance premium (I know plenty of churches that would love to do this, but don't see a need in the U.S.)

[/ QUOTE ]
Name one. Also, specify how many of the ~45 million uninsured Americans this arrangement would cover.


[/ QUOTE ]

Use a phonebook, there are millions.

[ QUOTE ]
Please show your work. For extra credit, please explain why someone who works full-time but can't afford tuition or gain admission into a college or university that provides health insurance, and has yet to stumble into an as-yet-unspecified church that provides health insurance is "just too lazy or stupid or worried about their next fix."

[/ QUOTE ]

Explain why they're not...

Re: Just Saw Sicko, Now Have Question
 

BDk3clash,

This basically sums it up:

http://www.mickhagen.com/images/asian.jpg

FWIW, you're not gonna anywhere debating this with people like Emperor. They ignore the points you make, choosing to throw barbs and when you ask them for evidence to back up their ridiculous assertions, they insist that you're the one who has to prove their assertions wrong. I know this kid still lives with mommy and daddy.

Re: Just Saw Sicko, Now Have Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
BDk3clash,

This basically sums it up:

http://www.mickhagen.com/images/asian.jpg

FWIW, you're not gonna anywhere debating this with people like Emperor. They ignore the points you make, choosing to throw barbs and when you ask them for evidence to back up their ridiculous assertions, they insist that you're the one who has to prove their assertions wrong. I know this kid still lives with mommy and daddy.

[/ QUOTE ]

No worries, I am praying for you.

Re: Just Saw Sicko, Now Have Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Did you miss the part where they can go to college and get health care?

[/ QUOTE ]
Please specify what percentage of the ~45 million uninsured Americans this arrangement would cover. I'll go ahead and assume you can knock out almost all of the 8.4 million uninsured children, save the rare Doogie Howser among them.

[ QUOTE ]
...or the part where they can ask the local church not to send the money to zimbabwe, but to pay their insurance premium (I know plenty of churches that would love to do this, but don't see a need in the U.S.)

[/ QUOTE ]
Name one. Also, specify how many of the ~45 million uninsured Americans this arrangement would cover.


[/ QUOTE ]

Use a phonebook, there are millions.

[/ QUOTE ]
Well, I am of the belief that the statement you made (that there are "plenty of churches that would love to [pay health insurance premiums for someone] but don't see a need in the U.S.") is not true. Surely of the "millions" (!) of churches dying to tackle this multi-billion dollar dilemma (that they have mysteriously remained unfamiliar with) there is one that you know of and can share with us here.

By the way, I hope it's reasonable to assume that you know plenty of churches that would love to do this is. I say this because you wrote:

[ QUOTE ]
I know plenty of churches that would love to do this...

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Please show your work. For extra credit, please explain why someone who works full-time but can't afford tuition or gain admission into a college or university that provides health insurance, and has yet to stumble into an as-yet-unspecified church that provides health insurance is "just too lazy or stupid or worried about their next fix."

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Explain why they're not...

[/ QUOTE ]
Well, I'll try to address your claims one by one. First off, I would need specific evidence of someone being "too lazy" or "stupid" or "worried about their next fix" to reasonably conclude that they are any of the above. Granted, your assertion that all of the 45 million who lack health insurance (including the elderly, infirm, children, etc.) are in fact "too lazy" or "stupid" or "worried about their next fix" is compelling evidence, but there are nitpickers among us who might insist on, you know, evidence (anecdotal or otherwise.)

Possessing a full-time job leads me to conclude that someone is not particularly likely to be "too lazy" to acquire health insurance if it were available to them, nor that the reason they don't have health insurance is that they're "worried about their next fix." I suppose one could quibble about the meaning of these words, and of "stupid," but in the absence of evidence I'd say remaining agnostic is about as far as a reasonable person should be willing to go.

Re: Just Saw Sicko, Now Have Question
 

All,

Locking this one now, think the discussion has run its course. Of course, feel free to start followup healthcare discussion threads, especially if you want to have discussion on any specific sub-points in this thread.