debate on universal access to health care

[gogo]

In terms of finance, we force 700,000 Americans into bankruptcy each year because of medical bills. In France, the number of medical bankruptcies is zero. Britain: zero. Japan: zero. Germany: zero.

The cost of what would be bankruptcy has been socialized. It doesn't mean their society hasn't suffered as a result.

Socialism has a cost:

List of countries by GDP (nominal) per capita 2008
17) United States___ 47,103
24) European Union 38,390

List of countries by GDP (PPP) per capita 2008
08) United States___ 47,000
27) European Union 33,400

Now, if we could rid ourselves of the encroaching disease of socialism instead of embracing it, we'd increase the margin further while simultaneously gaining real (not mixed economy) capitalism to address our healthcare needs. No amount of government coercion can do things better than real (not mixed economy) capitalism.

[Cackalacka]

We are sliding backwards towards the crappy types of goverment they have. Take a lesson from history and please see what it is that has made the USA better. Here's a clue: its the opposite of collectivism.

I am well aware of the principles and lessons of the founders. I love this country, and am well aware of where I come from.

I could try to attempt to pursuade you with the facts, but alas, it appears that the die is cast for some.

Please feel free to reconcile this quote with your advice to me, or not:

A popular Government without popular information, or the means of acquiring it, is but a Prologue to a Farce or a Tragedy, or perhaps both. Knowledge will forever govern ignorance: And a people who mean to be their own Governors, must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives.

[Cackalacka]

List of countries by GDP (nominal) per capita 2008
17) United States___ 47,103
24) European Union 38,390

List of countries by GDP (PPP) per capita 2008
08) United States___ 47,000
27) European Union 33,400

So... how many eastern block countries have we absorbed into the union in the past 5 years?

[Cackalacka]

Incidentally, Gogo, in your summary, would you like to tell the folks which continent 13 out of the 16 countries listed ahead of the U.S.?

Even factoring this in, the analogy isn't even apples and oranges, not even close.

[julesa]

In terms of finance, we force 700,000 Americans into bankruptcy each year because of medical bills. In France, the number of medical bankruptcies is zero. Britain: zero. Japan: zero. Germany: zero.

The cost of what would be bankruptcy has been socialized. It doesn't mean their society hasn't suffered as a result.

Socialism has a cost:

List of countries by GDP (nominal) per capita 2008
17) United States___ 47,103
24) European Union 38,390

List of countries by GDP (PPP) per capita 2008
08) United States___ 47,000
27) European Union 33,400

Now, if we could rid ourselves of the encroaching disease of socialism instead of embracing it, we'd increase the margin further while simultaneously gaining real (not mixed economy) capitalism to address our healthcare needs. No amount of government coercion can do things better than real (not mixed economy) capitalism.

Correlation is not causation. There is no evidence socialism causes lower GDP per capita. Norway, for example, has universal health care, subsidized higher education, and comprehensive social security, and their GDP per capita was something like $58,000.

Anyway. So what's your practical, specific solution for the average American? All we've heard is a lot of criticism of the proposed plans, scaremongering about socialism, and other nonsense. You can't deny there's a problem. Do you have any suggestions for fixing it that are actually useful and/or insightful? Otherwise:

[gogo]

Correlation is not causation.

Oh, so all those statistics like the infant mortality rate comparisons you made are not valid?

Well then, that leaves us with the principles that our laws are derived from. The principle I chose is individual rights, which precludes forcing me to pay for anything other than the enforcement of our individual rights. The rest should be voluntarily negotiated between individuals.

You can't deny there's a problem. Do you have any suggestions for fixing it that are actually useful and/or insightful?

The problem is government distortion of the healthcare industry. The solution is to remove all the laws and regulations that are screwing things up.

[julesa]

Correlation is not causation.

Oh, so all those statistics like the infant mortality rate comparisons you made are not valid?

Huh? I wasn't implying any causation when I linked to infant mortality rates. You aren't making sense.

Well then, that leaves us with the principles that our laws are derived from. The principle I chose is individual rights, which precludes forcing me to pay for anything other than the enforcement of our individual rights. The rest should be voluntarily negotiated between individuals.

You are seriously over the edge here. Are you one of those people who thinks you don't have to pay taxes? Do you think we'd be better off without public education, roads, etc?

Just get rid of all regulations, huh? Sure. Thanks for contributing your highly practical solution. Obviously you gave it a lot of thought. I'm sure unregulated insurance companies would never take advantage of individuals or charge disproportionately high premiums to get rid of unwanted customers.

[julesa]

[gogo]

You are seriously over the edge here.

Ya, insisting on identifying principles is irrational and over the edge. OK

[Matt Gruber]

i'd say both sides are in a hopeless quagmire.

[julesa]

Depends what you mean by quagmire. If most people saw a discussion between flat-earthers and spherical-earthers, they wouldn't say both sides are in a "hopeless quagmire." One group's opinion is based on real world data, which means they are not 'stuck.' Their position may not change, but that's because the data isn't changing. If new convincing data came around that said the earth was slightly egg-shaped, for example, it might convince a lot of them to reconsider their opinions.

I'm not saying the health care debate is equivalent to flat-earthers vs. spherical-earthers, because there are a lot of people in the world today who disagree with my position on health care, and also base their opinion on real world data. But as far as I can tell, none of them have been posting in this thread.

I'm willing to consider any viewpoints that are supported by real world data. My opinion was formed by reviewing the available real world data. I haven't seen any convincing real world data that contradicts the conclusion I came to, so I admit it's entrenched a bit. But I am open to considering any relevant facts, not unsupported opinions, that anyone would care to share, provided you also share a link to the source of that real world data. Basing your opinion on real world data means being able to admit you're wrong when you find new data that contradicts your old opinions, so I don't think that matches up well with the word quagmire, which implies being stuck in one position.

FYI - rushlimbaugh.com, keitholbermann.org, and foxnews.com are not reliable sources of real world data.

[Tom Tom]

I'm willing to consider any viewpoints that are supported by real world data. My opinion was formed by reviewing the available real world data. I haven't seen any convincing real world data that contradicts the conclusion I came to, so I admit it's entrenched a bit.

I haven't read every post in this thread, nor will I, so I'm not sure what "real world data" your referring too.

Are you referring to your post about the US spending twice what any other country currently spends?

I have seen that the budget deficit projection is 9 trillion which does not include health care estimated to cost 1 trillion.

Do you consider that real world data? If so, at what point does the economy implode? At what point is nothing left?

[julesa]

In 1992, they projected the 2000 budget deficit would be disastrously unsupportable. Turned out the Clinton administration was the only one in the past several decades to actually end up with a budget surplus.

Around 2000, the 2010 budget was projected to be in a surplus. Didn't exactly turn out that way, did it?

Budget projections are just projections.

The above statements are based on my memory. I'll add links if I can find them without too much trouble...
I think it would be interesting to compare the government debt load vs. GDP in the early fifties with what we have today.

[julesa]

Looks like we've survived much worse. If Obama isn't careful, our public debt as a fraction of GDP might even get as high as it was in the Bush, Sr. years. But I don't see any reason to panic yet.

Edited to add: the top image is the number that Some People are using to try to scare everyone. But the bottom image is the one that matters -- how much are we making vs. how much we owe.

[julesa]

I haven't read every post in this thread, nor will I, so I'm not sure what "real world data" your referring too.

The link in this post is one of the best I've found. Also scroll up a few posts from this one for some nice graphs... in a post that was a reply addressed to you...
http://www.endless-sphere.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=10455&start=345#p186023