Fuck its silent in here.......

[Slaky]

Here's what I know: my communist, unAmerican, socialist, Nazi, third world scum wife was and remains appalled at the healthcare in the United States.

Just curious... what exactly appalls her about it?  Is it the quality of care (which I would find hard to believe) or the fact that it's not "given" to everyone?  (given is in scare quotes because the government can't give something to *everyone*... it can only take from one person and give to another)  Or is it something else?

No, it's not the quality of care. It's the cost. Knowing that if she fell and broke her arm, it'd cost a good chunk of income. At home, it wouldn't cost her anything upfront. Yes, she and I and you understand that they are taxed to make up for that.

Per capita, Norwegians spend about 5 grand a year on health care. Americans spend over 7 grand. They don't have to worry about which insurance covers you for which doctors. If they're hurt or sick, they just go to the doctor and they don't have to worry about billing. Are their doctors worse/dumber than ours? Of course not. There's no way to convince anyone of that because anyone can cherry pick a medical horror story from anywhere and paint with a broad brush. There are good doctors and bad doctors in every country.

For her, it was quite a culture shock. Put yourself in those shoes. I'm sure you can understand why she would feel that way.

Data for those numbers is here: http://www.topforeignstocks.com/2009/07/03/a-comparison-of-us-health-care-spending-with-other-oecd-countries

This is something that a lot of people don't understand because their employer pays such a huge portion (80%) of their premiums.

So everything's fine and dandy - you get health insurance really cheap! The only problems are

- some of that employer portion could be going in your pocket if health insurance wasn't so goddamn expensive
- if you actually get sick or injured you're out a fat deductible

Among other things. Give me single-payer health care where I pay $5,000 a year in payroll taxes rather than $7,000 in premiums and lost wages, please.

There are plenty of countries that offer this now.  What's stopping you?

But on a serious note... you are assuming that the $5,000 versus $7,000 comparison means that the consumer in each place gets the same value (whether amount or quality) of health care to consume.  I don't see anything there to suggest that.  Do I want to spend $2,000 less every year?  Sure... assuming I get the same value of goods or services.

So if the US were to switch healthcare systems, the quality of your healthcare would decline because the doctors would stop giving a shit? Would this be a gradual change? Or are you saying that the doctors in other countries are inferior?

[Dr. Nguyen Van Falk]

Here's what I know: my communist, unAmerican, socialist, Nazi, third world scum wife was and remains appalled at the healthcare in the United States.

Just curious... what exactly appalls her about it?  Is it the quality of care (which I would find hard to believe) or the fact that it's not "given" to everyone?  (given is in scare quotes because the government can't give something to *everyone*... it can only take from one person and give to another)  Or is it something else?

No, it's not the quality of care. It's the cost. Knowing that if she fell and broke her arm, it'd cost a good chunk of income. At home, it wouldn't cost her anything upfront. Yes, she and I and you understand that they are taxed to make up for that.

Per capita, Norwegians spend about 5 grand a year on health care. Americans spend over 7 grand. They don't have to worry about which insurance covers you for which doctors. If they're hurt or sick, they just go to the doctor and they don't have to worry about billing. Are their doctors worse/dumber than ours? Of course not. There's no way to convince anyone of that because anyone can cherry pick a medical horror story from anywhere and paint with a broad brush. There are good doctors and bad doctors in every country.

For her, it was quite a culture shock. Put yourself in those shoes. I'm sure you can understand why she would feel that way.

Data for those numbers is here: http://www.topforeignstocks.com/2009/07/03/a-comparison-of-us-health-care-spending-with-other-oecd-countries

This is something that a lot of people don't understand because their employer pays such a huge portion (80%) of their premiums.

So everything's fine and dandy - you get health insurance really cheap! The only problems are

- some of that employer portion could be going in your pocket if health insurance wasn't so goddamn expensive
- if you actually get sick or injured you're out a fat deductible

Among other things. Give me single-payer health care where I pay $5,000 a year in payroll taxes rather than $7,000 in premiums and lost wages, please.

