Are you for or against government healthcare - Page 26 - Politics and Economics

Yeah this is just an argument against taxation. You could say people are forced into paying for police, fire, and military protection as well.

Are you against all forms of taxation? Are you against all forms of government healthcare? Medicare? Medicaid?

I don't know if you are serious or not. Yes, I am opposed to the existence of government.

01-31-2012 , 05:58 PM

#627

NMcNasty

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 3,990

Quote:

Originally Posted by RR

I don't know if you are serious or not. Yes, I am opposed to the existence of government.

LOL, k, well then there's no way to argue with you without massively derailing the thread.

01-31-2012 , 07:14 PM

#628

awval999

Election Monitor.

Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 6,269

Quote:

Originally Posted by jogsxyz

Americans would be much more willing to face death, if they were billed for the hopeless efforts to keep their elderly relatives 'alive'.

+100000000

01-31-2012 , 07:20 PM

#629

awval999

Election Monitor.

Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 6,269

Does the fact that the United States is a racial and economic heterogenous country have anything to do with the health care costs? Seems like Euroland is very racially and econcomically homogenous.

01-31-2012 , 07:39 PM

#630

jogsxyz

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 6,362

I think there are too many parasites attached to the system. Those who provide no direct health care seem to be the most highly compensated. Trial lawyers, health insurance execs, drug company execs are among those compensated to the tune of millions of dollars per year.

01-31-2012 , 07:42 PM

#631

jogsxyz

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 6,362

www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/table4c6.html

Code:

Statistical Tables 	SSA logo: link to Social Security Online home
Period Life Table

Life Tables
	

A period life table is based on the mortality experience of a population during a relatively short period of time. Here we present the 2007 period life table for the Social Security area population. For this table, the period life expectancy at a given age represents the average number of years of life remaining if a group of persons at that age were to experience the mortality rates for 2007 over the course of their remaining life.

Period Life Table, 2007
 Exact
age 		Male 			
	Death
	probability  Number of
		        lives   	Life
			             expectancy 	
0 	0.007379 	100,000 75.38 	
1 	0.000494 	99,262 	74.94 	
2 	0.000317 	99,213 	73.98 
3 	0.000241 	99,182 	73.00 	
4 	0.000200 	99,158 	72.02 	
5 	0.000179 	99,138 	71.03 	
6 	0.000166 	99,120 	70.04 	0.000128 	99,275 	75.01
7 	0.000152 	99,104 	69.05 	0.000122 	99,262 	74.02
8 	0.000133 	99,089 	68.06 	0.000115 	99,250 	73.03
9 	0.000108 	99,075 	67.07 	0.000106 	99,238 	72.04
10 	0.000089 	99,065 	66.08 	0.000100 	99,228 	71.04
11 	0.000094 	99,056 	65.09 	0.000102 	99,218 	70.05
12 	0.000145 	99,047 	64.09 	0.000120 	99,208 	69.06
13 	0.000252 	99,032 	63.10 	0.000157 	99,196 	68.07
14 	0.000401 	99,007 	62.12 	0.000209 	99,180 	67.08
15 	0.000563 	98,968 	61.14 	0.000267 	99,160 	66.09
16 	0.000719 	98,912 	60.18 	0.000323 	99,133 	65.11
17 	0.000873 	98,841 	59.22 	0.000369 	99,101 	64.13
18 	0.001017 	98,754 	58.27 	0.000401 	99,064 	63.15
19 	0.001148 	98,654 	57.33 	0.000422 	99,025 	62.18
20 	0.001285 	98,541 	56.40 	0.000441 	98,983 	61.20
21 	0.001412 	98,414 	55.47 	0.000463 	98,939 	60.23
22 	0.001493 	98,275 	54.54 	0.000483 	98,894 	59.26
23 	0.001513 	98,128 	53.63 	0.000499 	98,846 	58.29
24 	0.001487 	97,980 	52.71 	0.000513 	98,796 	57.32
25 	0.001446 	97,834 	51.78 	0.000528 	98,746 	56.35
26 	0.001412 	97,693 	50.86 	0.000544 	98,694 	55.38
27 	0.001389 	97,555 	49.93 	0.000563 	98,640 	54.40
28 	0.001388 	97,419 	49.00 	0.000585 	98,584 	53.44
29 	0.001405 	97,284 	48.07 	0.000612 	98,527 	52.47
30 	0.001428 	97,147 	47.13 	0.000642 	98,466 	51.50
31 	0.001453 	97,009 	46.20 	0.000678 	98,403 	50.53
32 	0.001487 	96,868 	45.27 	0.000721 	98,336 	49.56
33 	0.001529 	96,724 	44.33 	0.000771 	98,266 	48.60
34 	0.001584 	96,576 	43.40 	0.000830 	98,190 	47.64
35 	0.001651 	96,423 	42.47 	0.000896 	98,108 	46.68
36 	0.001737 	96,264 	41.54 	0.000971 	98,020 	45.72
37 	0.001845 	96,096 	40.61 	0.001056 	97,925 	44.76
38 	0.001979 	95,919 	39.68 	0.001153 	97,822 	43.81
39 	0.002140 	95,729 	38.76 	0.001260 	97,709 	42.86
40 	0.002323 	95,525 	37.84 	0.001377 	97,586 	41.91
41 	0.002526 	95,303 	36.93 	0.001506 	97,452 	40.97
42 	0.002750 	95,062 	36.02 	0.001650 	97,305 	40.03
43 	0.002993 	94,800 	35.12 	0.001810 	97,144 	39.10
44 	0.003257 	94,517 	34.22 	0.001985 	96,968 	38.17
45 	0.003543 	94,209 	33.33 	0.002174 	96,776 	37.24
46 	0.003856 	93,875 	32.45 	0.002375 	96,566 	36.32
47 	0.004208 	93,513 	31.57 	0.002582 	96,336 	35.41
48 	0.004603 	93,120 	30.71 	0.002794 	96,087 	34.50
49 	0.005037 	92,691 	29.84 	0.003012 	95,819 	33.59
50 	0.005512 	92,224 	28.99 	0.003255 	95,530 	32.69
51 	0.006008 	91,716 	28.15 	0.003517 	95,219 	31.80
52 	0.006500 	91,165 	27.32 	0.003782 	94,885 	30.91
53 	0.006977 	90,572 	26.49 	0.004045 	94,526 	30.02
54 	0.007456 	89,940 	25.68 	0.004318 	94,143 	29.14
55 	0.007975 	89,270 	24.87 	0.004619 	93,737 	28.27
56 	0.008551 	88,558 	24.06 	0.004965 	93,304 	27.40
57 	0.009174 	87,800 	23.26 	0.005366 	92,841 	26.53
58 	0.009848 	86,995 	22.48 	0.005830 	92,342 	25.67
59 	0.010584 	86,138 	21.69 	0.006358 	91,804 	24.82
60 	0.011407 	85,227 	20.92 	0.006961 	91,220 	23.97
61 	0.012315 	84,254 	20.16 	0.007624 	90,585 	23.14
62 	0.013289 	83,217 	19.40 	0.008322 	89,895 	22.31
63 	0.014326 	82,111 	18.66 	0.009046 	89,147 	21.49
64 	0.015453 	80,935 	17.92 	0.009822 	88,340 	20.69
65 	0.016723 	79,684 	17.19 	0.010698 	87,473 	19.89
66 	0.018154 	78,351 	16.48 	0.011702 	86,537 	19.10
67 	0.019732 	76,929 	15.77 	0.012832 	85,524 	18.32
68 	0.021468 	75,411 	15.08 	0.014103 	84,427 	17.55
69 	0.023387 	73,792 	14.40 	0.015526 	83,236 	16.79
70 	0.025579 	72,066 	13.73 	0.017163 	81,944 	16.05
71 	0.028032 	70,223 	13.08 	0.018987 	80,537 	15.32
72 	0.030665 	68,254 	12.44 	0.020922 	79,008 	14.61
73 	0.033467 	66,161 	11.82 	0.022951 	77,355 	13.91
74 	0.036519 	63,947 	11.21 	0.025147 	75,580 	13.22
75 	0.040010 	61,612 	10.62 	0.027709 	73,679 	12.55
76 	0.043987 	59,147 	10.04 	0.030659 	71,638 	11.90
77 	0.048359 	56,545 	9.48 	0.033861 	69,441 	11.26
78 	0.053140 	53,811 	8.94 	0.037311 	67,090 	10.63
79 	0.058434 	50,951 	8.41 	0.041132 	64,587 	10.03
80 	0.064457 	47,974 	7.90 	0.045561 	61,930 	9.43
81 	0.071259 	44,882 	7.41 	0.050698 	59,109 	8.86
82 	0.078741 	41,683 	6.94 	0.056486 	56,112 	8.31
83 	0.086923 	38,401 	6.49 	0.062971 	52,942 	7.77
84 	0.095935 	35,063 	6.06 	0.070259 	49,608 	7.26
85 	0.105937 	31,699 	5.65 	0.078471 	46,123 	6.77
86 	0.117063 	28,341 	5.26 	0.087713 	42,504 	6.31
87 	0.129407 	25,024 	4.89 	0.098064 	38,776 	5.87
88 	0.143015 	21,785 	4.55 	0.109578 	34,973 	5.45
89 	0.157889 	18,670 	4.22 	0.122283 	31,141 	5.06
90 	0.174013 	15,722 	3.92 	0.136190 	27,333 	4.69
91 	0.191354 	12,986 	3.64 	0.151300 	23,610 	4.36
92 	0.209867 	10,501 	3.38 	0.167602 	20,038 	4.04
93 	0.229502 	8,297 	3.15 	0.185078 	16,680 	3.76
94 	0.250198 	6,393 	2.93 	0.203700 	13,593 	3.50
95 	0.270750 	4,794 	2.75 	0.222541 	10,824 	3.26
96 	0.290814 	3,496 	2.58 	0.241317 	8,415 	3.05
97 	0.310029 	2,479 	2.44 	0.259716 	6,384 	2.87
98 	0.328021 	1,711 	2.30 	0.277409 	4,726 	2.70
99 	0.344422 	1,149 	2.19 	0.294054 	3,415 	2.54
100 	0.361644 	754 	2.07 	0.311697 	2,411 	2.39
101 	0.379726 	481 	1.96 	0.330399 	1,659 	2.25
102 	0.398712 	298 	1.85 	0.350223 	1,111 	2.11
103 	0.418648 	179 	1.75 	0.371236 	722 	1.98
104 	0.439580 	104 	1.66 	0.393510 	454 	1.86
105 	0.461559 	58 	1.56 	0.417121 	275 	1.74
106 	0.484637 	31 	1.47 	0.442148 	160 	1.62
107 	0.508869 	16 	1.39 	0.468677 	90 	1.52
108 	0.534312 	8 	1.30 	0.496798 	48 	1.41
109 	0.561028 	4 	1.22 	0.526605 	24 	1.31
110 	0.589079 	2 	1.15 	0.558202 	11 	1.22
111 	0.618533 	1 	1.07 	0.591694 	5 	1.13
112 	0.649460 	0 	1.00 	0.627196 	2 	1.05
113 	0.681933 	0 	0.94 	0.664827 	1 	0.97
114 	0.716029 	0 	0.87 	0.704717 	0 	0.89
115 	0.751831 	0 	0.81 	0.747000 	0 	0.82
116 	0.789422 	0 	0.75 	0.789422 	0 	0.75
117 	0.828894 	0 	0.70 	0.828894 	0 	0.70
118 	0.870338 	0 	0.64 	0.870338 	0 	0.64
119 	0.913855 	0 	0.59 	0.913855 	0 	0.59
   Probability of dying within one year.
 Number of survivors out of 100,000 born alive.

 Note: The period life expectancy at a given age for 2007 represents the average number of years of life remaining if a group of persons at that age were to experience the mortality rates for 2007 over the course of their remaining life.

01-31-2012 , 10:26 PM

#632

jogsxyz

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 6,362

Notes on the chart on post #631

It is the social security model for life expectancy for 2007.
The data on the women was removed. This model is for
the life expectancy of a male born in 2007. The histogram
is NOT a normal distribution. Life expectancy for a male
is 75.7 years. Half the males lived to 79.2 years. 84%
lived pass 60. 15.7% made it to their 90th birthday.
There is approximately 1 chance in 125 to die within the
first year of life. Another 1 chance in 125 of not making
to one's 21th birthday.

01-31-2012 , 10:29 PM

#633

jogsxyz

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 6,362

Quote:

Originally Posted by leoslayer

at 80k euro the tax rate in france is 40% 4*8 = 32 so that would include health care.

You're saying that there is no personal exemption. You get taxed for every euro you earn starting from the first euro?

01-31-2012 , 10:48 PM

#634

leoslayer

banned

Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 3,021

no the sources i used did not say it was a marginal rate.

01-31-2012 , 11:26 PM

#635

Namath12

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jan 2011 Posts: 55,849

Quote:

Originally Posted by jogsxyz

Trial lawyers, health insurance execs, drug company execs are among those compensated to the tune of millions of dollars per year.

It is getting more and more difficult to blame high health care costs on trial lawyers. Many states have enacted tort reform over the past ten years or so (FL is one) and health care costs have continued to climb at rates that outpace inflation.

01-31-2012 , 11:29 PM

#636

YouR_DooM

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 7,829

Quote:

Originally Posted by jogsxyz

So what's your point? I can post charts too without commenting.

02-01-2012 , 12:33 AM

#637

AlexM

ignored

Join Date: Dec 2003 Posts: 20,655

Quote:

Originally Posted by jjshabado

Sorry, I misunderstood your overall post. I agree with the bolded - but I definitely don't think it's impossible to implement at the Federal level. My point being that many different countries, with widely varying demographics, have successfully implemented UHC. I find it hard to believe that the US has a total population that is above some point that it becomes unmanageable while everyone else is below this point.

No other country has the GDP per congressman that the U.S has by a giant margin, which makes our government/politicians a lot easier/more valuable to corrupt. Even Japan, the next closest first world country to us in population at 40% of what we have, has their houses at 480 & 242. A much smaller country, yet their smaller house is 2.4 times as large as ours! The more money an individual politician has the potential to have control over, the more corrupt that government will be. Absolutely everything done by the U.S. federal government, particularly what's done by the Senate and the President, has massive corporate interests neck deep involved in it.

The smaller house in the UK has 650 members, a whopping 6.5-1 ratio despite having a mere 20% of the population of the U.S. That means corporations have to spend 35 times as much on a politician for an equivalent purchase in power! It's no surprise that our government is corrupt beyond belief and can't accomplish the things that other countries can manage. It's designed that way (I don't mean intentionally). Only by decentralizing or adding a lot more congressmen (minimum 1k per house) can we fix this problem, and decentralization is a whole hell of a lot easier to manage.

Also, the closest country to us in population with a successful UHC program is, again, Japan, and their diversity compared to us is not comparable in every sense of the word.

02-01-2012 , 12:39 AM

#638

AlexM

ignored

Join Date: Dec 2003 Posts: 20,655

Quote:

Originally Posted by awval999

3. We don't have "insurance" in this country, we have "health care coverage." ie: no one knows what anything costs, the consumers are insulated from the costs, insurance should be limited to catastrophic events

02-01-2012 , 12:42 AM

#639

AlexM

ignored

Join Date: Dec 2003 Posts: 20,655

Quote:

Originally Posted by dinopoker

Except it's not happening on the state level. This is another point you miss. Lots of states have Republitard governments that are ideologically opposed to the idea of UHC, and their poorer or unluckier citizens will therefore have to go without coverage. So what sense does it make for a citizen of Mass. to have access to decent care, but a citizen of, say, Georgia to be sh*t out of luck? Aren't they both Americans?

If the people of Georgia don't want it, how is it your business to force it on them? It's not exactly hard for the people who do want it to move.

02-01-2012 , 12:44 AM

#640

AlexM

ignored

Join Date: Dec 2003 Posts: 20,655

Quote:

Originally Posted by NMcNasty

UHC isn't a theory its already been implemented. The population overwhelmingly supported a democrat to take charge of it and the bill for it was passed through the house and senate to be enacted into law. Some random cherry picked poll where slightly over half the population views it as "unfavorable" shouldn't trump our entire democratic process.

Our "entire democratic process" didn't give us UHC, it gave us InsuranceCare, a bastardized healthcare system that mostly favors corporations.

02-01-2012 , 12:58 AM

#641

Namath12

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jan 2011 Posts: 55,849

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlexM

Our "entire democratic process" didn't give us UHC, it gave us InsuranceCare, a bastardized healthcare system that mostly favors corporations.

You keep saying this but you don't say why. I do not necessarily disagree with you, I am just trying to figure out why healthcare policy favors corporations moreso than any other policy we've enacted over the past 30 years.

02-01-2012 , 01:08 AM

#642

NMcNasty

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 3,990

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlexM

Our "entire democratic process" didn't give us UHC, it gave us InsuranceCare, a bastardized healthcare system that mostly favors corporations.

Then why were all the corporations fighting tooth and nail against it? And it's nice of you to call it InsuranceCare, getting bored of "Obamaocare"?

02-01-2012 , 06:06 AM

#643

ILOVEPOKER929

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 30,281

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlexM

Our "entire democratic process" didn't give us UHC, it gave us InsuranceCare, a bastardized healthcare system that mostly favors corporations.

Quote:

Originally Posted by NMcNasty

Then why were all the corporations fighting tooth and nail against it? And it's nice of you to call it InsuranceCare, getting bored of "Obamaocare"?

AlexM is actually right on this one NMcNasty...well he's half right. We don't have UHC. InsuranceCare, Obamacare, or whatever one wants to call it IS NOT UHC. What he's wrong about is the claim that "our entire democratic process gave us InsuranceCare"--well in a sense he's actually right about that too--but a more accurate formulation would be the reason we DON'T have UHC and instead have "InsuranceCare" is precisely because our "entire democratic process" is broken. If we had a functioning democracy, you know, where public policy matches public opinion, we would've had UHC decades ago. I think this dialogue below explains well the situation we are currently in:

This video, 2:51 mark, the eve of Obama signing the health care reform bill.

Quote:

Michael Moore: The worst thing about the bill is that our health care system in this country remains in the hands of private profit making insurance companies who stand between us and the doctors. These companies are still going to be calling the shots. They are still going to...this system will still be structured to pose the question every single day, in every single waiting room, every single hospital room: "what's in it for me?," say the health insurance companies. "Where's the profit?" or "How can we make sure that we don't lose too much money off this poor sick person?"

From the 5:24 mark:

Quote:

Wolf Blitzer: He [Obama] even walked away from what a lot of liberals and progressives would have liked, that so called public option, that's not included in this new law.

Michael Moore: That's correct, so for everybody's who's watching please understand this. We do not have universal health care in this country tonight as a result of this bill. In fact, we do not have any real overhaul of our health care system. We had a profit making system based on capitalist principles before this bill was passed and we have the same thing now after that bill is passed.

This video, from the 1:52 mark:

Quote:

Wolf Blitzer: Does this law do anything to cut medical expenses?

Michael Moore: Well, no, actually for the individual, your premiums are still gonna go up. The cost of all this is going to continue to go up, for the individual, for the company, the small business, whoever's having to buy insurance, because the health insurance companies are still setting the rates. And the weak regulation that's in this bill isn't really going to control them. So until we take them out of the equation...and let me tell you something, they're not going to be threatened at all by this. I love the punishment factor in this, you know, the one part of this bill where if an insurance company does deny you medical care because you have a pre-existing condition, their fine is $100 a day, per person. That's it. So of course they're gonna weigh--"gee should I pay for this $100,000 operation this guy needs? or take the fine of a $100 a day?" What do you think they're gonna do? They're gonna take the fine. These are thieves and jackals. They have no business being around people who are ill and who need help. The question should never be asked, "How much are we gonna make of this?" or "How much are we gonna save?"

Wolf Blitzer: But isn't that the nature of American capitalism?

Michael Moore: Yes it is Wolf (laughs). That's why this economic system we have is broke, it's bankrupt, it's corrupt, it's unfair, it's not just, and we need a more democratic economic system where the people have more of a say in what's going on and the richest 1% don't control the whole thing.

02-01-2012 , 10:16 AM

#644

jogsxyz

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 6,362

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ashington

How far did Florida go? Loser pays? What's the max on damages? No punitive damages? I favor no malpractice suits. A medical review board for removing incompetent doctors. Being incompetent is not criminal unless they are practicing without a license.
To really lower the cost there needs to be a review of IP protection for providers. They don't all need to be billionaires.

02-01-2012 , 10:46 AM

#645

Namath12

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jan 2011 Posts: 55,849

Quote:

Originally Posted by jogsxyz

How far did Florida go? Loser pays? What's the max on damages? No punitive damages?

Florida capped non-monetary damage awards at $250k iirc. We were promised that this would lead to more and better health care for everyone, less "defensive medicine" would lead to lower costs, etc. It didn't happen. Costs actually began to increase faster in the years after the law was enacted. I cannot say for certain that the acceleration in costs was a result of the legislation, but it is obvious that the legislation did not deliver on its promises...it was basically a handout to insurance companies at the expense of people who were injured and who had already proven their cases.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jogsxyz

I favor no malpractice suits.

So doctors who injure or kill patients should enjoy immunity? Really?

Quote:

Originally Posted by jogsxyz

A medical review board for removing incompetent doctors.

We already have that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jogsxyz

Being incompetent is not criminal unless they are practicing without a license.

There is (sometimes) an ocean's worth of difference between "incompetence" and "negligence." Incompetence alone generally won't win jury awards. Negligence that results in death or injury will.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jogsxyz

To really lower the cost there needs to be a review of IP protection for providers. They don't all need to be billionaires.

I agree with this.

02-01-2012 , 11:22 AM

#646

jogsxyz

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 6,362

Quote:

Originally Posted by YouR_DooM

So what's your point? I can post charts too without commenting.

Individual lifespans is not a tight cluster. Everyone isn't dying within 3-5 years of life expectancy. When one country's life expectancy is one year longer than another country's, we shouldn't attach too much significance to that number. It's just a rounding error.

02-01-2012 , 11:49 AM

#647

jogsxyz

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 6,362

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ashington

So doctors who injure or kill patients should enjoy immunity? Really?

Do you think all those doctors were intentional causing harm?

02-01-2012 , 12:07 PM

#648

Namath12

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jan 2011 Posts: 55,849

Quote:

Originally Posted by jogsxyz

Do you think all those doctors were intentional causing harm?

You seem to be putting all your argumentative weight on intent, but intent isn't the only factor to consider. If we're only going to consider intent then we open the door for a whole lot of bad things to happen as a result of bad actors with good intentions. Should a drunk driver face no penalties if he runs down and kills a pedestrian on the way home from the bar? I mean, he didn't intend to kill the guy, we should just chalk it up to bad luck and let him go, right?

02-01-2012 , 12:12 PM

#649

Benholio

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jun 2004 Posts: 8,292

Quote:

Originally Posted by jogsxyz

No, it isn't a rounding error. Deviation does not mean that. A 'rounding error' or a sampling error would be something that happened because they surveyed say, 10% of the population and then extrapolated the results. It has nothing to do with how the data points are distributed.

02-01-2012 , 01:16 PM

#650

leoslayer

banned

Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 3,021

for all the malpractice folks. you guys do understand that doctors are not perfect right? the human body is the most complex machine on the planet with tons of variables. there is not a procedure out there that is fool proof. you can die any time you go under general anesthesia.

Page 26 of 49

First

6 16 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 36 46

Last

...

Page 26 of 49

First

6 16 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 36 46

Last