US ranks only eighth in the world in "Economic Freedom"

[Chronos]

OK, so if we assume, for the sake of argument, that “economic freedom” as defined by Heritage is a good thing, and further assume that UHC hurts that goal, then those countries ahead of us must be doing something else right that more than offsets it. What is it they’re doing better than us, and shouldn’t we try to emulate them? If it’s something that “wouldn’t work here because America is exceptional”, then is that sort of exceptionalism a good thing, and shouldn’t we try to change so we’re not exceptional?

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

Post 37.

[msmith537]

@Kenyth

If they are using a totally free for all capitalism model as the most “free”, I don’t want it. Read up on the days of unregulated capitalism. It’s a human rights, job security, and economic stability horror story. For the same reason that free for all anarchy isn’t a good government, free for all capitalism isn’t a good economy.

We may not be perfect, but we’re doing pretty well.

Laissez faire capitalism is not the same thing as economic freedom. Some regulation is necessary in order to enforce safety standards, reduce descrimination and nepotism, break up cartels, prevent price fixing and other predatory business practices.

Regulation inhibits economic freedom when it prevents termination of incompetant or irrelevant employees, creates unnecessary barriers to entry and other burdens to new business, provides protection or other subsidies to non competitive companies and industries or otherwise restricts individuals or companies through complex and bloated beurocratic process.

[njtt]

@Bryan_Ekers

How far up from the bottom of the list do you have to go before finding a country with an effective UHC system? Just asking.

Cuba?

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

@Bryan_Ekers

How far up from the bottom of the list do you have to go before finding a country with an effective UHC system? Just asking.

North Korea finished dead last in ranked states with a score of 1.0. It provides free medical care to all its citizens and has 3.29 physicians per 1,000 people, the 28th best ratio in the world.

Of course, 100,000 North Koreans die of malnutrition every year, so there are swings and there are roundabouts.

[Laudenum]

@Dick_Dastardly

It’s the heritage Foundation, come on, they’re the crankiest of the cranky, they’re famous for still **defending the notion that tax cuts increase revenues in the face of all the evidence. **I would have put my house on the fact that the US would drop a few places in their economic freedom index once Obama took office. If the guy responsible for manufacturing this index every years hadn’t dropped the US a few places this year he would have been David Frumed.

They do in certain circumstances, where tax is too high.

[Bryan_Ekers]

@kushiel

Weeeeelllllll, that’s not entirely true…Canada doesn’t cover prescriptions, eye care or dental care. When I got laid off it was painful to pay my meds out of pocket, and pretty much all insurance plans don’t kick in until you’ve been employed 3 months. I mean, I don’t have anything special in the way of meds, but it was still $200 a month for me. Imagine someone that needed $1000 a month of drugs.

Hey, if you need cheap meds, you can always go to Canada.

Oh, wait…

[Rand_Rover]

@Fear_Itself

What more will it take to convince conservatives that universal health care will make them more economically free, not less?

How about you look into the interplay between correlation and causation and get back to us. Thanks.

[BrainGlutton]

@Laudenum

They do in certain circumstances, where tax is too high.

But studies produce widely varying figures for the “too high” point.

[Fear_Itself]

@Rand_Rover

How about you look into the interplay between correlation and causation and get back to us. Thanks.

Judging by the Heritage study, there is no correlation between private health insurance and economic freedom. How’s that?

[Dick_Dastardly]

@Laudenum

They do in certain circumstances, where tax is too high.

The point at which tax cuts would increase revenues is well above current tax rates and tax cuts at our current tax levels decrease revenue rather than increase it as the actual revenue numbers over the past couple of decades show. And the Heritage Foundation are arguing for further tax cuts on top of existing ones. That’s their raisond’etre, that’s what the conservative billionaires who pay their wages pay them to say.