The Truth About Socialism

[Vic]

Except every socialist, communist , progressive and most Democrats.

And as usual, you're lying.

edit: Also as usual, your supporting logic was abysmal. One poster's opinion does not represent the opinions of everyone that you arbitrarily put under the same label. Except, of course, to the dishonest.

 

[realibrad]

That's specific.

About as specific as needed.

 

[mikeymikec]

About as specific as needed.

Would you care to provide some evidence or are you happy to have your assertion labelled as bullshit?

 

[brycejones]

That's specific.

We support the development of boner pills.

 

[brandonbull]

I recognize that I or a member of my family could become ill with disease that could wipe me out financially. I recognize that medical bankruptcy is nonexistent in other 1st world nations and is the leading type of bankruptcy in America. I watched my in-laws be wiped out with medical issues, it took them a few years but they were able to transition from middle class to impoverished poor people. They died with nothing other than medical bills. You live in a fantasy world where you think medical issues only affect bad people or liberals and thus you will never be affected. You could not be more wrong.

Socialized medicine is an absolute benefit to middle class people and also to corporations which are saddled with paying for it.

Wow! I had no idea I said any of that. Next time you should start your posts of with "To whom it may concern" or "Dear Sir/Madam". I personally think having a different way to pay for medical treatments in the US is needed, BUT a few things will need to change in order for me to be ok with a taxpayer supported system.

 

[crashtech]

Glenn, we were at one time equivalent to Europe. Now look at us. It is troubling though that it is also growing in Europe as well.

http://www.scimagojr.com/countryrank.php?order=itp&ord=desc

The problem with providing evidence is that it usually hardens resistance to competing ideas. But it seems plausible that the US is bearing more than its share in the realm of innovation.

 

[realibrad]

Would you care to provide some evidence or are you happy to have your assertion labelled as bullshit?

Anyone stupid enough to label it as bullshit is ignorant.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3728884/

Its more than just defensive medicine though. There is also the fact that US hospitals often have very new hardware that may be equally as effective but more expensive as its new.

 

[dank69]

Right after you explain why it can't work in a single state.

I already posted some reasons earlier. People like you that just insist it won't work even though it works just fine in many other countries. You know, skull-fucked conservatives that can't even distinguish fact from fiction anymore.

So let's just continue being honest with each other and admit you really don't care about saving money or better care and just don't like it because liberals support it.

 

[bshole]

http://www.scimagojr.com/countryrank.php?order=itp&ord=desc

The problem with providing evidence is that it usually hardens resistance to competing ideas. But it seems plausible that the US is bearing more than its share in the realm of innovation.

But that chart is terrifying isn't it? As a share of GDP it has tripled in the United States. The trajectory is extremely stable and consistently in the same direction. The system has got to blow up. If it triples in the next 40 years, health care will be then be at 54% of GDP which would ruin the country.

Republicans have absolute shit to offer in way of solving this. Absolutely nothing to offer other than hate and obstruction for the ACA. Absolutely nothing to offer in the face of the clear and present danger of runaway of healthcare costs.

 

[mikeymikec]

Anyone stupid enough to label it as bullshit is ignorant.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3728884/

Its more than just defensive medicine though. There is also the fact that US hospitals often have very new hardware that may be equally as effective but more expensive as its new.

Would you care to point out anything from that article that backs up your assertion? Because while saying that medical professionals in America are commonly engaging in ligitation avoidance tactics by arranging referrals that are unlikely to be necessary and this would logically increase the cost of healthcare in America is a reasonably logical assertion, this article does not provide any basis for the assertion you made. European healthcare institutions are not even mentioned in this article, let alone any cost analysis comparisons, so how on earth did you think it provided sufficient base for your assertion? The article even says that similar behaviour was noted in a Japanese study.

For example, the Labour government in the UK changed the system by which the NHS trusts were being judged to provide good performance to a system which favoured making excessive referrals. Guess what happened? More referrals, more unnecessary scans, etc. For me to then claim that the change in policy is the cause of the spikes in the UK's graph line would be similarly without base.

 

[realibrad]

Would you care to point out anything from that article that backs up your assertion? Because while saying that medical professionals in America are commonly engaging in ligitation avoidance tactics by arranging referrals that are unlikely to be necessary and this would logically increase the cost of healthcare in America is a reasonably logical assertion, this article does not provide any basis for the assertion you made. European healthcare institutions are not even mentioned in this article, let alone any cost analysis comparisons, so how on earth did you think it provided sufficient base for your assertion? The article even says that similar behaviour was noted in a Japanese study.

For example, the Labour government in the UK changed the system by which the NHS trusts were being judged to provide good performance to a system which favoured making excessive referrals. Guess what happened? More referrals, more unnecessary scans, etc. For me to then claim that the change in policy is the cause of the spikes in the UK's graph line would be similarly without base.

You're an Idiot.

 

[bshole]

You're an Idiot.

Why didn't you just provide the data like he asked? I certainly didn't find anything in there that backed your assertion either.

I did see this:

Insurance status of patients has also added to the keenness to use resources. It was clearly seen in various researches that hospital patients with private insurance stay in hospitals longer and receive many procedures compared to patients with Medicaid coverage or patients who lack health insurance

Weird that huh? There is a correlation between number of procedure and insurance status of the patient. It counters your assertion to some degree.

 

[fskimospy]

Would you care to point out anything from that article that backs up your assertion? Because while saying that medical professionals in America are commonly engaging in ligitation avoidance tactics by arranging referrals that are unlikely to be necessary and this would logically increase the cost of healthcare in America is a reasonably logical assertion, this article does not provide any basis for the assertion you made. European healthcare institutions are not even mentioned in this article, let alone any cost analysis comparisons, so how on earth did you think it provided sufficient base for your assertion? The article even says that similar behaviour was noted in a Japanese study.

For example, the Labour government in the UK changed the system by which the NHS trusts were being judged to provide good performance to a system which favoured making excessive referrals. Guess what happened? More referrals, more unnecessary scans, etc. For me to then claim that the change in policy is the cause of the spikes in the UK's graph line would be similarly without base.

Defensive medicine is not driving our health care costs as malpractice related costs including it are responsible for about 2.5% of our total health care costs. We are also not the only place that practices defensive medicine of sorts/

https://www.medpagetoday.com/PracticeManagement/Medicolegal/22051

The idea that it's a significant driver of costs is a popular fiction that people who don't know what they are talking about often latch on to.

 

[soundforbjt]

Defensive medicine is not driving our health care costs as malpractice related costs including it are responsible for about 2.5% of our total health care costs. We are also not the only place that practices defensive medicine of sorts/

https://www.medpagetoday.com/PracticeManagement/Medicolegal/22051

The idea that it's a significant driver of costs is a popular fiction that people who don't know what they are talking about often latch on to.

The old and tired tort reform idea. Prescription drug prices eclipse that without even trying.

 

[soulcougher73]

You're an Idiot.

Well you sure showed him. I doubt he'll show his face around here again.

 

[brycejones]

You're an Idiot.

Does this mean you've finally ran out of BS to spout? We can only hope.

 

[crashtech]

But that chart is terrifying isn't it? As a share of GDP it has tripled in the United States. The trajectory is extremely stable and consistently in the same direction. The system has got to blow up. If it triples in the next 40 years, health care will be then be at 54% of GDP which would ruin the country.

Republicans have absolute shit to offer in way of solving this. Absolutely nothing to offer other than hate and obstruction for the ACA. Absolutely nothing to offer in the face of the clear and present danger of runaway of healthcare costs.

It is scary, yes. One problem is that single-payer, or things that look like they are going that way, contradict some of the classical liberal precepts that the US was founded on. Of course, the same could be said of other extant programs, but a massive takeover of healthcare is just a bridge too far for many citizens, and there are rational reasons to think that way. Individualist ideology still runs deep and strong in the heartland, refusal to deal with this fact continues to doom many modern liberal proposals. But the environment of extreme partisanship in which we now live make innovative solutions tailored to the unique nature of American society improbable, so we struggle along with a patched up mess. It's really too bad we can't come together and do some out-of-box thinking to alleviate the looming disaster. I've thought that the government might do better to start helping through (much) more publicly owned infrastructure, which would not arouse as much controversy, since it's already an accepted role.

 

[realibrad]

Does this mean you've finally ran out of BS to spout? We can only hope.

This is stupid, but fine.

