My Socialist Insurance Payments

[MoValley John]

Nobody would dispute charitable organizations existed or provided services. Arguing they were sufficient for the poor and elderly and implicitly asserting there was no problem to begin with is silly.

People have a way of remembering the past that glosses over inadequacies. People also have a way of overgeneralizing their own anecdotes.

I would submit that charitable organizations did a fine job of treating the poor. Not perfect, but actually better than we do today. Here is the thing all the liberals love to throw around, that the United States is 18th, or 22nd, or 53rd in health in the world. Whatever the number they are throwing around today, they love to toss that out there as justification to further move to socialized medicine. Prior to 1965, the United States was number one. Numero uno. The best. Not just for the rich, for everyone. When coming up with these BS numbers, they don't whittle out the poor. So prior to 1965, we were the best. Plus, we were the cheapest. So, as I said, it wasn't revisionist history or a fantasy, charity worked. And it worked quite well.

Fast forward, America is no longer number one, we aren't in the top 10. We aren't the cheapest, we are the most expensive. Medicare changed it all. For me to even try to come up with a solution would be futile because medicare is a sacred cow.

[Kung Wu]

@Kung Wu, I am woefully uninformed on single payer systems when it comes to cost inflation. I don't want to be a pain and make you do all the work, but can you point me to a good starting place to read up on it?

I have a feeling that is the direction we will continue to creep.

I can't really, but I would recommend you study Singapore's health system. I believe it's the cat's meow of single payer systems currently, because it operates like our private HSA's. It unfortunately utilizes price controls, so only time will tell how long it will take for their system to eventually spiral into oblivion. But at least there is a nice buffer with a compulsory medical savings account just like our private HSA's have, and more importantly NO service is free so ALL people -- including their poor -- have skin in the game. That's at least a good effort in reducing the inherent overuse problem that they will face.

[Play Angry]

Prior to 1965, the United States was number one. Numero uno. The best. Not just for the rich, for everyone. When coming up with these BS numbers, they don't whittle out the poor. So prior to 1965, we were the best. Plus, we were the cheapest. So, as I said, it wasn't revisionist history or a fantasy, charity worked. And it worked quite well.

Source? I did not find any rankings for 1964.

I would submit that charitable organizations did a fine job of treating the poor. Not perfect, but actually better than we do today.

The poor were simply uninsured back then. You are saying that charities fully funded and provided healthcare that covered their prescription, surgery, and rehabilitation needs at a level higher than today? And that the ethnic groups overrepresented in poverty, then and now, received such treatment?

I bet poor farmers in rural Nebraska who belonged to that county's church of majority probably had a little different experience than an aging minority factory worker in an urban area.


This is a little dumb because I am sure we agree that the current system is a trainwreck. I get tired of people acting like things were fantastic beforehand, though. They weren't. Medicare has turned out to be an unworkable solution, but acting like there was never an impetus for the legislation is simply wrong.

[Play Angry]

What KW is saying about price controls makes sense from an economic standpoint- unlimited, government-subsidized access to those goods inevitably leads to overconsumption and abuse.

How have many European countries managed to maintain such low health expenditures on a per capita basis then? I've read that the costs for UK and France are less than half than ours per capita. Is access restricted significantly, or is there another mechanism used?

[MoValley John]

Source? I did not find any rankings for 1964.



The poor were simply uninsured back then. You are saying that charities fully funded and provided healthcare that covered their prescription, surgery, and rehabilitation needs at a level higher than today? And that the ethnic groups overrepresented in poverty, then and now, received such treatment?

I bet poor farmers in rural Nebraska who belonged to that county's church of majority probably had a little different experience than an aging minority factory worker in an urban area.


This is a little dumb because I am sure we agree that the current system is a trainwreck. I get tired of people acting like things were fantastic beforehand, though. They weren't. Medicare has turned out to be an unworkable solution, but acting like there was never an impetus for the legislation is simply wrong.

So many generalizations, too much to reply to in one post. But first of all, of course charity didn't cover everything. Medicare doesn't cover everything. Mostly, charity didn't cover drugs, but drugs were cheaper then. Looking at what we have today, the government doesn't cover everything, and far less than you might think. That is why every election cycle we hear of the sob story of the poor and elderly having to choose between medicine and food. In Great Britain today, if you are elderly, you stand a great risk of being beaten in government hospitals. In Germany, they ship their elderly to other countries. We look with disdain at the flaws in our system, yet the world ignores the flaws elsewhere.

[Play Angry]

In Great Britain today, if you are elderly, you stand a great risk of being beaten in government hospitals. In Germany, they ship their elderly to other countries.

I will say that I enjoy the out of nowhere nuggets in every MVJ response on any subject.

:)

[MoValley John]

Single payer can work. It does in Norway. Then again, Norway has a homogeneous society and the entire healthcare industry is funded through oil exports.

The trick to making single payer work, is finding a way to fund it, all the while, encouraging and implementing ways to eliminate waste and abuse. I'm not against single payer in theory, but we as a country don't have a taxation system set up to even begin to fund it.

[MoValley John]

I will say that I enjoy the out of nowhere nuggets in every MVJ response on any subject. He's a little like a conservative Joe Biden- more full of **** than a potash factory and has a relative or buddy who has done literally everything, but still a charming dude.

You want links? I've posted them before.

[Play Angry]

You want links? I've posted them before.

Regarding beatings in UK hospitals or German seniors being shipped elsewhere? I don't need them, thanks.

[MoValley John]

Regarding beatings in UK hospitals or German seniors being shipped elsewhere? I don't need them, thanks.

You quoted my points on these and said I was full of ****. Something Joe Biden. Now, either I'm full of **** about UK hospitals and Germans shipping out their elderly, or I'm not.

Here's link #1 on UK. Please read the rest of the stories on the page, quite telling.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...sed-abuse.html

[Play Angry]

lol, just nevermind.

[MoValley John]

Germany
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...are-costs.html

[MoValley John]

The reason those were quoted was because they were laughably irrelevant to anything in my post.

They are quite relevant. As we look at the failings of healthcare in America, we need to look at healthcare everywhere. We need to accept the fact that healthcare has never, and will never treat everyone. There will always be people that miss out on care, the world isn't perfect. My contention, and it can be backed with photographs, statistics and archived letters, is that charitable health care worked in this country. It did. It wasn't perfect, but it worked. You seem to think it failed. If you look at most of the older hospitals in America, they were begun by religious and charitable organizations. Many still have the same or similar names, few have the same mission.

As for me bringing up all of these people, I know or are related to, I take great offense to that. I've been married for over 20 years to a woman who has worked on the front lines of health care. It is nothing new on this thread. I am very proud of what she does and she is one of the best. She has saved more lives than you could ever know. I have been there when she broke down and cried because she and the trauma team were unable to save a child. Through her, and becoming very good friends with her peers, I have learned much about the successes and failures of our healthcare system. If you want to "Joe Biden" that, we'll you can f@&k off and die.

[Play Angry]

Calm down fella, it was a comment relating to your general style of argument on this forum. It was left up for all of about one minute before I revised the post back to its original state.

You like to overwhelm a discussion with far-flung anecdotes and sidebars which have little or no relevance to the point you are arguing against. You also are the guy who drops connections into every discussion to establish a level of expertise. To turn pointing those out into some sort of personal attack on your wife is weird and beyond ludicrous.

[Shocker-maniac]

http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/stories/2012/october/25/health-care-costs.aspx