Worst Health Care system in the world

[Kynchile]

Although I'm very skeptical as to murder/auto fatalities having a substantial impact on life expectancy for the population.

Murder and auto fatalities impact life expectancy 100% of the time, I would argue.

[Maurepas]

Why does everyone keep saying the USA is the worst? We're what 37th? By the WHO list Myanmar bottoms out the list. Seeing as everyone cites WHO as an argument for Universal Health Care it's obviously a fairly legit source many of you seem to be convinetly ignoring.

Well, Id say we have the Best Healthcare in general...Its our Healthcare System that is in the pits, as since the majority cant afford to use it efficiently, it is underutilized and drives our Life Expectancy down...

just my two cents...

[Milks Empire]

Although I'm very skeptical as to murder/auto fatalities having a substantial impact on life expectancy for the population.

Murder and auto fatalities impact life expectancy 100% of the time, I would argue.

And you need to either back up or drop that argument. If it's true, then there would be sources out there. So let's see some of those sources.

[Kynchile]

Well, Id say we have the Best Healthcare in general...Its our Healthcare System that is in the pits, as since the majority cant afford to use it efficiently, it is underutilized and drives our Life Expectancy down...

just my two cents...

The majority of Americans have health insurance and can afford the deductibles. So I have to disagree.

[Samatolian City-States]

"forcing all private insurers out of business" is a huge step forward

No. Lack of competition = shitty service.

Excellent!!

No. Using political power to get an edge in business is wrong. Although the insurance business could use some regulating.

The key to the above statement is....."no stock holders to answer to, no profit to make".

By "selling at a loss" as you put it, will in fact save the Government a lot of money when the "private insurers" quit getting rich.

So what you're saying is: Once the private insurers are gone, the government can jack up the prices and "save a lot of money"?

Hurray for an option that will in the long run be beneficial to Americans on the whole.

Prove it.

Right now, the Government and the private insurers are already failing 45 Million Americans and even more people when insurance companies fail to pony up because of "pre-existing conditions".

I agree that some business standards should be put into practice, as the whole idea of "pre-existing conditions" is just another way of saying "Fuck you, my money!"

1 in 6 "private individuals" cannot afford to buy American healthcare.

Isn't that why they have Medicaid? You know, for those who can't afford to buy the regular healthcare?

Bullshit!!

If you're gonna call bullshit, post a link (or example, fact, ect.) to prove it.

More bullshit!!

Again, if you're gonna call more bullshit, post a link to prove it.

[Maurepas]

Well, Id say we have the Best Healthcare in general...Its our Healthcare System that is in the pits, as since the majority cant afford to use it efficiently, it is underutilized and drives our Life Expectancy down...

just my two cents...

The majority of Americans have health insurance and can afford the deductibles. So I have to disagree.

Yes, but can they afford to use that insurance to see the doctor for annual checkups? Or do they merely save it for emergencies and avoid the hospital at all costs?

[Kynchile]

Although I'm very skeptical as to murder/auto fatalities having a substantial impact on life expectancy for the population.

Murder and auto fatalities impact life expectancy 100% of the time, I would argue.

And you need to either back up or drop that argument. If it's true, then there would be sources out there. So let's see some of those sources.

United States - The death toll on our highways makes driving the number one cause of death and injury for young people ages 5 to 27. Highway crashes cause 94 percent of all transportation fatalities and 99 percent of all transportation injuries, yet traffic safety programs receive only one percent of the funding of the U.S. DOT budget. The staggering loss of life and the incidence of life-threatening injuries occurring each year is best described as a public health crisis. According to a WHO report, "The Injury Pyramid," for every motor vehicle injury resulting in death in the US, 13 people sustain injuries severe enough to require hospitalization.

In the US DOT publication "The Economic Costs Of Motor Vehicle Crashes," NHTSA investigator Lawrence J. Blincoe reports that in 1994, motor vehicle crashes accounted for 40,676 fatalites, and 4,100,000 injuries (of which 533,000 or 13% were serious). The total lifetime cost to the US economy for automobile accidents that occured in 1994 was $150.5 billion. The 1996 NHTSA report "1996 Traffic Safety Facts" (pdf) came up with similar though somewhat improved statistics: 41,907 fatalities and 3,511,000 injuries, 456,430 of them serious. The 1997 NHTSA report "Traffic Safety Facts 1997" reports 41,967 fatalities and 3,399,000 injuries, 441,870 of them serious. The 1998 NHTSA report "Traffic Safety Facts 1998 Annual Report" reports 41,471 fatalities and 3,192,000 injuries, 414,960 of them serious.

I would say the numbers signifacantly impact "life expectancy".

Despite the overall crime rate of the United States being seemingly in line with that of other industrialized countries, its homicide rate, which has declined substantially since 1991, is still among the highest in the industrialized world. Comparing just homicide rates by themselves, however, may not be representative of the overall crime rate of a country. Only the homicide rate of Northern Ireland in the early 1990s compares to that of the United States today. In 2004, there were 5.5 homicides for every 100,000 persons, compared to 1.9 in Canada and 1.0 in Germany. This means that the homicide rate in the United States was nearly three times as high as in Canada and slightly more than five times as high as in Germany.[31][32] Most industrialized countries had homicide rates below the 2.5 mark. Overall the homicide rate in the United States was similar to that of some lesser developed Eastern European countries.[34][35][36]]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_the_United_States

[Milks Empire]

*snip irrelevant article*
I would say the numbers signifacantly impact "life expectancy".
*snip another irrelevant article*

Fail. Your sources need to show a direct tie between the two. Those did not.

[The South Islands]

Although I'm very skeptical as to murder/auto fatalities having a substantial impact on life expectancy for the population.

Murder and auto fatalities impact life expectancy 100% of the time, I would argue.

True that murder leads to death 100% of the time (I never thought I would say that). However, other causes of death lead to death 100% of the time as well. I would venture a guess that the number of death caused by motor vehicle accidents and murder is significantly less (perhaps even inconsequential) compared to other causes of death, such as Cancer and Heart Disease.

Despite your flaws in argument, you do bring up a decent point that the United States is not the same as Canada or any other place, health wise. I would bet that our lower life expectancy can be more traced to the american Obesity epidemic and the relatively sedentary lifestyle that a sizable portion of Americans live. Not to say that access to health care is a small matter, of course. I only venture to say that if you were to remove obese and diabetic people from the US population, I would guess that life expectancy would increase. Of course, I have no hard evidence for this, so I just thought I'd toss it out there.

[Kynchile]

Well, Id say we have the Best Healthcare in general...Its our Healthcare System that is in the pits, as since the majority cant afford to use it efficiently, it is underutilized and drives our Life Expectancy down...

just my two cents...

The majority of Americans have health insurance and can afford the deductibles. So I have to disagree.

Yes, but can they afford to use that insurance to see the doctor for annual checkups? Or do they merely save it for emergencies and avoid the hospital at all costs?

According to the President, Americans use the doctors too much, and doctors are using too many expensive treatment options on us.

[Kynchile]

*snip irrelevant article*
I would say the numbers signifacantly impact "life expectancy".
*snip another irrelevant article*

Fail. Your sources need to show a direct tie between the two. Those did not.

I guess I fail then, carry on.

[Maurepas]

According to the President, Americans use the doctors too much, and doctors are using too many expensive treatment options on us.

When has he said that? Ive heard the claim that doctors use too many expensive treatment options, which I accept, an expensive one time surgery is less of a burden on the Insurance Company than a medicine that would need to be taken over time...

But that they use the doctors too much is something Im going to need to see, Cause it goes square against what Ive heard out of him...

[CanuckHeaven]

I already posted one example and there is many more right here.
This is also a good place to weigh the options:
Single-Payer National Health Insurance

I've said this to conservatives that pull this, and now I'll say it to you: It is not our job to dig up sources that support your argument, which is all those links allow for. That is unequivocally your job.

Actually, it is NM that should be backing up his claims......I was just yelling bullshit, because I can.

I too get tired of posters just throwing out shit and not backing it up. If you don't like my links.....tough!!

[Rhodmhire]

I already posted one example and there is many more right here.
This is also a good place to weigh the options:
Single-Payer National Health Insurance

I've said this to conservatives that pull this, and now I'll say it to you: It is not our job to dig up sources that support your argument, which is all those links allow for. That is unequivocally your job.

Actually, it is NM that should be backing up his claims......I was just yelling bullshit, because I can.

I too get tired of posters just throwing out shit and not backing it up. If you don't like my links.....tough!!

One of your "links" was a fucking Google search engine result, linking to millions of links.

They aren't even your links. For all I know, half of them might be in opposition to your opinions.

[Rhodmhire]

I already posted one example and there is many more right here.
This is also a good place to weigh the options:
Single-Payer National Health Insurance

I've said this to conservatives that pull this, and now I'll say it to you: It is not our job to dig up sources that support your argument, which is all those links allow for. That is unequivocally your job.

Actually, it is NM that should be backing up his claims......I was just yelling bullshit, because I can.

I too get tired of posters just throwing out shit and not backing it up. If you don't like my links.....tough!!

For Christ's sake, then be the better!

You know what, I'm tired of people using stupid curse words, like calling people dipshits, because of disagreement.

Do you see me calling you a fucking Canadian-flag communist douche? No.

Because I, unlike you, prove the others wrong by not submitting to what they're doing when I disagree with it.

You on the other hand, are making people like NM look like geniuses, and indefinately, you're making yourself look like a mindless liberal Obama sheep who agrees to whatever he says.

Change that, don't submit to them--don't fall to their level if you despise that level so bad.

Until then, I'm not going to even consider trusting a word you type.

[CanuckHeaven]

the less we like the socialist monstrosity that is Obamacare.

Fact: Britain's Iron Lady, Margaret Thatcher, supported Britain's National Health Service. She was on par with Reagan in terms of the rest of her ideology. Think about that...

Two can play this game......source please.

[CanuckHeaven]

For Christ's sake, then be the better!

You know what, I'm tired of people using stupid curse words, like calling people dipshits, because of disagreement.

Do you see me calling you a fucking Canadian-flag communist douche? No.

Because I, unlike you, prove the others wrong by not submitting to what they're doing when I disagree with it.

You on the other hand, are making people like NM look like geniuses, and indefinately, you're making yourself look like a mindless liberal Obama sheep who agrees to whatever he says.

Change that, don't submit to them--don't fall to their level if you despise that level so bad.

Until then, I'm not going to even consider trusting a word you type.

Look......I post lots of links during debate.....you on the other hand don't like the links I posted and are spending too much time complaining about it. Get a life or stay on topic....if you can.

BTW, it is about healthcare.

[UnhealthyTruthseeker]

Since Antarctica literally has no health care (unless those small research teams do), I don't see how it couldn't be the worst on Earth.

[Rhodmhire]

For Christ's sake, then be the better!

You know what, I'm tired of people using stupid curse words, like calling people dipshits, because of disagreement.

Do you see me calling you a fucking Canadian-flag communist douche? No.

Because I, unlike you, prove the others wrong by not submitting to what they're doing when I disagree with it.

You on the other hand, are making people like NM look like geniuses, and indefinately, you're making yourself look like a mindless liberal Obama sheep who agrees to whatever he says.

Change that, don't submit to them--don't fall to their level if you despise that level so bad.

Until then, I'm not going to even consider trusting a word you type.

Look......I post lots of links during debate.....you on the other hand don't like the links I posted and are spending too much time complaining about it. Get a life or stay on topic....if you can.

BTW, it is about healthcare.

I know what it's about, and this is indirectly about healtchare. It's about you providing information you likely know nothing about, considering healthcare--99% of your "links" are from a single link that links one to millions of other links, most of which you've probably never read.

And you never even spoke about those links, you just gave them.

I'm not complaining about it, I'm amazed that you call NM out for doing something, and using your dislike of what NM is doing to give you reason to do what you're doing. And I'm suggesting you be the better, and no scoop to NM's level.

And the underlined, nice assumption that I have no life. Failed attempt at trying to poke fun at me, good try though.

I'm not even saying I don't like, or agree with the links, just that you're asked to give reasons and sources, you give sources, but you don't go on to explain them, and/or utilize them in your debate.

I'm going to bed. I'll leave you to it, please consider what I've typed.

[Neu Leonstein]

I suppose I may have spoken poorly, but my intention was to disparage those who believed that the free market could fix everything, if only we would stop regulating it and let it.

Very few people say that, but many are accused of saying it. The fact of the matter is that market mechanisms can do basically everything, with a few exceptions primarily due to information constraints. That's where the government can add value - by being that monopolist that doesn't have to sustain itself productively it can stand outside the market and provide it with the means to function properly.

I'm not going to argue about socialised healthcare (except maybe by posting this and this). Fact of the matter is that the US system isn't a free market to start with, and from subsidised private insurers the proposal seems to be at most the addition of a directly government-owned insurer. So rather than your taxpayer dollars (or part of your wage cheque) being sent to private insurers, they get sent to a public institution. Realistically the only difference is going to be how much the actual cost of providing healthcare as a whole will come down, and chances are this won't help much. So I look at the debate in the States at the moment with bemusement.

Here is where we disagree. I feel that because human life is worth more than an individual's property, an individual has an obligation to give up something that is worth less for something that is worth more. To deny someone else life in order to preserve for yourself an artificial construct of society seems rather short sighted and despicable.

Human life without production is not possible. Virtually everything we need to survive must be created by someone using a combination of brains and physical labour. "Property" isn't simply stuff that one happens to claim for oneself, it's also the promise that if you do create something, you will have the right to decide what happens to it. Any system in which this isn't the case has failed. Sometimes there is such a thing as communal property where some poor blinded souls seem to think that deciding as a group is similar to deciding by yourself, but that's as far as it goes. You as a productive being can't be expected to exist in a world where you get no say about what you create - and that's the link with slavery Bluth was talking about. If you added a rule that you don't get to say when or what you create (and that's not a huge leap if you forced me to make the medicine that will save the village) then that really is slavery, just as in the American South back in the days.

So you see that this is a stance about a principle. Few people would say that my tax dollars are worth more than the lives they could conceivably save. Apart from my conviction that most of them are wasted because governments are intrinsically inefficient, corrupt and wasteful entities, that's my stance too. But just because you take my dollar and use it for something I don't think is bad doesn't make it okay to take it without my agreement. And taking a step further to take my dollar and use it for something others think is good, while I don't, is an attack on me as a productive, thinking, moral entity.

So when you say I have an obligation, then you must be able to formalise why that is. Why should I always give my agreement to you taking that tax dollar? Why don't I have the right to refuse? What makes your will more important than mine? And if no one has the right, and no one's will is most important, then whose interests are we supposed to serve?

[Neu Leonstein]

Since Antarctica literally has no health care (unless those small research teams do), I don't see how it couldn't be the worst on Earth.

It has no health care system, hence it can't be the worst health care system.

[CanuckHeaven]

For Christ's sake, then be the better!

You know what, I'm tired of people using stupid curse words, like calling people dipshits, because of disagreement.

Do you see me calling you a fucking Canadian-flag communist douche? No.

Because I, unlike you, prove the others wrong by not submitting to what they're doing when I disagree with it.

You on the other hand, are making people like NM look like geniuses, and indefinately, you're making yourself look like a mindless liberal Obama sheep who agrees to whatever he says.

Change that, don't submit to them--don't fall to their level if you despise that level so bad.

Until then, I'm not going to even consider trusting a word you type.

Look......I post lots of links during debate.....you on the other hand don't like the links I posted and are spending too much time complaining about it. Get a life or stay on topic....if you can.

BTW, it is about healthcare.

I know what it's about, and this is indirectly about healtchare. It's about you providing information you likely know nothing about, considering healthcare--99% of your "links" are from a single link that links one to millions of other links, most of which you've probably never read.

And you never even spoke about those links, you just gave them.

I'm not complaining about it, I'm amazed that you call NM out for doing something, and using your dislike of what NM is doing to give you reason to do what you're doing. And I'm suggesting you be the better, and no scoop to NM's level.

And the underlined, nice assumption that I have no life. Failed attempt at trying to poke fun at me, good try though.

I'm not even saying I don't like, or agree with the links, just that you're asked to give reasons and sources, you give sources, but you don't go on to explain them, and/or utilize them in your debate.

I'm going to bed. I'll leave you to it, please consider what I've typed.

It probably wouldn't matter to you what link(s) I provide, considering your mindset from another thread:

I don't know what the hell to think, and I honestly shouldn't even be on any of these healthcare threads because all I get is a bunch of fucking leftists spewing one fucking doctrine, and a bunch of fucking righties spewing another fucking doctrine.

And I thought you were "tired of people using stupid curse words"? Apparently not.

[Discount Liquor World]

Worst healthcare system? I would go with Chad or Somalia or something. I'm pretty sure the only healthcare workers there are non-profit relief organizations that the warlords rob.

Oh, well I guess that makes their systems better then the US since the people don't have to pay for it and their governments tax them heavily.

I'm definately going to see if I can arrange my grandfather's hip replacement surgery there.

btw, Antarctic stations have very skilled medical workers there. there healthcare is provided free to the workers there by the government or contractor running the station.

[UnhealthyTruthseeker]

True that murder leads to death 100% of the time (I never thought I would say that). However, other causes of death lead to death 100% of the time as well. I would venture a guess that the number of death caused by motor vehicle accidents and murder is significantly less (perhaps even inconsequential) compared to other causes of death, such as Cancer and Heart Disease.

Despite your flaws in argument, you do bring up a decent point that the United States is not the same as Canada or any other place, health wise. I would bet that our lower life expectancy can be more traced to the american Obesity epidemic and the relatively sedentary lifestyle that a sizable portion of Americans live. Not to say that access to health care is a small matter, of course. I only venture to say that if you were to remove obese and diabetic people from the US population, I would guess that life expectancy would increase. Of course, I have no hard evidence for this, so I just thought I'd toss it out there.

I wouldn't call between 3 and 4% of deaths negligible. That could likely impact our ratings enough to boost the life expectancy rating at least by one slot.

link:

http://www.benbest.com/lifeext/causes.html

[UnhealthyTruthseeker]

It has no health care system, hence it can't be the worst health care system.

It's hard to be worse than nothing. Well, there are several places in the universe with negative health care, like pretty much everywhere that isn't Earth.