Historically or recently?

Historically a business didn't have to worry about complying with the ADA (even if there is no way anyone would ever be inconvenienced with your location), as an example. More recently we have the infamous healthcare bill that drives up an employer's costs considerably.

jmog;1229456 wrote:We rank that low because we count infant mortality rates different than any other country and our typical citizen stuffs their face and becomes extremely obese. Healthcare can't fix stupidity.

The argument was about quality health insurance is just how the bill is paid.

So yes, a list of hospitals answers the quality discussion.

gosh a ruddies, our health care system is the best, it is just those horrible patients that make the system look bad by dying. how selfish of them to make the system look like a horrible expensive failure.

I Wear Pants;1229534 wrote:Why do other nations not have the same problem or at least not in nearly the same frequency?

Are you saying the US is simply filled with people who make more stupid choices than the rest of the world?

Maybe, but I was just asserting that individual lifestyle choices with regard to prevention in healthcare is a contributing factor to why we seem to be not so healthy. It's not all the healthcare "system".

I would say being a prosperous nation we have access to more opportunities to make stupid choices than many other places in the world. We're the ones who invent and export mega trademarks like Coca-cola, McDonald's, KFC, etc, etc to the rest of the world, so it only seems natural that we might indulge in them a little more.

gosh a ruddies canadians are richer and they have all the junk and fast food like us.

pmoney25;1229538 wrote:Boat- Are you arguing that our healthcare system is too blame for the overall health of the country? I hope I just misread what you put down because I cannot believe you really believe that.

No I didn't mean to imply that. There's some evidence that because we have such a large uninsured population a lot of folks end up getting sicker than they otherwise would be because they don't get preventative care/checkups etc. so it does contribute to the problem but by and large I think the evidence like that gathered by Dr. Esselstyn up at the Cleveland Clinic suggests, of course, that our diet has much more to do with it. A young person on a Vegan Diet who exercises regularly could probably go without insurance and be fine for a long time but the fact that they aren't in risk pool increases the overall cost of insurance premiums.

60% of you can GFY


I don't want to wait 3 years to repair a torn ACL if that happens to me!

Since when did the American way change from "an opportunity for all" to "100% perfect equality for all NO MATTER WHAT"?

social mobility does not guarantee equality for all, just a chance to better yourself. America lags behind many other countries in providing the chance. it is less and less "the land of opportunity."

BoatShoes;1229613 wrote: A young person on a Vegan Diet who exercises regularly could probably go without insurance and be fine for a long time but the fact that they aren't in risk pool increases the overall cost of insurance premiums.

I get that the point of insurance is to spread the cost of healthcare out to a greater number of people, but why should someone who chooses to be healthy be forced to pay for people who choose to not be healthy?

gosh I have locked all my doors, lights around my home on at night, security cameras, joined the community watch (Trayvon Martin might be in the neighborhood) why should I pay for police protection for someone who doesn't. Or I follow all the safety tips to prevent fire in the home why should I pay for fire protection for someone who doesn't. Because I am part of the society.

Probably because one is in the Constitution and one isn't(health care)

isadore;1229720 wrote:gosh I have locked all my doors, lights around my home on at night, security cameras, joined the community watch (Trayvon Martin might be in the neighborhood) why should I pay for police protection for someone who doesn't. Or I follow all the safety tips to prevent fire in the home why should I pay for fire protection for someone who doesn't. Because I am part of the society.

isadore;1229720 wrote:gosh I have locked all my doors, lights around my home on at night, security cameras, joined the community watch (Trayvon Martin might be in the neighborhood) why should I pay for police protection for someone who doesn't. Or I follow all the safety tips to prevent fire in the home why should I pay for fire protection for someone who doesn't. Because I am part of the society.

Following that train of logic to its ultimate conclusion leads to all sorts of absurdities that I'm not sure you want to hitch your horse to. Besides the fact the police and fire are local entities, do you really want to:

1) study hard and earn a scholarship only to have it divided among students who didn't study hard?
2) maintain your home and mow the lawn but pay for the guy who doesn't?

I could go on and on, but where does your social contract end? Or do private property and individual responsibility go out the window whenever you say it should?

Not surprised, isadore falling flat on his face with that reference.

You can find good things about the Canadian system....but you are just a few 'clicks' away from finding real problems with it as I posted earlier in this thread. One thing is for sure, and that is that there is no system without problem, and government sponsorship of healthcare is not a panacea.
There are plenty of Canadians unhappy with their system.

How about we stop trying to be like Canada or Europe...and just try being American? We've done pretty good so far.

As for the Canadians being 'worth more per capita'...might be because their real estate bubble hasn't burst yet. Let's compare after it pops.

HitsRus;1229923 wrote:You can find good things about the Canadian system....but you are just a few 'clicks' away from finding real problems with it as I posted earlier in this thread. One thing is for sure, and that is that there is no system without problem, and government sponsorship of healthcare is not a panacea.
There are plenty of Canadians unhappy with their system.

