• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Stossel Solves the Health Crisis with Capitalism

Rolfe said:
[....] in Britain some NHS committee, or maybe NICE, will simply send round a set of guidelines effectively telling the doctors what they ought to be prescribing unless they have a very very good reason for deviating. And at the same time there are financial incentives for doctors to stay inside a total prescription cost ceiling.

Now somebody is going to start screaming about "loss of our precious Freeeeeedomsssss!", any minute now. But you can't have it both ways. Firm guidelines regarding economical prescribing, but leaving the doctor with final discretion, seems to be a reasonable compromise.
Click to expand...


DaN K. StAnLeY said:
Do citizens in your country have the option to opt-out of paying a percentage of tax for UHC?
Click to expand...


OK, Dan, you asked first. But now that I've quoted the whole of the relevant passage of the post of mine you referred to, maybe you can see how your question wasn't entirely relevant?

We were discussing the effect of market forces in reducing healthcare costs. If someone is spending their own money, they may be more likely to choose the more economical option, for example the generic rather than the branded drug. It was asserted that insured patients in the US can choose, and so simply choose the expensive option because they are not bearing the cost.

I responded to this by pointing out that there were other ways of doing it. For example, the prescribing doctor could specify the economical option on the prescription, and not give the patient the chance to choose the branded drug. Which is one way healthcare costs are kept under control in Britain.

This may be seen as the loss of "freedom" to be completely profligate with other people's money. If you want to look at it that way. I merely observed that you can't have it both ways.

Rolfe.
 
DaN K. StAnLeY said:
Why bother apologizing? Your attitude is expected at this point.
Click to expand...


Dan, I was addressing Hittman, not you. And I was genuinely concerned that my post did sound as if I was teaching my granny to suck eggs. Because what adult doesn't understand that insurance is about spreading risk? Apart from John Stossel and Hittman, it appears.

Now, would you like to address what I actually said in my post? Do you agree that the "food insurance" analogy is a straw man, or not?

Rolfe.
 
DaN K. StAnLeY said:
Do citizens in your country have the option to opt-out of paying a percentage of tax for UHC?
Click to expand...


OK, let's try this one again.

No, citizens in our country do not have the option of opting out of any part of their taxes. Pacifists may not opt-out of taxes to pay for weapons of mass destruction, childless people do not have the option of opting out of taxes to pay for schools.

I understand that it is the same in your country. And that in your country, just as in ours, you do not have the option of opting out of the taxes that pay for other people's healthcare.

So what "freedom" would you lose if you moved to a system where you were actually entitled to benefit from the healthcare system your taxes are paying for?

Rolfe.
 
A personal story.

Now, I realise that this is one anecdote, and heck, everyone here should be aware of the famous quote "The plural of anecdote is not data" but heck, what harm can it do?

I live in the UK (duh) and I've lived here all my life. I was born here, and was born into a universal healthcare system. Good, because if I had not been, I would either have died or have forced my parents onto the streets with my elder brother and sister.

I was born with a rare heart condition. Actually, 3 heart conditions rolled into one, and I needed urgent (and practically instant) medical care. Indeed, as I am led to believe, medical cae that was only available in Liverpool (at least within the UK).

I was rushed under multiple police escorts to Liverpool Children's hospital (the old one, no longer there) where I was operated on. Multiple times (I forget how many exactly) in fact. I have received excellent quality follow-up care for the past 21 years (my life) including multiple follow on operations. I am alive because of this high standard of care.

My parents were not vastly rich, but we were far from poor. Upper middle class people living in a semi in a small, high interest village out in the sticks, close to the town they worked in. Big house, never went without food, always had TV, never went hungry, computers etc. (but not horrendous amounts of things, we were never spoilt or filthy rich) but my family, due to the huge amount of care I have needed and, at the time, brand new status and rarity of the operation(s) I needed would have put them out on the streets. The fact that I have needed a check-up every year to check if I need a new heart valve, had tests run on me, have taken up a not insignificant amount of hospital time for one patient...I've needed an NHS. No insurer would have touched me, no amount of medicaid softened the blow enough. Assuming I could even get the care in the US, what options would my parents have had under your system, America?

I thank you for taking the time to hear one persons small story, but I firmly believe that I would not be alive today if it were not for the NHS.
 
DaN K. StAnLeY said:
Do citizens in your country have the option to opt-out of paying a percentage of tax for UHC?
Click to expand...

No more than yours allows you to opt out of paying for your non-universal but state organised health-care.

However to the larger picture, the answer is yes, the UK allows any citizen (not incarcerated) to leave and give up their official recognised UK nationality at any time and emigrate. And indeed even remaining an UK citizen we have a right to (i.e. with no barriers) enter and work and live in over 25 other countries so we can choose which system we want to live under.
 
Last edited:
I thank you for taking the time to hear one persons small story, but I firmly believe that I would not be alive today if it were not for the NHS.
Click to expand...

Thanks for sharing that story. It is very probable that you would have also survived in the US, and you're family could keep their house.
 
No, citizens in our country do not have the option of opting out of any part of their taxes.
Click to expand...


However to the larger picture, the answer is yes, the UK allows any citizen (not incarcerated) to leave and give up their official recognised UK nationality at any time and emigrate. And indeed even remaining an UK citizen we have a right to (i.e. with no barriers) enter and work and live in over 25 other countries so we can choose which system we want to live under.
Click to expand...

Which is it? Yes, or no? If you can't, then you are less free than if you could.
 
OK, Dan, you asked first. But now that I've quoted the whole of the relevant passage of the post of mine you referred to, maybe you can see how your question wasn't entirely relevant?
Click to expand...

I've seen you argue it in a way that would make my question relevant.
 
DaN K. StAnLeY said:
Thanks for sharing that story. It is very probable that you would have also survived in the US, and you're family could keep their house.
Click to expand...

How do you work that out? And what does he now do that he is an adult with a condition that sounds as if no private health-care insurance company will insure him at any premium?
 
How do you work that out?
Click to expand...

Because we don't hear about kids with heart conditions being denied HC here and dying.

Do citizens in your country have the option to opt-out of paying a percentage of tax for your non-UHC?
Click to expand...

No, but we'd be more free if we could.
 
What if I don't want to pay for someone elses HC? What right does anyone else have to make me? I think it's nice that your choices are pay or leave.
 
DaN K. StAnLeY said:
What if I don't want to pay for someone elses HC? What right does anyone else have to make me? I think it's nice that your choices are pay or leave.
Click to expand...

You are now just repeating yourself. As has been explained a few times there is no way unless you remove the concept of insurance from your health system that you can avoid paying for other people's health-care.
 
So (as has been pointed out a few times) your point about freedom is a red-herring since a change to a UHC funded from general taxation would not alter your "level of freedom" one iota.
Click to expand...

Red herring?? Hows that?
 
DaN K. StAnLeY said:
About kids with bad hearts being denied HC, yeah I missed them. Could you link them again please?
Click to expand...

No - go back and look at the birth/death figures - the USA are higher than most countries with a universal health care system. A reasonable conclusion is that means more babies are dying from preventable causes in the USA than in a country like the UK.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom