Five Myths About Health Care Round The World
While conservatives are busily abandoning the moral imperative of the 8th Commandment (and doing so in a pretty ugly way), T.R. Reid provides a useful corrective in countering the most prevalent of the fear and loathing being manufactured based upon the health care systems in other countries.
It is very good and a very good reminder of just what is NOT on offer in our own effort to reform the system:
The key difference is that foreign health insurance plans exist only to pay people’s medical bills, not to make a profit. The United States is the only developed country that lets insurance companies profit from basic health coverage.
Read the whole thing.
Tags: Health Insurance Reform
Luckily we also have a profit driven media that can counterbalance every truth that you liberals try and bring to the table with five conservative lies.
Interesting anonii. Do you think we could have non-profit media as well?
That is a great read. It serves to remind us that we are not looking to reinvent the wheel. In some ways we are trying to standardize on the type of wheel we use.
The author has a book that just came out. I may have to grab a copy.
I never understood why health insurance is profit driven here in the US. I believe it should be a non-profit – if they have too much money, they can always lower premiums or increase benefits.
Competition breeds advancement (see Darwin); oligarchy breeds ossification (see USSR). And a fatuous belief in the efficacy of government leads to disaster (see $9T deficit).
Competition can be achieved through something other then running FOR PROFIT health insurance companies – you are playing with people’s lives and livelihoods. And if you use Darwin – while he wasn’t the one who coined it but he did use the phrase “survival of the fittest” – just what good would it do for society if the health insurance companies survive but not the people? Or if only those survived that have enough money to obtain health care but aren’t willing to do the crappy jobs that need to get done in a society – because they don’t pay enough? Try running a society like ours without the waitresses in smaller establishments, without the substitute teachers, without the lunch room ladies, without the secretaries and receptionists, without the people staffing the cash registers and stocking the shelves in the stores, without all those people that don’t mind getting their hands dirty and their backs achy – so you can live the life you do – but they don’t get paid as much as a CEO or superintendent of a school district or the owner of a national or international company? etc. etc. etc.
Thank you, Rick. And it’s not even my birthday. First of all, you get extra credit for learning Glenn Beck’s Word of the Day the other day (oligarchy). You get extra extra credit because you even spelled it right.
Competition breeds advancement (see Darwin)
Yup. The public option would finally introduce real competition into the insurance market. (Although a single-payer would be best. As Suzanne has said, this is not something we really should be competing over.)
oligarchy breeds ossification (see USSR)
Exactly right, which is why a public option is needed. Most insurance markets are dominated by a small handfull of insurance companies. That is quite oligarchical (if that’s a word).
And a fatuous belief in the efficacy of government leads to disaster (see $9T deficit).
Actually, most of that came from a “fatuous belief in the efficacy” of George Bush.
Here is a good read. And why isn’t the Dem’s and the White House getting this message out.\?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/02/gopers-decrying-socialize_n_275196.html
Not where health care is concerned. That’s why health care in America lags behind the rest of the developed world. It’s very simple – this tenet is absolutely, categorically disproven.
Sorry, but the Obama/Dem plan does not contain costs, does not enhance health outcomes or fix Medicare or Medicaid. The public plan is the government plan and is DOA.
Let me address the profit motive everyone here hates. My son as an MD has been involved in research grants which are funded by the government which is a good deal but he will also tell you that without the profit motive no private enterprise will bring a product to market based on that research.
Liberals always impose their self reported stronger moral compass which is streghtened by huge amounts of tax dollars and still fail to accomplish the job.
Mike Protack
The other side of our health care debate has backed out of the event on the 15th.
At Castle’s event I offered to UI the opportunity to have members or supporters of Delaware Liberal be in the debate.
Now, with the opening there is a big opportunity for Delaware Liberal to join the fight and defend/support their views in a public arena.
I am guessing you will pass but the invitation stands, let the BLOG world know if you are up to it or not.
Mike Protack
We never backed into the event.
Um…Mike, are you accusing DL of backing out, or are you saying it is an invitation for them to fill the gap left by someone else backing out? I agree with UI that it sounds like you are doing the former, not the latter.
Protack is lying. Delaware Liberal never agreed to any event. Indeed, why would we attach our name and waste our time with yet another screaming right wing town hall where nothing but right wing lies would be aired?
I am sorry if it offends you, Mike Protack, but we have no interest in working with you on this issue.
And why would Mr. Shallow Bench think that we would agree to work with someone who comes here to lie to us and insult us? You haven’t done much to earn any credibility here that might provide some incentive to work with you.
Besides, what kind of event is this that teabaggers need to invite liberal bloggers to for some kind of validation?
A real debate? No, I want the useless Town Halls of Mike Castle and the hide and seek of Tom Carper and Kaufman. How much do we pay these clowns?
A slugfest from the left and right would sell tickets.For what it is worth neither hard core liberals or conservatives have a clue about health care or anything else in life. Rants and attacks are the same old stuff while the country burns.
You libs talk a good game but if tyou are so smart get in the arena with the opposite side and show us what you have and Geezer the debate host. It will never happen because both sides are afraid of the truth.
I don’t really see the point of the event.
It is always helpful to engage your brain before you open your mouth.
I offered to UI at Castle’s event an opportunity to join other supporters (two groups) who support the government option and eventually single payer. The request was open ended and was not an ultimatum of any kind.
The other two groups have backed out as they had difficulty getting three people for their side of the panel and they also thought the opposite side were extremists who would not allow a real debate and they did not want to discuss any part of tort reform. The rules had been agreed to in a face to face meeting, the format was to be an opener from both sides and 7 questions from a moderator (mutual agreement) and then 8 questions from the audience. Each side would have two minutes to respond and then a 2 minute close.
Our panel was whittled down to a thirty year Medical Doctor who would takl about insurance reform and a retired U of D Economics Professor who is with Moody’s now would talk about the finance implications of each proposal. I was going to be on the panel to offer an alternative state approach to universal care.
The open ended opportunity was there for this Blog to participate at any level, it is still there. My guess is you can’t make a decent argument for your side so you are ducking it now as you did then. Simple attacks and non descript comments fron the right and left on blogs or radio is not what we need and despite the President’s glaring failure to produce results from within his own party the country still needs to address health care.
Everything is done for you, the time , the place and all of the small admin details. All you have to do is agree to talk intelligently about a serious subject. As far as validation from Delaware Liberal, no one wants it and you can’t give it.
You can launch personal attacks or offer a reasoned argument, either one is fine by me. Small businesses, uninsured people and taxpayers want to ask questions in a debate not the endless mini sermons we heard at Mr Castle’s event.
Thanks,
Mike Protack
Well then enjoy the asking of those questions.
Your problem here is that you still have no credibility and have not earned any goodwill that we should even try to work with you here. Even if we did you the favor of participating, you’d still be back here lying to us and insulting us again.
So forget it. Besides, the people on this blog speak for themselves not for any side. And people who are looking for real information about the reform effort are certainly in no danger of getting that info from you — Mr. Shallow Bench.
You people think like 14 year olds. How many of you have actually lived a significant part of your life in a foreigh country? France for example, Italy perhaps? Somewhere in the middle east?
I have spent a good part of the last 25 years living in various countries. And with respect to the ‘kooombaya’ effluvia I see in this thread, I say, you could not be more wrong.
The notion that theirs is better than ours is a complete, total fabrication. I learned this first hand, the hard way.
Even with its faults, the U.S. system is by far better. You doubt it? Then I suggest living in East or West Europe,or somewhere in the mid east for a few years. Don’t rely on noxious text from special interests, left or right. Observe not only what REALLY happens to yourself, but to those around you. You will come to a more Adult centered view of reality.
Wow, rj, you’ve convinced me that the health insurance companies are looking out for my best interests. Thanks for clearing that up for me.
it’s not better for people that don’t have health care you fucking putz. That’s the whole point, god damn. Why is that so hard for you!
47,000,000 don’t have health care does that number not register with you.
I’ve read a variety of your entries and I grant that you’re not among the sub100 set normally on blogs. Hooray! But the overall tone of the thread is just flat wrong.
WRT insurance companies- nope, they’re not looking out for you as an individual, nor should they. But the govt is even less generous, and not even remotely commodious. Not just our govt- all govts. The ins companies are facilitators, they’re just the mechanical cogs YOU have to use to get what YOU want and need.
Ultimately your health is up to YOU. Not the ins companies, and certainly not the govt.