How about we stop trying to be like Canada or Europe...and just try being American? We've done pretty good so far.

As for the Canadians being 'worth more per capita'...might be because their real estate bubble hasn't burst yet. Let's compare after it pops.

We haven't done "pretty good" as far as our healthcare system. It is far and away the most expensive and is not the highest quality.

jhay78;1229595 wrote:Maybe, but I was just asserting that individual lifestyle choices with regard to prevention in healthcare is a contributing factor to why we seem to be not so healthy. It's not all the healthcare "system".

I would say being a prosperous nation we have access to more opportunities to make stupid choices than many other places in the world. We're the ones who invent and export mega trademarks like Coca-cola, McDonald's, KFC, etc, etc to the rest of the world, so it only seems natural that we might indulge in them a little more.

There's plenty of shitty food in the rest of the world, they just don't eat it as much.

I Wear Pants;1229940 wrote:We haven't done "pretty good" as far as our healthcare system. It is far and away the most expensive and is not the highest quality.

Why do we have people come from all over the world to the US for serious conditions/procedures?

Al Bundy;1229948 wrote:Why do we have people come from all over the world to the US for serious conditions/procedures?

Because we have some of the best hospitals in the world. But overall not the best healthcare system.

I Wear Pants;1229940 wrote:We haven't done "pretty good" as far as our healthcare system. It is far and away the most expensive and is not the highest quality.

I Wear Pants;1229955 wrote:Because we have some of the best hospitals in the world. But overall not the best healthcare system.

IWP, what makes you say that we don't have the highest quality healthcare, but we have some of the best hospitals? Do you mean because not everyone can afford it? Or do you mean that some hospitals are great but others aren't?

FatHobbit;1229703 wrote:I get that the point of insurance is to spread the cost of healthcare out to a greater number of people, but why should someone who chooses to be healthy be forced to pay for people who choose to not be healthy?

The point of insurance is that people need health insurance to manage the risk of uncertain or contingent loss that is all but certain in a fallible human being. Even a Vegan Marathon Runner probably ought to insure himself against unforeseeable and unlikely catastrophic health problems unless he is wealthy enough to the point that he has liquid assets that could cover the expensive cost of an unforeseeable health problem. Given our exploding costs, very few individuals are able to cover many medical expenses with cash (unless of course you start manufacturing meth for the owner of a Fast Food Chain).

The lower overall cost of premiums and healthcare services that would be had if all healthy individuals were in the risk pool is a secondary effect that prevents the break down of the market that occurs when only people likely to incur health problems are in the risk pool.

So the idea that the healthy people are "paying for the healthcare of others" doesn't really apply as it is in their own interest to insure themselves in most cases.

FatHobbit;1230001 wrote:IWP, what makes you say that we don't have the highest quality healthcare, but we have some of the best hospitals? Do you mean because not everyone can afford it? Or do you mean that some hospitals are great but others aren't?

I mean that we have some incredible hospitals, the Cleveland Clinic being one of them. But that I've seen studies or articles (I'll link when I remember where they were from) that explain that we do not have as good of outcomes on average as some other nations when it comes to healthcare procedures. And I also take into account preventative care which we're clearly terrible with. Add to that our infant mortality rate is much higher than a lot of other countries.

I Wear Pants;1230005 wrote:I mean that we have some incredible hospitals, the Cleveland Clinic being one of them. But that I've seen studies or articles (I'll link when I remember where they were from) that explain that we do not have as good of outcomes on average as some other nations when it comes to healthcare procedures. And I also take into account preventative care which we're clearly terrible with. Add to that our infant mortality rate is much higher than a lot of other countries.

Thanks for the clarification.

I Wear Pants;1229942 wrote:There's plenty of shitty food in the rest of the world, they just don't eat it as much.

There's something to be said about our food system though. We massively subsidize food with high energy density that doesn't alleviate hunger pangs. Most people are just eating until they're not hungry anymore like we did back when we were hunters and gatherers and yet they pack on the pounds.

BoatShoes;1230002 wrote:So the idea that the healthy people are "paying for the healthcare of others" doesn't really apply as it is in their own interest to insure themselves in most cases.

I would say in most cases young healthy people don't need to be insured. Some of them will, but a large percentage will never need it. I don't think many of my friends had health insurance when they were in their twenties and I can't remember anyone who needed it. IMHO it should be a choice and individuals need to weigh the risk of not being covered with the cost.

FatHobbit;1230010 wrote:I would say in most cases young healthy people don't need to be insured. Some of them will, but a large percentage will never need it. I don't think many of my friends had health insurance when they were in their twenties and I can't remember anyone who needed it. IMHO it should be a choice and individuals need to weigh the risk of not being covered with the cost.

Even if that choice results in higher costs for everyone including those individuals?

I Wear Pants;1230012 wrote:Even if that choice results in higher costs for everyone including those individuals?

I honestly don't know that everyone having insurance is the way to control costs.