There are plenty of countries that offer this now.  What's stopping you?

But on a serious note... you are assuming that the $5,000 versus $7,000 comparison means that the consumer in each place gets the same value (whether amount or quality) of health care to consume.  I don't see anything there to suggest that.  Do I want to spend $2,000 less every year?  Sure... assuming I get the same value of goods or services.

Would you settle for better or equal aggregate outcomes at half the aggregate cost?

http://blogs.ngm.com/blog_central/2009/12/the-cost-of-care.html

(Someone else, likely RV, God rest his soul, posted the graphic at this link around here before, though I can't recall how far back.)

No, because there are many things that affect health outcomes.  U.S. lifestyles are awful, awful from a health standpoint, which surely has a greater effect on life expectancy than what doctors do.

Or don't do, for that matter.

You know, given a healthcare system here that disincentivizes less expensive preventative care for millions upon millions of people.

[Waco Kid]

Here's what I know: my communist, unAmerican, socialist, Nazi, third world scum wife was and remains appalled at the healthcare in the United States.

Just curious... what exactly appalls her about it?  Is it the quality of care (which I would find hard to believe) or the fact that it's not "given" to everyone?  (given is in scare quotes because the government can't give something to *everyone*... it can only take from one person and give to another)  Or is it something else?

No, it's not the quality of care. It's the cost. Knowing that if she fell and broke her arm, it'd cost a good chunk of income. At home, it wouldn't cost her anything upfront. Yes, she and I and you understand that they are taxed to make up for that.

Per capita, Norwegians spend about 5 grand a year on health care. Americans spend over 7 grand. They don't have to worry about which insurance covers you for which doctors. If they're hurt or sick, they just go to the doctor and they don't have to worry about billing. Are their doctors worse/dumber than ours? Of course not. There's no way to convince anyone of that because anyone can cherry pick a medical horror story from anywhere and paint with a broad brush. There are good doctors and bad doctors in every country.

For her, it was quite a culture shock. Put yourself in those shoes. I'm sure you can understand why she would feel that way.

Data for those numbers is here: http://www.topforeignstocks.com/2009/07/03/a-comparison-of-us-health-care-spending-with-other-oecd-countries

This is something that a lot of people don't understand because their employer pays such a huge portion (80%) of their premiums.

So everything's fine and dandy - you get health insurance really cheap! The only problems are

- some of that employer portion could be going in your pocket if health insurance wasn't so goddamn expensive
- if you actually get sick or injured you're out a fat deductible

Among other things. Give me single-payer health care where I pay $5,000 a year in payroll taxes rather than $7,000 in premiums and lost wages, please.

There are plenty of countries that offer this now.  What's stopping you?

But on a serious note... you are assuming that the $5,000 versus $7,000 comparison means that the consumer in each place gets the same value (whether amount or quality) of health care to consume.  I don't see anything there to suggest that.  Do I want to spend $2,000 less every year?  Sure... assuming I get the same value of goods or services.

So if the US were to switch healthcare systems, the quality of your healthcare would decline because the doctors would stop giving a shit? Would this be a gradual change? Or are you saying that the doctors in other countries are inferior?

With the insurance company steering you towards the doctors it wants you to see do you really know if you're getting the best doctor for the money you paid in premiums?

[morpheus]

Here's what I know: my communist, unAmerican, socialist, Nazi, third world scum wife was and remains appalled at the healthcare in the United States.

Just curious... what exactly appalls her about it?  Is it the quality of care (which I would find hard to believe) or the fact that it's not "given" to everyone?  (given is in scare quotes because the government can't give something to *everyone*... it can only take from one person and give to another)  Or is it something else?

No, it's not the quality of care. It's the cost. Knowing that if she fell and broke her arm, it'd cost a good chunk of income. At home, it wouldn't cost her anything upfront. Yes, she and I and you understand that they are taxed to make up for that.

Per capita, Norwegians spend about 5 grand a year on health care. Americans spend over 7 grand. They don't have to worry about which insurance covers you for which doctors. If they're hurt or sick, they just go to the doctor and they don't have to worry about billing. Are their doctors worse/dumber than ours? Of course not. There's no way to convince anyone of that because anyone can cherry pick a medical horror story from anywhere and paint with a broad brush. There are good doctors and bad doctors in every country.

For her, it was quite a culture shock. Put yourself in those shoes. I'm sure you can understand why she would feel that way.

Data for those numbers is here: http://www.topforeignstocks.com/2009/07/03/a-comparison-of-us-health-care-spending-with-other-oecd-countries

This is something that a lot of people don't understand because their employer pays such a huge portion (80%) of their premiums.

So everything's fine and dandy - you get health insurance really cheap! The only problems are

- some of that employer portion could be going in your pocket if health insurance wasn't so goddamn expensive
- if you actually get sick or injured you're out a fat deductible

Among other things. Give me single-payer health care where I pay $5,000 a year in payroll taxes rather than $7,000 in premiums and lost wages, please.

There are plenty of countries that offer this now.  What's stopping you?

But on a serious note... you are assuming that the $5,000 versus $7,000 comparison means that the consumer in each place gets the same value (whether amount or quality) of health care to consume.  I don't see anything there to suggest that.  Do I want to spend $2,000 less every year?  Sure... assuming I get the same value of goods or services.

So if the US were to switch healthcare systems, the quality of your healthcare would decline because the doctors would stop giving a shit? Would this be a gradual change? Or are you saying that the doctors in other countries are inferior?

No.  The total value is comprised of quality AND quantity.

[Slaky]

Here's what I know: my communist, unAmerican, socialist, Nazi, third world scum wife was and remains appalled at the healthcare in the United States.

Just curious... what exactly appalls her about it?  Is it the quality of care (which I would find hard to believe) or the fact that it's not "given" to everyone?  (given is in scare quotes because the government can't give something to *everyone*... it can only take from one person and give to another)  Or is it something else?

No, it's not the quality of care. It's the cost. Knowing that if she fell and broke her arm, it'd cost a good chunk of income. At home, it wouldn't cost her anything upfront. Yes, she and I and you understand that they are taxed to make up for that.

Per capita, Norwegians spend about 5 grand a year on health care. Americans spend over 7 grand. They don't have to worry about which insurance covers you for which doctors. If they're hurt or sick, they just go to the doctor and they don't have to worry about billing. Are their doctors worse/dumber than ours? Of course not. There's no way to convince anyone of that because anyone can cherry pick a medical horror story from anywhere and paint with a broad brush. There are good doctors and bad doctors in every country.

For her, it was quite a culture shock. Put yourself in those shoes. I'm sure you can understand why she would feel that way.

Data for those numbers is here: http://www.topforeignstocks.com/2009/07/03/a-comparison-of-us-health-care-spending-with-other-oecd-countries

This is something that a lot of people don't understand because their employer pays such a huge portion (80%) of their premiums.

So everything's fine and dandy - you get health insurance really cheap! The only problems are

- some of that employer portion could be going in your pocket if health insurance wasn't so goddamn expensive
- if you actually get sick or injured you're out a fat deductible

Among other things. Give me single-payer health care where I pay $5,000 a year in payroll taxes rather than $7,000 in premiums and lost wages, please.

There are plenty of countries that offer this now.  What's stopping you?

But on a serious note... you are assuming that the $5,000 versus $7,000 comparison means that the consumer in each place gets the same value (whether amount or quality) of health care to consume.  I don't see anything there to suggest that.  Do I want to spend $2,000 less every year?  Sure... assuming I get the same value of goods or services.

So if the US were to switch healthcare systems, the quality of your healthcare would decline because the doctors would stop giving a shit? Would this be a gradual change? Or are you saying that the doctors in other countries are inferior?

With the insurance company steering you towards the doctors it wants you to see do you really know if you're getting the best doctor for the money you paid in premiums?

You'd never know in any system. It depends on what you're seeing the doctor for. In small towns in rural areas (of any country), you have one hospital nearby. Your doctor will be from that hospital. You better hope he/she is a good doctor. That has nothing to do with the healthcare system of the country you live in. It's blind luck.

However, in a universal health care system - if something terrible happens to you - you can travel the distance to the nearest, highly recommended doctor without having to check if he/she is covered under your insurance. In our current system, you have to hope this doctor is under your insurance.

Is that a fair statement?

[morpheus]

Here's what I know: my communist, unAmerican, socialist, Nazi, third world scum wife was and remains appalled at the healthcare in the United States.

Just curious... what exactly appalls her about it?  Is it the quality of care (which I would find hard to believe) or the fact that it's not "given" to everyone?  (given is in scare quotes because the government can't give something to *everyone*... it can only take from one person and give to another)  Or is it something else?

No, it's not the quality of care. It's the cost. Knowing that if she fell and broke her arm, it'd cost a good chunk of income. At home, it wouldn't cost her anything upfront. Yes, she and I and you understand that they are taxed to make up for that.

Per capita, Norwegians spend about 5 grand a year on health care. Americans spend over 7 grand. They don't have to worry about which insurance covers you for which doctors. If they're hurt or sick, they just go to the doctor and they don't have to worry about billing. Are their doctors worse/dumber than ours? Of course not. There's no way to convince anyone of that because anyone can cherry pick a medical horror story from anywhere and paint with a broad brush. There are good doctors and bad doctors in every country.

For her, it was quite a culture shock. Put yourself in those shoes. I'm sure you can understand why she would feel that way.

Data for those numbers is here: http://www.topforeignstocks.com/2009/07/03/a-comparison-of-us-health-care-spending-with-other-oecd-countries

This is something that a lot of people don't understand because their employer pays such a huge portion (80%) of their premiums.

So everything's fine and dandy - you get health insurance really cheap! The only problems are

- some of that employer portion could be going in your pocket if health insurance wasn't so goddamn expensive
- if you actually get sick or injured you're out a fat deductible

Among other things. Give me single-payer health care where I pay $5,000 a year in payroll taxes rather than $7,000 in premiums and lost wages, please.

There are plenty of countries that offer this now.  What's stopping you?

But on a serious note... you are assuming that the $5,000 versus $7,000 comparison means that the consumer in each place gets the same value (whether amount or quality) of health care to consume.  I don't see anything there to suggest that.  Do I want to spend $2,000 less every year?  Sure... assuming I get the same value of goods or services.

So if the US were to switch healthcare systems, the quality of your healthcare would decline because the doctors would stop giving a shit? Would this be a gradual change? Or are you saying that the doctors in other countries are inferior?

With the insurance company steering you towards the doctors it wants you to see do you really know if you're getting the best doctor for the money you paid in premiums?

With the government controlling healthcare will you even be able to choose which doctor you go to?

[Slaky]

Here's what I know: my communist, unAmerican, socialist, Nazi, third world scum wife was and remains appalled at the healthcare in the United States.

Just curious... what exactly appalls her about it?  Is it the quality of care (which I would find hard to believe) or the fact that it's not "given" to everyone?  (given is in scare quotes because the government can't give something to *everyone*... it can only take from one person and give to another)  Or is it something else?

No, it's not the quality of care. It's the cost. Knowing that if she fell and broke her arm, it'd cost a good chunk of income. At home, it wouldn't cost her anything upfront. Yes, she and I and you understand that they are taxed to make up for that.

Per capita, Norwegians spend about 5 grand a year on health care. Americans spend over 7 grand. They don't have to worry about which insurance covers you for which doctors. If they're hurt or sick, they just go to the doctor and they don't have to worry about billing. Are their doctors worse/dumber than ours? Of course not. There's no way to convince anyone of that because anyone can cherry pick a medical horror story from anywhere and paint with a broad brush. There are good doctors and bad doctors in every country.

For her, it was quite a culture shock. Put yourself in those shoes. I'm sure you can understand why she would feel that way.

Data for those numbers is here: http://www.topforeignstocks.com/2009/07/03/a-comparison-of-us-health-care-spending-with-other-oecd-countries

This is something that a lot of people don't understand because their employer pays such a huge portion (80%) of their premiums.

So everything's fine and dandy - you get health insurance really cheap! The only problems are

- some of that employer portion could be going in your pocket if health insurance wasn't so goddamn expensive
- if you actually get sick or injured you're out a fat deductible

Among other things. Give me single-payer health care where I pay $5,000 a year in payroll taxes rather than $7,000 in premiums and lost wages, please.

There are plenty of countries that offer this now.  What's stopping you?

But on a serious note... you are assuming that the $5,000 versus $7,000 comparison means that the consumer in each place gets the same value (whether amount or quality) of health care to consume.  I don't see anything there to suggest that.  Do I want to spend $2,000 less every year?  Sure... assuming I get the same value of goods or services.

So if the US were to switch healthcare systems, the quality of your healthcare would decline because the doctors would stop giving a shit? Would this be a gradual change? Or are you saying that the doctors in other countries are inferior?

No.  The total value is comprised of quality AND quantity.

So you're under the impression that in such a system you're limited to how many visits you get per a certain period of time? Or how many doctors can tend to you at once? Less doctors per person? Help me out.

[Dr. Nguyen Van Falk]

Here's what I know: my communist, unAmerican, socialist, Nazi, third world scum wife was and remains appalled at the healthcare in the United States.

Just curious... what exactly appalls her about it?  Is it the quality of care (which I would find hard to believe) or the fact that it's not "given" to everyone?  (given is in scare quotes because the government can't give something to *everyone*... it can only take from one person and give to another)  Or is it something else?

No, it's not the quality of care. It's the cost. Knowing that if she fell and broke her arm, it'd cost a good chunk of income. At home, it wouldn't cost her anything upfront. Yes, she and I and you understand that they are taxed to make up for that.

Per capita, Norwegians spend about 5 grand a year on health care. Americans spend over 7 grand. They don't have to worry about which insurance covers you for which doctors. If they're hurt or sick, they just go to the doctor and they don't have to worry about billing. Are their doctors worse/dumber than ours? Of course not. There's no way to convince anyone of that because anyone can cherry pick a medical horror story from anywhere and paint with a broad brush. There are good doctors and bad doctors in every country.

For her, it was quite a culture shock. Put yourself in those shoes. I'm sure you can understand why she would feel that way.

Data for those numbers is here: http://www.topforeignstocks.com/2009/07/03/a-comparison-of-us-health-care-spending-with-other-oecd-countries

This is something that a lot of people don't understand because their employer pays such a huge portion (80%) of their premiums.

So everything's fine and dandy - you get health insurance really cheap! The only problems are

- some of that employer portion could be going in your pocket if health insurance wasn't so goddamn expensive
- if you actually get sick or injured you're out a fat deductible

Among other things. Give me single-payer health care where I pay $5,000 a year in payroll taxes rather than $7,000 in premiums and lost wages, please.

There are plenty of countries that offer this now.  What's stopping you?

But on a serious note... you are assuming that the $5,000 versus $7,000 comparison means that the consumer in each place gets the same value (whether amount or quality) of health care to consume.  I don't see anything there to suggest that.  Do I want to spend $2,000 less every year?  Sure... assuming I get the same value of goods or services.

So if the US were to switch healthcare systems, the quality of your healthcare would decline because the doctors would stop giving a shit? Would this be a gradual change? Or are you saying that the doctors in other countries are inferior?

With the insurance company steering you towards the doctors it wants you to see do you really know if you're getting the best doctor for the money you paid in premiums?

With the government controlling healthcare will you even be able to choose which doctor you go to?

If this were enacted here? Yes.

[Slaky]

Here's what I know: my communist, unAmerican, socialist, Nazi, third world scum wife was and remains appalled at the healthcare in the United States.

Just curious... what exactly appalls her about it?  Is it the quality of care (which I would find hard to believe) or the fact that it's not "given" to everyone?  (given is in scare quotes because the government can't give something to *everyone*... it can only take from one person and give to another)  Or is it something else?

No, it's not the quality of care. It's the cost. Knowing that if she fell and broke her arm, it'd cost a good chunk of income. At home, it wouldn't cost her anything upfront. Yes, she and I and you understand that they are taxed to make up for that.

Per capita, Norwegians spend about 5 grand a year on health care. Americans spend over 7 grand. They don't have to worry about which insurance covers you for which doctors. If they're hurt or sick, they just go to the doctor and they don't have to worry about billing. Are their doctors worse/dumber than ours? Of course not. There's no way to convince anyone of that because anyone can cherry pick a medical horror story from anywhere and paint with a broad brush. There are good doctors and bad doctors in every country.

For her, it was quite a culture shock. Put yourself in those shoes. I'm sure you can understand why she would feel that way.

Data for those numbers is here: http://www.topforeignstocks.com/2009/07/03/a-comparison-of-us-health-care-spending-with-other-oecd-countries

This is something that a lot of people don't understand because their employer pays such a huge portion (80%) of their premiums.

So everything's fine and dandy - you get health insurance really cheap! The only problems are

- some of that employer portion could be going in your pocket if health insurance wasn't so goddamn expensive
- if you actually get sick or injured you're out a fat deductible

Among other things. Give me single-payer health care where I pay $5,000 a year in payroll taxes rather than $7,000 in premiums and lost wages, please.

There are plenty of countries that offer this now.  What's stopping you?

But on a serious note... you are assuming that the $5,000 versus $7,000 comparison means that the consumer in each place gets the same value (whether amount or quality) of health care to consume.  I don't see anything there to suggest that.  Do I want to spend $2,000 less every year?  Sure... assuming I get the same value of goods or services.

So if the US were to switch healthcare systems, the quality of your healthcare would decline because the doctors would stop giving a shit? Would this be a gradual change? Or are you saying that the doctors in other countries are inferior?

With the insurance company steering you towards the doctors it wants you to see do you really know if you're getting the best doctor for the money you paid in premiums?

With the government controlling healthcare will you even be able to choose which doctor you go to?

If this were enacted here? Yes.

I'm trying to figure out how you wouldn't get to choose. This strikes me as fearmongering.

[Wheezer]

No.  The total value is comprised of quality AND quantity.

And this is quantified how?

[Dr. Nguyen Van Falk]

Here's what I know: my communist, unAmerican, socialist, Nazi, third world scum wife was and remains appalled at the healthcare in the United States.

Just curious... what exactly appalls her about it?  Is it the quality of care (which I would find hard to believe) or the fact that it's not "given" to everyone?  (given is in scare quotes because the government can't give something to *everyone*... it can only take from one person and give to another)  Or is it something else?

No, it's not the quality of care. It's the cost. Knowing that if she fell and broke her arm, it'd cost a good chunk of income. At home, it wouldn't cost her anything upfront. Yes, she and I and you understand that they are taxed to make up for that.

Per capita, Norwegians spend about 5 grand a year on health care. Americans spend over 7 grand. They don't have to worry about which insurance covers you for which doctors. If they're hurt or sick, they just go to the doctor and they don't have to worry about billing. Are their doctors worse/dumber than ours? Of course not. There's no way to convince anyone of that because anyone can cherry pick a medical horror story from anywhere and paint with a broad brush. There are good doctors and bad doctors in every country.

For her, it was quite a culture shock. Put yourself in those shoes. I'm sure you can understand why she would feel that way.

Data for those numbers is here: http://www.topforeignstocks.com/2009/07/03/a-comparison-of-us-health-care-spending-with-other-oecd-countries

This is something that a lot of people don't understand because their employer pays such a huge portion (80%) of their premiums.

So everything's fine and dandy - you get health insurance really cheap! The only problems are

- some of that employer portion could be going in your pocket if health insurance wasn't so goddamn expensive
- if you actually get sick or injured you're out a fat deductible

Among other things. Give me single-payer health care where I pay $5,000 a year in payroll taxes rather than $7,000 in premiums and lost wages, please.

There are plenty of countries that offer this now.  What's stopping you?

But on a serious note... you are assuming that the $5,000 versus $7,000 comparison means that the consumer in each place gets the same value (whether amount or quality) of health care to consume.  I don't see anything there to suggest that.  Do I want to spend $2,000 less every year?  Sure... assuming I get the same value of goods or services.

So if the US were to switch healthcare systems, the quality of your healthcare would decline because the doctors would stop giving a shit? Would this be a gradual change? Or are you saying that the doctors in other countries are inferior?

With the insurance company steering you towards the doctors it wants you to see do you really know if you're getting the best doctor for the money you paid in premiums?

With the government controlling healthcare will you even be able to choose which doctor you go to?

If this were enacted here? Yes.

I'm trying to figure out how you wouldn't get to choose. This strikes me as fearmongering.

For example, John Conyers' proposed House Resolution 676 (The United States National Health Insurance Act).

From Section 102:

(b) Portability- Such benefits are available through any licensed health care clinician anywhere in the United States that is legally qualified to provide the benefits.

[Waco Kid]

Here's what I know: my communist, unAmerican, socialist, Nazi, third world scum wife was and remains appalled at the healthcare in the United States.

Just curious... what exactly appalls her about it?  Is it the quality of care (which I would find hard to believe) or the fact that it's not "given" to everyone?  (given is in scare quotes because the government can't give something to *everyone*... it can only take from one person and give to another)  Or is it something else?

No, it's not the quality of care. It's the cost. Knowing that if she fell and broke her arm, it'd cost a good chunk of income. At home, it wouldn't cost her anything upfront. Yes, she and I and you understand that they are taxed to make up for that.

Per capita, Norwegians spend about 5 grand a year on health care. Americans spend over 7 grand. They don't have to worry about which insurance covers you for which doctors. If they're hurt or sick, they just go to the doctor and they don't have to worry about billing. Are their doctors worse/dumber than ours? Of course not. There's no way to convince anyone of that because anyone can cherry pick a medical horror story from anywhere and paint with a broad brush. There are good doctors and bad doctors in every country.

For her, it was quite a culture shock. Put yourself in those shoes. I'm sure you can understand why she would feel that way.

Data for those numbers is here: http://www.topforeignstocks.com/2009/07/03/a-comparison-of-us-health-care-spending-with-other-oecd-countries

This is something that a lot of people don't understand because their employer pays such a huge portion (80%) of their premiums.

So everything's fine and dandy - you get health insurance really cheap! The only problems are

- some of that employer portion could be going in your pocket if health insurance wasn't so goddamn expensive
- if you actually get sick or injured you're out a fat deductible

Among other things. Give me single-payer health care where I pay $5,000 a year in payroll taxes rather than $7,000 in premiums and lost wages, please.

There are plenty of countries that offer this now.  What's stopping you?

But on a serious note... you are assuming that the $5,000 versus $7,000 comparison means that the consumer in each place gets the same value (whether amount or quality) of health care to consume.  I don't see anything there to suggest that.  Do I want to spend $2,000 less every year?  Sure... assuming I get the same value of goods or services.

So if the US were to switch healthcare systems, the quality of your healthcare would decline because the doctors would stop giving a shit? Would this be a gradual change? Or are you saying that the doctors in other countries are inferior?

With the insurance company steering you towards the doctors it wants you to see do you really know if you're getting the best doctor for the money you paid in premiums?

With the government controlling healthcare will you even be able to choose which doctor you go to?

If this were enacted here? Yes.

I'm trying to figure out how you wouldn't get to choose. This strikes me as fearmongering.

In a single payer system there would many more options to choose from and you would get to pick. That's how it goes with Medicare.

[morpheus]

So if the US were to switch healthcare systems, the quality of your healthcare would decline because the doctors would stop giving a shit? Would this be a gradual change? Or are you saying that the doctors in other countries are inferior?

No.  The total value is comprised of quality AND quantity.

So you're under the impression that in such a system you're limited to how many visits you get per a certain period of time? Or how many doctors can tend to you at once? Less doctors per person? Help me out.

No, I'm under the impression that in the US, people consume more health care than in other countries, for many reasons... such as being filled with fat slobs who don't take care of themselves.  As Wheezer indicates, quantifying the amount of health care spending that is related to quantity (number of visits, procedures, etc.) versus quality (effectiveness of care, value per dollar of spending)t is not an easy task, because it's hard to disentangle the quality and quantity effects.  The BLS has a hard time handling this with all sorts of goods and services; they use "hedonic quality adjustments" to try to account for it.

[morpheus]

Here's what I know: my communist, unAmerican, socialist, Nazi, third world scum wife was and remains appalled at the healthcare in the United States.

Just curious... what exactly appalls her about it?  Is it the quality of care (which I would find hard to believe) or the fact that it's not "given" to everyone?  (given is in scare quotes because the government can't give something to *everyone*... it can only take from one person and give to another)  Or is it something else?

No, it's not the quality of care. It's the cost. Knowing that if she fell and broke her arm, it'd cost a good chunk of income. At home, it wouldn't cost her anything upfront. Yes, she and I and you understand that they are taxed to make up for that.

Per capita, Norwegians spend about 5 grand a year on health care. Americans spend over 7 grand. They don't have to worry about which insurance covers you for which doctors. If they're hurt or sick, they just go to the doctor and they don't have to worry about billing. Are their doctors worse/dumber than ours? Of course not. There's no way to convince anyone of that because anyone can cherry pick a medical horror story from anywhere and paint with a broad brush. There are good doctors and bad doctors in every country.

For her, it was quite a culture shock. Put yourself in those shoes. I'm sure you can understand why she would feel that way.

Data for those numbers is here: http://www.topforeignstocks.com/2009/07/03/a-comparison-of-us-health-care-spending-with-other-oecd-countries

This is something that a lot of people don't understand because their employer pays such a huge portion (80%) of their premiums.

So everything's fine and dandy - you get health insurance really cheap! The only problems are

- some of that employer portion could be going in your pocket if health insurance wasn't so goddamn expensive
- if you actually get sick or injured you're out a fat deductible

Among other things. Give me single-payer health care where I pay $5,000 a year in payroll taxes rather than $7,000 in premiums and lost wages, please.

There are plenty of countries that offer this now.  What's stopping you?

But on a serious note... you are assuming that the $5,000 versus $7,000 comparison means that the consumer in each place gets the same value (whether amount or quality) of health care to consume.  I don't see anything there to suggest that.  Do I want to spend $2,000 less every year?  Sure... assuming I get the same value of goods or services.

So if the US were to switch healthcare systems, the quality of your healthcare would decline because the doctors would stop giving a shit? Would this be a gradual change? Or are you saying that the doctors in other countries are inferior?

With the insurance company steering you towards the doctors it wants you to see do you really know if you're getting the best doctor for the money you paid in premiums?

With the government controlling healthcare will you even be able to choose which doctor you go to?

If this were enacted here? Yes.

I'm trying to figure out how you wouldn't get to choose. This strikes me as fearmongering.

In a single payer system there would many more options to choose from and you would get to pick. That's how it goes with Medicare.

Um... that's how it goes with Medicare?  http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/02/business/retirementspecial/02health.html

Sure.

[Wheezer]

So if the US were to switch healthcare systems, the quality of your healthcare would decline because the doctors would stop giving a shit? Would this be a gradual change? Or are you saying that the doctors in other countries are inferior?

No.  The total value is comprised of quality AND quantity.

So you're under the impression that in such a system you're limited to how many visits you get per a certain period of time? Or how many doctors can tend to you at once? Less doctors per person? Help me out.

No, I'm under the impression that in the US, people consume more health care than in other countries, for many reasons... such as being filled with fat slobs who don't take care of themselves.  As Wheezer indicates, quantifying the amount of health care spending that is related to quantity (number of visits, procedures, etc.) versus quality (effectiveness of care, value per dollar of spending)t is not an easy task, because it's hard to disentangle the quality and quantity effects.  The BLS has a hard time handling this with all sorts of goods and services; they use "hedonic quality adjustments" to try to account for it.

Don't forget the serial breeders.