Want better ins for yourself? Here’s what we do- do not take out ins for routine items. eg, do not use ins for routine dental, or a cold, and the like. Method? high deductible. Result? low payments for things that SHOULD be covered – like catostrophic events – cancer, car crash, etc.
donviti, dear moron. the 47Million fig has been totally, thoroughly, painstakingly shown to be false. bring someting to the table other than DNC talking points, pls.
btw, i must re-iterate. i am not a conservative or liberal. i am libertarian. had a fair number of years as a democrat, even helped the dnc off and on. until i just could not stand the errant nonsense. i quit the party, and the people. went to the rnc for a while – found them to be much nicer and smarter than portrayed- but still, not for me. so i’m an indepedent libertarian. kind-of liberal, but sort-of conservative on some things.
this one was meant for nemski
“I’ve read a variety of your entries and I grant that you’re not among the sub100 set normally on blogs. Hooray! But the overall tone of the thread is just flat wrong….”
47Million fig has been totally, thoroughly, painstakingly shown to be false.
No, actually, it hasn’t.
Wingnuts have broken down the numbers in a faulty and dishonest way to try to weave in a bunch of their usual pet whinges, but in no way has this been broken down in any reasonably sourced way. But if you run with the wingnut talking points, you can’t complain when people call you a wingnut.
Well the non-partisan NCHC puts the figure at 46 million.
Now would it be rational to believe that a group where George H.W. Bush and Jimmy Carter are honorary co-chairs would provide legitimate numbers?
http://www.nchc.org/facts/coverage.shtml
Sorry for injecting errant nonsense!
yes, actually, it has. the 47M figure has been shown to be manifestly and resolutely false. the number is much lower, but of course its not zero. yes, there are those who a) do not have ins, and b) want it, and c) cannot afford it. perhaps 8M. the real question is, how many do not have ANY access to medical care. that number, excluding elective things like plastic surgery, yes, that number trends towards zero.
what is a wingnut, anyway? are you a wingnut? or just a nut? if you’re merely a nut, then what kind of nut? perhaps you’re not even in the legume family? please enlighten us – and make sure its not in a ‘faulty and dishonest’ way.
sorry, 45.5 million,
so what, if it was 40, 30, 20 million, it too many. you schlep
btw, i must re-iterate. i am not a conservative or liberal. i am libertarian
it doesn’t make you any less an idiot. Or less susceptible to talking points.
wow, so you’re holding up GW BUSH and Jimmy Carter as REFERENCES? Holy Shit!
i may be an idiot. but i’m an idiot with 2 pHds. imagine the circus money i could earn “here now!, here today!, step right up ladies and gentlemen- SEE the idiot who has 2 Phds (and another master’s). i could rake in the cash. wow, now that i think about it, i might actually try it.
schlep- now there’s a good word. i like it. do you know what it means, schmuckmeister?
Thanks VC for providing an example to our two Ph.D’ed bud here of what adequately sourced data looks like.
And we note he has produced none.
rationaljew is just another wingnut clownshow.
well i must say these are all great invectives, laudably hurled. an honest effort by all.
but now, as is always the case at about this time of day, i must go make dinner.
please though, let loose as many fodder laden absurdities as you can, and i will reply to them some other time.
oh, oh, oh, i must reply. did you get that definition of a wingnut for me? do you even know what a ‘cassandra’ is? it is, after all, so appropriate (and comical).
i may be an idiot. but i’m an idiot with 2 pHds. imagine the circus money i could earn “here now!, here today!, step right up ladies and gentlemen- SEE the idiot who has 2 Phds (and another master’s). i could rake in the cash. wow, now that i think about it, i might actually try it.
then you should know how to cite your claim to the number being much lower.
…not the endless mini sermons we heard at Mr Castle’s event.
I do believe we just saw an indirect hint at a possible primary or shot-across-the-bow against Castle. Protack is unofficially in the ring for US Senate…again. Where’s that siren (Drudge or Slate, I can’t remember)?
Yeah Cass, you had to love the certainty of “47Million fig has been totally, thoroughly, painstakingly shown to be false.” turning into “wow, so you’re holding up GW BUSH and Jimmy Carter as REFERENCES? Holy Shit!”. lol
Plus the Utopian fantasy libertarian missed the point – it’s not the names of the two presidents that matter, it’s the juxtaposition of their political ideologies.
Let’s take Mr. rationaljew here back to the facts, who by the way with his two PhD’s and “another master’s” doesn’t even understand the basic rules of written English, punctuation and capitalization.
