The Horror Of National Health Care

What were they thinking? Liberal ideology, or a ploy to garner some headlines? Both, probably. But talk about insipid stupidity, at least in terms of selling health care reform. Obviously, it simply provokes jokes comparing reform to horror and makes the topic totally un-serious.

Hey, maybe the filmmaker is a closeted Conservative?

Mr. Jigsaw goes to Washington in “Saw VI.”

The demented serial killer stumps for health-care reform in this odd political turn by the torture franchise.

John Kramer (Tobin Bell), the Jigsaw killer, slipped this mortal coil in “Saw III,” yet he continues to gobble up screen time.

In flashbacks, Kramer reveals that a battle with Umbrella Insurance over his cancer treatment is what created his blood lust.

Comments

[MDr]

All aboard the train. Tea Party Express II is about to depart the station. If you can't attend, at least hit the tip jar.

The future of the Republic depends on you.

[WAHOO WILLIE]

http://www.myfederalretirement.com/public/519.cfm

[Joe]

I am not going to go see Saw Whatever, but that premise is actually kind of amusing. If you think managed care is bad, national health care will bring on Zombieland!

[Neo]

"The public option would effectively be just another insurance plan offered on the open market. It would likely be administered by a private insurance provider, charging premiums and copayments like any other policy."

If the WaPo is to be believed, the only real difference is that it would have the deep pockets and stable of lawyers of the federal government at it’s disposal, so it could engage in “dumping” with no fear of economic repercussions, no fear of anti-trust.

[WPE]

Then again, maybe not:

From http://www.forbes.com/2009/07/02/health-care-costs-opinions-columnists-reform.html

Even more significant is the fact that despite spending vastly more on health than any other country, the U.S. has little to show for it in terms of key measures of health resources. For example, we have fewer physicians per capita than most other OECD countries: 2.43 per 1,000 population versus an OECD average of 3.1. Austria, Belgium, Iceland, Ireland, the Netherlands and Norway all spend at least a third less of GDP on health than the U.S. yet have almost four doctors per 1,000 population.

Nor has the U.S. bought significantly better health with its vastly higher health spending. Life expectancy at birth is probably the best general measure of a population's health. This statistic has increased by 8.2 years in the U.S. since 1960, but has risen more in most other OECD countries. In Canada, life expectancy has risen 9.4 years and more than 10 years in both Germany and France. Life expectancy rose by almost 15 years in Japan over the same time.

Infant mortality is another good general measure of the quality of a health system. In 2006, 6.7 infants died per 1,000 live births in the U.S.--a sharp decline from 26 deaths in 1960. But the infant mortality rate is lower in every other OECD country except Turkey and Mexico. The average rate for all OECD countries is 4.9 deaths per 1,000 live births.

[Joe]

WPE, why do you think the statistics are different?

[the bishop]

Apples and oranges, why not compare the US to a proper aggregate, say Western Europe and see what they average. Germany has a fifth of our population, the UK, a sixth, And let's even get into the comparison with Turkey and Morocco, seriously

[WAHOO WILLIE]

CDC and others don't seem to have many answers on why the US loses between 1to2 more babies per 1000 than more advanced countries. Apparently between poor nutrition and (according to one med journal) too much medical care the premature birth rate is higher than most places. Premies don't stand much of a chance and in many of these progressive countries they are aborted.

[Lala]

I believe that some countries don't count preemies in the live (or dead) birth counts

[mark l.]

"Austria, Belgium, Iceland, Ireland, the Netherlands and Norway all spend at least a third less of GDP on health"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_external_debt

external debt/gdp ratio:

US:95%

Austria: 234%
Iceland: 25%(?)
Ireland: 961%
Netherlands: 353%
Norway: 190%

there comes a time when bragging sbout how good the house you live in, is easily countered by how bankrupt you have become living in it. Less curious about were their healthcare is now, than where it will be in 10 to 20 years.

[mark l.]

if healthcare is that much less of a drain on these countries, than the US, why are they so much further in debt?

must be that their govts haven't spent enough.

[mark l.]

forget the gap between the US and those other countries...

australians live 3 years longer than the irish, at about the same expenditure.

clearly the irish system is a failure for having such a gap.

don't get me started on the quality of the andoran healthcare system, based upon their life expectancy.

[mark l.]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_life_expectancy

here's a list of the life expectacny by US state.
clearly we should adopt the minnesota model.

interesting that dc has a life expectancy of 73.8

still, we are looking at an eight year range, just among the states. Still, shouldn't obama declare a crisis at this imbalance, which must soley be dependent upon quality of healthcare, and not lifestyle choices or genetics?

[mark l.]

so many nuggets in the life expectancy by state...

nota bene:
tennessee has tenncare which is federal govt subsidized, 'quasi-universal' healthcare system...

rank in life expectancy from a govt managed system?
45th. 75.3 years. all those federal dollars, just to get to 45th?

life expectancy is the WORST measure of the quality of healthcare.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TennCare
"TennCare is the State of Tennessee’s health care insurance program, designed to expand health insurance to the uninsured through the state’s Medicaid program by utilizing managed care."

so much crap to choose from...

the debt of the massachusett's system, the failure, in regards to life expectancy, of tenncare, only the messiah will be able to combine the two in something worse.

godspeed. I drop my coverage and pay the fine the very day the new, wonderful system goes into place.
no one ever need be turned away from an er becuase they refused to pony up cash, prior to an actual need.

in designing an all encompassing gravy train, it won't be like the feds will be chasing me off the boat.

free gas, free mortgage, free healthcare = the greatest president, ever.

[Lala]

Even the staff doesn't like the "free' healthcare

rom The Sunday Times
October 18, 2009
3,000 NHS staff get private care
Marie Woolf, Whitehall Editor

Recommend? (16)
NHS staff

NHS staff

THE National Health Service has spent £1.5m paying for hundreds of its staff to have private health treatment so they can leapfrog their own waiting lists.

More than 3,000 staff, including doctors and nurses, have gone private at the taxpayers’ expense in the past three years because the queues at the clinics and hospitals where they work are too long.

Figures released under the Freedom of Information act show that NHS administrative staff, paramedics and ambulance drivers have also been given free private healthcare. This has covered physiotherapy, osteopathy, psychiatric care and counselling — all widely available on the NHS.

[Lala]

Here's the link to the above, I thought it would show up automatically -

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/health/article6879553.ece

[WAHOO WILLIE]

Most of the countries who spend such a "tiny amount" of GDPon health care have income tax rates from 40-60% the US <30%. The US has the highest corporate taxes worldwide. I'm convinced! I no longer mind the idea of paying 60% of my income to provide people who make more than I with health insurance and 4 week vacations. Now, If I'm paying 60% in federal income taxes will I still have to pay state/local income tax and all those other hidden fees, taxes and stuff?

[WAHOO WILLIE]

"paramedics and ambulance drivers have also been given free private healthcare."

@Lala; Boy, that would have been great for your hubby and for me all those working years. Course it probably would have been like the VA....Damned scary idea that.

[Lala]

In 1999 or so the VA had some kind of change whereby all veterans had to sign up by a certain time or forfeit future care. The facility at Northport, NY was swamped with requests and so my husband's appointment to get a check-up was for a year in the future. As the day of the appointment came near a relative came down with a brain tumor so my husband gave it to him rather than make a sick person wait a year. Not that it did him much good as the VA wouldn't approve the treatments his private doctor recommended, or the drugs.

[WPE]

How about one of thos fabled cost / benefit analysis on our health care system - you know, compare what we pay on healthcare - highest in the world by a mile - to what we get, the overall health of the country - not so good?

Here's a start:

"Despite having the most costly health system in the world, the United States consistently underperforms on most dimensions of performance, relative to other countries."

http://bit.ly/k1PsE

No one's talking about instituting a British style system.

****************
"The US has the highest corporate taxes worldwide."

Actually, I think we're #2, behind Japan. But the effective corporate tax rate - after exemptions, playing various accounting tricks, etc., is lower than a number of Western countries. That's why there are so many companies that pay no taxes.

"Between 2000 and 2005, U.S. corporate taxes amounted to 2.2% of the GDP. The average for the 30 mostly rich member countries of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development was 3.4%."

http://www.smartmoney.com/investing/economy/high-corporate-tax-rate-is-misleading-22463/?page=2

[neomom]

Many other industrialized nations don't count certain babies....

In much of Europe, babies born before 26 weeks' gestation are not considered "live births." Switzerland only counts babies who are at least 30 centimeters long (11.8 inches) as being born alive. In Canada, Austria and Germany, only babies weighing at least a pound are considered. France, Hong Kong and Japan don't count infant deaths that occur in the 24 hours after birth. All of these are counted in their statistics as a miscarriage.

In the US, every baby born with a pulse is counted as a live birth.

[Lala]

In Italy one has to bring their own linens and food to the hospital. That's how they keep costs down.

[Wahoo Willie]

"Actually, I think we're #2, behind Japan."

Yep, you're right they beat us by a whopping .29%.

"No one's talking about instituting a British style system."

So you've read all five bills floating around in committee?

[WPE]

I've read parts of them and lots of coverage. There's no bill to create a British style system. What's probably going to come out of the Senate is a bill with some sort of public option which allows states to opt-out.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Health_Service

[WAHOO WILLIE]

"What's probably going to come out of the Senate is a bill with some sort of public option which allows states to opt-out."

Wow that's cool how you came up with that just about the same time Reid was saying it on the radio. Good, state opt out. Whatever, as long as they leave me alone.

[WPE]

I thought it would be a change of pace to talk about what they're ACTUALLY going to do.

Not many states - if any - will opt out.