How are countries with UHC suffering (or not) economically because of UHC?

[Wesley_Clark]

@Babale

So common sense and TV campaigns telling people how bad fatty foods are for them won’t do anything, but going to the doctor for free instead of paying for the visit will suddenly make people see the light?
You misinterpreted me, though perhaps I should have been clearer: I would get a temporary job until I could find new work at my level. And you know what? I get to keep my dignity. Now, as for your example, let’s break it down: With your example, JtP spends 1100 out of his 2000 salary. Let’s say he spends most of that money, say, 450 on food and other things. He’s left with 450 a month, which he puts in the bank. When he looses his job, he works for 700 a month, enough to pay his rent. He uses his savings to pay his other bills and buy food. If he sees that he isn’t getting a job fast enough, he downgrades his apartment, or gets a roommate to share costs with. Then he gets a new job and there we go, he survived his hard times.

Now, if he gets his 1200 a month, he pays his bills, keeps his apartment, and has enough to live on cheap food (which incidentally makes him obese). Now Joe is living from month to month, spends all of his government money, and relaxes at home, knowing that while he will never move up, he can leech off of the government permanently.

I don’t know about you, but I like my scenario better.

There are roughly 30 million people in the US who are unemployed or underemployed. In the last 10 years, no net jobs were created.

So your argument that you can go out and find another job isn’t necessarily true. If there were jobs for the taking, why are 30 million people un/underemployed? What is Joe the Plumber supposed to do when there are 30 million people just like him looking for jobs? Start his own business? Its an idea, but most fail in the first few years so its not a magic bullet.

You aren’t taking these things into account. You sound like you want to believe the world is a safer, simpler place than it really is. The world has lots of gray areas.

[Lobohan]

@Babale

So common sense and TV campaigns telling people how bad fatty foods are for them won’t do anything, but going to the doctor for free instead of paying for the visit will suddenly make people see the light?

I imagine being told that your blood pressure and cholesterol is dangerously high is a life changing event.

You misinterpreted me, though perhaps I should have been clearer: I would get a temporary job until I could find new work at my level.

And you would be homeless. Also, there are five people looking for work for every job in this country. Do you even know we’re in a recession?

And you know what? I get to keep my dignity.

You obviously don’t put much value for your dignity. If you did why would you keep showing how utterly uninformed and illogical every argument you are making is.

Now, as for your example, let’s break it down: With your example, JtP spends 1100 out of his 2000 salary. Let’s say he spends most of that money, say, 450 on food and other things. He’s left with 450 a month, which he puts in the bank. When he looses his job, he works for 700 a month, enough to pay his rent. He uses his savings to pay his other bills and buy food. If he sees that he isn’t getting a job fast enough, he downgrades his apartment, or gets a roommate to share costs with. Then he gets a new job and there we go, he survived his hard times.

Not everyone has savings. What do you suggest for those that don’t? Become homeless, right? Because that’s what your ignorant proposal means.

Now, if he gets his 1200 a month, he pays his bills, keeps his apartment, and has enough to live on cheap food (which incidentally makes him obese). Now Joe is living from month to month, spends all of his government money, and relaxes at home, knowing that while he will never move up, he can leech off of the government permanently.

That’s plainly stupid.

Unemployment is temporary.

Since you didn’t understand that the last time I said it:

Unemployment is temporary.

Are you aware of that fact yet? One more time:

Unemployment is temporary. You don’t get it forever. You need to look for work to keep getting it. And eventually it runs out entirely.

You don’t know that and you have the nerve to argue about this? This is plan, basic stuff that any adult living in America should know. You not only don’t know this, but you ignore it when you are told about it. You are out of your depth sir.

I don’t know about you, but I like my scenario better.

Well if you paint it like a bizarre bullshit fantasy I suppose I see why.

[Babale]

Let me add the following point: Is the United States not far ahead in terms of medical breakthroughs compared to Europe and Canada? And do you really think that medical research in the US would be as motivated if it wasn’t for the big profits involved?
About the Europeans coming to America: I have heard about this somewhere, but until I find where, I will stop using that to support my argument. However, I fear you may have misunderstood me: People who come here for medical procedures do so for complicated and dangerous ones, not simple ones.

[Blalron]

@Babale

So common sense and TV campaigns telling people how bad fatty foods are for them won’t do anything, but going to the doctor for free instead of paying for the visit will suddenly make people see the light?

The best way to mitigate the problem is to tax junk food. And, most definitely, junk food should not be sold in schools so children don’t have bad eating habits officially encouraged. We can’t force everyone to make perfect choices, but we can nudge them in the right direction.

There’s a tendency I see among conservatives to dismiss people in need of help because they’ve made bad choices in life. But in my humble opinion people deserve compassion even if they are fuck ups.

[Cat_Whisperer]

By just about every metric, the standard of living in Canada is as good or better than in the US. UHC is not hurting us in any way I can discern.

[Babale]

Whoo, posts while I was typing.

@Lobohan

Not everyone has savings. What do you suggest for those that don’t? Become homeless, right? Because that’s what your ignorant proposal means.

And that is a much bigger problem with American society than anything health care related, although that’s a different debate. Let me just say that people who live off of their mortgage are asking to loose their home.

Unemployment is temporary.

Since you didn’t understand that the last time I said it:

Unemployment is temporary.

Are you aware of that fact yet? One more time:

Unemployment is temporary. You don’t get it forever. You need to look for work to keep getting it. And eventually it runs out entirely.

For most people that is true. But the problem isn’t those people. It’s the people who DON’T go out and look for work while they are on unemployment benefits. The problem is the people who sit there and freeload. And if you tell me that there are no people like that, you have no idea what you’re talking about. And in fact, those people are also the ones who will abuse UHC.

Not all all. The Senate HC bill will lower the deficit.

Say it with me. The Senate HC bill will lower the deficit. Look up the CBO report if you care enough about facts to check up on it.

I did look up the CBO report, and this is what I found: http://cboblog.cbo.gov/?p=473

If I am missing another report, kindly link it?

Though I fail to see how RAISING SPENDING will lower the deficit.

[Babale]

@Lobohan

I imagine being told that your blood pressure and cholesterol is dangerously high is a life changing event.

I imagine looking down and realizing that you can’t see your own feet, or having trouble putting a seat belt on, or a thousand other signs of obesity would be just as life changing for anyone who cared.

[Raygun99]

@Babale

Let me add the following point: Is the United States not far ahead in terms of medical breakthroughs compared to Europe and Canada? And do you really think that medical research in the US would be as motivated if it wasn’t for the big profits involved?
About the Europeans coming to America: I have heard about this somewhere, but until I find where, I will stop using that to support my argument. However, I fear you may have misunderstood me: People who come here for medical procedures do so for complicated and dangerous ones, not simple ones.

How do you define “far ahead” in breakthroughs? Canadian universities are leaders in diabetes research, thanks to the legacy of Banting and Best. There are several significant cardiac surgery techniques that have been invented by Canadian surgeons. These aren’t breakthroughs motivated by profit - there are far easier ways to make money than to spend possibly decades trying to develop a new technique or therapy. Researchers are motivated by the pride of being the person that does something first.

And if the US is far ahead in breakthroughs, to what benefit is it if you don’t get superior results?

[Euphonious_Polemic]

@Babale

How many of those are teenagers who go to Mexico to get cheap abortions, and how many of those girls will get sick and even die because of it? You get what you pay for, after all.

I don’t know, how many? You brought up this imaginary scenario, so it is up to you to show how many of the 6 million statistic are made up of these imaginary pregnant teens.

Making stuff up does not bolster your case, you know.

[Babale]

Not an imaginary scenario-a hard reality. Teenagers, especially in California, do this quite often. Though that was a rhetorical question, as an exact figure would be quite difficult to come by, considering how those girls are unlikely to tell anyone about it.

[MrDibble]

@Rand_Rover

A lot more goes into the health of a population than the quality of the health care.

But good, easily-available primary health care is, in fact, a significant factor in influencing said health. If the US had better, preferably universal free, primary and preventative care, it would have a healthier population. Many diseases like cardio, cancer and diabetes are better treated the earlier they are caught, so it’s more efficient to prioritise things like day clinics and regular checkups(which really needs nurses rather than doctors for the grunt work) over surgeries and MRIs. Having everyone have access to primary health care also cuts down on such things as communicable disease epidemics.

[MrDibble]

@Babale

How many of those are teenagers who go to Mexico to get cheap abortions, and how many of those girls will get sick and even die because of it? You get what you pay for, after all.

