Common Sense

[Lost User]

I had the same thoughts too. Why the overreaction to this, and also bird flu? Perhaps ots the 'cross species' aspect, or that it isnt just the 'good olod flu that goes aorund every year and kills half a million'. Bizare, and the stock markets having a fit over it. Mind you its overvalued right now anyway so I think its just an excuse for a dip.

Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription

[Mike Gaskey]

Christian Graus wrote:

OK, so you're saying that people won't become doctors if it means they are accountable for their actions ?

not at all, it'll be because the government will control their income.

Mike - typical white guy. The USA does have universal healthcare, but you have to pay for it. D'oh. Thomas Mann - "Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to evil." The NYT - my leftist brochure. Calling an illegal alien an “undocumented immigrant” is like calling a drug dealer an “unlicensed pharmacist”. God doesn't believe in atheists, therefore they don't exist.

[Rob Graham]

You certainly draw a sweeping conclusion from a single bad experience. Do you never consider that you might just have encountered a boundary case?

[Oakman]

Fisticuffs wrote:

Unsurprisingly, you wait less time for the latter and I've rarely heard anyone bitch about them or one of their loved ones not getting into surgery quickly when it is unequivocally necessary.

Perhaps I was unclear. 18 months after the accident, she is finally getting into see an orthopedic surgeon who can decided whether getting into surgery is unequivocally necessary. I certainly hope you are right that once the decision is made, the action comes quickly. She has waited long enough.

Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Both democrats and republicans are playing for the same team and it's not us. - Chris Austin

[Oakman]

John Carson wrote:

However, it is worth pointing out that the flu epidemic that began in 1918 killed more people than WWI.

No need, as far as I am concerned. My mother's family lost two of her brothers and her mother. There is speculation that the Spanish Flu died out because everyone who was not naturally immune, caught it - and those who could not fight it off, died. Thusly we are all descended from the survivors. I did not say that this could not be an epidemic, or a pandemic, which simply means epidemic in a large geographical area; not more virulent, or that I am not concerned about the lack of a vaccine. I am saying that the level of panic being driven by the cable news media in this country (and in Canada, Christian) is preposetrous and possibly more dangerous in some ways than the flu itself.

Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Both democrats and republicans are playing for the same team and it's not us. - Chris Austin

[Oakman]

Christian Graus wrote:

I am not a yank

Funny thing about the word Yankee. It means someone who comes from New England and comes from the sobriquet bestowed on the continentals even before 1775 when they started kicking the shit out of Britain. Then, in the civil war, the South started calling all of the North, Yankees - who proceded to kick the shit out of the South. Then, in WWI, the word was applied to all Americans by the Europeans - who proceded to get the shit kicked out of them - twice. Maybe the problem in Vietnam is the Vietnamese never really learned to call us "Yankees."

Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Both democrats and republicans are playing for the same team and it's not us. - Chris Austin

[Rob Graham]

Christian Graus wrote:

The US thrives on this sort of thing, keep the people scared.

I think you meant "The US media thrives on this sort of thing"... Actually, although the media has a tendency to be more than a little hysterical (they seem to think hysteria and ratings are correlated) most Americans are so desensitized to this that it produces little anxiety. In many ways this is bad, since REAL crisis tend to get ignored as well- witness Katrina. When the government starts being hysterical, we check to see if we still have our wallets, then look around for whatever it might be that they don't want us to notice...

[Oakman]

Christian Graus wrote:

How much does a real doctor cost in the US, right now ?

