• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

New Health Rankings: Of 17 Nations, U.S. Is Dead Last

Re: We're Number......LAST

Dittohead not! said:
People who live unhealthy lifestyles and/or who engage in risky pursuits pay more for life insurance than the rest of us do. Why couldn't the same apply to health insurance?
Click to expand...
About 40% of Americans who have any of it at all have group life insurance and have never been rated at all. Why can't health insurance be like that?

And again, your lifestyle obsession grows out of a raft of population studies which are good at finding correlations worthy of further investigation. These studies do not explain their findings. They merely report them. Can you actually find causation here? At an individual level? With sufficient precision to be able to make rating decisions at that level? Don't kid yourself.
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

Cardinal Fang said:
About 40% of Americans who have any of it at all have group life insurance and have never been rated at all. Why can't health insurance be like that?

And again, your lifestyle obsession grows out of a raft of population studies which are good at finding correlations worthy of further investigation. These studies do not explain their findings. They merely report them. Can you actually find causation here? At an individual level? With sufficient precision to be able to make rating decisions at that level? Don't kid yourself.
Click to expand...

It's really a matter of odds, or what insurance people call "actuariels". People with a high BMI, people who smoke, people who never exercise, are more likely to need expensive medical procedures than the rest of us. Moreover, those conditions can be changed by the individual.
Therefore, it makes sense to charge them a little more, and make up the added costs and motivate them to change their lifestyles as well.
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

Dittohead not! said:
What we have now, no question about it. Every other modern nation on Earth has universal health care, and we pay more than any of them by far.
Click to expand...

Strange you would think Americans would want to save tax dollars wouldn't you.:peace
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

Dittohead not! said:
It's really a matter of odds, or what insurance people call "actuariels". People with a high BMI, people who smoke, people who never exercise, are more likely to need expensive medical procedures than the rest of us.
Click to expand...
So are tall people, short people, thin people, stupid people, people for whom English is a second language, the foreign-born population, people who travel frequently, southerners, the homeless, meat-eaters, and a whole range of other people. It's probably human nature to think we're as healthy as a horse and it's all those other sick people who are causing all the problems, and that might even be true at a particular point in time. But the chances that it will continue to be true are slim and none. The purpose of insurance is to smooth the inevitable spikes in health care costs so that even sick and injured people can afford treatment when the time comes. You are working to defeat that purpose.

Dittohead not! said:
Moreover, those conditions can be changed by the individual. Therefore, it makes sense to charge them a little more, and make up the added costs and motivate them to change their lifestyles as well.
Click to expand...
So we hear routinely the nonsense notion that poor people are poor because they are lazy, and now it turns out that sick people are sick because they are lazy as well? Maybe it's the people who make up reasons to smear other people who are lazy, since they keep coming up with the same one all the time? Or maybe take a step over into the real world where health care professionals have been working on these very issues for decades and realize that the problems aren't quite as elementary as they are too often taken to be.
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

presluc said:
Strange you would think Americans would want to save tax dollars wouldn't you.:peace
Click to expand...

I have nothing against saving tax dollars. But using socialism on a broad scale for an unlimited time, in any form, is totally unacceptable.
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

presluc said:
That wasn't my question.

So you got 12 million people trying and failing to get jobs with the job opportunity where it is, my question remains.
THERE ARE LESS JOBS WHY?
Because according to some but many a huge majority of unemployed are not even trying to find a job.
Now I can not quote the exact number but since you have 12 million people trying and failing to find jobs ,lets say 12 million not looking for jobs or not trying.

If my math is correct if the ones that are not looking all started to look at the same time., that's 24 million people looking for work when 12 million can't find work.

Question does America want everybody out of work to start looking at the same time from ages 18 to 63 ?:peace
Click to expand...

Ok, since I'm still not sure what you're talking about, let's go through the actual numbers real quick. For convenience of comparison, since some of the data-series are not seasonally adjusted, I'll use the not seasonally adjusted numbers throughout which means the UE level and rate will be a little different from the headline numbers reported.
Adult Civilian Non-Institutional Population (16 years and older not active duty military, in prison or other institution): 244,350,000
Labor Force (employed + unemployed): 154,904,000
Employed (includes farm workers, self-employed, unpaid family workers): 143,060,000
Unemployed (did not work, but was available for work and actively looked for work in the previous 4 weeks): 11,844,000
Not in the Labor Force (did not work and did not look for work or was not available for work): 89,445,000

Let's break down the Not in the Labor Force category in Table A-38:
Do Not Want a Job Now: 82,914,000
Want a Job: 6,532,000
Of those Not in the Labor Force who say they want a job (and aren't classified unemployed because they're not available or haven't looked for work)
Did Not Look for Work in Previous Year: 3,252,000
Looked in Last Year but not last 4 weeks: 3,280,000
Of those...
Not available now: 667,000
Marginally Attached (available now): 2,614,000
Discouraged (stop looking because believed would be unsuccessful): 1,068,000
Other Marginally Attached (stopped looking for personal reasons): 1,545,000

So, besides the fact that your guess of "12 million not looking for jobs or not trying" (which is either 89 million or 6.5 million or lower) by what standard would you call people not attempting to work "unemployed?"