But setting that aside, he avoids certain basic facts about our system: a much higher per capita cost and cost based on our GDP, with outrageously poor outcomes in terms of infant mortality, life span, and insurance coverage, not to mention insurance companies profiting by denying health care and the preexisting conditions problem.
And what about the T.R. Reid piece referenced in the opening comment. Do you have the evidence to refute his claims when comparing the health delivery systems of the developed countries? Moreover, the WHO rates us 37th on the list.
With you, rationaljew, all we have to go on is your word and your claimed anecdotal experiences. With your attitude, I am not surprised that you do not bring out the best of care from the health care providers you encounter, regardless of the country.
I find your comments quite unconvincing. Instead, I chose to rely on T.R. Reid and other factual information well known to most of us here!
Flashback six years and rationaljew was saying “You know, it has been totally, thoroughly, painstakingly shown that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction.”
They lied then. They lie now. They will lie forever.
That Cassandra could possibly call someone else a wingnut with a straight face is laughable.
Of that 46 million, how many CHOOSE not to carry health insurance, and why should they be forced to purchase insurance under penalty of law?
“They lied then. They lie now. They will lie forever.”
If by “they” you mean liberals then you and I are in complete agreement on that point.
Awesome DD, awesome.
why does that matter mike? Why are they “choosing” not to have it? Why are you asking us the question? Do you know the answer? What is the number? What number is an acceptable number of Americans to not have health care? What other bullshit nonsense do you of all people bring to the table about health care?
How can someone like you, with your handicap spew this bullshit? What about someone in your shoes that doesn’t have insurance? That’s parents don’t have insurance? That can’t afford it because they won’t qualify?
What is the matter with you man?
“Thanks VC for providing an example to our two Ph.D’ed bud here of what adequately sourced data looks like.”
This coming from one of 2 contributors here who bitched at me when I provided sourced facts from the FBI Uniform Crime Report and dismissed them as complete hogwash because they totally and without question showed that she was full of shit.
I’m sorry, but I can think of a few DL liberal contributors who have proven they wouldn’t know “adequately sourced data” if it bit them in the ass.
Did you all notice that rj jumped to comparing American health care with Eastern Europe. Nice one! Don’t even bother to compare to Japan, Great Britain, France or Canada.
rationajew is a fake glibertarian, thinking that he may get away with the wingnut talking points by pretending to not belong to the wingnuts.
It is pretty rich for someone with spelling, grammar and fact issues to challenge other people’s knowledge of Greek mythology.
nope you’re wrong again cassandra. i’m a REAL libertarian. you might be a fake Glibertarian, i’m not sure. i do like that word, though. may i use it, with no license fee?
and now, to respond to Unstable Isotope.
Here is your comment-
“Did you all notice that rj jumped to comparing American health care with Eastern Europe. Nice one! Don’t even bother to compare to Japan, Great Britain, France or Canada.”
And here is what i said-
“Even with its faults, the U.S. system is by far better. You doubt it? Then I suggest living in East or West Europe,or somewhere in the mid east for a few years…”
So, you moronic muon, as you can see I referenced three major regions outside the U.S. in which I have lived and worked. INCLUDING WEEEEST Europe. Are you suggesting GB and France are NOT in West Europe? Darn, I thought they were.
And now on to Delaware Dem, who snorted thusly-
“Flashback six years and rationaljew was saying “You know, it has been totally, thoroughly, painstakingly shown that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction.”
They lied then. They lie now. They will lie forever.”
Well, in fact, I was not on this blog six years ago. But thanks for a display of classic doofusian strategy – When deeply enmeshed in a blown riposte – feint, feint, feint.
who’s this, fucking Dennis Miller?
Sauntering over to Perry, who blew diligently like this-
“… doesn’t even understand the basic rules of written English, punctuation and capitalization.”
well, i do understand them but while blogging choose not to use them. i think the spontaneity of the form is key. do you agree, or do you still not understand?
dennis miller? are you comparing me, rationaljew, to dennis miller?
von cracker, with just a couple letter changes, your name reads hilariously in german (Schwäbisch). i mean, von cracker is pretty darn good on its own. look into it. if you can’t see it in a couple days, i’ll give you the two letter switchs.
i have to go, for now. but i leave you with this- i can see that most of you are earnest in your efforts here on this blog. but you are wrong, wrong, wrong to think that the govt will look after you any better than an ins company. i see it as a zero sum thing, except that you have less flex with the govt. there are people who do not have ins- i know many, invariably younger than me, who do not have ins. but they CAN afford it. who are we to force them to have ins? if they want to spend their money on skiing or travel, or blow refer all day, i will not play god and force ins on them, govt or otherwise. it is unwise and unjust. and for those that a)want it b)truly cannot afford it, there are much, much cheaper solutions than obamacare, via private ins. we don’t need the govt serving in the role of daddy and mommy. we are much, much better than that.
