• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Where's the health care benefit in health insurance "reform?"

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Nov 30, 2006
15,456
389
121
Cutting through all the BS of Dr. Atlas, the undeniable, basic truths are:

1) America pays more per person for health care than any other country on Earth.

2) For all that expense, the life expectancy of Americans is not 1st in the world. Not 5th in the world. Not 10th in the world. Not 25th in the world. The life expectancy we get back for all that expense is 50TH in the world.
Please provide link.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,872
4,214
126
Please provide link.

He posted earlier. It's from the CIA factbook.

We are indeed 50th in life expectancy

What he didn't tell you (because it shoots any point he may have in the foot) is that No. 1 on the list is Macau. Evidently they have such a superior health care system that people there live about 6 years longer than those in the EU as a whole or the US. Probably alien technology brought to earth by Space Progressives.

Causality fail.

Since he would have seen this, it is evidence that you having an understanding of the situation is not something he cares about. Doing whatever he needs to convince you of his agenda matters most.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
73,352
25,080
136
He posted earlier. It's from the CIA factbook.

We are indeed 50th in life expectancy

What he didn't tell you (because it shoots any point he may have in the foot) is that No. 1 on the list is Macau. Evidently they have such a superior health care system that people there live about 6 years longer than those in the EU as a whole or the US. Probably alien technology brought to earth by Space Progressives.

Causality fail.

Since he would have seen this, it is evidence that you having an understanding of the situation is not something he cares about. Doing whatever he needs to convince you of his agenda matters most.
Uhmm, I can't possibly imagine how that is a 'causality fail'. The only way it could be a failure in causality would be if you thought that a country's health care system had no effect on life expectancy... and that would be insane.

What this list shows is that there are lots of other significant factors that influence it, not that health care does not.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
73,352
25,080
136
So you believe the Australia has a similar psychopathic work ethic as the US?
Yeap, in fact they work slightly more according to this OECD analysis: http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/174615513635 (It's an excel file)

Does reshuffling finances change the medicine?
Not sure what you mean here, but you would have to provide some evidence regardless.

Do you think the Dems have any desire to surrender control to people who actually DO health care? I've not seen any evidence of that. Neither has anyone else.
The government is a regulatory body, of course you don't submit control of an industry to those who run it. We already did that with Wall Street. That would be exceptionally foolish to do again.

Waving the Magic Wand isn't going to fix it, and they aren't going to let anyone else have it. As I've often said if health care was a priority then they would have gotten up to speed THEN enacted legislation guided by those who have a clue about how the system works.
They did exactly that. Also, it's not like the people running those committies that crafted the legislation are ignorant about the industry works, they have been doing this sort of regulation for years, in some cases decades.

Nope. Instead we charge in just like Iraq, because the exact same mentality applies. It's the Dems turn to gain control, and that's what counts, not if you live longer or better.

It's painfully obvious to us who do this day to day that this will be another gem like medicaid, a program around for decades which has glaring faults, but those politicians who are going to give you better health care can't begin to fix.
Unfounded ideological speculation.

If they can't handle the easy stuff, why am I to trust them with my and my family's health care?
They do handle that sort of stuff, and they do it well every day. We have one of the smoothest running societies on the entire planet, and we owe a good chunk of that to the fact that we've been able to craft an effective government.

Again though, so now that you see Australia shares (and exceeds) the US in another area that you cite as a primary cause for our health care expenses, what do you make of the fact that their system costs hugely less per capita?
 

shira

Diamond Member
Jan 12, 2005
9,567
6
81
Shira said:
Cutting through all the BS of Dr. Atlas, the undeniable, basic truths are:

1) America pays more per person for health care than any other country on Earth.

2) For all that expense, the life expectancy of Americans is not 1st in the world. Not 5th in the world. Not 10th in the world. Not 25th in the world. The life expectancy we get back for all that expense is 50TH in the world.
Please provide link.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_Expectancy_by_Country#List_by_the_CIA_World_Factbook_.282009_estimates.29
 

shira

Diamond Member
Jan 12, 2005
9,567
6
81
Life expectancy is meaningless without quality of life.
We're talking about health here. Longevity is directly correlated with health.

Since YOU raised the issue of quality of life, why don't YOU produce data that demonstrates that the quality of life in the U.S. is among the highest in the world. If you can't, stop muddying the waters.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,872
4,214
126
Yeap, in fact they work slightly more according to this OECD analysis: http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/174615513635 (It's an excel file)



Not sure what you mean here, but you would have to provide some evidence regardless.



The government is a regulatory body, of course you don't submit control of an industry to those who run it. We already did that with Wall Street. That would be exceptionally foolish to do again.