Actually, if local experience is anything to go by, a lot of them are older rich people coming for cosmetic surgery and other electives. “Medical tourism”, they call it. If you go “on holiday” to another country, you can stay there until the bandages come off and no-one back home will be any the wiser;). Here in SA, the private hospital is coupled with recuperative stay on a game farm or a private wine & golf estate.

[MrDibble]

@Babale

Let me add the following point: Is the United States not far ahead in terms of medical breakthroughs compared to Europe and Canada?

That isn’t a point, that’s a question. So answer it - is it? And what does “far ahead” mean, (other than weasel room?) Some cites would be useful.

[Lobohan]

@Babale

Not an imaginary scenario-a hard reality. Teenagers, especially in California, do this quite often. Though that was a rhetorical question, as an exact figure would be quite difficult to come by, considering how those girls are unlikely to tell anyone about it.

If they aren’t telling anyone about it they aren’t in the statistics. So in any case your fantasy is utterly irrelevant.

@Babale

I imagine looking down and realizing that you can’t see your own feet, or having trouble putting a seat belt on, or a thousand other signs of obesity would be just as life changing for anyone who cared.

Have you ever met a human? You don’t seem to understand how they work.

@Babale

Whoo, posts while I was typing.
And that is a much bigger problem with American society than anything health care related, although that’s a different debate. Let me just say that people who live off of their mortgage are asking to loose their home.

So you will admit that your “plan” for Unemployment was silly and that the way it is done now makes much more sense than your off-the-cuff and poorly thought out one?

For most people that is true. But the problem isn’t those people. It’s the people who DON’T go out and look for work while they are on unemployment benefits. The problem is the people who sit there and freeload. And if you tell me that there are no people like that, you have no idea what you’re talking about. And in fact, those people are also the ones who will abuse UHC.

Listen.

Seriously.

Unemployment Insurance is not forever. It is a program that has a limited duration. Can you read? I’ve told you this what, four times now?

Unemployment pays benefits for something like 26 weeks normally. It isn’t a gravy train you can ride for the rest of your life. That an adult living in America can not know that doesn’t speak very well for how informed you are about civic matters.

Educate yourself before you solidify into rock-solid opinions. You have no place trying to convince other people of something if you don’t understand what you’re talking about.

I did look up the CBO report, and this is what I found: http://cboblog.cbo.gov/?p=473

If I am missing another report, kindly link it?

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/108xx/doc10868/12-19-Reid_Letter_Managers_Correction_Noted.pdf

Though I fail to see how RAISING SPENDING will lower the deficit.

The current HCR bill is paid for by cutting Medicare Advantage, a program that doesn’t work any better than standard Medicare and costs a ton and by tax increases. It will lower the deficit because it adjusts the nature of health care spending. It will also lower premiums (except for people who have terrible coverage now that will buy better coverage once they have the chance).

[Dumbguy]

@Nava

Would you kindly provide a cite? Thank you,

Nava, who has met American doctors who were studying newest-techniques in Spain, but no Spaniards who went to the US for medical treatment.

I’ll second this. Anecdotal, of course, but as an American living in Germany I’ve never met a European who went to the US for medical treatment. I do know two Americans who came to Germany for stem cell treatments they couldn’t get in the US.

[Gyrate]

@Lobohan

Unemployment pays benefits for something like 26 weeks normally. It isn’t a gravy train you can ride for the rest of your life. That an adult living in America can not know that doesn’t speak very well for how informed you are about civic matters.

Don’t be so hard on the man - there are US Senators spouting the same nonsense.

Sen. Jon Kyl of Arizona, the Republican whip, argued that unemployment benefits dissuade people from job-hunting “because people are being paid even though they’re not working.”

Unemployment insurance “doesn’t create new jobs. In fact, if anything, continuing to pay people unemployment compensation is a disincentive for them to seek new work,” Kyl said during debate over whether unemployment insurance and other benefits that expired amid GOP objections Sunday should be extended.

Of course, that guy is wrong too:

Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.), about as far from a populist as can be found in the Democratic Party, appeared surprised at Kyl’s claim.

“The Senator from Arizona argues that unemployment insurance is a disincentive to jobs. Nothing could be further from the truth. I don’t know anybody who’s out of work and is receiving some unemployment insurance believes that that payment is sufficient not to find a job. The payments are so much lower than any salary or wage would be, it’s just ridiculous. I might add, there are five unemployed Americans today for every job opening in the economy,” said Baucus, chairman of the Finance Committee. “People are looking for work. They’re not unemployed because of choice.”