Rationaljew wrote: “I’m a REAL libertarian.” Okay…Do you believe in legalizing segregation? Should it be legal for businesses to go back to hanging “No Dogs or Jews” signs on their doors?
now i’m curious. my german is basic, at best.
btw, i must re-iterate. i am not a conservative or liberal. i am libertarian.
Strangely enough, I doubt this. It is not merely the embarassment of association that makes me do so, it is the fact that unlike most genuine libertarians I see multiple discrepancies in your comments
1) All of your “evidence” is either unsourced or anecdotal. Most of it–the purported debunking of the 47 million figure–is actually straight out of social conservative/GOP talking points and not from the Libertarian side of the house. Libertarians generally acknowledge the accuracy of the statistic and then argue what we should or should not do about it. Libertarians who want to make points about the inadequacy of government-run health care in other industrialized democracies also make direct comparisons and cite data. You merely wave at Western Europe and say you’ve lived there, and then lump it in with Eastern Europe and the Middle East as if they were somehow germane to the conversation. Tentative conclusion: Bob Barr/Russ Vierney type Libertarian infiltrator from the RNC.
2) Your high-deductible health insurance argument is again straight out of GOP talking points. Yes, some Libertarians (John Stoessel comes to mind) have made the argument that covering minor things causes their cost to be inflated, and that health insurance should be analogous to car insurance (i.e pays for accident damage but not for oil changes), but you are driving straight down the middle-class Republican line here with $3000-5000 deductibles, and my only surprise is the lack of a reference to health savings account. Again, the verdict would be conservative, not Libertarian.
3) Your treatment of people who cannot afford basic medical treatment comes from the GW Bush school of “just tell ’em to go to the emergency room,” when you argue that the poor have access to everything except elective health care. It’s funny, most radical libertarians argue that such a practice should be eliminated as a coercive transfer of wealth since the hospitals reassign the costs to those who have insurance to pay for the government’s unfunded mandate. You instead followed the RNC talking point that we already take care of them, rather than the libertarian critique of coerced use of tax dollars.
4) You make the argument that we can’t trust the government with our health care–again a straight Republican argument, when the more orthodox Libertarian argument would revolve around the superiority of the free market and the unethical coercive practice of wealth transfer via taxation.
5) Nor, curiously enough, do you ever use in your comments any of the vernacular employed by libertarians–instead it is all verbiage with which any conservative Republican would be comfortable.
Conclusion: despite two and a half PhDs (the revelance of which to the quality of your arguments escapes me), you seem to have confused the term “libertarian” for “conservative Republican,” in much the same way that–during the 1990s–many liberals preferred to be known as moderates because it was more politically expedient.
Thanks for playing.
And health insurance companies regularly deny coverage for “unproven” (including FDA approved) procedures and devices. So I guess it’s nice to make cures that no one can afford to get.
steve newton, your writing skills are good, but both your premise and conclusion are wrong. i give you high marks for writing skills, and a straight F for analytical reasoning.
Fortunately, you are not my professor. And given your usual “fact-free” assertion-filled response, it is equally evident that you are not a Libertarian.
But it is a fairly harmless delusion on your part, so by all means keep trying.
“Backing out” would imply we’d agreed to it and then changed our minds. What actually happened is that you invited us and we completely ignored you. I mean, even Republicans ignore Mike Protack, why are we supposed to give him the time of day? If Orly Taitz invited me to discuss Obama’s birth certificate, I’d ignore that too. People clinging to nonsensical fringe beliefs who seek attention do not get any from me.
and i give you another F for your ‘facts’, which are mostly sweeping canards and grandiose claims of philosophical exactitude. yes, fortunately i am not your professor.
but more to the point, if you are libertarian you should know that there is no single flavor of libertarian. we are more like the universalist unitarian church, in that one respect. there is no single philosophy, and while i truly find your blustery spewage amusing, it serves no useful purpose.