They did exactly that. Also, it's not like the people running those committies that crafted the legislation are ignorant about the industry works, they have been doing this sort of regulation for years, in some cases decades.



Unfounded ideological speculation.



They do handle that sort of stuff, and they do it well every day. We have one of the smoothest running societies on the entire planet, and we owe a good chunk of that to the fact that we've been able to craft an effective government.

Again though, so now that you see Australia shares (and exceeds) the US in another area that you cite as a primary cause for our health care expenses, what do you make of the fact that their system costs hugely less per capita?
First, society isn't government.
Second, you are asking for a significant change. In effect you are saying "Prove invading Iraq won't work". No the onus is to show that HERE, prospective legislation will fix things.

Government is excellent at legislating. They legislated us into Iraq. They legislated Medicaid, which is more to the point. Now if they did such a great job, why does it suck after all these decades from a provider/patient pov?

Your basic message is "You can't prove that we aren't right, so you have to trust us"

Nope. I've seen Medicaid. I've seen private insurance. I've seen stupidity in action.

These people don't know the first thing about health care. Nothing. Yet you would give them control.

I don't accept good faith ignorance. YMMV.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
73,352
25,080
136
First, society isn't government.
Second, you are asking for a significant change. In effect you are saying "Prove invading Iraq won't work". No the onus is to show that HERE, prospective legislation will fix things.

Government is excellent at legislating. They legislated us into Iraq. They legislated Medicaid, which is more to the point. Now if they did such a great job, why does it suck after all these decades from a provider/patient pov?

Your basic message is "You can't prove that we aren't right, so you have to trust us"

Nope. I've seen Medicaid. I've seen private insurance. I've seen stupidity in action.

These people don't know the first thing about health care. Nothing. Yet you would give them control.

I don't accept good faith ignorance. YMMV.
My argument is nothing of the sort. My argument is that we spend vastly more than any other nation on earth on health care, and our results are underwhelming. We do this using a system that is dramatically different than what all these other countries do, and the evidence shows that we will likely gain from adopting a more socialized form.

I didn't ask for proof that health care wouldn't work, I actually thought you were referring to Australia's form of medicine and that they 'reshuffled finances' somehow. As I said in my post, I didn't really understand what you were saying.

Prospective legislation here will provide a vital social service to millions of Americans along with some things we've needed for years. (eliminating pre-existing condition clauses, weakening the tie between health insurance and employment) Depending on what is in the final bill, and broadly speaking the more we socialize it the more we will save. (according to the CBO at least) Like I said before, who knows if it will fix things?

That's not really what I was talking about though. Does the example of Australia give you cause to rethink your statements as to the causes of the excessive expense of the US health care system?
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,872
4,214
126
Oh and from your spread sheet Mexico has a higher number of hours worked. I said psychopathic, not automatically longer. They have a rational life style where they take a break. Not us. We have to hammer away at our adrenal glands.

Also "unfounded ideological speculation"? Like Medicaid is a great success? No.

I believe you have good intentions, but your faith makes you censor that which goes on every day.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,872
4,214
126
Just read your response.

I don't give a rat's ass about expenses. I can control them in a heartbeat. Just make everything cost less. Put a limit on what can be charged and damn the consequences.

Here's the rub. When you legislate there are consequences. I can say "hey look at Germany. Look at Sweden." No, I'm looking at the US and you are not going to get Germany or Sweden. You are going to get a program like Medicaid in that something is better than nothing. Oh we'll fix it. No, that hasn't happened and the cost of that program is over $300 billion a year. Not ten years. Per annum.

So these same types will get it right because that's what they do.

Nope, they haven't.
 
Nov 30, 2006
15,456
389
121
82.6 Japan
78.2 US
67.2 World Average

Not too shabby...and in the scheme of things...78.2 is damn good. Are their any projections available that show how current legislation will improve this number? Here's an life expectancy site that I hope you find interesting.

http://www.worldlifeexpectancy.com/
"We don't dispute the need for Healthcare reform, but we've seen some convincing Data that would vault the USA to the top of the World Life Expectancy rankings if Traffic Accidents, Homicides and other non Healthcare related Causes of Death were standardized between countries."

"The Infant Mortality data alone is powerful evidence of the value the American Healthcare System places on a human life. As Americans we're proud of the fact our Doctors not only try to save them all, we count them all too, no matter what they weigh and even if they only take a single breath of life. I'd rather not describe how other countries define a live birth or what determines who they try to save, but if you want to bump up your Life Expectancy Stats improving Infant Mortality will certainly help you do it. Having said that there is one area related to Infant Mortality that we do need to continue to improve and that's Teen Pregnancies, but I doubt even the most adamant supporters of Healthcare reform would blame that on the system.