Now for "jobs," I'm not sure if you mean jobs held or job openings. We have to switch definitions a little and exclude agriculture, self employed and unpaid family members (and go back a little further for available data). Table B-1 Not Seasonally adjusted, there were 134,822,000 non-farm payroll jobs (that's jobs actually held) and on the last day of November 2012 there were 3,248,000 job openings (non-farm payroll jobs) according to the Job Openings Labor Turnover Survey.
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

Cardinal Fang said:
So are tall people, short people, thin people, stupid people, people for whom English is a second language, the foreign-born population, people who travel frequently, southerners, the homeless, meat-eaters, and a whole range of other people. It's probably human nature to think we're as healthy as a horse and it's all those other sick people who are causing all the problems, and that might even be true at a particular point in time. But the chances that it will continue to be true are slim and none. The purpose of insurance is to smooth the inevitable spikes in health care costs so that even sick and injured people can afford treatment when the time comes. You are working to defeat that purpose.


So we hear routinely the nonsense notion that poor people are poor because they are lazy, and now it turns out that sick people are sick because they are lazy as well? Maybe it's the people who make up reasons to smear other people who are lazy, since they keep coming up with the same one all the time? Or maybe take a step over into the real world where health care professionals have been working on these very issues for decades and realize that the problems aren't quite as elementary as they are too often taken to be.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure how you could possibly have gotten all of that from my posts.
It is well known that people who are obese and/or smokers are more likely to get sick than the average person. They are also more likely to die at an early age. Those are simply facts. Life insurance costs them more. Why shouldn't health insurance cost them more as well?

I didn't say anything about tall, short, rich, poor, or any other group of people.
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

Dittohead not! said:
How does Obamacare fit in? Now, that's a good question. The mandate that everyone have insurance would still have to be there. The very wealthy, or just those who object to any sort of government funded program would have the option of private insurance.
Click to expand...
There is a problem there if too many people opt out of the system ... I would agree on the first term but, at least in the USA, see a problem with the second term (in bold).

In Germany, the "very wealthy" have no obligation to be in the public system - that is not SO wealthy since from a monthly earning of 3.937, - € (5.299 dollars i.e approx. 63.000 dollars/ year) ... Those who decide to stay in the public system pay a maximum fee amounting to approx. 300 €/ month on their salary.

Dittohead not! said:
Everyone has some income. Even the very poor should have to pay at least a token, as that which is free is seen as having no value.
Click to expand...
Are you so sure about this? This is not so much the income the problem but what is left of an income once you paid for food and lodging ..
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

DVSentinel said:
I have nothing against saving tax dollars. But using socialism on a broad scale for an unlimited time, in any form, is totally unacceptable.
Click to expand...

FYI, the US has been "using socialism on a broad scale for an unlimited time" in many forms
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

So let's see:

From the article in The Atlantic:

In presenting their findings Wednesday, the authors seemed to be urging the U.S. to do some soul searching. Our culture "cherishes independence" and "wants to limit the intrusion of government in our personal lives," said Steven Woolf, director of the Center for Human Needs at Virginia Commonwealth University, the panel chairman. While those values serve us in some ways, he said, our resistance to regulation "may work against our ability to achieve optimal health outcomes."

So I suppose it's possible to surmise the author, and those who conducted the study are suggesting it is our freedoms and our desire to restrict the intrusion of government that is to blame for our "poor" showing.

Only is highly structured, and heavily regulated societies does one have the chance to live healthy lives.

Gee, seems quite possible a hidden bias could be at play.............
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

Sucre said:
There is a problem there if too many people opt out of the system ... I would agree on the first term but, at least in the USA, see a problem with the second term (in bold).

In Germany, the "very wealthy" have no obligation to be in the public system - that is not SO wealthy since from a monthly earning of 3.937, - € (5.299 dollars i.e approx. 63.000 dollars/ year) ... Those who decide to stay in the public system pay a maximum fee amounting to approx. 300 €/ month on their salary.


Are you so sure about this? This is not so much the income the problem but what is left of an income once you paid for food and lodging ..
Click to expand...

I think when it came down to a decision, very few would opt out of the government program. The very wealthy might, but then there aren't so many of them. The ones against any sort of government program would compromise. How many reject Medicare, after all?

Yes, some people have nothing left after paying the bills, that's so. Some of them are far from poor, however. I suppose there might be a place for private charity for those who can't pay medical bills and still eat.
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

sangha said:
FYI, the US has been "using socialism on a broad scale for an unlimited time" in many forms
Click to expand...

FYI, I am aware of that. Our debt has been growing, our society has been falling apart and our economy has been in decline for a longtime now also. Oh, about the same amount of time as we have been using any "socialist" elements.
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

DVSentinel said:
FYI, I am aware of that. Our debt has been growing, our society has been falling apart and our economy has been in decline for a longtime now also. Oh, about the same amount of time as we have been using any "socialist" elements.
Click to expand...

Reality contradicts everything you said
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

Dittohead not! said:
I'm not sure how you could possibly have gotten all of that from my posts.
Click to expand...
It wasn't hard at all.

