Destroying Healthcare in America

[Bujin]

Hmm..let me try to summarize: survey data shows that Germany, France and Sweden all have higher satisfaction rates than the US. All have public / private combos. The counter-argument is that people in those countries "don't know any better". In response, data has been posted that early mortality rates (a common indicator of health care) is more positive in those countries than in the US.

Is there any actual data that shows how our health care system provides a higher level of care than other countries? Anything that goes beyond the usual "socialism, let the market decide" ideological arguments?

[Micael]

Originally Posted by daThomas

Rank Country or territory Infant mortality rate(deaths/1,000 live births) Under-five mortality rate (deaths/1,000 live births)
List by the United Nations Population Division
163 United States 6.3 7.8
164 New Caledonia 6.1 8.7
165 Cyprus 5.9 6.9
166 Brunei 5.5 6.7
167 Channel Islands ( Jersey and Guernsey) 5.2 6.2
168 Cuba 5.1 6.5
169 New Zealand 5.0 6.4
170 Portugal 5.0 6.6
171 Italy 5.0 6.1
172 Ireland 4.9 6.2
173 Canada 4.8 5.9
174 United Kingdom 4.8 6.0
175 Slovenia 4.8 6.4
176 Israel 4.7 5.7
177 Netherlands 4.7 5.9
178 Luxembourg 4.5 6.6
179 Australia 4.4 5.6
180 Austria 4.4 5.4
181 Denmark 4.4 5.8
182 Germany 4.3 5.4
183 Spain 4.2 5.3
184 France 4.2 5.2
185 Belgium 4.2 5.3
186 South Korea 4.1 4.8
187 Switzerland 4.1 5.1
188 Czech Republic 3.8 4.8
189 Finland 3.7 4.7
190 Hong Kong 3.7 4.7
191 Norway 3.3 4.4
192 Sweden 3.2 4.0
193 Japan 3.2 4.2
194 Singapore 3.0 4.1
195 Iceland 2.9 3.9


List by the CIA World Factbook
(all 2009 est.)
Rank Country or territory Infant mortality rate(deaths/1,000 live births)
178 United States 6.26
179 Guam 6.05
180 Cuba 5.82
181 European Union 5.72
182 Italy 5.51
183 Isle of Man 5.37
184 Taiwan 5.35
185 San Marino 5.34
186 Greece 5.16
187 Ireland 5.05
188 Canada 5.04
189 Wallis and Futuna 5.02
190 Monaco 5.00
191 New Zealand 4.92
192 United Kingdom 4.85
193 Gibraltar 4.83
194 Portugal 4.78
195 Australia 4.75
196 Jersey 4.73
197 Netherlands 4.73
198 Luxembourg 4.56
199 Guernsey 4.47
200 Belgium 4.44
201 Austria 4.42
202 Denmark 4.34
203 South Korea 4.26
204 Liechtenstein 4.25
205 Slovenia 4.25
206 Israel 4.22
207 Spain 4.21
208 Switzerland 4.18
209 Germany 3.99
210 Czech Republic 3.79
211 Andorra 3.76
212 Malta 3.75
213 Norway 3.58
214 Anguilla 3.52
215 Finland 3.47
216 France 3.33
217 Iceland 3.23
218 Macau 3.22
219 Hong Kong 2.92
220 Japan 2.79
221 Sweden 2.75
222 Bermuda 2.46
223 Singapore 2.31


The numbers don't lie.

Nice numbers. I didn't call them liars. And this isn't, nor supports, what you asserted. Thanks for trying though.

[Micael]

Originally Posted by Bujin

Hmm..let me try to summarize: survey data shows that Germany, France and Sweden all have higher satisfaction rates than the US. All have public / private combos. The counter-argument is that people in those countries "don't know any better". In response, data has been posted that early mortality rates (a common indicator of health care) is more positive in those countries than in the US.

Is there any actual data that shows how our health care system provides a higher level of care than other countries? Anything that goes beyond the usual "socialism, let the market decide" ideological arguments?

Your claim doesn't show they have a higher level of care, but that they have higher satisfaction rates. Two totally different things. Why must you continue illustrating your Apples using Oranges?

[Micael]

Originally Posted by daThomas

A nurse is a laborer. Not an investor.

They could be both, but we weren't speaking about investors. Follow along please.

[daThomas]

Originally Posted by Micael

They could be both, but we weren't speaking about investors. Follow along please.

Please tone down the snark. We were discussing profits. Investors profit.

[Micael]

Originally Posted by daThomas

If what you say is true, would the U.S. population not lead the World in all measures of Healthcare efficacy?

So your argument is that profitability and focusing on the individual drives efficacy down?

[daThomas]

Originally Posted by Micael

Nice numbers. I didn't call them liars. And this isn't, nor supports, what you asserted. Thanks for trying though.

No one suggested you were lying. "Numbers don't lie" is a well known expression.

Please tell me what metrics you consider a good measure of a county's healthcare system, in addition to infant mortality rate (an internationally accepted standard) and please feel free to note any of those.

[daThomas]

Originally Posted by Micael

So your argument is that profitability and focusing on the individual drives efficacy down?

You're really not making sense.

[Micael]

Originally Posted by daThomas

Please tone down the snark. We were discussing profits. Investors profit.

"We" were not. The discussion went like this:

Originally Posted by Micael

It's quite possible, believe me, that the people who work in healthcare in the US are in it to improve and help their fellow man. It's even possible to help people, and make money doing it. Where do you people get this need to assign guilt to every paycheck you see?

Originally Posted by ryleyinstl

Possible yes, likely no. The system just isn't set up that way nor was it founded/built on those principles.

Originally Posted by Micael

damn profiteers in healthcare. I hate em! Next time you see a nurse, just slap her silly!

Then came comment:

Originally Posted by daThomas

A nurse is a laborer. Not an investor.

Other than the fact that I mentioned a nurse is a silly retort, what relevance was that to the discussion between ryleyinstl and myself? Hence my comment "Follow along please." Wow. So snarky.

[Bujin]

Originally Posted by Micael

Your claim doesn't show they have a higher level of care, but that they have higher satisfaction rates. Two totally different things. Why must you continue illustrating your Apples using Oranges?

I referred to higher satisfaction rates, to which the response was that citizens of those countries "didn't know any better". In an attempt to demonstrate that the satisfaction levels have a correlation to level of care, and not ignorance of entire countries of citizens, I referred to the infant mortality rate as a measure of level of care....purely an apples to apples comparison.

I notice that you show absolutely no data to support your assertion that the higher profits lead to our country having more innovation and thus a higher level of care than these countries. Do you have any data, or are you just expressing an ideological opinion?

[Micael]

Originally Posted by daThomas

You're really not making sense.

Funny. Others have seemed to either like what I've had to say, or countered just fine. Where did I lose you?

[Micael]

Originally Posted by Bujin

I referred to higher satisfaction rates, to which the response was that citizens of those countries "didn't know any better". I responded by referring to the infant mortality rate as a measure of level of care....purely an apples to apples comparison.

If you say so. But isn't it a bit of a stretch to say that we need to completely overhaul the healthcare system for 100s of millions of people because we're lagging behind Guam (which is 30 miles wide and 12 miles long) by less than a quarter of a kid per 1000? BTW, Guam is a US territory and most of the population there are using our healthcare system. I lived there for a while and think they should be a state, don't you!?

[Bujin]

Originally Posted by Micael

Funny. Others have seemed to either like what I've had to say, or countered just fine. Where did I lose you?

And yet 73% of Americans disagree with your central assertion and support a public option.

[Toby]

Originally Posted by daThomas

Please tone down the snark. We were discussing profits. Investors profit.

Seems to me there's plenty of snark to go around. Who are the investors?

[Bujin]

Originally Posted by Micael

If you say so. But isn't it a bit of a stretch to say that we need to completely overhaul the healthcare system for 100s of millions of people because we're lagging behind Guam (which is 30 miles wide and 12 miles long) by less than a quarter of a kid per 1000? BTW, Guam is a US territory and most of the population there are using our healthcare system. I lived there for a while and think they should be a state, don't you!?

We don't need to overhaul just because we're lagging behind Guam....we're also lagging behind Cuba, South Korea, and dozens of other countries that don't spend nearly what we do. And because our infant mortality rate is double that of Japan and Sweden. And because we have millions who don't have adequate health care (who didn't all "choose to be uninsured"). And because over half of home foreclosures are due to medical bills.

I think your Guam comment oversimplifies the issue a bit, and seems a distraction from the fact that you have no data to support why our system is better than those countries with public options.

We need to overhaul because our system is broken. and throwing away a public option based merely on ideological statements regarding how much better our system is, although the data clearly supports the idea that such options have been successfully implemented, is simply a poor decision-making model.

[Micael]

Originally Posted by Bujin

And yet 73% of Americans disagree with your central assertion and support a public option.

Ok, if you're going to quote stats please give reference.

[daThomas]

Originally Posted by Micael

Other than the fact that I mentioned a nurse is a silly retort, what relevance was that to the discussion between ryleyinstl and myself? Hence my comment "Follow along please." Wow. So snarky.

The statement, "damn profiteers in healthcare. I hate em! Next time you see a nurse, just slap her silly!" implies that the nurse is a profiteer and should be slapped.

[daThomas]

Originally Posted by Micael

Funny. Others have seemed to either like what I've had to say, or countered just fine. Where did I lose you?

When you refuse to name any metrics for measuring the efficacy of a nations healthcare for it's populous.

[Toby]

Originally Posted by Bujin

[...] I referred to the infant mortality rate as a measure of level of care....purely an apples to apples comparison. [...]

Out of curiosity, how are those numbers compiled?

[Micael]

Originally Posted by daThomas

When you refuse to name any metrics for measuring the efficacy of a nations healthcare for it's populous.

I haven't refused, I've stated I didn't want to get in a statistics shooting match. You can make numbers say just about anything you want. Numbers can't lie, but those presenting them can misconstrue their meaning. Kind of like the whole global warming lie, but I digress...

Showing we have room to improve (from 6.xx to 2.xx per 1000) on infant mortality does not, to me, indicate a failure of our system over others.