Democrats start to jump ship...

[Diogenes]

It is a very old problem. Lots of people want a King.

4 So all the elders of Israel gathered together and came to Samuel at Ramah. 5 They said to him, “You are old, and your sons do not follow your ways; now appoint a king to lead us, such as all the other nations have.”

6 But when they said, “Give us a king to lead us,” this displeased Samuel; so he prayed to the Lord. 7 And the Lord told him: “Listen to all that the people are saying to you; it is not you they have rejected, but they have rejected me as their king. 8 As they have done from the day I brought them up out of Egypt until this day, forsaking me and serving other gods, so they are doing to you. 9 Now listen to them; but warn them solemnly and let them know what the king who will reign over them will claim as his rights.”

10 Samuel told all the words of the Lord to the people who were asking him for a king. 11 He said, “This is what the king who will reign over you will claim as his rights: He will take your sons and make them serve with his chariots and horses, and they will run in front of his chariots. 12 Some he will assign to be commanders of thousands and commanders of fifties, and others to plow his ground and reap his harvest, and still others to make weapons of war and equipment for his chariots. 13 He will take your daughters to be perfumers and cooks and bakers. 14 He will take the best of your fields and vineyards and olive groves and give them to his attendants. 15 He will take a tenth of your grain and of your vintage and give it to his officials and attendants. 16 Your male and female servants and the best of your cattle[c] and donkeys he will take for his own use. 17 He will take a tenth of your flocks, and you yourselves will become his slaves. 18 When that day comes, you will cry out for relief from the king you have chosen, but the Lord will not answer you in that day.”

19 But the people refused to listen to Samuel. “No!” they said. “We want a king over us.

Over two thousand years and nothing has changed:

http://www.examiner.com/article/liberal ... ctatorship

Agreed. My argument has always been that this is because Human Nature doesn't change. It might evolve slowly over very long (multi-generational) time periods, but in general I regard human nature as a constant.


The way people behaved 50,000 years ago is pretty much the same way they behave now, and yes, it's instinctive to human nature to want a strong-man leader.

Representative Republic was an unnatural experiment in the history of the Human race, and we are now screwing it up.

[Diogenes]

This is going to get very VERY ugly in coming months with
- continued failure of exchanges to work.
- millions losing the insurance they had.
- sticker shock from more expensive policies with higher deductibles.
- low information people showing up at hospitals thinking they have coverage they don't.
- potential for identity theft from exchange site bugs and lack of "navigator" screening.
- people unable to keep their doctor with any approved policy.
- extensive less direct fallout of this "pass something, ANYTHING, while we can" disaster.

Yep, it really sounds like Americans should can the whole rotten system with its parasitic, profit-over-people HMOs and move to single payer, doesn't it.

Sure, because the frying pan just isn't hot enough!

[Schneibster]

http://www.examiner.com/article/liberal ... ctatorship

Next comes the National Enquirer.

[Teahive]

Now as to why free market healthcare can't work. For anything to work in a free market supply and demand need to have a natural method to equalize. In commodities this is simple, you vote with your dollar. If something is priced to high you simply chose to not buy it or pay for an alternative. In healthcare there is no alternative to being live. You can't chose to be "discount" alive, or "generic" alive. You have a health problem, you need it take care of. If I'm the provider of that care I can chose to charge whatever I want for that care. Your only choice is to pay me or die. In economic terms this can be expressed as setting demand to infinity. No amount of supply can balance with an infinite demand.

You are confusing demand with something else. Demand is never infinite. It depends on both willingness and ability to pay the price asked. If you charge $10m for a treatment, you're not going to have many patients, regardless of how many (and how much) people want it.

In emergencies there may be just one provider that can help you fast enough. But since you might be unable to agree to anything anyway, there is always a need to handle these cases specially. For example, by negotiating the price of emergency care ahead of time. In most other cases there are multiple providers of the same treatment, thus competition brings the price down.

There are, however, a number of other problems which free market health care faces, possibly to a greater degree than more regulated systems. That includes conflicts of interest, a strong information imbalance, collusion, fraud, and crowding out of nonmarket values.

[Diogenes]

Now as to why free market healthcare can't work. For anything to work in a free market supply and demand need to have a natural method to equalize. In commodities this is simple, you vote with your dollar. If something is priced to high you simply chose to not buy it or pay for an alternative. In healthcare there is no alternative to being live. You can't chose to be "discount" alive, or "generic" alive. You have a health problem, you need it take care of. If I'm the provider of that care I can chose to charge whatever I want for that care. Your only choice is to pay me or die. In economic terms this can be expressed as setting demand to infinity. No amount of supply can balance with an infinite demand.

You are confusing demand with something else. Demand is never infinite. It depends on both willingness and ability to pay the price asked. If you charge $10m for a treatment, you're not going to have many patients, regardless of how many (and how much) people want it.

In emergencies there may be just one provider that can help you fast enough. But since you might be unable to agree to anything anyway, there is always a need to handle these cases specially. For example, by negotiating the price of emergency care ahead of time. In most other cases there are multiple providers of the same treatment, thus competition brings the price down.

There are, however, a number of other problems which free market health care faces, possibly to a greater degree than more regulated systems. That includes conflicts of interest, a strong information imbalance, collusion, fraud, and crowding out of nonmarket values.

Not to mention the moral hazard created by Insurance separating individuals from cost, restriction on the creation of Doctors through the collaboration of Universities and State Authorities, (artificial restriction of supply) Sue Happy Patients and Lawyers, and the fact that Government forces medical staff to treat indigents at a loss.


The medical industry has long been the victim of interference with it's free market natural position. It does not resemble a free market at all. It is heavily regulated by all sorts of people with their thumb on the scale, and all this translates into excessive, and often ridiculous costs.

[Schneibster]

Not to mention if you deny people healthcare they die.

[MSimon]

Not to mention if you deny people healthcare they die.

If you give people healthcare they die.

[MSimon]

There are 700,000 physicians in the United States.
There are 120,000 accidental deaths in the United States caused by physicians every year, and the accidental death percentage per physician is 17.1%.
http://skeptics.stackexchange.com/quest ... ed-by-guns

Stay away from doctors.

[Schneibster]

How many are suffering from fatal diseases or injuries?

Duh.

Liars figure.

[Schneibster]

I'm gonna die of heart disease. I'll live longer if I listen to the doctors. When I die is it their "fault?"

[Diogenes]

There are 700,000 physicians in the United States.
There are 120,000 accidental deaths in the United States caused by physicians every year, and the accidental death percentage per physician is 17.1%.
http://skeptics.stackexchange.com/quest ... ed-by-guns

Stay away from doctors.

That's why they call it "Practicing" medicine.





Some of them are really not terribly good at it.

[choff]

http://www.healthcare-now.org/new-poll- ... ealth-care

A new poll conducted by the Toronto-based Nanos Research points to overwhelming support — 86.2 percent — for strengthening public health care rather than expanding for-profit services.

“With more than 8 in 10 Canadians supporting public solutions to make public health care stronger, there is compelling evidence that Canadians across all demographics would prefer a public over a for-profit health care system,” said Nik Nanos, president of Nanos Research.



https://www.sodahead.com/living/why-do- ... n-1557419/

These findings from U.S. data are supported by responses to a large
population-based health survey, the NPHS, in Canada undertaken during
our study period. As noted above, 0.5 percent of respondents
indicated that they had received health care in the United States in the
prior year, but only 0.11 percent (20 of 18,000 respondents) said that
they had gone there for the purpose of obtaining any type of health
care, whether or not covered by the public plans.


http://www.denverpost.com/recommended/ci_12523427


The U.S. has the most bureaucratic health care system in the world. More than 31 percent of every dollar spent on health care in the U.S. goes to paperwork, overhead, CEO salaries, profits, etc. The provincial single-payer system in Canada operates with just a 1 percent overhead. Think about it. It is not necessary to spend a huge amount of money to decide who gets care and who doesn't when everybody is covered.




Myth: There are long waits for care, which compromise access to care.There are no waits for urgent or primary care in Canada. There are reasonable waits for most specialists' care, and much longer waits for elective surgery. Yes, there are those instances where a patient can wait up to a month for radiation therapy for breast cancer or prostate cancer, for example. However, the wait has nothing to do with money per se, but everything to do with the lack of radiation therapists. Despite such waits, however, it is noteworthy that Canada boasts lower incident and mortality rates than the U.S. for all cancers combined, according to the U.S. Cancer Statistics Working Group and the Canadian Cancer Society. Moreover, fewer Canadians (11.3 percent) than Americans (14.4 percent) admit unmet health care needs.



Read more: Debunking Canadian health care myths - The Denver Post http://www.denverpost.com/recommended/c ... z2kgZRnman
Read The Denver Post's Terms of Use of its content: http://www.denverpost.com/termsofuse
Follow us: @Denverpost on Twitter | Denverpost on Facebook

[MSimon]

However, the wait has nothing to do with money per se, but everything to do with the lack of radiation therapists.

Radiation therapists are under paid.

And US bureaucracy? Mostly government imposed.

Back 30 or 40 years ago Time Magazine ran an article on the horrific rate of medical inflation in the Us. It was 5%. They called for government involvement to reduce that rate. Since government has gotten involved medical inflation is now a much more reasonable 10% a year.

[MSimon]

1.1^30 = 17.45
1.05^30 = 4.32

17.45/4.32= 4.04

[Schneibster]

Toronto-based

Snicker.