Governing is different from knee-jerk opposition.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

winsor

***

Quote

So that leads to strange decisions about care.

I recently heard about an insane example of this. Medicare will pay for a kidney transplant (about $100,000), but by law they can cover the anti-rejection drugs needed to keep the kidney viable for only three years. After that the patient has to come up with as much as $950/month for the co-pay for anti-rejection drugs. Medicare pays about $15,000/year for the anti-rejection drugs. Medicare also pays the full cost for dialysis (about $90,000/year) with no limit on the duration of treatment. Dialysis requires 3 sessions of 3-4 hours each/week, making it difficult for patients to hold down a regular job. So patients with failed kidneys get dialysis ($90,000/year) until a kidney becomes available at which time they receive a transplant ($100,000) and drugs for three years ($15,000/yr x 3 = $45,000). At the end of three years many patients cannot afford the anti-rejection drugs, even if they have insurance, as the co-pay is so high. So they skip doses to make the drugs go farther, which doesn't work and trhe kidney is rejected, or they just stop taking the drugs altogether and let the kidney fail. Then they go back on dialysis ($90,000/yr) until a new transplant is available and start the process all over again. In other words, to prevent so-called "freeloaders" from getting their anti-rejection drugs for "free" (costing taxpayers $15,000/yr) the government would prefer to pay $90,000/yr for dialysis and perhaps another $100,000 for another transplant. Also you can factor in that people on dialysis generally can't work because they have to spend so much time getting dialysis treatment, so they are not paying taxes and are often also collecting disability payments. On the other hand after a successful transplant people don't need dialysis and so they can work and pay taxes. Cutting people off from the drugs they need to keep their transplant viable is beyond stupid, it is insane!

Don

Public health care is to health care what public housing is to housing.

Says the guy who can afford health care in the US.

Canadian public health care is pretty decent.

Is it as good as the best US health care I can spend fortunes on? No.

Is it better than average care in the US? Yes.

[winsor 236]

SkyDekker

***

Public health care is to health care what public housing is to housing.

Says the guy who can afford health care in the US.

Canadian public health care is pretty decent.

Is it as good as the best US health care I can spend fortunes on? No.

Is it better than average care in the US? Yes.

Don't get me wrong - the U.S. system of health care - such as it is - is FUBAR.

My point is not that the problems are not glaring and overwhelming, but having 'the Government' pay for everything is not the solution.

The basic principle goes something like this: there is a service that everyone needs but that almost nobody can afford (health care, higher education, etc.), but somehow, by giving an affordable amount of money to the most inefficient and incompetent organization anyone has ever seen they will be able to bargain on our behalf and obtain for us the services we could not originally afford - with the portion of our funds they have not yet wasted.

What am I missing?

I will admit that enough time has lapsed since I lived in Canada that my take on the system of health care is not at all current. It did strike me that the state of Canadian health care at the time, added to the horror stories regarding the NHS provided by English physicians, made the prospect of nationalizing health care in the U.S. rather unattractive to me, at least.

I can think of a few rule changes that I would prefer to either the out of control 'private' health care we had or to the socialized variant, but it is not going to happen so the issue is moot.


BSBD,

Winsor

[billvon 2,991]

Quote

The basic principle goes something like this: there is a service that everyone needs but that almost nobody can afford (health care, higher education, etc.), but somehow, by giving an affordable amount of money to the most inefficient and incompetent organization anyone has ever seen they will be able to bargain on our behalf and obtain for us the services we could not originally afford - with the portion of our funds they have not yet wasted.

What am I missing?

That the US healthcare system is not "the most inefficient and incompetent organization anyone has ever seen." I've been to a lot of hospitals (mostly to see people who were there) and for the most part the people (and the organization itself) was effective and efficient.

That insurance companies do this for us pretty effectively right now, and it's a lot more effective to use what works now than to create something new that doesn't.

That other countries do this even more effectively, so there is room for improvement - as long as your worldview doesn't equate any level of governance with Satan.

[Stumpy 284]

winsor

... the horror stories regarding the NHS provided by English physicians,

The NHS has its flaws, but it's infinitely better than the US system. The majority of brits are fiercely protective of it, for good reason.
generally, the main flaws are that if you need something "optional" (is that elective? I forget), then waiting lists can be long, bureaucracy gets tied up etc etc. But when the SHTF, the NHS are amazing.
Don't forget - there is still the option of private insurance if you want it to get preferential care etc, but you don't need it and the socialized equivalent is generally very very good. Of course you hear about the worst cases, but 99.9% of people get great treatment.

Of course, the tories are doing their best to fuck it up for everyone, but they are as bad as the GOP.

Never try to eat more than you can lift

[kallend 2,027]

There are 42 countries with government run healthcare that have longer life expectancies than the USA.

There are 21 countries with government run healthcare that have lower infant mortality rates than the USA.

Every country with WORSE outcomes than the USA is second or third world.

Every developed country except the USA has government run healthcare to a greater or lesser extent. They all have longer life expectancies and lower infant mortality.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[winsor 236]

billvon

That the US healthcare system is not "the most inefficient and incompetent organization anyone has ever seen."

I was referring, of course, to the Federal Government.

[kallend 2,027]

winsor

***
That the US healthcare system is not "the most inefficient and incompetent organization anyone has ever seen."

I was referring, of course, to the Federal Government.

It did OK with the Manhattan project and Apollo.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[billvon 2,991]

>I was referring, of course, to the Federal Government.

I don't think "the most inefficient and incompetent organization anyone has ever seen" could have gotten us to the Moon, built the first nuclear reactor, built the first atomic bombs, put up a satellite navigation system that almost everyone in the world uses, visited asteroids, planets and moons, built the world's first reusable spacecraft, built the US highway system or done most of the work to put up a 450-ton, 100-meter long space station.

[winsor 236]

kallend

******
That the US healthcare system is not "the most inefficient and incompetent organization anyone has ever seen."

I was referring, of course, to the Federal Government.

It did OK with the Manhattan project and Apollo.

A broken (analog) clock is right twice a day.

[winsor 236]

billvon

>I was referring, of course, to the Federal Government.

I don't think "the most inefficient and incompetent organization anyone has ever seen" could have gotten us to the Moon, built the first nuclear reactor, built the first atomic bombs, put up a satellite navigation system that almost everyone in the world uses, visited asteroids, planets and moons, built the world's first reusable spacecraft, built the US highway system or done most of the work to put up a 450-ton, 100-meter long space station.

Keep that in mind when you renew your driver's license.

NASA is rather an outlier; the bulk of Government employees exemplify the Lowest Common Denominator.

[kallend 2,027]

winsor

***>I was referring, of course, to the Federal Government.

I don't think "the most inefficient and incompetent organization anyone has ever seen" could have gotten us to the Moon, built the first nuclear reactor, built the first atomic bombs, put up a satellite navigation system that almost everyone in the world uses, visited asteroids, planets and moons, built the world's first reusable spacecraft, built the US highway system or done most of the work to put up a 450-ton, 100-meter long space station.

Keep that in mind when you renew your driver's license.

The feds don't issue drivers' licenses in Illinois. Maybe they do where you live.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[gowlerk 2,192]

Quote

It did OK with the Manhattan project and Apollo.

Both were a walk in the park with an stop for ice cream at the end compared to the complexity and expense of running a national healthcare system. Canada does not have National Health. It has a national mandate for the Provinces to run local healthcare paid through Provincial insurance programs.

Most of the efficiencies gained are from cutting out the huge expense of American insurance companies. Which together make up "the most inefficient and incompetent organization anyone has ever seen."

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[billvon 2,991]

>Keep that in mind when you renew your driver's license.

It takes about 10 minutes for me to print out the form and mail it in. Maybe you're doing it wrong?

[kallend 2,027]

gowlerk

Most of the efficiencies gained are from cutting out the huge expense of American insurance companies. Which together make up "the most inefficient and incompetent organization anyone has ever seen."

My wife works for one of them, and she agrees with your assessment.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 2,027]

winsor

*********
That the US healthcare system is not "the most inefficient and incompetent organization anyone has ever seen."

I was referring, of course, to the Federal Government.

It did OK with the Manhattan project and Apollo.

A broken (analog) clock is right twice a day.

ANd I've yet to have a problem with ATC, or customs and immigration (except at KMIA). I get 2 mail deliveries daily (1 on Sundays) and they never miss...

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[normiss 800]

They don't here either, and yet I still haven't ever even sat down to wait at ours. Walk in, walk to counter, done in a few blinks.

[Phil1111 1,149]

kallend

There are 42 countries with government run healthcare that have longer life expectancies than the USA.

There are 21 countries with government run healthcare that have lower infant mortality rates than the USA.

Every country with WORSE outcomes than the USA is second or third world.

Every developed country except the USA has government run healthcare to a greater or lesser extent. They all have longer life expectancies and lower infant mortality.

These factors ^^^^^^ should tell US citizens the most about the direction to achieve results.

Canada, Britain, USA...Satisfaction Ratings
http://www.gallup.com/poll/8056/healthcare-system-ratings-us-great-britain-canada.aspx

164 page report covering developed counties which has ALL the answers on how to model a cost effective outcome. Canada for example is not the most efficient, not the best and need not be the model. But its citizens visit physicians twice a often as US citizens. With overall costs per person 1/2 of that of the US.
http://www.commonwealthfund.org/~/media/files/publications/fund-report/2015/jan/1802_mossialos_intl_profiles_2014_v7.pdf

I think that industry lobbyists are the greatest obstacle to reform and reduction of costs.

[jakee 1,489]

Quote

What am I missing?

That the distribution of wealth in the USA (or any country) is not a straight line.

That's basically it.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[kallend 2,027]

Good news.

www.nytimes.com/2017/01/10/us/politics/trump-confirmation-hearings.html

Mr. Sessions, who has supported the use of waterboarding as an interrogation tactic, said that current law makes it “absolutely improper and illegal.”

In response to a question about whether he supported a temporary ban on Muslim immigration, as Mr. Trump has suggested, Mr. Sessions said he did not. “I have no belief and do not support the idea that Muslims as a religious groups should be denied admission to the United States,” he said. But he noted that Mr. Trump has since clarified that the restriction should be on immigration from countries that support terrorism. He said religious views — where, for example, they include justification for violence against Americans — should be considered as part of the visa progress.

Would you support a law that says you can’t come to America because you’re a Muslim? Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, asked.

No, Mr. Sessions replied.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 2,027]

It looks like reality is sinking in:

www.nytimes.com/2017/01/19/us/politics/confirmation-hearings-cabinet-donald-trump.html?_r=0

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[billvon 2,991]

Uh oh. Trump is not going to be happy with this:

==========
“I believe the climate is changing,” Mr. Perry said. “I believe some of it is naturally occurring, but some of it is also caused by man-made activity.”
==========

Or this:

==========
Mr. Perry, perhaps more importantly, said he had learned about the department’s mission, most notably its oversight of the nation’s nuclear arsenal.
==========

Next thing you know he'll come out in favor of vaccinations, and Trump will have to replace him with someone more politically correct.