He added that Kyl’s economic argument was flawed, as well. Unemployment benefits do create jobs because the recipients cycle the money through the economy. He cited a Congressional Budget Office analysis that said the Gross Domestic Product grew $1.90 for every dollar the federal government paid out.

And more anecdotally:

@dumbguy

I’ll second this. Anecdotal, of course, but as an American living in Germany I’ve never met a European who went to the US for medical treatment. I do know two Americans who came to Germany for stem cell treatments they couldn’t get in the US.

Same here for the UK. Brits will sometimes go abroad for dental care (dentistry gets minimal coverage under the NHS, unlike other medical care) but even then they usually go to Hungary, not the US.

[flodnak]

@Dumbguy

I’ll second this. Anecdotal, of course, but as an American living in Germany I’ve never met a European who went to the US for medical treatment. I do know two Americans who came to Germany for stem cell treatments they couldn’t get in the US.

Anecdotally, as an American living in Norway, I’ve met one person who went to the US for treatment, and know one family that right now is considering it as an option for their son. In both cases, the patient needed (or may need) a surgical procedure that is so rarely performed, no surgeon in Norway has the necessary experience. So the patient was (will be) sent abroad for the procedure, paid for by national health insurance. Yup, they’re off to the States on the Norwegian taxpayer’s dime.

It’s more common to be sent elsewhere in Europe, of course. That’s cheaper and also less stressful for the patient and his or her family. But sometimes none of the qualified surgeons in Europe has time available, so the patient has to travel further from home.

[Kevbo]

Babale asks us to prove, among a list of other negatives:

@Babale

4. Free health care will not be abused in the same way emergency rooms currently are.

In spite of the problem of asking for proof of a negative, this one is a real thigh slapper.

Babale, sweetheart, lack of health coverage is THE reason poor folks “abuse” emergency rooms in the US. Actually, the “abusers” are just USING E-rooms, because in this great country that is the only available option to meet their medical needs. And when you or I, who have insurance, have a serious need for an emergency room, as a result of the triage process, all those “abusers” mostly get to wait, and we just get to wait while an administrator quizzes us about our insurance coverage. I once used an emergency room for a non-urgent, but needed dealing with issue when I was traveling. It took most of day to get a few minutes of time with a doctor. The only reason someone uses an emergency room for non life threatening issues is desperation.

It is not a matter of poor choices. For many, health insurance premiums would amount to more than their entire income. Even when it is less, is going without a home or food so you pay an insurance premium really any choice at all? For many others, insurers will not offer coverage at ANY price.

In short, E-room “abuse” is exactly one of the problems that HCR is targeting. Emergency room care is THE most expensive way to provide treatment, and the treatment is not very effective. Any means of moving this “abuse” to a more efficient setting (like a clinic) is a win.

And, you ARE paying for that “abuse” now. Why are you so against paying less?

[Euphonious_Polemic]

Babale, this forum is called “Great Debates”, not “Great Rhetoric and Made Up Stuff”.

The topic under debate is:

How are countries with UHC suffering (or not) economically because of UHC?

• Someone came up with the (unsupported) thought that lots of people travel to the US for medical reasons because “it has the best medical system in the world”.
• Other people have come up with actual citations (cites) containing facts and figures that dispute that
• If you want to debate this point, you must come up with your OWN cites that show that the 6 million people that travel outside the US for medical procedures are doing so for trivial reasons. You can’t just “suppose” it.

[gonzomax]

http://www.medicaltourism.com/destination/destination.php?lang=en Medical tourism is becoming an industry. Those who can afford it can go abroad and get better care than here, much ,much cheaper. I know people who got weight reduction surgery in Mexico. Others that got their teeth done. Colososcopy 350 bucks abroad 5000 here. Heart valves 200,000 here 2000 abroad. It won’t be long before insurance companies start sending customers abroad to save money .
Our medical system is rated 37 th in the world. But if you are rich ,you get the best. That is why some foreign dignitaries are treated here. The Senators and congressmen don’t feel the pain. The health care people would not screw with them. You they will deny coverage and refuse to pay.
Medical coverage should not be a for profit industry. It should be like police and fire departments.