From an individual whose spewings across this thread have had no purpose, useful or otherwise, that is the compliment of a professional.
But then humor me with but a single fact. If not Bob Barr as the nominee of the Libertarian Party, which of the five major candidates for that nomination would you have supported, and why?
The answer would give a clue as to the type of libertarian you purport to be.
The lack of one (or one that took so long to appear as to suggest you had to look it up) would tend to substantiate my conclusion that you are–as cassandra suggests–merely a glib impostor.
“rationaljew”, since you don’t appear to be familiar with the Delaware blogosphere, let me clue you in. When Steve Newton says you are not a libertarian, you have lost that argument. You can keep making noises all you want, but no reader of any blog in Delaware is going to take your word over Steve’s regarding who is and isn’t a libertarian. If you want, though, you and I can have our own little fight over whether you’re “rational” or a “jew”.
(I kid – I’d never tell anyone they weren’t Jewish, no matter how out of whack their values were with the tenets of Judaism. That’s not how being Jewish is defined)
i can see that you are not aware of my previous posts. allow me to enlighten you. addressing your 5 points-
1) the distinction made previously was that of a) cronically no insurance, b) needs insurance, c) absolutely cannot afford it. THAT figure is not 47 million.
2) I did not know who John Stossel was so I googled JS. Yes, there is some overlap with his ‘philosophy’, but not totally. Health insurance is clearly different than car insurance, for one. My view is based on the notion that irrespective of eventual risk, a persons fate is mostly his own. Our deductible is high, but not nearly as high as you state. As for HSA, we do not use them and i do not believe they offer significant advantage.
3) my previous posts made clear that of the people that met criteria set forth in #1, it would be far cheaper to grant rebates/credits for PRIVATE insurance than for the govt to take over all of health care.
4) no, i do not trust the govt with health care. yes, i believe that private insurance is the way to go. see #3.
5) such black and white thinking indicates, that you sir, not i, are a conservative republican.
Work harder. There would be very few Libertarians who do not recognize the name of John Stoessel.
Especially those with 2 1/2 PhDs.
wow, and now xstryker claims i’m not jewish? well then, lemme bust open a big ol’ bag of pork rinds.
in truth, yes i am jewish. but not too religious, granted.
i have spent much of my life outside the U.S. and you’re arguing i don’t know a TV reporter?
Good dodge, there rj.
Now answer the question about the Libertarian candidate you would have supported. You have had plenty of time to Google them and fake a response.
so then, to be a libertarian, i must pledge philosophical exactitude with steve newton, watch john stossel on TV (instead of something more useful), and what else? can you clue the great masses of libertarian wannabes in on the expanded tenets of Club Newton?
i am literally laughing, out loud, at these posts. kidding aside, they are marvelous. i am sorry i do not meet the requirements for delaware libertarian club. but libertarian is the label i choose, as it best describes my philosophy. i just did not realize that some libertarians were so parochial and (dare i say it) xenophobic.
as for the candidate, i will allow you to hang on to that thread. mostly because i never post (anywwhere) which candidate i have supported. that would be very un-libertarian.
steve newton, i believe you are the most worthy wordsman i’ve seen on this blog to date. i do thank you for that.
No, you don’t have to agree with me on anything. But you would–based on all your pontificating about world-wide experience and massive education–generally be expected to at least recognize the name of one of the few prominent Libertarian-oriented reporters in the MSM and to have some semblance of name recognition of the major players in the Libertarian political movement.
We won’t go into busting your chops over knowing about major libertarian intellectual influences, because I don’t want to eliminate whatever remains of your credibility.
Sure, there are lots of libertarians, from anarchos to paleos to gold bugs to minarchists to pragmatists to Starchild, who is in a class all his own.
So far on this thread nothing you have said specifically recalls any recognizable piece of any of those flavors of libertarianism, but everything you have said is consistent with GOP talking points.
Ergo: you are either a GOP troll pretending to be a libertarian, or you have just affected the name without any real understanding of the philosophy.
Either way, you’re pretty much done now.
no, i think i am not pretty much done now. such bad manners! tsk, tsk.
And now it’s time for Listening Corner, with your esteemed host, me.