I pay nothing per visit; never have to wait more than a day for an appointment - less if I am willing to accept who's up, but I prefer to see my doctor; get to talk with her for 15 mins or so, plus the time with the nurse. They run their own pharmacy so prescriptions, when I need 'em, cost me from $4.00 - $15.00, depending. My wait, once I arrive has never been longer than 15 mins. I am extremely satisfied with the quality of their service and have been going to them for 4 years, though I could switch to another Doc, simply by walking into his or her office. Of course, if you walked in there, not having bought insurance, and being a drive-by patient with a funny accent that they'd never see again, you might not walk out as happy as I do. in other words, YMMV. Why is this such a surprise Christian, and more importantly why does one unhappy experience in one doctor's office make you an expert on the American health system? If you got bad service in one restaurant picked at random in one city in the U.S. would you announce that all food in the US was bad and all US cooks were charlatans?

Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Both democrats and republicans are playing for the same team and it's not us. - Chris Austin

[fred_]

Maybe I'm crazy but I think all the hype is a smoke screen to get peoples minds of the economic issues and the governments world wide throwing cash at it. In the USA they are working on the Federal budget. But the flu occupies the spot light.

[Christian Graus]

Why would you assume this to be the case ? It's not in Australia. Doctors can charge what they want. I choose to go to a doctor that charges more, I simply choose to pay more than the amount that Medicare covers.

Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. "I am new to programming world. I have been learning c# for about past four weeks. I am quite acquainted with the fundamentals of c#. Now I have to work on a project which converts given flat files to XML using the XML serialization method" - SK64 ( but the forums have stuff like this posted every day )

[Christian Graus]

Yeah, it's true I have a limited sample. All I know for sure is that it cost me $500 for a standard of care that would make the newspapers if it happened here.

Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. "I am new to programming world. I have been learning c# for about past four weeks. I am quite acquainted with the fundamentals of c#. Now I have to work on a project which converts given flat files to XML using the XML serialization method" - SK64 ( but the forums have stuff like this posted every day )

[Christian Graus]

Oakman wrote:

why does one unhappy experience in one doctor's office make you an expert on the American health system?

It doesn't, but it does interest me that some people ( not you ) want to tell me that the Australian health system is obviously inferior, being socialist and all, but when I went to a doctor in the US, I instead found my experience to be well below the standards I have come to expect, to the point that I wondered how it is possible to practice medicine effectively in the manner that I experienced.

Oakman wrote:

If you got bad service in one restaurant picked at random in one city in the U.S. would you announce that all food in the US was bad and all US cooks were charlatans?

*grin* I have no doubt there are good doctors in the US, I just assume that as an uninsured visitor, I need to spend a lot more than $500 to get a basic GP visit that would cost $30 in Australia. The point is really an attempt to draw a real comparison between my (admittedly limited) experience, and my *obviously* flawed 'socialist' system at home, not to then assume that my experience means that all US medical care sucks.

Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. "I am new to programming world. I have been learning c# for about past four weeks. I am quite acquainted with the fundamentals of c#. Now I have to work on a project which converts given flat files to XML using the XML serialization method" - SK64 ( but the forums have stuff like this posted every day )

[Oakman]

Christian Graus wrote:

some people ( not you ) want to tell me that the Australian health system is obviously inferior, being socialist

I don't imagine many North Americans understand the Australian healthcare delivery system. I know I didn't until Josh and you explained it. We are used to hearing about the Canadian system's problems - from, among other sources, their Supreme Court.

Christian Graus wrote:

a basic GP visit that would cost $30 in Australia

Wow. Been a long time since I paid that much! ;)

Christian Graus wrote:

The point is really an attempt to draw a real comparison between my (admittedly limited) experience, and my *obviously* flawed 'socialist' system at home, not to then assume that my experience means that all US medical care sucks

Perhaps having as your entire response, "you're actually having a vote on having actual health care in the US ?" didn't convey your intentions as well as it might have. . . ;P

Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Both democrats and republicans are playing for the same team and it's not us. - Chris Austin

[Christian Graus]

Oakman wrote:

Wow. Been a long time since I paid that much!

*grin* let me clarify. If I go to a doctor for whom I am willing to pay extra, it will cost as much as $30. Most people go to a doctor who is free.

Oakman wrote:

Perhaps having as your entire response, "you're actually having a vote on having actual health care in the US ?" didn't convey your intentions as well as it might have. .

*grin* well, I do like to stir people up from time to time. I have been stuck in Melbourne for the past few days, much of that just sitting in a hotel room, so I was happy to stir up some discussion to keep myself amused.....

Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. "I am new to programming world. I have been learning c# for about past four weeks. I am quite acquainted with the fundamentals of c#. Now I have to work on a project which converts given flat files to XML using the XML serialization method" - SK64 ( but the forums have stuff like this posted every day )

[Oakman]

Christian Graus wrote:

I was happy to stir up some discussion to keep myself amused.....

Well, of course, I don't understand any motivation like that. But I do recognize that there are a few people who post here who do not have the same noble, high-minded, and altruistic motives in posting that I do. (Where's that haloed icon when you need it?)

Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Both democrats and republicans are playing for the same team and it's not us. - Chris Austin

[Stan Shannon]

Oakman wrote:

However, if I understand it correctly, in Australia, there is a basic minimum health care available that is paid for by taxes. Since not everyone works, but everyone is covered, this is definitely a single-payer national health plan. However, you can also get more/better health care if you've got the bread by buying additional insurance. Just as you can over here.

I don't believe it. Like many such plans, it might appear to work initially. However, simple logic demands that there is some subset of the population which must be forced into the system who would otherwise not need government health care if the productive weatlh of the nation were not being sucked into a health care bureaucracy. That class of individual will inevitably grow. There is no such thing as a static economic model. Economies must either grow or shrink, and an economy controlled by the government cannot grow. There is no system of taxation that can force an economy to grow. There are systems of taxation which can allow an economy to grow naturally (by encouraging hard work and investment) but none that can actually cause it to happen.

Chaining ourselves to the moral high ground does not make us good guys. Aside from making us easy targets, it merely makes us idiotic prisoners of our own self loathing.

[Oakman]

Stan Shannon wrote:

There is no system of taxation that can force an economy to grow.

Stan Shannon wrote:

Like many such plans, it might appear to work initially

No plan works forever, Stan. Even the universe will die of heatdeath.

Stan Shannon wrote:

However, simple logic demands that there is some subset of the population which must be forced into the system who would otherwise not need government health care if the productive weatlh of the nation were not being sucked into a health care bureaucracy.

Well, I admit I only took a couple of courses in logic, so maybe you could explain to me exactly what a prioris you are using and what, if any, reasoning went into them. Then if you'd go on to spell out your logic, I'd be very grateful.

Stan Shannon wrote:

There is no such thing as a static economic model.

A truism, yes? But equally true of any political/economy system you or I might ever have heard of. As I said this morning about natural disasters: it's not a matter of whether, just of when.

Stan Shannon wrote:

There is no system of taxation that can force an economy to grow.

There is definitely a redistribution of wealth involved in their system, I agree. As I pointed out, individuals are taxed to pay for it, while businesses are freed of a burden they are expected to bear in this country. Ultimately that means the middle class pays the lion's share - but so they do in the here and now, as well. And the middle class often has less health care available in this country, whereas it sounds as if the poor have some but not as much as the middle class in Australia.

Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Both democrats and republicans are playing for the same team and it's not us. - Chris Austin

[Stan Shannon]

Oakman wrote:

No plan works forever, Stan. Even the universe will die of heatdeath.

I'd be willing to bet the universe outlives the Australian health care system.

Oakman wrote:

Well, I admit I only took a couple of courses in logic, so maybe you could explain to me exactly what a prioris you are using and what, if any, reasoning went into them. Then if you'd go on to spell out your logic, I'd be very grateful.

Because the alternative is that taxation has no affect at all on the behavior of those paying it. If you are taking money away from people, there must be some segment that falls in between those in need and those able to pay. The system either decreases those able to care for their own needs or it increases those able to do so. It cannot simultaneously do both or neither. If paying for the health care of the poor changes the economy so that the number of people able to care for their own health care increases, than at some point everyone would be able to care for their own health care. Or, the reverse is true. One state is true, the other state is not. It is black or white, on or off, true or false. It is perfectly binary. If the system in Australia appears to be static, it is only because revenue is being diverted from other purposes to make it appear to work.

Oakman wrote:

But equally true of any political/economy system you or I might ever have heard of. As I said this morning about natural disasters: it's not a matter of whether, just of when.

But some systems are more inclined to grow. Free market systems will grow up to the physical capacity of the environment to support growth. Than they will collapse. Collectivist systems will shrink and collapse over time because they have no mechnism which allows for economic growth.

Oakman wrote:

There is definitely a redistribution of wealth involved in their system, I agree. As I pointed out, individuals are taxed to pay for it, while businesses are freed of a burden they are expected to bear in this country. Ultimately that means the middle class pays the lion's share - but so they do in the here and now, as well. And the middle class often has less health care available in this country, whereas it sounds as if the poor have some but not as much as the middle class in Australia.

I don

[Mike Gaskey]

Christian Graus wrote:

Why would you assume this to be the case ? It's not in Australia. Doctors can charge what they want. I choose to go to a doctor that charges more, I simply choose to pay more than the amount that Medicare covers.

well ... the way Medicare works (the model oft quoted) is that a doctor must agree to accept what Medicare deems to be the appropriate charge. if he doesn't agree then the patient is stuck for the balance of the bill and must acknowledge that in writing (signing a form). Medicare supplement policies are a way of covering the difference but it isn't a gaurantee. that more or less works okay for the elderly (those covered by Medicare) but if you listen to the rhetoric while you're here you'll see that our healthcare "crisis" is a result of 45 million uninsured. now do you think those same 45 million uninsured will all of a sudden decide they need to purchase a supplemental policy ?? now that was a rhetorical question. what will happen is we'll anounce yet another crisis and the medical community will be forced to accept the government's view of what a fair ("fair" being my sarcastic slant) charge. that'll work for those medical professionals "trapped" in the system but will not last more than a generation. I've heard the Canadian system touted, and to be honest I was once enthralled by the possibility, but I just watched a news report with a Candaian doctor being intervied. there are currently 750,000 Canadians waiting for their turn for a procedure (some surgery) our of a population of 32 million. doesn't sound like a system I want here, especially given the other tidbit; 4 months to go from primary care physican to a specialist and there's a shortage of primary care physicans with a waiting list (waiting to be assigned an open slot). it simply will not work.

[Oakman]

Stan Shannon wrote:

I'd be willing to bet the universe outlives the Australian health care system.

Along with you, me, the United States, Terra, and Sol. So?

Stan Shannon wrote:

Because the alternative is that taxation has no affect at all on the behavior of those paying it.

that's your a priori? Or your conclusion? For someone using formal logic, you aren't being terribly clear.

Stan Shannon wrote:

Collectivist systems will shrink and collapse over time because they have no mechnism which allows for economic growth

Just out of curiosity, what is China?

Stan Shannon wrote:

I don't believe

That's the crux of our differences, I think. I cite what has been given me as fact. You find that these facts don't gibe with your beliefs and discard them. I feel like Galileo.

Stan Shannon wrote:

The only efficient way to maintain a health care system is to allow it to be managed by free market capitalism.

And yet, consistently, the most effective and efficient provider of health care in the US turns out to be Medicare with administrative costs far lower than that of insurance agencies, and before you trot out that old horsechestnut about the doctors are forced to provide the health care more cheaply and charge others to make up for it, any doctor has to agree to accept the rates the insurance company will pay or not be an insystem provider. Exactly the same thing is true for Medicare. Doctors can refuse to accept the rates and then the patient must make up the difference between the fee and the reimbursement - or simply find another Dr. By the way, I am not talking about Bush's pharmacy add-on nor medicaid which is a welfare program not an insurance program.