USA health system... umm... what the hell?!

[Lord Beautiful]

The healthcare system in the united states is Bull. Shit. Period.

Health care is a business.

Socrates once said (or perhaps Plato) that if you wanted to have a chariot built, you'd go to a chariot maker. If you wanted to get a bone fixed, you'd go to a doctor etc. The point being that these people/practices exist to fill a need in society.

Now we're back to health care is a business.

Health care, being a business as it is, does not exist to fix people. It exists to make money. That's why businesses exist. Insurance companies don't give a shit about people and making them healthy. They care about their bottom line and making it healthy. This is why they have people (seriously, wish I was kidding but fuck I'm not) who scour patient claims for reasons to deny coverage through loop holes or their own jargon'd contracts/health plans. It's bullshit, plain and simple. It's existence for the wrong reason. It's damaging and destructive. And the people behind it don't give a shit. They have money to act as a salve for their wounds.

In closing, someone asked me once (as a diabetic from age 10 - healthy btw and looking to stay that way but finding insurance for the cost is... difficult) how I thought insurance company execs sleep at night.
My response: Quite heavenly, I imagine. *sullen pause*
They probably lie their heads on pillows stuffed with angel-soft down clipped from the wings of patients they've slain, whose familes had to watch as their bodies swung suspended with loopholes around their necks like nooses.

So, you think every industry that makes money is poorly ran and the government should do it? I mean, obviously, anything ran by the government is done well.

Think about this. Canada and the US have very similar economies except socialized healthcare. Canada flips the bill for 70% of it's healthcare, the US 50% (elderly people in the US do have government health care). Canada spends 5% more of their GPD than the US. 5% of their GDP for 20% more spending on health care. On top of that, I have worked with Canadians for years (in Detroit, which attracts many people from Windsor). All of them would rather go to a US hospital or see a US doctor.

Privatization is not a bad thing. There simply needs to be some more regulation and coverage for people on the lower end of the scale. Overall the health care for the insured in the US is some of the best in the world, and innovation is pretty much second to none. There does need to be issues cleared up on the low end, and pre existing conditions/denial of coverage needs to be eliminated. Yet the idea that companies out to make money is a bad thing is a horrible, horrible idea proven to be inefficient. Honestly, since this is a video game site, how well to you think your government would do in making video games? Privatized health care drives a ton of innovation. 6 of the top 12 (including the top 2) pharmaceutical companies are American. Even pharmaceutical companies outside of the US are driven by competition in the US market. Without the US healthcare market, many of the innovations you know and benefit from would never exist. A substantial amount of the top specialized hospitals in the world are in the US. There are some great things about privatized business, including innovation and streamlined businesses.

Just match up a business ran by any government where they have to compete vs. the private sector. They always lose unless heavily propped up by tax money giving them a competitive advantage.

Capitalism is not a bad thing, even in health care. There simply needs to be some checks added in so there is care for all. The problem we are facing in the US is determining that care, and who pays for it. Yes, the current system is broken, yet full scale socialist medicine funded by the government is not the answer.

And finally someone makes sense.

Besides, would it really be beneficial to allow the United States government to take control of our health care? Say what you will about corporations and capitalist fatcats and other things that'd bring a proud tear to the eyes of sociology professors the world over, but I don't think our hilariously incompetent government could, or should, take over.

Just as the quote above states, the system is broken. Few deny this. However, complete government takeover isn't exactly the most promising idea.

 

[orangeban]

That is a weak argument, the US is nowhere near the best place in the world, and regardless there is always room for improvement.

Either way your original point was that socialized medicine is bad, I showed you examples of how that is not so for many first world countries and I'm still waiting for the reason behind your statement.

Socialized medicine, in its current form, hinders economic growth.

Okay, I'm not gonna argue whether or not it hinders economic growth, I know nowhere near enough about economics to do so, but I will say that you seem to have missed the big point of socialized health care (by which I presume you mean universal free health care, if not then egg on my face) which is that the quality of the health care received should not depend on the income of the patient. And yeah, you do need to raise taxes for this, because your paying to help your fellow human beings. Look past practical economic arguments and (at the risk of sounding like a hippie) think more about principles. This whole thing is about empathy, sacrifice from you helps everyone (which in turn helps you). The right to not die of illness, no matter my income, criminal record or personal habits should be universal, and frankly, your gonna have to pay some more money for it. On the plus side, the extra tax could well be balanced out by any medical fees you'd have to pay with none free health-care if your insurance company dropped out (like Allisons).

 

[SuperShadowAce]

The thing I don't get is why some people claim private Healthcare helps with natural selection. There's plenty of stories of rich people being morons and I know several geniuses who are stuck in middle-class.

 

[godofallu]

I'd pay 20,000 dollars to keep my arm in good condition. Hell i'd pay 100,000. If anything the surgery is drastically underpriced considering in the U.S. most adults can make 20,000 dollars in a few months.

Plus there is clearly some sort of reason why her individually hired healthcare provider didn't pay for the surgery. That of course is unknown to everyone including the OP.

 

[spartandude]

Here in Britain we have a State Health Care System and it works, it aint brilliant but its much better than the American system

what i dont get is why countries dont look to how Canada and Sweden run their health care, both are state run and offer the best health care in the world, while Americans still cling to a horrible private system and the british govt tries to slowly make the NHS more like a private system

 

[SuperShadowAce]

I'd pay 20,000 dollars to keep my arm in good condition. Hell i'd pay 100,000. If anything the surgery is drastically underpriced considering in the U.S. most adults can make 20,000 dollars in a few months.

Plus there is clearly some sort of reason why her individually hired healthcare provider didn't pay for the surgery. That of course is unknown to everyone including the OP.

Yeah, all that money isn't being used on other things they need to live like food or shelter.

 

[scott91575]

I know you said to keep the America-bashing to a minimum, but that's really at the crux of this issue. We are not a democracy. We are a plutocracy. This isn't really up for debate. People with money get things done, and they do for themselves and their interests - not for the good of the nation.

Privatizing health insurance is supposed to keep costs down, yet we have the highest health care costs in the world by an astounding margin. Why is that? To hear the insurance lobbyists tell it, we're not privatizing hard enough; too many restrictions, too much legislation aimed at limiting what providers can do. That's the problem, apparently. It's not that free market systems are subject to the whims of the wealthiest and most powerful among us. It's not that rich people have invariably attempted to "game" every single society they've lived since the dawn of fucking time.

It's the anti-free market legislation. Of course.

Sidebar: there's a reason why the vast majority of scientists are considered "liberal". You really can't employ America's modern conservative philosophies and the scientific method at the same time.

You do realize liberal and socialism do not go hand in hand, and neither does conservative with capitalism. In fact, in many countries, just the opposite would be true. A liberal in Australia is no the same as we think of a liberal in the US.

Liberal and conservative have a more social connotation in the US, and has little to do with health care.

Here's a crazy idea. Ditch the labels, because nobody seems to be able to use them properly. Seriously. If you stopped using them, progressing this debate would be far easier. At best, they're names that parties can adopt if they want to give a very vague indication of their values, and even that requires context. They are not suitable as points in a debate.

In the UK, we rarely use the terms for that reason. What we value most is which side of the debate has the more reasoned argument. Try it sometime, America.

How about you ditch the undeserved sense of superiority you like to throw out there. The amazing thing is you are so wrong about British politics it's laughable. First of all, you use labels all the time. You even still worship a monarch, giving their family title, land, etc. Second, you have just as much political strife. Please get off your high horse, because if there is a group of people that love to label others and use it all the time it's the Brits.

The amazing thing about this thread, people bashing the US and acting just like the stuff you state you hate about Americans. All pumping out your chests like your government and country is better, then bashing Americans for the same thing.

 

[CaptainKoala]

I agree. I think it's ridiculous that USA doesn't have socialized health care, nearly all other developed country has it. It has something to do with USA's deep-rooted fear of socialism and "Dem evil reds!" I think.

The US can't balance a simple budget. And we can't afford to do ANYTHING. My state's government just shut down most services (Except police and emergency services. And welfare of course). Do you think they can manage free health care?

 

[orangeban]

That is a weak argument, the US is nowhere near the best place in the world, and regardless there is always room for improvement.

Either way your original point was that socialized medicine is bad, I showed you examples of how that is not so for many first world countries and I'm still waiting for the reason behind your statement.

Socialized medicine, in its current form, hinders economic growth.

Okay, I'm not gonna argue whether or not it hinders economic growth, I know nowhere near enough about economics to do so, but I will say that you seem to have missed the big point of socialized health care (by which I presume you mean universal free health care, if not then egg on my face) which is that the quality of the health care received should not depend on the income of the patient. And yeah, you do need to raise taxes for this, because your paying to help your fellow human beings. Look past practical economic arguments and (at the risk of sounding like a hippie) think more about principles. This whole thing is about empathy, sacrifice from you helps everyone (which in turn helps you). The right to not die of illness, no matter my income, criminal record or personal habits should be universal, and frankly, your gonna have to pay some more money for it. On the plus side, the extra tax could well be balanced out by any medical fees you'd have to pay with none free health-care if your insurance company dropped out (like Allisons).

My principle is that the economy is what keeps our world spinning. In a metaphorical sense of course. Economics isn't just "money." Its what keeps us fed, keeps roofs over our heads and what gets people to make all the nice things that we have today.

With that in mind, you have to carefully consider how something will effect the economy. With something like socialized medicine, it will most likely do more harm than good. Especially with how the system works today. If we can work to deflate costs or meet in the middle with some regulations on how the medical insurance industry works, that may be good enough. I don't know. Let's play it by ear.

Well, I'll play by ear and I'll listen to Britain (though I'll ignore the Torys right now) Canada, Sweden ect.

Here's the thing, the "good" caused by socialized medicine (in theory of course) is health care for all, which is not currently available in America. The "harm" you keep mentioning is mainly tax increase which does not necesarrily hurt the economy (in fact, I think that taxes are way too low but we don't need that debate...)

And I understand how the economy is all those things, but why not list next to "keeps us fed, keeps roofs over our heads," keep us from dying of illness? Seems like a logical inclusion to me.

 

[SamuelT]

snip

See, what makes this even sadder, is that the vast majority of the whole world's money is literally in the U.S.

[...]

You're talking about the debts here, right?

 

[orangeban]

I know you said to keep the America-bashing to a minimum, but that's really at the crux of this issue. We are not a democracy. We are a plutocracy. This isn't really up for debate. People with money get things done, and they do for themselves and their interests - not for the good of the nation.

Privatizing health insurance is supposed to keep costs down, yet we have the highest health care costs in the world by an astounding margin. Why is that? To hear the insurance lobbyists tell it, we're not privatizing hard enough; too many restrictions, too much legislation aimed at limiting what providers can do. That's the problem, apparently. It's not that free market systems are subject to the whims of the wealthiest and most powerful among us. It's not that rich people have invariably attempted to "game" every single society they've lived since the dawn of fucking time.

It's the anti-free market legislation. Of course.

Sidebar: there's a reason why the vast majority of scientists are considered "liberal". You really can't employ America's modern conservative philosophies and the scientific method at the same time.

You do realize liberal and socialism do not go hand in hand, and neither does conservative with capitalism. In fact, in many countries, just the opposite would be true. A liberal in Australia is no the same as we think of a liberal in the US.

Liberal and conservative have a more social connotation in the US, and has little to do with health care.

Here's a crazy idea. Ditch the labels, because nobody seems to be able to use them properly. Seriously. If you stopped using them, progressing this debate would be far easier. At best, they're names that parties can adopt if they want to give a very vague indication of their values, and even that requires context. They are not suitable as points in a debate.

In the UK, we rarely use the terms for that reason. What we value most is which side of the debate has the more reasoned argument. Try it sometime, America.

How about you ditch the undeserved sense of superiority you like to throw out there. The amazing thing is you are so wrong about British politics it's laughable. First of all, you use labels all the time. You even still worship a monarch, giving their family title, land, etc. Second, you have just as much political strife. Please get off your high horse, because if there is a group of people that love to label others and use it all the time it's the Brits.

The amazing thing about this thread, people bashing the US and acting just like the stuff you state you hate about Americans. All pumping out your chests like your government and country is better, then bashing Americans for the same thing.

Wow, wow, wow there, *some* Brits worship a monarch. Some. Your statement that we still do is like me saying all worship God because it's on your currency. No, not true, not at all.

Though I agree, Brits do like labels, and that stuff about us valuing which side has the most reasoned argument is not true. Sure, some, maybe even a lot of people do it like that (the same for America) but look at Scotland, where no matter how Right-wing you are, it's a big no-no to vote Conservative (Scotland frickin' hates Torys) or the people who vote Labour every election because that's what there parents voted even though they personally want all non-British people out the country or no taxes or something equally non-labourish.

 

[SamuelT]

snip

See, what makes this even sadder, is that the vast majority of the whole world's money is literally in the U.S.

[...]

You're talking about the debts here, right?

Money, in itself, is debt.

Great. Good to have that out of the picture.

Now I'd like to know what he meant. No offense.

 

[orangeban]

Well, I'll play by ear and I'll listen to Britain (though I'll ignore the Torys right now) Canada, Sweden ect.

Here's the thing, the "good" caused by socialized medicine (in theory of course) is health care for all, which is not currently available in America. The "harm" you keep mentioning is mainly tax increase which does not necesarrily hurt the economy (in fact, I think that taxes are way too low but we don't need that debate...)

And I understand how the economy is all those things, but why not list next to "keeps us fed, keeps roofs over our heads," keep us from dying of illness? Seems like a logical inclusion to me.

In a way, it does already. But the situations could be better already.

Though, I do have to ask, why only listen to Switzerland and Canada and stuff? The U.S. has some really good hospitals and medical care as well.

I just don't think we need to harm the economy, cause even more layoffs and problems for socialized medicine when there are much less harmful alternatives out there.

Well, I said Sweden and Canada because they have free health care and are doing alright for themselves, though I agree that it'd take America a long long time to move across the political spectrum to where they sit. (though I hear worrying stuff of right-wing governments gaining popularity over there.) And yeah, I agree that America probably has very good hospitals, can't say so from personal experience but I'm sure they do, it's the USA, a leading economy and superpower, of course it's pretty good. Maybe the real answer with socialized health care is to wait until a sunny day economically for this debate, because it's a huge pain to discuss adding new stuff when people are making cuts.

 

[orangeban]

In response to a fair amount of the posts: (a vocal minority)

I am getting so tired of some in this forum having a free-for-all attitude against all Americans. No, we are not all uneducated, gun-toting, racist hicks. Just like those in the rest of the English-speaking world are certainly not all fully self-actualized and supremely enlightened saints.

The scapegoat you are looking for is not "Americans." Health care, health insurance, government entitlements, taxes, economics, etc, are all extremely complex issues, yet, this board has free reign to approach this issue as a fast and loose attack on all things American. Nothing's simple, and no argument can be settled by pure conjecture and finger-pointing, unless of course the solution is to point the finger at me and everyone like me who had the misfortune of being born in this horrible hell-hole of tyranny known as the USA.

This kind of stereotyping and prejudice creates resentment and breeds contempt. The board moderators have deadly efficiency when it comes to most forms of posting foolishness, but I wonder when spewing hateful, prejudiced comments at an entire society is going to be considered too vitriolic to get away with.

But America bashing is a national British past-time
I mean, if we don't bash you then who? The French? Cause there's only so many frog jokes you can make...

Seriously though I agree, and I try to talk about the American government when discussing stuff like this, unfortunately I don't really know enough about American government to go into much more detail.