huntmmup wrote:But our health care system is ranked 37th in the world, behind countries like Costa Rica, Dominica, Morocco, etc because our health care system in general, sucks.
Would you go to Costa Rica, Dominica, or Morocco for your health care?
No freaking way. It doesn't pass the laugh test. Those measure that do that are intended to make the failed nations around the world feel better about themselves and make America look worse. If you and I sat down and defined measure of the health care system and then calculated those measure, all these poor countries with low quality of life would score based on reality and not some egalitarian notion that gives weight to equality as if your health care suffers because Bill Gates gets even better health care.
When you include in equality, it gives silly answers. On scale of 1 to 10, 1 being the worst in the world and 10 being the best in the world and ranking within a country what the bottom 10% and top 10% get.
America it's probably a 5 and a 10, if not higher for the bottom 10%. In the poor countries that are supposedly better, excluding those that are so wealthy they can leave the country for medical treatment, it's probably a 3 and 5 maybe 6. Their best is at bost slightly better than our worst, but the "gap" between the best and worst is smaller. But if you put a lot of weight on that "gap" then you can say the country where the people get care in the range of 3 to 5 is better than the country where the range is 5 to 10 even though everybody in the one country is getting better health care. This is literally how these crazy scores are reported.
If it were me, I'd compare the average American with the average Costa Rican and the American at the 10% level with the Costa Rican at the 10% level with ZERO consideration in the gap between the two. The poor Costa Rican is not getting better health care if the Average Costa Rican is getting the same, is he? You wouldn't be getting better health care if Barack Obama's family got inferior health care, would you? The gap does not matter. If anything, it is a positive driving force for working harder and smarter and encouraging your kids to do the same because of the potential for even better health care. If everybody is the same, why not just go on welfare?
huntmmup wrote:Yes we're the best at treating the most unusual, rare diseases.
How can we be better at treating the unusual and rare and not be better at treating the common
Again, it makes no sense. You have to separate the personal behavior of the people, from the medical care they get. You tear an ACL, do you want to be in America or Morocco or France or England or Canada? You have a heart attack, cancer, a traumatic injury like a car crash, ... We are so good at trauma, it is actually a large contributor to the reduction in the murder right. You were not murdered if the doctors save your life.
That reminds me Spinner. .When previously condemning nationalized Health Care, you were complaining about the per capita cost, but you neglected to show the US per capita cost to put it all in context. Thanks!
Listen, you might learn something. Wealthy people spend more money on EVERYTHING! This is a good thing. They can afford it. And what better thing to spend that increased wealth on than better health care. Getting wealthier as a nation is not about bigger houses and bigger cars and more vacations. It's about having the resources to get the best care for your wife when she has cancer. It's about getting the best care for your wife when she has to have a surgeon open her chest and remove a tumor located in the middle of her chest near her heart. It's getting the best care for your wife when she has third degree heart block and needs a pacemaker. BTW, that's just a short list of the big things that are very personal to me.
Now, with Obamacare, my health care costs have gone up a hell of a lot in one year. The quality has not improved. The convenience has not gotten better. Nothing has changed except the cost. That is what I am condemn. That is destructive. Now for me, that doesn't hamper my ability to give the best health care to my family, but for people earning a lot less than me, this will do real harm to them and their family.
A nation becoming wealthier and choosing to spend more on health care
A nation added inefficient bureaucracy and undesirable mandates and forcing higher spend
A nation turning health care spending into government budget items competing with pork barrel projects
You are most adept at putting up graphs that depict the problem with anything you wish to denigrate..........yet you always seem to avoid the core of the question. Is this a technique developed from years of CYA when authoring reports on energy?
And in re to the chart above......apparently, after hundreds of years of "Great health care", our claim to fame is that we have the highest percentage of drug users. That has, indeed, been a big problem with conservative talk show hosts, but we're working on it! What it means other than that is beyond comprehension.
You miss the point.
If a person sits at home eating Twinkies and smoking crack and does at 35 years old of a massive heart attack does that indicate that their is a problem with insurance, hospitals, medical technology, it's cost, availability or any part of the health care system? Not at all.
Now, I know liberals really don't believe in freedom. They want the government to take away this man's freedom to be a self-destructive dumbass and do what they want. Freedom loving people such as myself never want the government to have any power to force this guy to stop eating Twinkies and smoking crack. That is what his family, friends, neighbors, and the community are therefore. However, sometimes there is just nothing you can do to save everyone from themselves.
This chart shows that there are a lot of dumbasses in America. That does not tell us a think about our health care system. The one thing we can do and we fail to do because the system is totally dominated by the Democrat aligned teacher's unions is K-12 education.
BTW, what's with all the personal attacks lately?
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.