Compare A:
with B:
When you use “Listening” to determine what people are saying, you open up the door to Not Sounding Like A Complete Idiot. The More You Know! (!shooting star!)
interesting, can you expand on this: (I kid – I’d never tell anyone they weren’t Jewish, no matter how out of whack their values were with the tenets of Judaism. That’s not how being Jewish is defined)
are you claiming you’re a a morally superior jew, much the same way SN claims to be the gatekeeper for all of libertarianism?
Oh, I’d say you’ve been flame broiled to perfection. Troll en flambe, ce magnifique!
Ha! No way.
But back to my question, pertaining to the last sentence of a previous post (which regrettably i did not see until your repost), are you somehow claiming to be a superior jew, perhaps because you know the tenets of judaism better? i am really curious as to what you are trying to say with that last comment.
If I did, that would automatically make me less Jewish than you. What I am suggesting is that helping the sick and the poor is an important tenet of Judaism, and your views suggest you do not share this value.
you could not be more wrong. truly. if you read my previous posts, you would see that i do accept that there are those who cannot help themselves, except that i do not believe the govt is the best way to accomplish this. my guess is that i’m noticably older than most people on this blog. and i seek to give the benefit of what i’ve observed elsewhere in the world, firsthand. and the sum tot of that is complicated, unfortunately. but one thing is clear to me, govt is not the way to go for health care. it is simply not the case that the govt health care in these countries that are being touted, is superior. it is a lie.
as i made clear to SN, and in previous posts, i am not saying that no one needs help. i am saying that the best way to do this is through the free market system, even though it has warts-aplenty.
I didn’t make any claim whatsoever regarding my own Jewishness – in my own personal view, there is no such thing as a “superior” Jew. I certainly didn’t claim to know the tenets of Judaism better than you did – I haven’t the slightest idea whether or not you are familiar with those tenets. Are you insecure about your Jewishness?
I will state, however, that I believe that providing health care to all is a moral issue, and that forcing people to choose between death or bankruptcy is morally wrong.
What we have today is the free market system. Every thirty seconds, another American is driven bankrupt by medical bills. This is a moral failure. Out of a survey of 30 developed nations, men in the United States had the lowest life expectancy – despite the fact that we spend far more per capita on health care than any other nation. That is not an anecdotal failure; it is a systemic one.
like SN you seem prone to black-or-white thinking. i am telling you that the stark scenarios you paint are not systemic. there is not systemic failure of the health care system, especially wrt govt systems in other countries.
you are quoting aggregated statistics. i am giving you boiled down first hand observation from having lived/worked in numerous areas outside the u.s. for many years.
if it is true that the life exp of males is lower, and i do not beleive it is signficantly different for SIMILAR countries, then you need to point to life style as the causitive agent -not the health care system. one thing that strikes you when returning to the u.s. is not differences in health care (in fact you realize it is BETTER here), but life style. the u.s. lifestyle is a killer. that is what needs changing, not the health care system.
i forgot to address this one:
“I haven’t the slightest idea whether or not you are familiar with those tenets. Are you insecure about your Jewishness?”
yes, fairly familiar. but i am not religious. insecure…? no way. i flaunt it. especially at customs in frankfurt.
This is a very ironic statement given half the things you said in this thread and my status as a believer in moral relativism. There are infinitely many shades of grey, but they don’t absolve us of the responsibility to use our judgement to decide whether things are generally right or generally wrong.
You may have observed things first hand, but you haven’t made any first hand observations. All you do is make declarative statements without offering even anecdotal evidence.
if you read my previous posts, you would see both. but i think that’s a problem with the way this blog works, rather than ignorance on your part. at any rate my ‘real work’ just finished, and i am signing off. yes, and i will re-load for another jaust with SN, soon. thx for the discussion.
Stop saying that 46 (or 47 – whatever number you want to plug in here) million people don’t have health care. They absolutely have access to health care — they just don’t have an insurance policy to pay for it! BIG difference!!!!
Okay, rationaljew, I’ll ask you again: as a Libertarian, do you believe in legalizing segregation? Should it be legal for businesses to go back to hanging “No Dogs or Jews” signs on their doors?
“all 47 million have access to healthcare, just not the insurance policy to pay for it” Perhaps I misunderstand your point–are you saying that in this country every American has access to health care? Really, that’s your contention?
Then I guess that no one in this world is dying of starvation, just the money to pay for food.
I’m certainly relieved that we solved the world starvation problem!