Label Yourself

[thegreekdog]

Ouch, intellectually dishonest or cryptic. Just to restate my point, made several times over this thread, I think it's a good idea to look at systems that work in other countries. A point that you outright dismissed and have been scrambling to justify throughout the thread. I'm glad that you now accept again that the Times points were about the high cost of healthcare in the current system in the US, and not arguments against why universal healthcare would be impossible though. There was a moment there when you came across as being a little dishonest.

Did you read the New Yorker piece I posted about the rising cost of healthcare? It dismisses several of the points in Time. Not to be cryptic, or anything, but it's worth a read and is significantly more in depth and specific than a "top ten reasons America's system is expensive" featuring such gems as "we're just too fat".

Oh, I'm not saying we dismiss univeral healthcare outright or that we not look at other systems. I'm simply pointing out that there are alternatives to other systems, alternatives to universal healthcare, and that one must not look at other systems without considering the inherent problems with the United States (the US government, the US healthcare system, the US insurance system, and the US people generally).

I will look at the New Yorker piece (I'm assuming it's in this thread). And "we're too fat" is actually a valid discussion point as to why healthcare costs so much.

I'll post it again-

Link

Thanks.

My initial reaction after skimming:

- The author is only looking at two or three communities (i.e. comparing the "bad" community with the "good" communities). I'm not sure whether that's representative of the costs of healthcare in the United States.
- The author has identified the "bad" community as the one with the highest healthcare costs based on Medicare spending. Medicare is a government run program, so I'm pretty sure that indicates that the "bad" community has the highest Medicare costs.
- The author makes reference to some good things that are occurring throughout the country (the Mayo Clinic being one example). I'm going to read more about these, but they appeared to be free market (AH! RUN!) solutions.

I will read in further detail to give some more complete thoughts. However, at first blush, this appears to be a fluff piece without much relevance to US healthcare costs.

[Symmetry]

Ouch, intellectually dishonest or cryptic. Just to restate my point, made several times over this thread, I think it's a good idea to look at systems that work in other countries. A point that you outright dismissed and have been scrambling to justify throughout the thread. I'm glad that you now accept again that the Times points were about the high cost of healthcare in the current system in the US, and not arguments against why universal healthcare would be impossible though. There was a moment there when you came across as being a little dishonest.

Did you read the New Yorker piece I posted about the rising cost of healthcare? It dismisses several of the points in Time. Not to be cryptic, or anything, but it's worth a read and is significantly more in depth and specific than a "top ten reasons America's system is expensive" featuring such gems as "we're just too fat".

Oh, I'm not saying we dismiss univeral healthcare outright or that we not look at other systems. I'm simply pointing out that there are alternatives to other systems, alternatives to universal healthcare, and that one must not look at other systems without considering the inherent problems with the United States (the US government, the US healthcare system, the US insurance system, and the US people generally).

I will look at the New Yorker piece (I'm assuming it's in this thread). And "we're too fat" is actually a valid discussion point as to why healthcare costs so much.

I'll post it again-

Link

Thanks.

My initial reaction after skimming:

- The author is only looking at two or three communities (i.e. comparing the "bad" community with the "good" communities). I'm not sure whether that's representative of the costs of healthcare in the United States.
- The author has identified the "bad" community as the one with the highest healthcare costs based on Medicare spending. Medicare is a government run program, so I'm pretty sure that indicates that the "bad" community has the highest Medicare costs.
- The author makes reference to some good things that are occurring throughout the country (the Mayo Clinic being one example). I'm going to read more about these, but they appeared to be free market (AH! RUN!) solutions.

I will read in further detail to give some more complete thoughts. However, at first blush, this appears to be a fluff piece without much relevance to US healthcare costs.

It's worth reading more. He's mainly looking at one of the most expensive places, in fact the second most expensive in the US. I'm not sure where you got the good and bad bit from, or where he refers to communities in that way. I don't recall any moral judgement about the communities at all, but do read it.

And of course post back when you feel you have better justifications for why it just doesn't have any relevance.