Politics Discussion Thread (Heated Arguing Warning)

[AdrienIer]

Meh. The US has a more costly insurance system than other developed countries for a worse overall public health. Perhaps it's time for you to admit that others have a more efficient system and start moving towards those kinds of healthcare systems. Not copying them of course, because the specifics of the US should be taken into account, but using what works in those systems to solve some of your issues.
The rest, like the specifics of how the FDA works, is not as important (as is shown by the fact that the FDA is not really unique in its workings and it's not really a problem in other countries).

[Mardoc]

Agreed, but while Republican politicians keep the focus on the Affordable Care Act, there won't be meaningful debate on the real issues.

Everyone does it.  Repubs, Democrats, Libertarians, my coworkers and Adrien.  It was how the ACA got passed, and I'm sure it's how whatever changes next will happen.  No one is willing to pay attention to anything specific, because every specific cost is attached to someone's income.  Instead it's just a question of who can I get to pay who isn't me?

I sold my house. It was planned in advance and at market value so I did not have to rush through paperwork, and I realised the full market value of the property. I did not lose any of my possessions in the move, what I did not bring with me were sold or donated before I left. I planned ahead for where to live when I arrived, I did not have to scramble to find temporary housing, or stay on the couch of family or friends.

Alright, fine, bad example.  I was thinking of a new grad, or one of Darrell's undocumented immigrants.

It's a false equivalency, and not one I would dare to make to anyone who had just lost their home.

Sure, and you don't cheer up someone who lost their cat by telling them at least it wasn't their wife.  You only take *that* into account when you're setting policy, like bereavement paid time off schedules and life insurance.  But you wanted to talk policy, with zoning and building codes and floodplains and whatnot, so I was focused on policy as well.

[darrelljs]

Holy cow that's a lot of posts . Way too much to try and comment on but everyone for keeping it civil. Wish this was the tenor of debate at large in the U.S. right. I will make a few comments on the medical stuff, since I have some experience in this...

Without said double blind study scams become a million times more likely to succeed. Because, once again, companies don't really care about you getting better, they only care about making money and if possible making money in the short term.

[quote='AdrienIer' pid='646644' dateline='1505656242']
Long story short, because companies don't care for the common good (nor for your good) but only for their financial well being they can't be blindly trusted when it comes to public good areas like healthcare.

You keep saying things like this, but every company I've worked for is made up of people, and those people actually do care. Not because its their job but because they are human beings. I have witnessed several times decisions made that were to the detriment of the bottom line but to the good of the public.

I mean, what's to stop one from making the same argument about a government? Whether its a dictatorship like Cuba or North Korea, a democracy like France or the U.S., or a transitional government like China or Venezuela (in opposite directions) the first goal is invariably to stay in power. The methods differ, from pandering to coercion to repression, but its still main focus much of the time. The only thing that makes them work to the benefit of the people, is that they are run by *people*, and people by and large don't suck.

The US has a more costly insurance system than other developed countries for a worse overall public health. Perhaps it's time for you to admit that others have a more efficient system and start moving towards those kinds of healthcare systems.

Ah, but those "in" the system have the best health care in the world, and if the average is below other western nations what's that to the majority in the U.S. that are so very well served? The U.S. system sucks and I'd gladly pay higher taxes to greatly widen access to Medicare, but that's not what Sanders is proposing. IMO Obamacare is an excellent step in the right direction, it didn't go far enough in some places and is not on solid economic ground due to the way it had to get passed, but it could be iteratively improved and end up giving the being the best system in the world.

I had one kid born in Ft. Lauderdale and one in Penang, Malaysia where I lived for three years. The care in Malaysia was much more personal and better, and cost $1200 vs. $9600. It got me curious, and as near as I can tell the deltas comes from:

• Technology costs (more modern equipment)
  Drug costs (we subsidize the rest of the world0
  Labor costs (our doctors make bank)
  Insurance industry overhead
  Malpractice coverage
  

Darrell

[AdrienIer]

Agreed, but while Republican politicians keep the focus on the Affordable Care Act, there won't be meaningful debate on the real issues.

Everyone does it.  Repubs, Democrats, Libertarians, my coworkers and Adrien.  It was how the ACA got passed, and I'm sure it's how whatever changes next will happen.  No one is willing to pay attention to anything specific, because every specific cost is attached to someone's income.  Instead it's just a question of who can I get to pay who isn't me?

Sharing the costs means that other people pay for your treatments but also that you pay for other people's treatment. It's not someone paying for you, it's the question of whether it's ok for people to go bankrupt for a disease they'd rather not have in the first place.
This summer I went to the ER twice and had a minor surgery done. For this, plus all the medicine I had to buy afterwards, I payed literally nothing. But every year, in every paycheck, I pay for the common pool. I don't know what my overall balance is, and I don't care. I just know that unless I choose to go to a private clinic I won't have an unexpected check to pay that will ruin me.

[AdrienIer]

Holy cow that's a lot of posts .  Way too much to try and comment on but   everyone for keeping it civil.  Wish this was the tenor of debate at large in the U.S. right.  I will make a few comments on the medical stuff, since I have some experience in this...

Without said double blind study scams become a million times more likely to succeed. Because, once again, companies don't really care about you getting better, they only care about making money and if possible making money in the short term.

[quote='AdrienIer' pid='646644' dateline='1505656242']
Long story short, because companies don't care for the common good (nor for your good) but only for their financial well being they can't be blindly trusted when it comes to public good areas like healthcare.

You keep saying things like this, but every company I've worked for is made up of people, and those people actually do care.  Not because its their job but because they are human beings.  I have witnessed several times decisions made that were to the detriment of the bottom line but to the good of the public.

I mean, what's to stop one from making the same argument about a government?  Whether its a dictatorship like Cuba or North Korea, a democracy like France or the U.S., or a transitional government like China or Venezuela (in opposite directions) the first goal is invariably to stay in power.  The methods differ, from pandering to coercion to repression, but its still main focus much of the time.  The only thing that makes them work to the benefit of the people, is that they are run by *people*, and people by and large don't suck.

That is very true. In many cases the people in the company will stop it from doing awful things, and sometimes will pull it towards doing good stuff. And to those people regulations are a hindrance. But without regulations the non-decent people get to roam around free.
Perhaps saying that companies don't care about the common good is not entirely accurate. It's more that companies cannot, and should not be trusted to care for the common good.

Ah, but those "in" the system have the best health care in the world, and if the average is below other western nations what's that to the majority in the U.S. that are so very well served?

Are you sure that the majority of the US is really better off than the rest of the developed world ? (genuine question, my gut says they're not but perhaps I'm wrong)

[darrelljs]

That is very true. In many cases the people in the company will stop it from doing awful things, and sometimes will pull it towards doing good stuff. And to those people regulations are a hindrance. But without regulations the non-decent people get to roam around free.

I'm outing myself as a contrarian, but the other thing I've noticed is that psychopaths tend to gravitate towards the higher, decision making roles (i.e. you are right). So its a balance as most things are, some regulation and oversight is needed, too much and it starts to cause more harm than good. Its scandalous to suggest but I honestly believe the Scandinavian countries come closest.

Are you sure that the majority of the US is really better off than the rest of the developed world ? (genuine question, my gut says they're not but perhaps I'm wrong)

I honestly don't know . All my evidence is anecdotal; I have friends in Canada, U.K. and in particular many in Denmark. The things they have to go through sometimes to get a test that in the U.S. I could essentially schedule and have in a week constantly amazes me. One friend in particular knew with a high degree of uncertainty what was wrong with her, but had to get a physical exam/blood test, then an ultrasound, before she could get the MRI everyone knew she needed. The time between appointments was a couple of months. Another thing I believe is true with no evidence is that the amazing lifestyle most physicians can enjoy in the U.S. attracts the top talent. If you come to Harvard or Johns Hopkins to study medicine, why would you go back to wherever you are from and make nickels on the dollar?

I find it highly annoying that there are no outcome studies (at least none my Google skills could find) that break up results into income ranges.

EDIT: In some sense its irrelevant...there is polling to suggest (especially with the pre-existing conditions issue solved) that Americans love their private health insurance. Giving them a public option without taking that private option away from them is IMO the right thing to do...which is what's begun with the ACA.

Darrell

[Chevalier Mal Fet]

Just to provide data to this debate, the idea that the US spends more than other countries in return for worse care is not at all well-established. Maybe they do, but it's not as clear-cut as people outside the US believe. Anyway, you guys are doing fantastic with each other. I'm actually enjoying following along. Please continue.

[Krill]

Darrell please stop looking like a decent human being that I would agree with. It's disconcerting.

[Krill]

Also it's not fair that you post hoc take the sting out of every zing I've made at your expense for the past 7 years.

[Krill]

Ps. This is Apolyton c.2001. I await the implosion with glee, abandon and dunkin' donuts. And beer, but maybe that does need sayin'.