American Healthcare does need to improve. It costs too much, it excludes too many and the Insurance Industry must accept more social responsibility. We have some powerful data related to these metrics we'll be sharing with you soon. But for now we wanted to clear up some of the misconceptions many people have regarding the relationship between America's World Life Expectancy Ranking and the cost and quality of its Healthcare System. The reasons for reform are real and they need to be addressed, but with all the Medical Research and Innovation we share with the rest of the world and the number of foreign Doctors we educate in our Universities, it's hard to imagine how what the rest of the world does has much, if anything, to do with us."
 
Last edited:

Sacrilege

Senior member
Sep 6, 2007
647
0
0
We're talking about health here. Longevity is directly correlated with health.

Since YOU raised the issue of quality of life, why don't YOU produce data that demonstrates that the quality of life in the U.S. is among the highest in the world. If you can't, stop muddying the waters.
Quality of life in the US is absolutely abysmal. Everyone is fat with rotting burritos stuck under their rolls of flab.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
73,352
25,080
136
Oh and from your spread sheet Mexico has a higher number of hours worked. I said psychopathic, not automatically longer. They have a rational life style where they take a break. Not us. We have to hammer away at our adrenal glands.

Also "unfounded ideological speculation"? Like Medicaid is a great success? No.

I believe you have good intentions, but your faith makes you censor that which goes on every day.
Australia's average work day is exactly the same as ours in America, 8-5 with an hour lunch break in the middle. (their regulated work hours are actually until 4-4:30 or so, but everyone works overtime, hence the longer total hours.) So yes, their work schedules are almost EXACTLY the same as ours. Any other caveats you have? With that also in mind, now do you rethink your idea?

We can definitely get something exactly like Germany and Sweden in the United States, there's absolutely no reason why we can't. I find it strange that people believe America is the greatest country in the world, one that can accomplish anything... except for have a decent health care system.
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,063
495
126
Life expectancy takes into account infant mortality. There is no universal definition of infant mortality. Some countries dont consider children with severe birth defects to have ever been born. The United States probably has one of the most liberal definitions. And the United States as a whole is seeing higher than avg premature births. Meaning our infant mortality rate will cut into life expectancy.

But I ask, who cares? Is our sole goal here to increase life expectancy? I am sure we could pump everybody with enough drugs to make their bodies live to 125 years of age. But what does that really get us? And from a purely money aspect of it. Do we want people living longer on a public system? Each day they live longer, they pull from the system and make it harder for that system to survive.
 
Nov 30, 2006
15,456
389
121
Australia's average work day is exactly the same as ours in America, 8-5 with an hour lunch break in the middle. (their regulated work hours are actually until 4-4:30 or so, but everyone works overtime, hence the longer total hours.) So yes, their work schedules are almost EXACTLY the same as ours. Any other caveats you have? With that also in mind, now do you rethink your idea?

We can definitely get something exactly like Germany and Sweden in the United States, there's absolutely no reason why we can't. I find it strange that people believe America is the greatest country in the world, one that can accomplish anything... except for have a decent health care system.
Are there any studies or even 'wild ass' projections available that show how current legislation will improve our healthcare so "We can definitely get something exactly like Germany and Sweden in the United States"? Or is this just wishful thinking on your part?
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
73,352
25,080
136
Are there any studies or even 'wild ass' projections available that show how current legislation will improve our healthcare so "We can definitely get something exactly like Germany and Sweden in the United States"? Or is this just wishful thinking on your part?
Huh? Where did I say anything about current legislation improving our healthcare so we can get something like Germany and Sweden? I feel like almost every response I have to you when you jump into a discussion I'm having with someone else starts out with 'huh?'

We can definitely implement a mixed public/private system on their model. Larger systems with universal enrollment have significant power to lower prices. I'm not really aware of credible sources that say otherwise.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,872
4,214
126
Australia's average work day is exactly the same as ours in America, 8-5 with an hour lunch break in the middle. (their regulated work hours are actually until 4-4:30 or so, but everyone works overtime, hence the longer total hours.) So yes, their work schedules are almost EXACTLY the same as ours. Any other caveats you have? With that also in mind, now do you rethink your idea?

We can definitely get something exactly like Germany and Sweden in the United States, there's absolutely no reason why we can't. I find it strange that people believe America is the greatest country in the world, one that can accomplish anything... except for have a decent health care system.
Well when we get German or Swedish health care on the table, then let me know. I'd be glad to look at it.

Until then, there is nothing like it, and citing medicaid as a here and today example of the largest (so far) health plan, I'm not buying that someone is going to make the silk purse out of the sow's ear some day.
 
Nov 30, 2006
15,456
389
121
Huh? Where did I say anything about current legislation improving our healthcare so we can get something like Germany and Sweden? I feel like almost every response I have to you when you jump into a discussion I'm having with someone else starts out with 'huh?'

We can definitely implement a mixed public/private system on their model. Larger systems with universal enrollment have significant power to lower prices. I'm not really aware of credible sources that say otherwise.
Sorry to interject...just trying to understand what you're saying. Basically I'm trying to understand how current healthcare legislation will improve our healthcare and how savings as a result of these proposed changes will be realized. What exactly do you see as concrete healthcare benefits and concrete savings and exactly where will they be realized?
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
73,352
25,080
136
Sorry to interject...just trying to understand what you're saying. Basically I'm trying to understand how current healthcare legislation will improve our healthcare and how savings as a result of these proposed changes will be realized. What exactly do you see as concrete healthcare benefits and concrete savings and exactly where will they be realized?
Honestly I view this legislation as a means to an end. Regardless of that, I believe that our current health situation in America will be improved by expanding the pool of insured to cover pretty much the entire population. (yes not all, but it's fairly close). The elimination of the pre-existing condition clause for another. The tax on health benefits (although I believe all health benefits should be taxed, not just the really good ones). I think this legislation is an important step in breaking the employment tie to health insurance that handcuffs worker mobility. (I for example could never dream of quitting my job to start my own business or whatever, I would be immediately denied all health care coverage due to my pre-existing condition) That's a pretty big plus and they appear to be pretty much guaranteed in every version of the bill.

As for the specifics on exactly where cost savings will be realized, as I said earlier to Hyabusa I can't say because we don't know what will be in the final legislation and even small changes can have significant repercussions. I am going to bet that the cost savings will be marginal, in particular because the bill does not include a public option with rates tied to Medicare. When the final bill comes out I guess we'll see.
 

lupi

Lifer
Apr 8, 2001
32,539
260
126
When there appears to be any health care reform in these health care reform bills let us know.
 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
20,990
853
126
I didn't say they were or it's not because of our diet (or lack of exercise). My point is that if people want to be throwing out how long American's live on average vs. other countries, and how healthy we are vs. other countries, I hope they're factoring in our total lack of exercise and poor diet into that before pronouncing that Trillion dollar healthcare packages are somehow going to fix that: Because they will not, in any way shape or form.

All these uninsured, fat, inactive American's aren't somehow going to see the light when they get health insurance in whatever way it arrives...they'll be living the same way they're living now, no change.

Chuck

BINGO. According to WHO, the United States is the 9th fattest country. Having a nationalized health care plan wont change that AT ALL.

http://www.epidemiologic.org/2007/02/most-overweight-countries-in-world.html



According to the latest 2005 statistics from the World Health Organization (WHO), released in 2007, there are 1,600,000,000 overweight adults (age 15 and over) in the world. That number is projected to grow by 40% over the next 10 years. The following list reflects the percentage of overweight adults in various countries, ranked by percentage overweight (BMI>=25).

Although the U.S. ranks 9th, it is by far the largest country among the top 20 most overweight countries, and thus, contributing a significantly more "onerous" overweight burden than most countries.

Rank, Country, %Overweight
1. Nauru 94.5
2. Micronesia, Federated States of 91.1
3. Cook Islands 90.9
4. Tonga 90.8
5. Niue 81.7
6. Samoa 80.4
7. Palau 78.4
8. Kuwait 74.2
9. United States 74.1
10. Kiribati 73.6
11. Dominica 71.0
12. Barbados 69.7
13. Argentina 69.4
14. Egypt 69.4
15. Malta 68.7
16. Greece 68.5
17. New Zealand 68.4
18. United Arab Emirates 68.3
19. Mexico 68.1
20. Trinidad and Tobago 67.9


The beloved UK is 28th, Germany 43rd, Japan 163rd.

People mention countries with the longest life spans...Macau (China) ranks 148th on this list, #2 Japan is 163rd, #3 Singapore is 162nd, #4 San Marino is 32nd, and #5 Australia is 21st.
 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
20,990
853
126
When there appears to be any health care reform in these health care reform bills let us know.
Well, there are a few things. For example eliminating pre-existing condition clauses and lifetime caps, although it really isnt reform in its purest word. The rest is as Ive called it all along - a giant welfare bill.
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,063
495
126
Well, there are a few things. For example eliminating pre-existing condition clauses and lifetime caps, although it really isnt reform in its purest word. The rest is as Ive called it all along - a giant welfare bill.
Eliminating pre-existing conditions will definately go a long ways to curtail premium inflation :)
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY