Total Posts:94|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Health Care is Far Worse in the UK

jimtimmy
Posts: 3,953
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2012 7:53:25 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
The NHS, or British National Health Service, has been an utter failure. It is a totally socialized system with no price system or markets at all. In a word, it is awful.

There are extremely long waits, medical care has very low quality, medical technology is hard to come by, and virtually no medical inovation comes from the UK nowadays.

Why should this be surprising?

This is how state run systems worked.

Want evidence?

Well, look at cancer survival rates. For men and women in the USA, the five year cancer survival rates are 66% and 63%, respectively, compared to 45% and 53% for men and women in the UK, according to a landmark study in Lancet Oncology.

How about medical technology?

Here the UK is quite lacking as well. For every million people in the USA, there are 26.7 MRIs, 34 CT Scanners, 40.2 Mammographs, and 11.3 Radiation Therapy Technology units. For every million people in the UK, there are only 5.7 MRIs, 7.7 CT Scanners, 9 Mammographs, and 5.2 Radiation Therapy Technology units. That is a very dramatic difference in medical technology between the two nations.

What about wait times?

Again, not very good in the UK. This is especially true for specialists and elective surgery. 60% of people in the UK wait longer than 4 weeks to see a specialist compared to 23% of people in the USA. For elective surgery, 41% of people in the UK wait 4 months or more to get elective surgery. In the USA, only 8% of people wait that long. As far as diagnostic tests go, 57% of UK doctors say patients have excessive wait times for diagnostic tests. In the USA, only 9% of doctors say patients have excessive waits for diagnostic tests.

How about costs?

Yes, the USA system is more expensive. In the USA, health care spending is about 17.4% of GDP compared to only 9.8% of GDP in the UK. However, health care spending is increasing faster in the UK than in the USA. From 1999 to 2009, health care spending as a percent of GDP has increased by 28% in the USA. During the same period in the UK, health care spending's percentage of GDP increased by a whopping 42%.

To recap, the UK health care system has far lower quality of care than the USA. It has far less medical technology available than does the USA. It also has much longer wait times than the USA. And, while the USA does have a more expensive system, the UK's system's costs are rising faster than the costs of the USA system.

Sources:

http://mjperry.blogspot.com...

http://www.oecd.org...

http://www.commonwealthfund.org...
President of DDO
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2012 7:56:31 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
use this, I think it is the best site on HC:

http://www.biggovhealth.org...
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
jimtimmy
Posts: 3,953
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2012 7:59:02 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/30/2012 7:56:31 PM, 16kadams wrote:
use this, I think it is the best site on HC:

http://www.biggovhealth.org...

That is pretty useful. I didn't even know that existed.
President of DDO
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2012 8:00:16 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/30/2012 7:59:02 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 3/30/2012 7:56:31 PM, 16kadams wrote:
use this, I think it is the best site on HC:

http://www.biggovhealth.org...


That is pretty useful. I didn't even know that existed.

XD
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2012 8:04:18 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/30/2012 7:53:25 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
The NHS, or British National Health Service, has been an utter failure. It is a totally socialized system with no price system or markets at all. In a word, it is awful.

There are extremely long waits, medical care has very low quality, medical technology is hard to come by, and virtually no medical inovation comes from the UK nowadays.

Why should this be surprising?

This is how state run systems worked.

Want evidence?

Well, look at cancer survival rates. For men and women in the USA, the five year cancer survival rates are 66% and 63%, respectively, compared to 45% and 53% for men and women in the UK, according to a landmark study in Lancet Oncology.

How about medical technology?

Here the UK is quite lacking as well. For every million people in the USA, there are 26.7 MRIs, 34 CT Scanners, 40.2 Mammographs, and 11.3 Radiation Therapy Technology units. For every million people in the UK, there are only 5.7 MRIs, 7.7 CT Scanners, 9 Mammographs, and 5.2 Radiation Therapy Technology units. That is a very dramatic difference in medical technology between the two nations.

What about wait times?

Again, not very good in the UK. This is especially true for specialists and elective surgery. 60% of people in the UK wait longer than 4 weeks to see a specialist compared to 23% of people in the USA. For elective surgery, 41% of people in the UK wait 4 months or more to get elective surgery. In the USA, only 8% of people wait that long. As far as diagnostic tests go, 57% of UK doctors say patients have excessive wait times for diagnostic tests. In the USA, only 9% of doctors say patients have excessive waits for diagnostic tests.


How about costs?

Yes, the USA system is more expensive. In the USA, health care spending is about 17.4% of GDP compared to only 9.8% of GDP in the UK. However, health care spending is increasing faster in the UK than in the USA. From 1999 to 2009, health care spending as a percent of GDP has increased by 28% in the USA. During the same period in the UK, health care spending's percentage of GDP increased by a whopping 42%.


To recap, the UK health care system has far lower quality of care than the USA. It has far less medical technology available than does the USA. It also has much longer wait times than the USA. And, while the USA does have a more expensive system, the UK's system's costs are rising faster than the costs of the USA system.


also note a large portion of people are already on goverment HC in the US.


Sources:

http://mjperry.blogspot.com...

http://www.oecd.org...

http://www.commonwealthfund.org...
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
Contra
Posts: 3,941
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2012 8:05:34 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I don't care for Socialized Medicine.
"The solution [for Republicans] is to admit that Bush was a bad president, stop this racist homophobic stuff, stop trying to give most of the tax cuts to the rich, propose a real alternative to Obamacare that actually works, and propose smart free market solutions to our economic problems." - Distraff

"Americans are better off in a dynamic, free-enterprise-based economy that fosters economic growth, opportunity and upward mobility." - Paul Ryan
jimtimmy
Posts: 3,953
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2012 8:06:19 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/30/2012 8:04:18 PM, 16kadams wrote:
At 3/30/2012 7:53:25 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
The NHS, or British National Health Service, has been an utter failure. It is a totally socialized system with no price system or markets at all. In a word, it is awful.

There are extremely long waits, medical care has very low quality, medical technology is hard to come by, and virtually no medical inovation comes from the UK nowadays.

Why should this be surprising?

This is how state run systems worked.

Want evidence?

Well, look at cancer survival rates. For men and women in the USA, the five year cancer survival rates are 66% and 63%, respectively, compared to 45% and 53% for men and women in the UK, according to a landmark study in Lancet Oncology.

How about medical technology?

Here the UK is quite lacking as well. For every million people in the USA, there are 26.7 MRIs, 34 CT Scanners, 40.2 Mammographs, and 11.3 Radiation Therapy Technology units. For every million people in the UK, there are only 5.7 MRIs, 7.7 CT Scanners, 9 Mammographs, and 5.2 Radiation Therapy Technology units. That is a very dramatic difference in medical technology between the two nations.

What about wait times?

Again, not very good in the UK. This is especially true for specialists and elective surgery. 60% of people in the UK wait longer than 4 weeks to see a specialist compared to 23% of people in the USA. For elective surgery, 41% of people in the UK wait 4 months or more to get elective surgery. In the USA, only 8% of people wait that long. As far as diagnostic tests go, 57% of UK doctors say patients have excessive wait times for diagnostic tests. In the USA, only 9% of doctors say patients have excessive waits for diagnostic tests.


How about costs?

Yes, the USA system is more expensive. In the USA, health care spending is about 17.4% of GDP compared to only 9.8% of GDP in the UK. However, health care spending is increasing faster in the UK than in the USA. From 1999 to 2009, health care spending as a percent of GDP has increased by 28% in the USA. During the same period in the UK, health care spending's percentage of GDP increased by a whopping 42%.


To recap, the UK health care system has far lower quality of care than the USA. It has far less medical technology available than does the USA. It also has much longer wait times than the USA. And, while the USA does have a more expensive system, the UK's system's costs are rising faster than the costs of the USA system.


also note a large portion of people are already on goverment HC in the US.

Excellent point. People with private coverage in the USA have the best care of all.
President of DDO
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2012 8:07:43 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Listening to Economic Update by Richard Wolff on the radio, he says that many of the European countries with so-called "socialist style governments" have individual mandates in their economic plan. He referenced...it was either Switzerland or Sweden and also Italy, and argued that for them, this form of health care is common sense. Here in the United States we spend MUCH more than they do in Europe yet have lesser quality of healthcare. The average life expectancy in Italy is 82, whereas in the United States it's around 77 or so.

If you really want to attack Europe....The evidence and models they present in support of Obamacare will crush you.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
jimtimmy
Posts: 3,953
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2012 8:08:35 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/30/2012 8:07:43 PM, 000ike wrote:
Listening to Economic Update by Richard Wolff on the radio, he says that many of the European countries with so-called "socialist style governments" have individual mandates in their economic plan. He referenced...it was either Switzerland or Sweden and also Italy, and argued that for them, this form of health care is common sense. Here in the United States we spend MUCH more than they do in Europe yet have lesser quality of healthcare. The average life expectancy in Italy is 82, whereas in the United States it's around 77 or so.

If you really want to attack Europe....The evidence and models they present in support of Obamacare will crush you.

So, the UK has better care than the US. LOL.
President of DDO
Contra
Posts: 3,941
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2012 8:08:59 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/30/2012 8:06:19 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 3/30/2012 8:04:18 PM, 16kadams wrote:
At 3/30/2012 7:53:25 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
The NHS, or British National Health Service, has been an utter failure. It is a totally socialized system with no price system or markets at all. In a word, it is awful.

There are extremely long waits, medical care has very low quality, medical technology is hard to come by, and virtually no medical inovation comes from the UK nowadays.

Why should this be surprising?

This is how state run systems worked.

Want evidence?

Well, look at cancer survival rates. For men and women in the USA, the five year cancer survival rates are 66% and 63%, respectively, compared to 45% and 53% for men and women in the UK, according to a landmark study in Lancet Oncology.

How about medical technology?

Here the UK is quite lacking as well. For every million people in the USA, there are 26.7 MRIs, 34 CT Scanners, 40.2 Mammographs, and 11.3 Radiation Therapy Technology units. For every million people in the UK, there are only 5.7 MRIs, 7.7 CT Scanners, 9 Mammographs, and 5.2 Radiation Therapy Technology units. That is a very dramatic difference in medical technology between the two nations.

What about wait times?

Again, not very good in the UK. This is especially true for specialists and elective surgery. 60% of people in the UK wait longer than 4 weeks to see a specialist compared to 23% of people in the USA. For elective surgery, 41% of people in the UK wait 4 months or more to get elective surgery. In the USA, only 8% of people wait that long. As far as diagnostic tests go, 57% of UK doctors say patients have excessive wait times for diagnostic tests. In the USA, only 9% of doctors say patients have excessive waits for diagnostic tests.


How about costs?

Yes, the USA system is more expensive. In the USA, health care spending is about 17.4% of GDP compared to only 9.8% of GDP in the UK. However, health care spending is increasing faster in the UK than in the USA. From 1999 to 2009, health care spending as a percent of GDP has increased by 28% in the USA. During the same period in the UK, health care spending's percentage of GDP increased by a whopping 42%.


To recap, the UK health care system has far lower quality of care than the USA. It has far less medical technology available than does the USA. It also has much longer wait times than the USA. And, while the USA does have a more expensive system, the UK's system's costs are rising faster than the costs of the USA system.


also note a large portion of people are already on goverment HC in the US.


Excellent point. People with private coverage in the USA have the best care of all.

Not true. Proof please?
"The solution [for Republicans] is to admit that Bush was a bad president, stop this racist homophobic stuff, stop trying to give most of the tax cuts to the rich, propose a real alternative to Obamacare that actually works, and propose smart free market solutions to our economic problems." - Distraff

"Americans are better off in a dynamic, free-enterprise-based economy that fosters economic growth, opportunity and upward mobility." - Paul Ryan
jimtimmy
Posts: 3,953
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2012 8:10:18 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/30/2012 8:08:59 PM, Contra wrote:
At 3/30/2012 8:06:19 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 3/30/2012 8:04:18 PM, 16kadams wrote:
At 3/30/2012 7:53:25 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
The NHS, or British National Health Service, has been an utter failure. It is a totally socialized system with no price system or markets at all. In a word, it is awful.

There are extremely long waits, medical care has very low quality, medical technology is hard to come by, and virtually no medical inovation comes from the UK nowadays.

Why should this be surprising?

This is how state run systems worked.

Want evidence?

Well, look at cancer survival rates. For men and women in the USA, the five year cancer survival rates are 66% and 63%, respectively, compared to 45% and 53% for men and women in the UK, according to a landmark study in Lancet Oncology.

How about medical technology?

Here the UK is quite lacking as well. For every million people in the USA, there are 26.7 MRIs, 34 CT Scanners, 40.2 Mammographs, and 11.3 Radiation Therapy Technology units. For every million people in the UK, there are only 5.7 MRIs, 7.7 CT Scanners, 9 Mammographs, and 5.2 Radiation Therapy Technology units. That is a very dramatic difference in medical technology between the two nations.

What about wait times?

Again, not very good in the UK. This is especially true for specialists and elective surgery. 60% of people in the UK wait longer than 4 weeks to see a specialist compared to 23% of people in the USA. For elective surgery, 41% of people in the UK wait 4 months or more to get elective surgery. In the USA, only 8% of people wait that long. As far as diagnostic tests go, 57% of UK doctors say patients have excessive wait times for diagnostic tests. In the USA, only 9% of doctors say patients have excessive waits for diagnostic tests.


How about costs?

Yes, the USA system is more expensive. In the USA, health care spending is about 17.4% of GDP compared to only 9.8% of GDP in the UK. However, health care spending is increasing faster in the UK than in the USA. From 1999 to 2009, health care spending as a percent of GDP has increased by 28% in the USA. During the same period in the UK, health care spending's percentage of GDP increased by a whopping 42%.


To recap, the UK health care system has far lower quality of care than the USA. It has far less medical technology available than does the USA. It also has much longer wait times than the USA. And, while the USA does have a more expensive system, the UK's system's costs are rising faster than the costs of the USA system.


also note a large portion of people are already on goverment HC in the US.


Excellent point. People with private coverage in the USA have the best care of all.

Not true. Proof please?

Do you think people on Medicaid and SCHIP get better care than people with private coverage?
President of DDO
Contra
Posts: 3,941
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2012 8:13:25 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/30/2012 8:10:18 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 3/30/2012 8:08:59 PM, Contra wrote:
At 3/30/2012 8:06:19 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 3/30/2012 8:04:18 PM, 16kadams wrote:
At 3/30/2012 7:53:25 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
The NHS, or British National Health Service, has been an utter failure. It is a totally socialized system with no price system or markets at all. In a word, it is awful.

There are extremely long waits, medical care has very low quality, medical technology is hard to come by, and virtually no medical inovation comes from the UK nowadays.

Why should this be surprising?

This is how state run systems worked.

Want evidence?

Well, look at cancer survival rates. For men and women in the USA, the five year cancer survival rates are 66% and 63%, respectively, compared to 45% and 53% for men and women in the UK, according to a landmark study in Lancet Oncology.

How about medical technology?

Here the UK is quite lacking as well. For every million people in the USA, there are 26.7 MRIs, 34 CT Scanners, 40.2 Mammographs, and 11.3 Radiation Therapy Technology units. For every million people in the UK, there are only 5.7 MRIs, 7.7 CT Scanners, 9 Mammographs, and 5.2 Radiation Therapy Technology units. That is a very dramatic difference in medical technology between the two nations.

What about wait times?

Again, not very good in the UK. This is especially true for specialists and elective surgery. 60% of people in the UK wait longer than 4 weeks to see a specialist compared to 23% of people in the USA. For elective surgery, 41% of people in the UK wait 4 months or more to get elective surgery. In the USA, only 8% of people wait that long. As far as diagnostic tests go, 57% of UK doctors say patients have excessive wait times for diagnostic tests. In the USA, only 9% of doctors say patients have excessive waits for diagnostic tests.


How about costs?

Yes, the USA system is more expensive. In the USA, health care spending is about 17.4% of GDP compared to only 9.8% of GDP in the UK. However, health care spending is increasing faster in the UK than in the USA. From 1999 to 2009, health care spending as a percent of GDP has increased by 28% in the USA. During the same period in the UK, health care spending's percentage of GDP increased by a whopping 42%.


To recap, the UK health care system has far lower quality of care than the USA. It has far less medical technology available than does the USA. It also has much longer wait times than the USA. And, while the USA does have a more expensive system, the UK's system's costs are rising faster than the costs of the USA system.


also note a large portion of people are already on goverment HC in the US.


Excellent point. People with private coverage in the USA have the best care of all.

Not true. Proof please?


Do you think people on Medicaid and SCHIP get better care than people with private coverage?

No, they in often cases DO NOT GET BETTER CARE. Placing the blame on "Oh, it's just a government program" doesn't mean that gov't healthcare sucks. On the contrary, Medicare is successful. The reason why Medicaid and SCHIP suck in comparison is because the rich don't care about these programs. Thus, political reform is ranked low. The low reimbursement rates are causing doctors to rarely give care to Medicaid patients. In my opinion, both programs should be destroyed, and all Americans should be covered by a well designed, Single-Payer system.
"The solution [for Republicans] is to admit that Bush was a bad president, stop this racist homophobic stuff, stop trying to give most of the tax cuts to the rich, propose a real alternative to Obamacare that actually works, and propose smart free market solutions to our economic problems." - Distraff

"Americans are better off in a dynamic, free-enterprise-based economy that fosters economic growth, opportunity and upward mobility." - Paul Ryan
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2012 8:20:27 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
this form of health care is common sense. Here in the United States we spend MUCH more than they do in Europe yet have lesser quality of healthcare. The average life expectancy in Italy is 82, whereas in the United States it's around 77 or so.:

I've never understood life expectancy to be useful in determining the efficacy of a health care system. It could very easily be argued that Americans live much unhealthier lives with less exercise and poorer diets, on average, than Italians. They also probably sleep more and work less, which adding all these factors up, means being in better overall health than Americans.
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)
jimtimmy
Posts: 3,953
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2012 8:21:33 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/30/2012 8:13:25 PM, Contra wrote:
At 3/30/2012 8:10:18 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 3/30/2012 8:08:59 PM, Contra wrote:
At 3/30/2012 8:06:19 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 3/30/2012 8:04:18 PM, 16kadams wrote:
At 3/30/2012 7:53:25 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
The NHS, or British National Health Service, has been an utter failure. It is a totally socialized system with no price system or markets at all. In a word, it is awful.

There are extremely long waits, medical care has very low quality, medical technology is hard to come by, and virtually no medical inovation comes from the UK nowadays.

Why should this be surprising?

This is how state run systems worked.

Want evidence?

Well, look at cancer survival rates. For men and women in the USA, the five year cancer survival rates are 66% and 63%, respectively, compared to 45% and 53% for men and women in the UK, according to a landmark study in Lancet Oncology.

How about medical technology?

Here the UK is quite lacking as well. For every million people in the USA, there are 26.7 MRIs, 34 CT Scanners, 40.2 Mammographs, and 11.3 Radiation Therapy Technology units. For every million people in the UK, there are only 5.7 MRIs, 7.7 CT Scanners, 9 Mammographs, and 5.2 Radiation Therapy Technology units. That is a very dramatic difference in medical technology between the two nations.

What about wait times?

Again, not very good in the UK. This is especially true for specialists and elective surgery. 60% of people in the UK wait longer than 4 weeks to see a specialist compared to 23% of people in the USA. For elective surgery, 41% of people in the UK wait 4 months or more to get elective surgery. In the USA, only 8% of people wait that long. As far as diagnostic tests go, 57% of UK doctors say patients have excessive wait times for diagnostic tests. In the USA, only 9% of doctors say patients have excessive waits for diagnostic tests.


How about costs?

Yes, the USA system is more expensive. In the USA, health care spending is about 17.4% of GDP compared to only 9.8% of GDP in the UK. However, health care spending is increasing faster in the UK than in the USA. From 1999 to 2009, health care spending as a percent of GDP has increased by 28% in the USA. During the same period in the UK, health care spending's percentage of GDP increased by a whopping 42%.


To recap, the UK health care system has far lower quality of care than the USA. It has far less medical technology available than does the USA. It also has much longer wait times than the USA. And, while the USA does have a more expensive system, the UK's system's costs are rising faster than the costs of the USA system.


also note a large portion of people are already on goverment HC in the US.


Excellent point. People with private coverage in the USA have the best care of all.

Not true. Proof please?


Do you think people on Medicaid and SCHIP get better care than people with private coverage?

No, they in often cases DO NOT GET BETTER CARE. Placing the blame on "Oh, it's just a government program" doesn't mean that gov't healthcare sucks. On the contrary, Medicare is successful. The reason why Medicaid and SCHIP suck in comparison is because the rich don't care about these programs. Thus, political reform is ranked low. The low reimbursement rates are causing doctors to rarely give care to Medicaid patients. In my opinion, both programs should be destroyed, and all Americans should be covered by a well designed, Single-Payer system.

Um, yes, people with private coverage do get the best care. They have far more access to care and they get better quality.

People on Medicare have worse surgical outcomes than people with private coverage:

uva-study-surgical-patients-medicaid-are-13-more-likely-die-those-without-

People on Medicare also have worse access to care than people with private insurance:

http://www.forbes.com...

Although, Medicaid is far worse than Medicare.
President of DDO
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2012 8:29:24 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
No, they in often cases DO NOT GET BETTER CARE. Placing the blame on "Oh, it's just a government program" doesn't mean that gov't healthcare sucks. On the contrary, Medicare is successful. The reason why Medicaid and SCHIP suck in comparison is because the rich don't care about these programs. Thus, political reform is ranked low. The low reimbursement rates are causing doctors to rarely give care to Medicaid patients. In my opinion, both programs should be destroyed, and all Americans should be covered by a well designed, Single-Payer system.

If Medicare is so awesome, why do most doctors refuse to accept it? It is functionally useless. It might get you by on a trip to the ER, but as far as any kind of comprehensive care, it is an abysmal failure that dumps money down the drain. What's worse, it's unsustainable.

We'll be Greece in the next 5-10 years if we continue down this path to absolute ruin.
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)
Contra
Posts: 3,941
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2012 9:06:12 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/30/2012 8:21:33 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 3/30/2012 8:13:25 PM, Contra wrote:
At 3/30/2012 8:10:18 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 3/30/2012 8:08:59 PM, Contra wrote:
At 3/30/2012 8:06:19 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 3/30/2012 8:04:18 PM, 16kadams wrote:
At 3/30/2012 7:53:25 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
The NHS, or British National Health Service, has been an utter failure. It is a totally socialized system with no price system or markets at all. In a word, it is awful.

There are extremely long waits, medical care has very low quality, medical technology is hard to come by, and virtually no medical inovation comes from the UK nowadays.

Why should this be surprising?

This is how state run systems worked.

Want evidence?

Well, look at cancer survival rates. For men and women in the USA, the five year cancer survival rates are 66% and 63%, respectively, compared to 45% and 53% for men and women in the UK, according to a landmark study in Lancet Oncology.

How about medical technology?

Here the UK is quite lacking as well. For every million people in the USA, there are 26.7 MRIs, 34 CT Scanners, 40.2 Mammographs, and 11.3 Radiation Therapy Technology units. For every million people in the UK, there are only 5.7 MRIs, 7.7 CT Scanners, 9 Mammographs, and 5.2 Radiation Therapy Technology units. That is a very dramatic difference in medical technology between the two nations.

What about wait times?

Again, not very good in the UK. This is especially true for specialists and elective surgery. 60% of people in the UK wait longer than 4 weeks to see a specialist compared to 23% of people in the USA. For elective surgery, 41% of people in the UK wait 4 months or more to get elective surgery. In the USA, only 8% of people wait that long. As far as diagnostic tests go, 57% of UK doctors say patients have excessive wait times for diagnostic tests. In the USA, only 9% of doctors say patients have excessive waits for diagnostic tests.


How about costs?

Yes, the USA system is more expensive. In the USA, health care spending is about 17.4% of GDP compared to only 9.8% of GDP in the UK. However, health care spending is increasing faster in the UK than in the USA. From 1999 to 2009, health care spending as a percent of GDP has increased by 28% in the USA. During the same period in the UK, health care spending's percentage of GDP increased by a whopping 42%.


To recap, the UK health care system has far lower quality of care than the USA. It has far less medical technology available than does the USA. It also has much longer wait times than the USA. And, while the USA does have a more expensive system, the UK's system's costs are rising faster than the costs of the USA system.


also note a large portion of people are already on goverment HC in the US.


Excellent point. People with private coverage in the USA have the best care of all.

Not true. Proof please?


Do you think people on Medicaid and SCHIP get better care than people with private coverage?

No, they in often cases DO NOT GET BETTER CARE. Placing the blame on "Oh, it's just a government program" doesn't mean that gov't healthcare sucks. On the contrary, Medicare is successful. The reason why Medicaid and SCHIP suck in comparison is because the rich don't care about these programs. Thus, political reform is ranked low. The low reimbursement rates are causing doctors to rarely give care to Medicaid patients. In my opinion, both programs should be destroyed, and all Americans should be covered by a well designed, Single-Payer system.



Um, yes, people with private coverage do get the best care. They have far more access to care and they get better quality.

People on Medicare have worse surgical outcomes than people with private coverage:

uva-study-surgical-patients-medicaid-are-13-more-likely-die-those-without-

People on Medicare also have worse access to care than people with private insurance:


http://www.forbes.com...


Not true at all. I was saying that Medicaid currently sucks, and your article was describing Medicaid, NOT Medicare. I showed why Medicaid sucks as well. Seniors like their insurance from Medicare more than young adults like private insurance.

http://seniorjournal.com...
"The solution [for Republicans] is to admit that Bush was a bad president, stop this racist homophobic stuff, stop trying to give most of the tax cuts to the rich, propose a real alternative to Obamacare that actually works, and propose smart free market solutions to our economic problems." - Distraff

"Americans are better off in a dynamic, free-enterprise-based economy that fosters economic growth, opportunity and upward mobility." - Paul Ryan
Contra
Posts: 3,941
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2012 9:09:58 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/30/2012 8:29:24 PM, PARADIGM_L0ST wrote:
No, they in often cases DO NOT GET BETTER CARE. Placing the blame on "Oh, it's just a government program" doesn't mean that gov't healthcare sucks. On the contrary, Medicare is successful. The reason why Medicaid and SCHIP suck in comparison is because the rich don't care about these programs. Thus, political reform is ranked low. The low reimbursement rates are causing doctors to rarely give care to Medicaid patients. In my opinion, both programs should be destroyed, and all Americans should be covered by a well designed, Single-Payer system.

If Medicare is so awesome, why do most doctors refuse to accept it? It is functionally useless. It might get you by on a trip to the ER, but as far as any kind of comprehensive care, it is an abysmal failure that dumps money down the drain. What's worse, it's unsustainable.


I am pretty sure you are confusing Medicaid with Medicare. Medicare saves money compared to private insurance.

We'll be Greece in the next 5-10 years if we continue down this path to absolute ruin.

We need to rein in on the whole picture. We need to cut down on some areas of Federal spending, such as long-term welfare and all the loopholes and deductions, and we also need to raise taxes in some areas. We need to end the Bush tax cuts.

"The solution [for Republicans] is to admit that Bush was a bad president, stop this racist homophobic stuff, stop trying to give most of the tax cuts to the rich, propose a real alternative to Obamacare that actually works, and propose smart free market solutions to our economic problems." - Distraff

"Americans are better off in a dynamic, free-enterprise-based economy that fosters economic growth, opportunity and upward mobility." - Paul Ryan
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2012 9:16:04 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/30/2012 9:09:58 PM, Contra wrote:
At 3/30/2012 8:29:24 PM, PARADIGM_L0ST wrote:
No, they in often cases DO NOT GET BETTER CARE. Placing the blame on "Oh, it's just a government program" doesn't mean that gov't healthcare sucks. On the contrary, Medicare is successful. The reason why Medicaid and SCHIP suck in comparison is because the rich don't care about these programs. Thus, political reform is ranked low. The low reimbursement rates are causing doctors to rarely give care to Medicaid patients. In my opinion, both programs should be destroyed, and all Americans should be covered by a well designed, Single-Payer system.

If Medicare is so awesome, why do most doctors refuse to accept it? It is functionally useless. It might get you by on a trip to the ER, but as far as any kind of comprehensive care, it is an abysmal failure that dumps money down the drain. What's worse, it's unsustainable.


I am pretty sure you are confusing Medicaid with Medicare. Medicare saves money compared to private insurance.

We'll be Greece in the next 5-10 years if we continue down this path to absolute ruin.

We need to rein in on the whole picture. We need to cut down on some areas of Federal spending, such as long-term welfare and all the loopholes and deductions, and we also need to raise taxes in some areas. We need to end the Bush tax cuts.

Raising taxes will not benefit the economy. Raising taxes will force businesses to move overseas and bring less jobs to the United States. It will also stagnate incentives.

Social Security needs to be immediately removed.
Medicare and Medicaid should be immediately removed.
Defence budget cut down by 25%.
Obamacare repealed.
Government pensions need to be immediately removed.

"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
Contra
Posts: 3,941
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2012 9:22:12 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/30/2012 9:16:04 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 3/30/2012 9:09:58 PM, Contra wrote:
At 3/30/2012 8:29:24 PM, PARADIGM_L0ST wrote:
No, they in often cases DO NOT GET BETTER CARE. Placing the blame on "Oh, it's just a government program" doesn't mean that gov't healthcare sucks. On the contrary, Medicare is successful. The reason why Medicaid and SCHIP suck in comparison is because the rich don't care about these programs. Thus, political reform is ranked low. The low reimbursement rates are causing doctors to rarely give care to Medicaid patients. In my opinion, both programs should be destroyed, and all Americans should be covered by a well designed, Single-Payer system.

If Medicare is so awesome, why do most doctors refuse to accept it? It is functionally useless. It might get you by on a trip to the ER, but as far as any kind of comprehensive care, it is an abysmal failure that dumps money down the drain. What's worse, it's unsustainable.


I am pretty sure you are confusing Medicaid with Medicare. Medicare saves money compared to private insurance.

We'll be Greece in the next 5-10 years if we continue down this path to absolute ruin.

We need to rein in on the whole picture. We need to cut down on some areas of Federal spending, such as long-term welfare and all the loopholes and deductions, and we also need to raise taxes in some areas. We need to end the Bush tax cuts.

Raising taxes will not benefit the economy. Raising taxes will force businesses to move overseas and bring less jobs to the United States. It will also stagnate incentives.

I want to raise the income tax, NOT the business income tax. We should lower the business income tax to about 26% actually, and remove loopholes, and deductions, and switch to a territorial system of taxation.

Social Security needs to be immediately removed.

Reformed, not removed.

Medicare and Medicaid should be immediately removed.

Replace with well designed Single-Payer system.

Defence budget cut down by 25%.

Sure, but be careful on what exactly you cut. Cut down on overseas bases.

Obamacare repealed.

See *Medicare above*

Government pensions need to be immediately removed.

Why? We can shrink the size of the Federal workforce by 5%, but pensions are useful. We could make the pensions less useful though.



"The solution [for Republicans] is to admit that Bush was a bad president, stop this racist homophobic stuff, stop trying to give most of the tax cuts to the rich, propose a real alternative to Obamacare that actually works, and propose smart free market solutions to our economic problems." - Distraff

"Americans are better off in a dynamic, free-enterprise-based economy that fosters economic growth, opportunity and upward mobility." - Paul Ryan
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2012 9:25:01 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
It doesn't matter whether you raise income or business taxes. Economic stagnation will follow with any and all tax increases.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
Contra
Posts: 3,941
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2012 9:27:29 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/30/2012 9:25:01 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
It doesn't matter whether you raise income or business taxes. Economic stagnation will follow with any and all tax increases.

Economic stagnation did not occur in the 1950s with a top marginal rate of 90%.
"The solution [for Republicans] is to admit that Bush was a bad president, stop this racist homophobic stuff, stop trying to give most of the tax cuts to the rich, propose a real alternative to Obamacare that actually works, and propose smart free market solutions to our economic problems." - Distraff

"Americans are better off in a dynamic, free-enterprise-based economy that fosters economic growth, opportunity and upward mobility." - Paul Ryan
jimtimmy
Posts: 3,953
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2012 9:52:45 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Contra,

Do you realize that public health care spending has grown much faster than private health care spending over the past 50 or so years?
President of DDO
mongoose
Posts: 3,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2012 9:59:45 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/30/2012 9:27:29 PM, Contra wrote:
At 3/30/2012 9:25:01 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
It doesn't matter whether you raise income or business taxes. Economic stagnation will follow with any and all tax increases.

Economic stagnation did not occur in the 1950s with a top marginal rate of 90%.

And how many businesses actually paid that tax?
It is odd when one's capacity for compassion is measured not in what he is willing to do by his own time, effort, and property, but what he will force others to do with their own property instead.
Contra
Posts: 3,941
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2012 10:02:28 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/30/2012 9:52:45 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
Contra,

Do you realize that public health care spending has grown much faster than private health care spending over the past 50 or so years?

Over the last 40 years I believe, Medicare spending has increased 200% per person. In private insurance, spending has increased 700% per person.
"The solution [for Republicans] is to admit that Bush was a bad president, stop this racist homophobic stuff, stop trying to give most of the tax cuts to the rich, propose a real alternative to Obamacare that actually works, and propose smart free market solutions to our economic problems." - Distraff

"Americans are better off in a dynamic, free-enterprise-based economy that fosters economic growth, opportunity and upward mobility." - Paul Ryan
jimtimmy
Posts: 3,953
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2012 10:08:12 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/30/2012 10:02:28 PM, Contra wrote:
At 3/30/2012 9:52:45 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
Contra,

Do you realize that public health care spending has grown much faster than private health care spending over the past 50 or so years?

Over the last 40 years I believe, Medicare spending has increased 200% per person. In private insurance, spending has increased 700% per person.

From 1960 to 2009, public health care spending has increased by 11,228% (not a typo). During that same period, private health spending only increased 3,647%. So, public health spending increased MUCH more dramatically.
President of DDO
jimtimmy
Posts: 3,953
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2012 10:09:39 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/30/2012 10:02:28 PM, Contra wrote:
At 3/30/2012 9:52:45 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
Contra,

Do you realize that public health care spending has grown much faster than private health care spending over the past 50 or so years?

Over the last 40 years I believe, Medicare spending has increased 200% per person. In private insurance, spending has increased 700% per person.

From 1960 to 2009, public health care spending has increased by 11,228% per person (not a typo). During that same period, private health spending only increased 3,647% per person. So, public health spending increased MUCH more dramatically.
President of DDO
Contra
Posts: 3,941
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2012 10:27:32 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
http://www.debate.org...
"The solution [for Republicans] is to admit that Bush was a bad president, stop this racist homophobic stuff, stop trying to give most of the tax cuts to the rich, propose a real alternative to Obamacare that actually works, and propose smart free market solutions to our economic problems." - Distraff

"Americans are better off in a dynamic, free-enterprise-based economy that fosters economic growth, opportunity and upward mobility." - Paul Ryan
jimtimmy
Posts: 3,953
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2012 10:32:35 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/30/2012 10:27:32 PM, Contra wrote:
http://www.debate.org...

Yes, what is your point?

Americans make a lot more money and are much more unhealthy than any of those other countries. We also have better health care. Why is it so surprising that we spend more?
President of DDO
Contra
Posts: 3,941
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2012 10:46:18 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/30/2012 10:32:35 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 3/30/2012 10:27:32 PM, Contra wrote:
http://www.debate.org...

Yes, what is your point?

Americans make a lot more money and are much more unhealthy than any of those other countries. We also have better health care. Why is it so surprising that we spend more?

We don't have better health care. We spend more because we have a fragmented for profit system of health care. Capitalism is not "Destroyed" with a Single-payer system. Australia, and Taiwan, and Canada, all have strong Capitalist economies and all have SP health care.

The USA has the best health care system if you are talking of the third world.

-We are 23rd in infant mortality
-20th in life expectancy for women
-21st in life expectancy for men
-67th in immunization rate, behind Botswana
-The United States ranks below Canada and a wide variety of industrialized nations as shown by studies on various diseases.
-We have the most expensive Health care in the world
-29th in amount of hospital beds
-29th in average stay in hospitals
-We have high rates of avoidable hospital admissions for people with asthma, lung disease, diabetes, hypertension and other common illnesses.
-26th in number of physicians, thanks to the AMA artifically limiting the number
-16th in preventing preventable deaths (such as if they had more early medical care)

http://michaelmoore.com...

http://library.thinkquest.org...

We deserve much better in rhetoric and results.
"The solution [for Republicans] is to admit that Bush was a bad president, stop this racist homophobic stuff, stop trying to give most of the tax cuts to the rich, propose a real alternative to Obamacare that actually works, and propose smart free market solutions to our economic problems." - Distraff

"Americans are better off in a dynamic, free-enterprise-based economy that fosters economic growth, opportunity and upward mobility." - Paul Ryan
jimtimmy
Posts: 3,953
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/30/2012 11:08:30 PM
Posted: 4 years ago

We don't have better health care. We spend more because we have a fragmented for profit system of health care. Capitalism is not "Destroyed" with a Single-payer system. Australia, and Taiwan, and Canada, all have strong Capitalist economies and all have SP health care.

The USA has the best health care system if you are talking of the third world.

-We are 23rd in infant mortality
-20th in life expectancy for women
-21st in life expectancy for men
-67th in immunization rate, behind Botswana
-The United States ranks below Canada and a wide variety of industrialized nations as shown by studies on various diseases.
-We have the most expensive Health care in the world
-29th in amount of hospital beds
-29th in average stay in hospitals
-We have high rates of avoidable hospital admissions for people with asthma, lung disease, diabetes, hypertension and other common illnesses.
-26th in number of physicians, thanks to the AMA artifically limiting the number
-16th in preventing preventable deaths (such as if they had more early medical care)

http://michaelmoore.com...

http://library.thinkquest.org...

We deserve much better in rhetoric and results.

You cited Michael Moore?
President of DDO