Tell me, does anyone notice a theme?

https://www.oecd.org/unitedstates/49084355.pdf

It amazes me how I take a few hours away for a forum, and idiots start to assume that me not responding means I have no argument. The US in many areas of healthcare does far more. There is far more out there to find as well, but I have a life outside of a tech forum. Gasp, how could it be?

 

[brycejones]

This is stupid, but fine.

Tell me, does anyone notice a theme?

https://www.oecd.org/unitedstates/49084355.pdf

It amazes me how I take a few hours away for a forum, and idiots start to assume that me not responding means I have no argument. The US in many areas of healthcare does far more. There is far more out there to find as well, but I have a life outside of a tech forum. Gasp, how could it be?

It was just some wishful thinking......

Keep on spamming away.

 

[realibrad]

It was just some wishful thinking......

Keep on spamming away.

Is that not literally evidence? We're you looking for something different?

 

[jackstar7]

If you liberals want to personally guarantee from your own pockets that everyone "personally benefits" from universal healthcare with a direct transfer payment to me if I don't "personally benefit" then I'd support it. But you won't because you know damn well that folks like me are the ones you plan to fleece to pay for it all and we won't come out ahead in any way, shape, or form.

I always forget how internet rich you are.

 

[soundforbjt]

This is stupid, but fine.

Tell me, does anyone notice a theme?

https://www.oecd.org/unitedstates/49084355.pdf

It amazes me how I take a few hours away for a forum, and idiots start to assume that me not responding means I have no argument. The US in many areas of healthcare does far more. There is far more out there to find as well, but I have a life outside of a tech forum. Gasp, how could it be?

That’s from six years ago.

 

[twjr]

http://www.scimagojr.com/countryrank.php?order=itp&ord=desc

The problem with providing evidence is that it usually hardens resistance to competing ideas. But it seems plausible that the US is bearing more than its share in the realm of innovation.

On a per capita basis that looks to me like the US isn't pulling it's weight. Australia has 1/13 the population and is producing 1/9 the citable documents. The UK has 1/5 the population and 1/4 the citable articles.

 

[twjr]

The old and tired tort reform idea. Prescription drug prices eclipse that without even trying.

Collective bargaining arrangements present in many universal healthcare systems greatly help reduce the cost of medicines and procedures. My government doesn't care nearly as much as I personally do whether I get treatment, therefore they are prepared to pay far less for it than I would as an individual.

 

[mikeymikec]

This is stupid, but fine.

It's stupid that if you make an assertion that you should back it up with evidence? Why doesn't everyone descend to the level of pizzagate conspiracy theorists and anti-vaxxers, that would make a whole lot more sense, wouldn't it!

It amazes me how I take a few hours away for a forum, and idiots start to assume that me not responding means I have no argument. The US in many areas of healthcare does far more. There is far more out there to find as well, but I have a life outside of a tech forum. Gasp, how could it be?

Your last response to me was "you're an idiot"; frankly I don't think anyone was expecting you to respond again after your insult in lieu of an evidence-based argument, because it's the kind of thing that someone with the maturity of a child does when they feel that they've lost. Your last bit of evidence only backs up the assertion that US spending is higher per capita than other countries, but the funny thing is, chart 4 in the PDF shows that the expenses are higher across the board of spending. You also apparently decided to completely ignore table 2. I don't think anyone is challenging the assertion that US medical spending per capita is relatively high (which is all that your evidence so far backs up), perhaps than it ought to be, but just admit that you pulled the assertion you made out of your ass, or got it from somewhere that provided either as much basis for the assertion as you did (which in terms of making assertions with a factual basis, it's as good as making it up on the spot), or you have no idea what their sources are (in which case you have no idea whether it has a solid factual basis).

But it doesn't at all make you look like an arrogant arsehole to then drop another insult aimed at everyone else here to suggest that you're the only one with a life outside of this forum.

Coming back to the topic, if US's higher spending was largely the result of fear of litigation, then it's reasonably logical to assume that if they're sending patients off for "likely to be unnecessary but let's not take the risk" procedures that they would be more likely to detect conditions and thus have better outcomes. However, Japan's and Canada's spending is signficantly lower and also has similarly decent outcomes (charts 4, 5 & 6).