Dittohead not! said:
It is well known that people who are obese and/or smokers are more likely to get sick than the average person. They are also more likely to die at an early age. Those are simply facts. Life insurance costs them more. Why shouldn't health insurance cost them more as well? I didn't say anything about tall, short, rich, poor, or any other group of people.
Click to expand...
Why not? All of those groups are as likely to suffer adverse health histories as the groups you have singled out. Why so selective?
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

DVSentinel said:
I have nothing against saving tax dollars. But using socialism on a broad scale for an unlimited time, in any form, is totally unacceptable.
Click to expand...

Welfare TAXPAYER MONEY
Bailouts to private organizations TAXPAYER MONEY
Unemployment extensions TAXPAYER MONEY
Medicare TAXPAYER MONEY
Medicade TAXPAYER MONEY
Food banks TAXPAYER MONEY
ShelterS TAXPAYER MONEY

The top rich % of the country after paying taxes gets a cut from the working taxpayers who pay taxes.

AM I MISSING SOMETHING???:peace
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

Cardinal Fang said:
It wasn't hard at all.


Why not? All of those groups are as likely to suffer adverse health histories as the groups you have singled out. Why so selective?
Click to expand...

Being tall is a health risk on the order of smoking?

C'mon, let's get real. Anyway, there would no point in giving tall people an incentive to be short, even if it were a health risk.
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

presluc said:
Strange you would think Americans would want to save tax dollars wouldn't you.:peace
Click to expand...

Yep. Just like they did in Greece, they saved so much tax money that they went broke! ;)
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

pinqy said:
Ok, since I'm still not sure what you're talking about, let's go through the actual numbers real quick. For convenience of comparison, since some of the data-series are not seasonally adjusted, I'll use the not seasonally adjusted numbers throughout which means the UE level and rate will be a little different from the headline numbers reported.
Adult Civilian Non-Institutional Population (16 years and older not active duty military, in prison or other institution): 244,350,000
Labor Force (employed + unemployed): 154,904,000
Employed (includes farm workers, self-employed, unpaid family workers): 143,060,000
Unemployed (did not work, but was available for work and actively looked for work in the previous 4 weeks): 11,844,000
Not in the Labor Force (did not work and did not look for work or was not available for work): 89,445,000

Let's break down the Not in the Labor Force category in Table A-38:
Do Not Want a Job Now: 82,914,000
Want a Job: 6,532,000
Of those Not in the Labor Force who say they want a job (and aren't classified unemployed because they're not available or haven't looked for work)
Did Not Look for Work in Previous Year: 3,252,000
Looked in Last Year but not last 4 weeks: 3,280,000
Of those...
Not available now: 667,000
Marginally Attached (available now): 2,614,000
Discouraged (stop looking because believed would be unsuccessful): 1,068,000
Other Marginally Attached (stopped looking for personal reasons): 1,545,000

So, besides the fact that your guess of "12 million not looking for jobs or not trying" (which is either 89 million or 6.5 million or lower) by what standard would you call people not attempting to work "unemployed?"

Now for "jobs," I'm not sure if you mean jobs held or job openings. We have to switch definitions a little and exclude agriculture, self employed and unpaid family members (and go back a little further for available data). Table B-1 Not Seasonally adjusted, there were 134,822,000 non-farm payroll jobs (that's jobs actually held) and on the last day of November 2012 there were 3,248,000 job openings (non-farm payroll jobs) according to the Job Openings Labor Turnover Survey.
Click to expand...

In response to your rather lengthy post I need only use one sentence
JOB OPPORTUNITIES for American labor force and College graduates and young and elderly are there enough?:peace
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

ttwtt78640 said:
Yep. Just like they did in Greece, they saved so much tax money that they went broke! ;)
Click to expand...

Excuse me but was that before or after the rise in unemployment?
Were the protestors protesting because the government had no money or was it because the people had no jobs?:peace
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

presluc said:
In response to your rather lengthy post I need only use one sentence
JOB OPPORTUNITIES for American labor force and College graduates and young and elderly are there enough?:peace
Click to expand...

as long as you're willing to work part time for ten bucks an hour, sure.
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

presluc said:
Excuse me but was that before or after the rise in unemployment?
Were the protestors protesting because the government had no money or was it because the people had no jobs?:peace
Click to expand...

Yes, it was.
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

Dittohead not! said:
as long as you're willing to work part time for ten bucks an hour, sure.
Click to expand...

As we all know part time work is not to be trusted, one month you might be working 3 days a week , the next you're cut to 1 day a week and any red ink you will be looking for another job.

To budget your lifestyle in this economic society on part time work would be like walking the edge of a straight razor..

Yet average Americans in the workplace do this everyday.:peace
 
Re: We're Number......LAST

presluc said:
As we all know part time work is not to be trusted, one month you might be working 3 days a week , the next you're cut to 1 day a week and any red ink you will be looking for another job.

To budget your lifestyle in this economic society on part time work would be like walking the edge of a straight razor..

Yet average Americans in the workplace do this everyday.:peace
Click to expand...

Yes, they do.
Making a living in America is a lot harder than it used to be.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom