I Can't Wait For Government Run Health-Care!!!
Comments
-
KDH12 wrote:jlew24asu wrote:profit does lead to innovation and this current economic crisis has nothing to do that. :roll:Kel Varnsen wrote:I think profit is a motivator in pretty much every business, but at the same time innovation and research and adopting new technologies are usually risky and not always profitable. But if you are already making a profit, most businesses will just keep on with the status quo. I see it all the time in my line of work, I am an engineer working on buildings. Contractors and landlords are totally not willing to take a risk on newer, innovative, more efficient technologies because they are usually more expensive and when there is competition you need to keep profits down to make a profit, so no one is willing to take a risk on innovation.
I could not have said it better myself, innovation is not profitable therefor we have been in a stalemate in this country......
yes profit is a motivator (there are thousands of people trying to create the next big social networking site to launch and sell to google for 200 mil, but that is not innovation) I am not debating that,
but profit does not lead to progressive change or innovations
We were discussing this last night. Profit can, in fact, stifle innovation. The reason we have been unable to innovate and find better energy policies is because we have been using the same technology for power for over 100 years. Why? Because the profits earned by old energy interests are being used to stifle any and all innovation (and competition) to ensure that their profits remain up. The market is not open and free, it is very closed. There is no money in medical innovation, the profit is all being reaped by insurance companies that will not allow any system that streamlines the process, protects uninsured people, or gives anyone the power to deal with doctors without them taking their cut as a middle man. Profit motive has stifled growth and innovation in health care, not promoted it.0 -
soulsinging wrote:KDH12 wrote:jlew24asu wrote:profit does lead to innovation and this current economic crisis has nothing to do that. :roll:Kel Varnsen wrote:I think profit is a motivator in pretty much every business, but at the same time innovation and research and adopting new technologies are usually risky and not always profitable. But if you are already making a profit, most businesses will just keep on with the status quo. I see it all the time in my line of work, I am an engineer working on buildings. Contractors and landlords are totally not willing to take a risk on newer, innovative, more efficient technologies because they are usually more expensive and when there is competition you need to keep profits down to make a profit, so no one is willing to take a risk on innovation.
I could not have said it better myself, innovation is not profitable therefor we have been in a stalemate in this country......
yes profit is a motivator (there are thousands of people trying to create the next big social networking site to launch and sell to google for 200 mil, but that is not innovation) I am not debating that,
but profit does not lead to progressive change or innovations
We were discussing this last night. Profit can, in fact, stifle innovation. The reason we have been unable to innovate and find better energy policies is because we have been using the same technology for power for over 100 years. Why? Because the profits earned by old energy interests are being used to stifle any and all innovation (and competition) to ensure that their profits remain up. The market is not open and free, it is very closed. There is no money in medical innovation, the profit is all being reaped by insurance companies that will not allow any system that streamlines the process, protects uninsured people, or gives anyone the power to deal with doctors without them taking their cut as a middle man. Profit motive has stifled growth and innovation in health care, not promoted it.
who is "we"? the council of kids who just graduated law school who think they are important? I say bullshit. the are plenty of healthcare innovations going on...and the major thing driving that is profit. I dont see the life expectancy rate going down, do you? and it damn well should be considered how fat and lazy our country has become.
with oil and new energy technology, you might have a point, but not healthcare. but even with energy, I think there is PLENTY of innovations going on such as nanotechnology, solar, and wind. we just haven't figured it out yet.0 -
jlew24asu wrote:who is "we"? the council of kids who just graduated law school who think they are important? I say bullshit. the are plenty of healthcare innovations going on...and the major thing driving that is profit. I dont see the life expectancy rate going down, do you? and it damn well should be considered how fat and lazy our country has become.
with oil and new energy technology, you might have a point, but not healthcare. but even with energy, I think there is PLENTY of innovations going on such as nanotechnology, solar, and wind. we just haven't figured it out yet.
This was just the family sitting around talking about shit. My brother, a fellow law school grad, and my parents, both highly educated professionals that have had nightmares for years about their health care plans changing every year, shifting coverage, moving us to a different family practice every 2 years or so, etc. There is no consumer "choice" in this current system and if you think there is then I'M the one saying bullshit.
The energy innovations we do have are coming from GOVERNMENT funded universities, not GM, Ford, Exxon, etc. Yes, drug companies are doing lots of drug research, but 1) they're doing it by giving $ to universities and 2) they're still going to be able to turn a decent profit on a good drug, they just won't be able to bankrupt their customers to do it. They operate like the mafia now, or a heroin dealer... sky's the limit for a drug they know someone will DIE without. By your logic, our utilities companies should have gone out of business long ago. But they continue to operate profitably despite heavy government regulations. Or I can refer again to our public system for judges and attorneys for the destitute... that doesn't stop a lively and significant private legal sector with a pretty sizable profit. And I don't anyone arguing that profit motive has been good for our legal system. Because it has led to the exact problems we face with health care... willful self-serving complexity. You make the system so impossible for an individual to negotiate it alone and it ensures that your services (lawyers, health insurance agents) are absolutely necessary for every breath you draw and thus guarantee a lifetime of exorbitant income.0 -
jlew24asu wrote:
The New England Journal of Medicine.
2005; 352:1138-1145. A Potential Decline in Life Expectancy in the United States in the 21st Century. S. Jay Olshansky, Ph.D., Douglas J. Passaro, M.D., Ronald C. Hershow, M.D., Jennifer Layden, M.P.H., Bruce A. Carnes, Ph.D., Jacob Brody, M.D., Leonard Hayflick, Ph.D., Robert N. Butler, M.D., David B. Allison, Ph.D., and David S. Ludwig, M.D., Ph.D.
Also, I learned about it in my public health classes. It's attributed to obesity. Life expectancy is also lower for Americans who are poor, which says a lot about how our current system is failing us.
See also: "Life Expectancy Declines in the United States" at http://longevity.about.com/od/longevitystatsandnumbers/a/le_declines.htm0 -
scb wrote:
The New England Journal of Medicine.
2005; 352:1138-1145. A Potential Decline in Life Expectancy in the United States in the 21st Century. S. Jay Olshansky, Ph.D., Douglas J. Passaro, M.D., Ronald C. Hershow, M.D., Jennifer Layden, M.P.H., Bruce A. Carnes, Ph.D., Jacob Brody, M.D., Leonard Hayflick, Ph.D., Robert N. Butler, M.D., David B. Allison, Ph.D., and David S. Ludwig, M.D., Ph.D.
Also, I learned about it in my public health classes. It's attributed to obesity.
I think I mentioned before, I'm surprised this hasn't happened already. America has become fat and lazy. but to be clear, this report says "potential" decline. secondly, this has nothing to do with lack of innovation in the healthcare field. I dont think all the money in the world can help cure the wave of obesity related health problems that are set to plague our nation.
bottom line, money and profits do spur on innovations. healthcare innovations are happening and will continue under a for profit system. it certainly could under a government run program as well. but that just means higher taxes to pay for it.scb wrote:Life expectancy is also lower for Americans who are poor, which says a lot about how our current system is failing us.
I am all for the poor in this country having access to healthcare....similar to an unemployment benefit. its how this plan is drawn up is the hard part.0 -
I know the first report is just a projection. It can't be anything more than that until this generation is old enough to start dying off.jlew24asu wrote:I think I mentioned before, I'm surprised this hasn't happened already. America has become fat and lazy. but to be clear, this report says "potential" decline. secondly, this has nothing to do with lack of innovation in the healthcare field. I dont think all the money in the world can help cure the wave of obesity related health problems that are set to plague our nation.
That's just talking about the American life expectancy rate overall though. The 2nd article shows how life expectancy already has declined for particular populations, such as the poor.
The problem with the government providing healthcare only for the poor is that socio-economic status is a continuum - you're not either poor or rich; there's a whole middle-class out there that is screwed.jlew24asu wrote:I am all for the poor in this country having access to healthcare....similar to an unemployment benefit. its how this plan is drawn up is the hard part.
INCOME is the #1 predictor of health in this country - not lifestyle choices, genetics, etc. I'd say that's a pretty sad state of affairs and is a direct result of our for-profit system.0 -
scb wrote:
I know the first report is just a projection. It can't be anything more than that until this generation is old enough to start dying off.jlew24asu wrote:I think I mentioned before, I'm surprised this hasn't happened already. America has become fat and lazy. but to be clear, this report says "potential" decline. secondly, this has nothing to do with lack of innovation in the healthcare field. I dont think all the money in the world can help cure the wave of obesity related health problems that are set to plague our nation.
That's just talking about the American life expectancy rate overall though. The 2nd article shows how life expectancy already has declined for particular populations, such as the poor.
The problem with the government providing healthcare only for the poor is that socio-economic status is a continuum - you're not either poor or rich; there's a whole middle-class out there that is screwed.jlew24asu wrote:I am all for the poor in this country having access to healthcare....similar to an unemployment benefit. its how this plan is drawn up is the hard part.
INCOME is the #1 predictor of health in this country - not lifestyle choices, genetics, etc. I'd say that's a pretty sad state of affairs and is a direct result of our for-profit system.
um. lifestyle choices are always the top predictor. a poor man who works out, eats healthy, doesnt smoke, can be 1000 times more healthy that a millionaire fatass who does nothing but eat like shit.0 -
jlew24asu wrote:um. lifestyle choices are always the top predictor. a poor man who works out, eats healthy, doesnt smoke, can be 1000 times more healthy that a millionaire fatass who does nothing but eat like shit.
Yeah, I'm sure there are plenty of millionaires who eat regularly at drive-thru McDonalds. :roll:0 -
jlew24asu wrote:scb wrote:INCOME is the #1 predictor of health in this country - not lifestyle choices, genetics, etc. I'd say that's a pretty sad state of affairs and is a direct result of our for-profit system.
um. lifestyle choices are always the top predictor. a poor man who works out, eats healthy, doesnt smoke, can be 1000 times more healthy that a millionaire fatass who does nothing but eat like shit.
I don't think you're getting the point.
A. We're talking about population health here.
B. I said lifestyle "choice". Socio-economic status limits ones choices.
C. A poor man with good habits still has a lower life expectancy than a rich man with the same habits.
D. Poverty causes stress and stress lowers the immune system, leading to increased illness.
Maybe I'm not explaining myself well here. But, lest you think I'm just relying on conventional wisdom (like some people in this conversation), let me quote one of the experts.
(From, "Unnatural Causes: Is inequality making us sick?" Episode 1, "In Sickness & In Wealth")We know that social class is the most important determinant of health above any other risk factor.0 -
Byrnzie wrote:jlew24asu wrote:um. lifestyle choices are always the top predictor. a poor man who works out, eats healthy, doesnt smoke, can be 1000 times more healthy that a millionaire fatass who does nothing but eat like shit.
Yeah, I'm sure there are plenty of millionaires who eat regularly at drive-thru McDonalds. :roll:
what, no half page link cut and pasted to do your talking for you? there must be a link out there somewhere proving that rich people dont eat fast food.
anyway I bet my life there are millionaires eating fast food.. and if not McDonalds, then they are stuffing their face with all sorts of bad expensive food. makes no fucking difference where it comes from. thanks for stopping by and adding so much to the discussion as usual0 -
scb wrote:jlew24asu wrote:scb wrote:INCOME is the #1 predictor of health in this country - not lifestyle choices, genetics, etc. I'd say that's a pretty sad state of affairs and is a direct result of our for-profit system.
um. lifestyle choices are always the top predictor. a poor man who works out, eats healthy, doesnt smoke, can be 1000 times more healthy that a millionaire fatass who does nothing but eat like shit.
I don't think you're getting the point.
A. We're talking about population health here.
B. I said lifestyle "choice". Socio-economic status limits ones choices.
C. A poor man with good habits still has a lower life expectancy than a rich man with the same habits.
D. Poverty causes stress and stress lowers the immune system, leading to increased illness.
Maybe I'm not explaining myself well here. But, lest you think I'm just relying on conventional wisdom (like some people in this conversation), let me quote one of the experts.
(From, "Unnatural Causes: Is inequality making us sick?" Episode 1, "In Sickness & In Wealth")We know that social class is the most important determinant of health above any other risk factor.
ok, you are talking on a general scale, I got it. and I appreciate you quoting an "expert". I'm not sure I totally agree and I bet I can find another expect to refute this. I'll look around
regardless, eating habits play a HUGE role in health no matter what your financial status.0 -
-
RIP Biggie
0 -
jlew24asu wrote:scb wrote:
The New England Journal of Medicine.
2005; 352:1138-1145. A Potential Decline in Life Expectancy in the United States in the 21st Century. S. Jay Olshansky, Ph.D., Douglas J. Passaro, M.D., Ronald C. Hershow, M.D., Jennifer Layden, M.P.H., Bruce A. Carnes, Ph.D., Jacob Brody, M.D., Leonard Hayflick, Ph.D., Robert N. Butler, M.D., David B. Allison, Ph.D., and David S. Ludwig, M.D., Ph.D.
Also, I learned about it in my public health classes. It's attributed to obesity.
I think I mentioned before, I'm surprised this hasn't happened already. America has become fat and lazy. but to be clear, this report says "potential" decline. secondly, this has nothing to do with lack of innovation in the healthcare field. I dont think all the money in the world can help cure the wave of obesity related health problems that are set to plague our nation.
bottom line, money and profits do spur on innovations. healthcare innovations are happening and will continue under a for profit system. it certainly could under a government run program as well. but that just means higher taxes to pay for it.scb wrote:Life expectancy is also lower for Americans who are poor, which says a lot about how our current system is failing us.
I am all for the poor in this country having access to healthcare....similar to an unemployment benefit. its how this plan is drawn up is the hard part.
christ. :roll:
it's been said over and over and over...right now...in our 'for profit' healthcare culture....the GOVERNMENT subsidizes a GREAt # of all these 'innovations' thru grants and funds....ALL the time. and the 'innovators' are the doctors and scientists, who still would be getting paid under a not-for-profit model...just no dividends off these innovations going into stockholder pockets. also, with the 'higher taxes'...yes....true....inb reality......may be the same or less out of pocket cost b/c NO more healthcare premiums, deductibles, etc.
suggesting we actually only cover *some* of our citizens as you suggest, actually would more than likely increase taxes for all, b/c where would these funds come from? whereas if we embrace a UHC model for all, remove the 'for profit' nature of our healthcare system, as mentioned, more than likely, keep costs the same.Stay with me...
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow0 -
i am not one for research, i leave to that to many others.....but over the weekend in one of my magazines, whether women's health, real simple or health....i don't rmemeber....
anyhoo, there was a blurb about medical costs. specifically cancer treatments, and it stated that 1 in 6 cancer patients CANNOT afford ther treatements - becuase even though they HAVE health insurance, the deductibles and copays are too crippling to afford. so yes......there's our wonderful health system at 'work'...works just fine until you actually need it. so even WITH insurance, the costs can skyrocket. that is not a system that *works*....and the sad thing is, you read about this shit ALL the time! so yea, it's NOT just about the poor or elderly, tho they are most at risk....but it's ALSO about you and me, and yea....we may well just become poor b/c this very thing could easily happen to any one of us.Stay with me...
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow0 -
decides2dream wrote:jlew24asu wrote:scb wrote:
The New England Journal of Medicine.
2005; 352:1138-1145. A Potential Decline in Life Expectancy in the United States in the 21st Century. S. Jay Olshansky, Ph.D., Douglas J. Passaro, M.D., Ronald C. Hershow, M.D., Jennifer Layden, M.P.H., Bruce A. Carnes, Ph.D., Jacob Brody, M.D., Leonard Hayflick, Ph.D., Robert N. Butler, M.D., David B. Allison, Ph.D., and David S. Ludwig, M.D., Ph.D.
Also, I learned about it in my public health classes. It's attributed to obesity.
I think I mentioned before, I'm surprised this hasn't happened already. America has become fat and lazy. but to be clear, this report says "potential" decline. secondly, this has nothing to do with lack of innovation in the healthcare field. I dont think all the money in the world can help cure the wave of obesity related health problems that are set to plague our nation.
bottom line, money and profits do spur on innovations. healthcare innovations are happening and will continue under a for profit system. it certainly could under a government run program as well. but that just means higher taxes to pay for it.scb wrote:Life expectancy is also lower for Americans who are poor, which says a lot about how our current system is failing us.
I am all for the poor in this country having access to healthcare....similar to an unemployment benefit. its how this plan is drawn up is the hard part.
christ. :roll:
it's been said over and over and over...right now...in our 'for profit' healthcare culture....the GOVERNMENT subsidizes a GREAt # of all these 'innovations' thru grants and funds....ALL the time. and the 'innovators' are the doctors and scientists, who still would be getting paid under a not-for-profit model...just no dividends off these innovations going into stockholder pockets. also, with the 'higher taxes'...yes....true....inb reality......may be the same or less out of pocket cost b/c NO more healthcare premiums, deductibles, etc.
suggesting we actually only cover *some* of our citizens as you suggest, actually would more than likely increase taxes for all, b/c where would these funds come from? whereas if we embrace a UHC model for all, remove the 'for profit' nature of our healthcare system, as mentioned, more than likely, keep costs the same.
its monday morning, dont start getting all excited on me just yet
you have your opinion and I disagree. taxes would be raised far more then you seem to think mostly based solely on the fact that they have no regard for spending tax payer money efficiently.0 -
jlew24asu wrote:decides2dream wrote:jlew24asu wrote:I think I mentioned before, I'm surprised this hasn't happened already. America has become fat and lazy. but to be clear, this report says "potential" decline. secondly, this has nothing to do with lack of innovation in the healthcare field. I dont think all the money in the world can help cure the wave of obesity related health problems that are set to plague our nation.
bottom line, money and profits do spur on innovations. healthcare innovations are happening and will continue under a for profit system. it certainly could under a government run program as well. but that just means higher taxes to pay for it.
I am all for the poor in this country having access to healthcare....similar to an unemployment benefit. its how this plan is drawn up is the hard part.
christ. :roll:
it's been said over and over and over...right now...in our 'for profit' healthcare culture....the GOVERNMENT subsidizes a GREAt # of all these 'innovations' thru grants and funds....ALL the time. and the 'innovators' are the doctors and scientists, who still would be getting paid under a not-for-profit model...just no dividends off these innovations going into stockholder pockets. also, with the 'higher taxes'...yes....true....inb reality......may be the same or less out of pocket cost b/c NO more healthcare premiums, deductibles, etc.
suggesting we actually only cover *some* of our citizens as you suggest, actually would more than likely increase taxes for all, b/c where would these funds come from? whereas if we embrace a UHC model for all, remove the 'for profit' nature of our healthcare system, as mentioned, more than likely, keep costs the same.
its monday morning, dont start getting all excited on me just yet
you have your opinion and I disagree. taxes would be raised far more then you seem to think mostly based solely on the fact that they have no regard for spending tax payer money efficiently.
bottomline...that is an ASSUMPTION on your part.
done correctly, there is no reason for that to occur.
and you can go on and on about track record, past failures, etc...i'm aware of all of it. none the less, it is certainly possible to do it correctly ad not cost more $$$. beyond that, even if taxes were raised, overall, if it absolutely guaranteed healthcare for ALL, for LIFE....and we wouldn't have ANyone who 'can't afford' healthcare and the treatments needed, you betcha...sign me up.
and really, what i was focusing on is your continual comments that innovation is linked soley to profit, and it just ain't so simple. that's all.
and no worries jlew...you have no ability to get me excited.......;)
also, just pointing out that your system would almost guarantee raises in taxes w/o benefit for all. i mean, how would you say you'd fund this healthcare for the elderly, unemployed, the poor...whoever else you say should ge governement healthcare, just not the rest of us? if we still operate in an overall for profit environment for the rest of us...where is the funding for this system you imagine? still would raise taxes. so yea....i'll take same or even slightly elevated taxbase along with healthcare for ALL, for LIFE...thanks.
already agreed to disagree with you, but on occasion...i still need to address/refute some of your posts, simply b/c i can't help myself.
Stay with me...
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow0
Categories
- All Categories
- 148.8K Pearl Jam's Music and Activism
- 110K The Porch
- 274 Vitalogy
- 35K Given To Fly (live)
- 3.5K Words and Music...Communication
- 39.1K Flea Market
- 39.1K Lost Dogs
- 58.7K Not Pearl Jam's Music
- 10.6K Musicians and Gearheads
- 29.1K Other Music
- 17.8K Poetry, Prose, Music & Art
- 1.1K The Art Wall
- 56.8K Non-Pearl Jam Discussion
- 22.2K A Moving Train
- 31.7K All Encompassing Trip
- 2.9K Technical Stuff and Help