Originally Posted By: Derid
Pointing out again that the current system is not perfect, does not create a credible argument for your proposed solutions.


Pointing out that current system is deeply flawed, astronomically expensive and still fails citizens creates a credible argument that drastic change is urgently needed.

Quote:
Fundamentally, centrally planned economies - which is what you propose in regards to health care, have ingrained inefficiencies that always produces a worse result.


You are still wrong, brining it up again does not make it any more true. See quote below from _this thread_.

Originally Posted By: sinij
Helemoto, I have done just so in every thread.

The List:

1. Sweden (social, 9% GDP)
2. Canada ( social, 9% GDP )
3. Netherlands (state mandated purchase of private health insurance, 8% GDP)
4. Australia ( social, 6% GDP)


99. USA (private, 15% GDP)


Quote:
But let look at the facts - Canadian model for example only spends 9% of GDP on health care, to US 15%+, with better overall results. Less child mortality, longer life expectancy and no health insurance job slavery. How is that missing 6% is not an extra-governmental "tax" on everybody?

Canadian healthcare costs. or $3899 per person

US healthcare costs or $7291 per person

Infant Mortality and life expectancy.

You like to talk about inflation effects on personal wealth, how about we talk about ever-increasing health premiums and punitive individual insurance costs stifling small business creation and extracting ever-increasing toll on every household in US?



Quote:
A huge part of that health care GDP goes to "insuring" against frivolous lawsuits.


This is also wrong. The Effect of Malpractice Liability on the Delivery of Health Care.

Quote:
"First, we find that increases in malpractice payments made on behalf of physicians do not seem to be the driving force behind increases in premiums. Second, increases in malpractice costs (both premiums overall and the subcomponent factors) do not seem to affect the overall size of the physician workforce, although they may deter marginal entry, increase marginal exit, and reduce the rural physician workforce. Third, there is little evidence of increased use of many treatments in response to malpractice liability at the state level, although there may be some increase in screening procedures such as mammography. "




Last edited by sinij; 11/21/11 05:28 PM.
[Linked Image]